TORONTO

A little more than a year ago — quietly and behind closed doors — members of the board of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority voted to allow CEO Brian Denney to retire and then be hired back on contract right on the spot.

Only three of 20 board members voted against the plan during an in-camera session at a Jan. 4, 2013 board meeting. The board also changed his title from CAO to CEO even though he’d already characterized himself as CEO in TRCA’s 2012 annual report and on the 2012 Sunshine List.

Freshly retired, Denney was able to collect his OMERS pension — equivalent to about $140,000 per year — in addition to his contract fee. According to the 2013 Sunshine List, Denney made $201,491 last year, bringing his total compensation to about $341,491 in 2013.

That’s nearly 300% more than the $117,140 he made as the TRCA’s CAO 10 years ago.

The TRCA, which oversees nine watersheds and owns 44,000 acres of land in the GTA, got nearly half of its $96-million 2012 budget from the public purse — municipalities, the province and the federal government. Toronto taxpayers contributed $7.8 million, with the balance of TRCA’s money coming from user fees and fundraising.

Denney, who started as a site development engineer with the TRCA 40 years ago, confirmed last week he did indeed retire and was put on a three-year contract with an option for a two-year renewal. He also has use of a TRCA corporate credit card and a 2007 Toyota Prius.

That contract, he said, was not put out competitively because the “board was happy” to have him continue.

Tory MPP candidate and public relations consultant Kevin Gaudet, who tried to blow the whistle on the TRCA board’s actions a year ago and came up against a brick wall, called this the “worst most aggregious case of double dipping” he has ever seen.

“A public sector employee retires, takes the pension and doesn’t just go back anywhere else in the public sector ... he takes the (same) job he had,” said Gaudet.

Asked what he’d say to allegations of double dipping, Denney said he doesn’t know what the issue is or what is wrong with what he’s doing.

“I would say I contributed to a pension plan for 35 years and I probably should be taking steps to collect that pension,” said the 62-year-old. “I don’t know how long I’m going to live ... I chose to see if I could receive it.”

Catherine MacEwen, the TRCA’s director of human resources and marketing communications, said Denney had the opportunity to retire and to go to another conservation authority but TRCA wanted to keep him for a few more years as part of its “succession plan.

“We just wanted some time where we could allow that transition to take place,” MacEwen said, confirming the contract was not put out competitively because TRCA does not have a policy where it has to put every job out to tender.

“We took it to the board and the board was fine with how we handled it,” she said.

Denney also reiterated during an interview that the board approved the move.

“I simply said to the board I’d like to continue to work for a few years ... would you be content to have me continue to work for a few years knowing I’m officially retired and starting to collect that pension,” he said. “They said ‘yes.’”

Denney added he also checked with OMERS and received confirmation it was OK for him to collect his pension and return to a public service job.

However, Gaudet said Denney’s employment situation and the board’s approval appear to “clearly violate” a number of Ontario public sector rules — which are supposed to apply to government agencies and which should have been enforced by the board overseeing TRCA.

According to information obtained from the Ministry of Government Services (MGS), Ontario public service conflict rules prohibit senior public servants from accepting employment with a public body or entity for 12 months after leaving the Ontario public service where they would have had access to confidential information. As an agency of the Ontario government, all TRCA public servants are required to comply with these conflict of interest rules.

The MGS directives also state that a former Ontario public service employee may only collect a pension if they work for an employer that does not contribute to the plan from which their pension is being paid. According to TRCA’s own financial statements, the authority contributed $2.8 million to OMERS in 2012.

MacEwen — who board members claim was responsible for putting together Denney’s employment plan — insists they are a “legal entity separate from the city and province” with their own policies and procedures around HR and procurement.

“(The) OPS (Ontario public service) is a huge megalopolis and we’re just a teeny tiny company,” she said.

But despite several requests to MacEwen, I never did receive a copy of the TRCA-specific human resources policies to which she referred.

She did send me a copy of Denney’s CEO job description, indicating it was same as the CAO one except that over the past few years, the “size of the intitiatives and programs the organization” oversees had grown and there are more complex issues, like extreme weather problems.

The board vote itself was recorded publicly in the TRCA minutes of Jan. 4, 2013 but there was no indication in those same minutes of who or what the vote was about. There was never any confirmation publicly, either, of the change in Denney’s employment provisions, as had typically been done with such votes at Toronto City Hall.

Various TRCA board members approached by the Toronto Sun in the past few weeks either refused to talk about it because the matter was addressed in-camera or they were having trouble remembering their actions of one year ago.

Toronto Councillor Gloria Lindsay Luby, who voted in favour of Denney’s re-hiring, said she “honestly can’t remember” what exactly happened with his employment status but does recall a “long discussion” and that she asked a lot of questions about “succession planning.”

When I suggested Denney might be double dipping, Lindsay Luby said she didn’t know if the TRCA operates under the same rules as Toronto or the province.

Vaughan regional Councillor Michael Di Biase, who also voted in favour of allowing Denney to retire and be re-hired on contract, said he didn’t see anything wrong with what was done and never heard of any rules about putting the job out for a competitive bid.

Glenn De Baeremaeker, also a Toronto councillor, said he recalled the board direction was to follow the human resources policies and keep Denney because he’s a “very skilled and talented individual.

“We retained a very, very talented individual who’s got 30 years of experience in the field and has done a spectacular job at the conservation authority,” said De Baeremaeker, emphasizing the use of “very.”

York Region Councillor Deb Schulte wouldn’t talk about why she voted against the plan even after I’d confirmed it with Denney.

“I’m really not at liberty to discuss that ... that’s between you and him,” she said earlier this week. “That’s his personal situation.”

Gaudet said he couldn’t believe that, when he wrote to the Ontario auditor-general and to Ontario’s natural resources minister about Denney’s contract on March 27, 2013, both said they weren’t interested in pursuing the issue.

He also brought the contract to the attention of Mayor Rob Ford but, due to his problems, it is easy to understand how the issue got sidetracked.

“It was their job to take these allegations seriously ... allegations (about Denney being permitted to retire, collect his pension and being hired on contract) that have now been proven to be accurate,” Gaudet said. “Nobody seems to be doing their job and that means these bureaucrats get to run amok and get away with it.”

Gaudet thinks the leadership of the TRCA should be removed with cause and all TRCA board members turfed.

Tory accountability critic MPP Doug Holyday thinks the current provincial auditor should look into TRCA.

Holyday said Denney’s job should have been put out to tender.

“The optics of hiring back a former employee so quickly aren’t good,” he said. “It certainly makes it questionable that it has been less than open and transparent.”