In the same open letter where she suggests city CAO Ed Archer should resign from his position, Ward 7 Coun. Natalie Labbée also volunteers herself for resignation.
That is, if she’s incorrect about when city council knew about last year’s non-union wage hikes.
In her open letter published on Tuesday, Labbée wrote in all-caps that the annual $520,000 cost to hike non-union city managers’ salaries approved last year was “NEVER DISCLOSED” to city council “prior to or during budget discussions, nor was it disclosed to us in any closed documents until it was leaked to Sudbury.com, and I will die on my sword over this FACT!!!!”
The idiom to “fall on one’s sword” means “to resign from one's position as a result of failure, wrongdoing, etc.”
Despite the Ward 7 councillor’s assertion this week that she and her colleagues were blindsided by the cost of wage hikes for non-union employees approved by CAO Ed Archer, leaked emails obtained by Sudbury.com show Labbée and her fellow councillors were informed, and should’ve been aware, of how much the raises would cost.
As well, all available facts point to Archer having followed city council’s direction.
Last year’s pay hikes were made known to Sudbury.com in March, when we received a brown envelope from an anonymous tipster(s) signed “Honest City Employees.”
Enclosed documents included a closed-session report from April 26, 2022, and internal city correspondence from November 2023 revealing that pay groups 15-18 (non-union managers) were to receive salary increases of between six and eight per cent, in addition to their regularly scheduled three-per-cent annual salary boost.
The decision was retroactive to April 1 and to be paid by December, according to the letter. The pay jump does not include the first level of senior management.
The cost of the decision to boost pay groups 15-18 was approximately $520,000 annually, Sudbury.com clarified through city communications staff.
The April 26, 2022, closed-session report was in relation to the previous city council considering a pay boost of six-per-cent (also in addition to regular wage hikes) within pay groups 16-18, a decision Archer said the city’s elected officials deferred to the new city council.
(Ward 11 Coun. Bill Leduc later said they deferred it to the new city council because it would have been “political suicide” to approve the wage hikes just prior to an election.)
In September 2023, all 13 members of city council voted in favour of granting Archer delegated authority “to adjust the pay structure of all or some categories of non-union employees” when he believes “it is appropriate to do so” in accordance with existing city policies.
Last year’s pay hikes made use of this delegated authority.
After Sudbury.com broke the wage hike story in March, city council seemed divided over what they knew and what they should have know, with some members of city council lashing out against Archer, punting blame in his direction.
Ward 4 Coun. Pauline Fortin said it’s “always of great concern” when she finds out something as important as salary hikes at the same time as the public, “and it is made even more alarming when we all find out from the proverbial brown envelope.”
Labbée echoed this sentiment both at the time, and in this week’s open letter in which she wrote that if she were in Archer’s position, she “would probably resign because it would be the right thing to do.”
Others on city council have contended that their colleagues should have known what was going on, with Ward 11 Coun. Bill Leduc asserting last week, “We all knew exactly what we were doing moving forward. It wasn’t like we were blindsided, where there was no disclosure.”
During this same May 14 city council meeting, city Corporate Services General Manager Kevin Fowke clarified that Archer’s delegated authority “was carried out in its full spirit and intent.”
Although it’s rare that closed-session meetings are discussed publicly, Fowke clarified that the wage-change information was provided to city council during a closed-session meeting in December 2023, in the midst of 2024-25 budget deliberations.
This assertion contradicts Labbée’s assertion that she didn’t know until Sudbury.com broke the story in March.
The answer to the question of what city council knew and when they knew it is protected within closed-session meetings of city council, which Sudbury.com is not typically privy to.
Although Sudbury.com has been unable to obtain copies of the closed-session reports and presentations in question, we did receive leaked internal city emails that shed a light on what city council was told. This includes the Dec. 12, 2023, closed session Fowke referenced.
In this correspondence, City Solicitor and Clerk Eric Labelle wrote that Fowke presented a slide presentation during the meeting regarding contract cost changes and approved salary adjustments “with an amount of $520,067 for 2024 and $481,098 for 2025,” and that Fowke had clarified that the amounts were attributable to an increase for pay groups 15-18.
The correspondence also notes that city council discussed a report on proposed wage increases during a May 16, 2023, closed session, which concluded with a successful resolution for staff to draft the bylaw amendment that resulted in delegated authority being afforded to Archer to change non-union salaries (which city council unanimously approved in open session on Sept. 26, 2023).
Sudbury.com reached out to all 13 members of Greater Sudbury city council this week for additional insight regarding what has taken place and what needs to be done. Verbatim questions included:
- Is this a divided city council? If so, what is the cause and what is the solution?
- I haven’t confirmed its origins (the closed-session reports would go a long way), but it’s clear that misinformation has played a role in this very public disagreement between some members of city council and staff. What was the source of this misinformation, and what, if anything, are you going to do to ensure similar disagreements regarding facts are not repeated?
- Is there any concern that some city council members have breached the city’s social media policy (approved in 2022)? Are any complaints being filed?
Ward 2 Coun. Eric Benoit, Ward 3 Coun. Michel Brabant, Ward 11 Coun. Bill Leduc, Ward 9 Coun. Deb McIntosh, Ward 8 Coun. Al Sizer and Labbée responded.
Both Benoit and Brabant were appointed to council chambers in March, so would not have been privy to any prior closed session meetings where the wage hikes were discussed.
Brabant affirmed as much in his response, while Benoit added that he doesn’t believe that city council is divided.
“There are issues where we disagree and sometimes when you work with people for a while there can be a bit of friction,” Benoit said. “I feel like most councillors treat each other with respect and we work well together. There will always be issues where we disagree but with healthy debate and discussion we can proceed through things professionally.”
In his response, Leduc said that Labbée “needs to apologize to the residents of Greater Sudbury, to the whole council, mayor and staff.”
Labbée’s open letter “absolutely” shows a divided city council, Leduc said, adding a sarcastic “congratulations” to the Ward 7 member of city council.
McIntosh said that her position was made clear during the May 14 city council meeting, at which she said the wage increases were intended to bring salaries back to the middle of the pack of comparator municipalities.
“Council did this with the full knowledge of what we were directing our CAO to do and based on the data we were provided," she said at the time.
There are "many talented and dedicated people at the municipality working hard on our behalf," McIntosh said in today's response to Sudbury.com's inquiry. "The public servants who work tirelessly on behalf of all of us also weather unfair public criticism at times and have no means to respond. They are some of the brightest people I have had the pleasure of working with and I thank them for their continued service to our great community."
Sizer said the increases "did follow the council-approved pay philosophy."
In her response, Labbée said that she wrote the open letter "to inform the public for clarity and transparency," and that she has not alleged any wrongdoing on Archer's part.
She does not believe there is a fractured city council.
The new city council is "clearly beyond the honeymoon stage," she said. "Those of us who are new, are learning more as we ask more questions. We aren't perfect, but we are committed to doing better and making decisions that impact all taxpayers and that is what is most important to me."
City council is "only as effective as the information we are being presented," she said, adding that city council needs more than "just what staff think we need to know."
City integrity commissioner David Boghosian told Sudbury.com that he is unable to comment one way or the other regarding whether Labbée’s open letter was being investigated.
Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.
