For publicly maligning city CAO Ed Archer, Ward 7 Coun. Natalie Labbée should face a 20-day suspension of pay and apologize to the city’s top bureaucrat.
So concludes city integrity commissioner David Boghosian’s 40-page report, which responds to complaints regarding Labbée’s conduct earlier this year in response to city CAO Ed Archer’s decision to hike management salaries.
Labbée made “repeated breaches of confidentiality and misleading statements in the name of defending herself,” Boghosian concluded in a report tabled for the Sept. 3 city council meeting, at which the city’s elected officials are slated to vote on whether to proceed with sanctions.
In conversation with Sudbury.com this week, Labbée said she’s sticking to what she said.
“I used my outside voice for a few things I probably shouldn’t have, but I will not take it back,” she said. “It’s what I feel. I feel strongly about my opinion, I stay strong against that, and I did not mislead the public.”
Labbée also questioned why she’s facing sanctions, and named four colleagues on city council who also spoke critically of Archer, including Ward 1 Coun. Mark Signoretti, Ward 4 Coun. Pauline Fortin and Ward 5 Coun. Mike Parent.
Labbée also pointed toward Ward 8 Coun. Al Sizer, who chaired a May 14 meeting at which Archer was publicly criticized. She contends that Sizer should have moved the conversation to a closed session, outside of the public realm.
“Myself as a new councillor, I felt that was the role of the chair,” Labbée said. “I really didn’t think that any of us could have suggested it.”
The core issue at play is Labbée’s response to a six- to eight-per-cent pay boost some city managers received last year in addition to their regularly scheduled three-per-cent increase.
To make these increases happen, Archer used the delegated authority a unanimous vote of city council gave him a couple months prior, and the wage increases reportedly brought them back within a city council-approved range after falling behind in recent years.
Sudbury.com learned about the pay boost in March after receiving an anonymous tip in a package signed, “Honest City Employees.”
Labbée’s response was critical.
She penned an open letter published by Sudbury.com in which she opined that she would resign over the wage hike issue if she were CAO. Various other public comments were also made which implied some form of wrongdoing, despite there being no evidence of as much.
This factored into one of several of Labbée’s alleged breaches of the city’s Code of Conduct, which Boghosian flags in his report.
As stated in Boghosian’s report, Labbée’s finger-pointing toward Archer came in spite of the fact she voted in favour of granting him the very delegated authority he used to increase wages.
Labbée’s various comments “were motivated by a desire to distance herself from the decision in order to salvage her own political fortunes,” Boghosian wrote.
While talking about last year’s wage increases and Archer’s delegated authority, Labbée said during the May 14 city council meeting, “This is definitely one of those situations where asking for forgiveness is a lot better than asking for permission. If you don’t have trust, then you have nothing.”
This statement is “false and misleading,” Boghosian said, noting that it implies Archer acted without authority, or contrary to city council's direction. This is not true, and Boghosian contends that Labbée knew it was not true, and “knowingly made a false statement.”
Other alleged breaches on the part of Labbée include:
- Publicly reporting on her recollection of what took place during a closed session of city council, and further breached confidentiality for publicly alleging a “spit and a handshake” deal between Archer and city council members whereby he would come back to city council for further direction if his contemplated wage increase was outside an undefined “reasonable range.”
- Claiming that the past city council rejected a six-per-cent-wage increase for senior staff in 2022, which is false, as they deferred a decision until after that year’s election. “Putting aside the misleading nature of her statement,” Boghosian reported that this is another breach of confidentiality.
- Misusing confidential information to the detriment of city staff and the city as a whole in “lowering the reputation of senior staff members in the eyes of the public.” Boghosian wrote, “The information disclosed by Coun. Labbée was certainly detrimental to the CAO and anyone in Coun. Labbée’s position could not come to any other objective conclusion but that it would.”
- Although elected officials “can rightly criticize the salary increases determined by the CAO,” Boghosian found that she crossed a line “into disrespectful and inappropriate comments.”
In his report, Boghosian responds to two complaints filed by Ward 11 Coun. Bill Leduc, including one regarding Labbée’s conduct and another regarding Parent. Boghosian subsequently received another complaint regarding both city council members from a Sudbury resident who wanted to remain anonymous, and two supplementary complaints from Leduc.
The complaints against Parent related to social media posts which expressed support for Labbée’s comments. Boghosian concluded that Parent did not breach the city’s Code of Conduct, noting that Parent defended Archer against allegations on social media.
In her response to Boghosian’s proposed penalties, Labbée told the integrity commissioner that she was just being “honest,” and that Leduc’s complaint was part of a “retaliation and personal vendetta,” according to the report.
Boghosian countered, “No other councillor went to the extent of maligning the CAO that Coun. Labbée did.”
In her response, Labbée also suggested that city council as a whole should apologize to Archer for having a conversation about this matter in public instead of a closed session of city council.
Boghosian countered, “No one else went to the extent of criticizing the CAO as Coun. Labbée did. Based on everything I have reviewed, I believe she is the only one that needs to apologize to the CAO.”
In conversation with Sudbury.com this week, Labbée said that in addition to what she perceives to be a bias against her, there are inaccuracies within Boghosian’s report. Although unable to cite anything specific, she said some quotations implied she’d said things she did not.
When it comes to whether she plans on apologizing to Archer, Labbée said, “I’m not even gonna...” before trailing off.
“You’ll see,” she added. “Whatever happens at that meeting (on Sept. 3) is going to happen at that meeting. ... My apology is that this was all done in a public forum and we should have had a discussion behind closed doors. That’s the extent of my apology.”
With a chuckle, she added, “I have a bombshell,” which she’ll drop during the Sept. 3 meeting, depending “on how things go.”
The public portion of the Sept. 3 city council meeting is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. It can be viewed in-person at Tom Davies Square or livestreamed by clicking here.
Boghosian’s report also includes several points of clarification regarding when city council was made aware of last year’s wage increase to senior managers.
He clarifies that Labbée’s claim that she first learned about the wage increases when she read about it on Sudbury.com in March 2024 was “false and misleading.”
This timeline will be explored in-depth in a future story.
Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.
