Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-121-99 iw Cl '. DN: P1)..121-99 ,~ THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARlNGTON REPORT Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # Date: Monday, November I, 1999 Res. YIt-iflb-eft Report #: PD-121-99 FILE #: By-law # Subject: GREATER TORONTO SERVICES BOARD PROCESS FOR FACILITATING DISPUTE RESOLUTION Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: I. THAT Report PD-121-99 be received; 2. THAT a copy of this report be forwarded to the Strategic Planning and Review Committee of the Board of the GTSB for their consideration. 1. BACKGROUND The Greater Toronto Services Board at its meeting of September lOth deferred consideration of a report entitled GTSB Process for Facilitating Dispute Resolution, which recommended "that the Board adopt the protocol for facilitating dispute resolution attached as Appendix A and that the appropriate officials take the necessary action to give effect thereto" . This report was deferred pending circulation to all member municipalities for comments to the Strategic Planning and Review Committee which will report to the Board at its November 5th, 1999 meeting. Council of the Municipality ofClarington at its meeting of October 12, 1999 instructed staff to prepare a response to the GTSB report. 628 , , - REPORT NO.: PD-121-99 PAGE 2 2. DISCUSSION The protocol for dispute resolution is a step in the right direction as it would provide a useful guide in the resolution of conflicts amongst the municipalities in the Greater Toronto Area. The report indicates that although a number of conflicts are solved by the municipalities themselves there are often issues between municipalities that remain unresolved, to the disadvantage of the municipalities involved and the broader GTA. It is in this realm that the GTSB sees itself playing a more significant role. The report also implies that participation in the dispute resolution process is voluntary and that the decision of the Board as the adjudicator is not binding on any party which does not agree to accept its decision. Notwithstanding the above, the proposed protocol for facilitating dispute resolution needs further refinement in order to clearly define the role of the GTSB and to enhance the clarity of the process. Specifically, the following changes are suggested: i) The roles of the OMB and the Regional Governments in dispute resolution need to be acknowledged and defined in relation to the role of the GTSB in this regard. Within a regional government framework, disputes between area municipalities should first be considered by the regional authority before it can be referred to the GTSB. ii) Item 2 of the proposed protocol needs to be expanded to identify the criteria to be used to determine what matters fall within the GTSB's mandate. iii) Item 4 states that "of those matters that fall outside the mandate of the GTSB, the GTSB will review the request to determine if the dispute is one in which the GTSB can usefully or properly contribute to the resolution of the dispute through its facilitation services". This statement raises a number of questions: 629 , \~ REPORT NO.: PD-121-99 PAGE 3 . How will the GTSB determine whether it can usefully or properly contribute to the resolution of the dispute? . What criteria will be used? Clarification is needed in this regard. 3. CONCLUSION The proposed GTSB protocol for facilitating dispute resolution has been reviewed. It is concluded that with further refinement it can be a useful process to expedite the resolution of disputes in the GT A. Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, 6 Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Chief Administrative Officer. BN*DC*df 25 October 1999 Attachment #1 - GTSB Protocol for Facilitating Dispute Resolution 630 .,. .4 =,cr- ~tJ- Lj:i'.j "-11; ~',' ATTACHMENT '1 6 Appendix A GTSB PR.OTOCOL FOR. FACILITATING DISPUTE RESOLUTION 1. A member municipality may request the Board to assist in the resolution of conflicts. 2. The GTSB determines whether it is a matter that falls within its mandate or not 3. For all of those matters that fall within its mandate the GTSB establishes a panel of member(s) of the Board in order to facilitate a resolution of the dispute (the "Panel"). 4. For all of those matters that fall outside of the mandate of the GTSB the GTSB will review the request to determine if the dispute is one in which the GTSB can usefully or properly contribute to the resolution of the dispute through its facilitation services. If the GTSB finds that it would be useful and proper to facilitate a resolution to the dispute then it will establish a panel of member(s) of the Board in order to facilitate a resolution of the dispute. 5. The Panel will comprise Chairman Tonks and the Chairman of the relevant Board committee (eg. in the case of a transit integration matter this would be the co-chairs of the Transportation Committee), as well as such other Board members as are required to ensure knowledge and understanding of the matter in dispute and to reflect a GTA-wide perspective, while recognizing that a panel of no more than three to five members is preferable. 6. The Panel may eng.lge a professional facilitator(s)/mediator(s) or such other external expertise as may be deemed appropriate to assist it in facilitating the resolution of the dispute. (Should external expertise be required the GTSB will pay 50% of the cost and the disputing parties will equally share the remaining 50%.) 7. The Panel shall begin by identitying the parties to the dispute and establishing their willingness to participate in the facilitation process. 8. All participation in the facilitation process is voluntary, parties may discontinue their involvement in the process at any time without consequence. 631 ..",.~t:.t-'~..)U-l':l'::l'::l IJl:~'(' P.08/10 / 7 9. All parties to the facilitation process must agree, as a condition of participating, that they are participating in the process on a "without prejudice" basis and that statements made during the process can not be used in subsequent actions. 10. Once the parties have been identified the Panel will through discussions with the parties establish the issues that will be part of the facilitation process and get agreement among the parties for this issues list. Documents will be submitted outlining the facts of the issue and the positions that the respective organizations are taking. 11. The Panel will, if necessary, propose and establish agreement on the process for the facilitation, ie. the terms and conditions. 12. The Panel will then make a preliminary report to the Board on the parties, issues, process and time frame for the facilitation. 13. The Panel will, from time to time, report to the Board on progress with the facilitation. 14. In the event that a complete resolution of the dispute is not achieved, the Panel may attempt to get the parties to agree on a partial settlement or a narrowing of the issues that might be involved in subsequent actions around the dispute. 15. Any agreement reached between the parties will be acknowledged in a "Minutes of Settlement" to be signed by the patties at the conclusion of the facilitation process. 16. The Panel will make a final report to the Board on the facilitation including any agreement reached. 17. In the event that the facilitation process is not concluded by the prescribed time, the Panel must seek and secure an extension from the Board -- otherwise the facilitation will be discontinued. 632