Much has been written about Peterborough Mayor Diane Therrien's report earlier this month on the distribution of 99 annual appointments among 11 city councillors, especially as they affected seven-term Coun. Henry Clarke. At the Dec. 3 special city council meeting, Clarke had complained, with cause, that the process of consulting with him by the mayor was flawed and exclusionary. Clarke was the only councillor not to receive a portfolio responsibility, in spite of his longstanding service as a deputy mayor and finance committee chair.

The exclusion of Clarke by Therrien was an aggressive act of partisan political hardball that belied her frequent campaign assertions of wanting to work co-operatively with people and make improvements in the ways that councillors consult with each other. During the fall municipal election campaign, then-candidate Therrien released a "Policy Commitments" document in which she wrote that "I have seen that we need more collaborative, forward thinking leadership in the mayor's office ... we need a mayor who is able to work collaboratively with partners at all levels ... engaging in meaningful consultation with the broader community." One of her commitments in that document was to "create a community engagement charter to better involve residents in the decisions that affect them." While it is too early to expect to have such a charter in place, it is not too early to consider whether Mayor Therrien's stated commitments to improved collaboration and consultation match up with her actions.

What went unnoticed in the public response to the lack of consultation with Coun. Clarke was another denial of consultation, this one affecting the entire community. Here's the story.

The mayor's report on councillor appointments was presented to a special city council meeting on Dec. 3 and was the only report on the meeting agenda. In the normal course, reports like this are posted on the city's website on the Thursday prior to the Monday meeting so that the public can review them and the media can report on them. While it's not a lot of time for the public to read the reports and decide if they want to comment on them, it is at least some time. The mayor had sent her report to all councillors on the prior Wednesday and there had been objections, including by Coun. Clarke, which were not dealt with by the mayor until the last minute. That meant that she did not post her report online before the Monday meeting and that it was not available for public review.

At the Monday council meeting, when the mayor asked those in the public gallery whether anyone wanted to comment on her report, no one did: it was a certainty that no one had even seen it, except for a few in the gallery who may have picked it up in hard copy mere minutes before it was debated.

This fumbling meant that members of the public were not and will not be consulted on one of the most important reports of the year, including those who may have wanted to speak to council about the treatment of Coun. Clarke.

There may have been some who would have spoken to council about the fact that experienced Coun. Lesley Parnell received the fewest appointments of any woman councillor and only half the number of appointments given to two other councillors. Some may have wanted to comment to council on the mayor's assignment to herself of fully a fifth of all the appointments.

One of the first tests of public consultation fell well short of the mayor's campaign commitments.

David Goyette is a writer, political advisor and communications consultant.