During a private meeting with council on May 11, CAO Tony Martens cleared the planning department and its former director of blame for the survey-question kerfuffle raised by Reeve Paddy Munro in an article that had appeared the previous day in the Gazette.Yet three weeks later, when the county announced the departure of planning director Diana Hawryluk over a ìgapî working with her that existed for some members of council, the survey flap was the only specific example given by any of the seven ñ Div. 1 Coun. Kevin Good.In the notes to Martens' verbal report to council, obtained by the Gazette under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, Martens said it was his decision not to send the April mail-out survey questions to council for review, due to time and other factors that he lists in the report.The decision, he told council, ìhad nothing to do with the planning department or the planning director.îIn an interview, Good acknowledged hearing the report from Martens at the time.ìYeah, in the meeting he indicated that for sure. He said that,î Good confirmed.ìHowever, you can take it at face value or not.îGood said he questions whether Martens was made aware of council's direction on the survey.ìI couldn't see (Martens) doing something against council's direction. I don't think he had all the information when he made that call.îMartens' report to council began: ìThe questions were to have gone to council, which was the direction of council. It was my decision to proceed with the questions prior to them being reviewed by council.îThe CAO also pointed out in his report that councillors had four opportunities to stop the survey from being mailed out ñ after three councillor open houses and during a conference in Red Deer.In her report to Martens prepared on the same day the Gazette article appeared, Hawryluk provides a three-page chronology of ìevents regarding the MDP mail-out.îThe survey was mailed out on April 8 and Hawryluk writes in her report that the first she heard of councillors having problems with the questions was during a lunch break on April 27.ìWhen I inquired to council and specifically asked Coun. McKean what the issues with the questions were, I got no specific answers other than people who attended the roundtables said we did not listen to them as these questions did not reflect their views.îIn her report, Hawryluk lists 11 ìinconsistencies in the reeve's statementsî that appeared in the May 10 Gazette.She also notes that 1,436 surveys had been received to date, making it the most successful mail-out in county history.Apart from Good, two other members of council admitted to having differences with Hawryluk when her departure was announced as ìa mutual parting of ways.îMunro said he believed Hawryluk's philosophy was too urban for the county ìand certainly this council,î and Div. 2 Coun. Patricia McKean said she had ìareas of disagreementî with Hawryluk, but neither cited specific cases.The other four councillors said they had encountered no problems working with Hawryluk, who held the position for almost five years. She begins her new job as head of planning for the City of Regina in September.
