If Coun. Matthew Green has his way, organizations that receive more than $250,000 in city funding will soon be called upon to post their agendas, minutes and financial records online.

Green introduced the motion after the embattled Hamilton Waterfront Trust's recent presentation of its financial statements to city council.

The Ward 3 councillor clearly sees his proposal as a "remedy" to a situation in which the trust, while under intense media and public scrutiny, dragged its feet for almost two months before finally releasing minutes from its board meetings.

"This is a governance issue for me," said Green, adding he doesn't believe the trust adequately addressed the issue of why it took so long to make such basic information available.

Waterfront Trust chair Bob Charters explained his arms-length agency was concerned that providing the minutes would be a "precedent setting" move which other city board and agencies are not required to do.

Charters also said it was "onerous" for organizations to keep minutes. "It's just a lot of work."

Green said he was disappointed by the trust's response.

"This is not onerous in today's day and age in any way, shape or form," he said.

Green says the point of his motion is to prevent a similar situation happening with other city boards, agencies, and arms-length agencies.

The motion, however, got bogged down in discussion over wording and which organizations would be impacted if the proposal is approved by council.

Coun. Terry Whitehead wants the motion to capture any and all organizations which receive more than $250,000 in taxpayer money, including those which collect project management fees from the city.

Finance general manager Mike Zegarac is expected to tweak the language and report back on which groups the initiative would potentially encompass.

Green said he's been working with staff to ensure the proposal does not encumber small community groups.

If the motion goes forward, it could include two organizations which currently receive money from the city's enrichment fund. The Art Gallery of Hamilton annually gets $1 million in funding and Theatre Aquarius receives $250,000.

Interestingly, Coun. Jason Farr seconded Green's motion. Farr is a board member of the Waterfront Trust, which annually receives $334,000 from the city as well as project management fees.

Farr personally apologized for the trust taking too long to cough up its minutes but offered assurances it is "ready, willing and able'' to turn over a new leaf.

"And we'll put them on our website and send them to whoever requests them, if that's the case."

Hopefully the staff report will shed some light on the city's ability to compel various organizations to comply with a policy of this kind. The original wording of the motion positions it as a request, which in some cases may be the best the city can do.

Then again, there's good reason why the old phrase "he who pays the piper calls the tune" still retains currency. If taxpayers are kicking in $250,000 to an organization, it's not unreasonable to expect that organization should make itself see-through to the public.

Green is framing the proposal as a logical extension of the city's open data program and its goal of helping the community access city information easily and transparently.

Obviously the devil will be in the details, but Green is absolutely correct when he says perceptions of irregularities in an organization can easily be avoided when proper information is provided in a timely fashion. The Waterfront Trust learned that lesson the hard way.

MY MISTAKE: In Friday's column I wrote city manager Chris Murray said bringing the Waterfront Trust in-house as a city service would cost about $8 million annually. I misheard. It would actually cost close to $1 million. Apologies and regrets.

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

- The Spectator's View: Waterfront Trust scrutiny isn't going away

- DRESCHEL: City councillors soft on Waterfront Trust

- Councillors give Hamilton Waterfront Trust a pass