Supporters of Toronto ombudsman Fiona Crean appear to have won a temporary victory in the council battle over her future.

Council voted 24-15 on Thursday in favour of a confidential recommendation that Crean’s defenders advocated and her detractors opposed.

Councillors would not say exactly what they approved, but they hinted that they voted to delay, until the next term of council, a final decision on whether to keep Crean employed after her current contract expires in November 2015.

A punt would help Crean because she does not have sufficient support for reappointment among the current batch of councillors. Reappointment requires a supermajority of two-thirds of council, 30 out of 45 members.

Councillor Maria Augimeri and Councillor Shelley Carroll said city officials are now involved in a contract negotiation with Crean. They did not provide details. For the delay tactic to work, though, Crean would have to relinquish a contract provision that requires the city to tell her by this November whether she will be renewed or not.

The details of council’s decision, Augimeri said, will be revealed when the negotiation is complete, likely in a “few days.”

Councillor David Shiner pushed for the information on the vote to be made available immediately. The city's solicitor told him that details of labour matters related to particular individuals are regularly kept secret.

Crean had irked Mayor Rob Ford, his allies, and some centrists with investigative reports on the Toronto Community Housing Corp. and the civic appointments process. Other councillors urged their colleagues not to dump her simply because she had upset them personally.

Council’s left wing and some centrists voted in favour of Crean, almost all of the right and some centrists against. Mayor Rob Ford was not in the room for the vote.

Councillor Josh Matlow said Crean has done a “remarkable job.” If she was not renewed, Matlow said, it would only be because she threatened councillors by doing her work too well.

“If we are serious as a council to uphold our democratic institution, the integrity of this institution, and public confidence in this institution, we’re not just going to shoot the messenger,” Matlow said.

Councillor James Pasternak, who also voted against the mystery motion, said he and others had believed that they had given Crean her final extension in 2012, when they added two years to her initial five-year term.

“This was never about the current ombudsman’s ability to perform the job. This was about an agreement reached on the council floor on Oct. 30, 2012,” he said. “There was absolutely no vindictive slant to any of the votes.”

Councillor Michelle Berardinetti, who does not want to extend Crean’s term, said she was simply seeking “renewal.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

“Certain people feel that there could be the risk of entrenched vision,” she said. “And I’m not saying that this current ombudsman has an entrenched vision, but the whole point of having renewal is so they do not have an entrenched vision.”

There is some dispute even about the propriety of the 2012 decision, which provincial ombudsman Andre Marin has called “illegal.” The city’s municipal code says the ombudsman will serve one five-year term and “may be renewed once for an additional term of five years.” It makes no provision for a shorter extension like the one council gave Crean.