Clear and Transparent

When or if Council changed hands, it was apparent there would be revelations

Two special meetings held last night were the beginning.

The first meeting scheduled for 7p.m. allowed for Notice of Motion .The second provided for reconsideration of the decision made by Council on September 14th 2010.

"the town solicitor be directed to retain external counsel to take any and all actions to bring this matter to a resolution"

During last night's debate last night,Councillor Gallo stated he had no idea the motion would lead to legal action being taken against three town residents. He also said he believed Councillors should have some means of defending themselves against
being defamed. He stayed with his original decision.

But his comment reminded me of a point that needed to be clarified.

When legal action is being taken against the town or the town is faced with the requirement of taking legal action, Council must be informed of the first and must authorize the second.

The question was directed to the town's assistant solicitor.

The fact was established.

Council must authorize when legal action needs to be taken.

Council did not authorize litigation be taken against three residents of the town.

The question has been asked about cost. The answer is nothing at this point though invoices have been received.

Cost for services rendered does not come under the heading of solicitor/client privilege.

I have the figures. I lo-o-ove getting the figures.

The first invoice submitted on October 25th (election day)$4,480.65. The second was in the amount of $38,242.17 was received on November 18th. These amounts are not yet paid.

In summary therefore, the litigation was not authorized by Council as required.

To this point, only the cost of staff time has been expended.

Invoices have been tendered. While the electorate of Aurora were in the process of choosing a new council and making it clear, they wanted no part of suing three residents of the town for critical comments, however severe,against a politician, made by a person not identified.

Last night,the new Council settled the matter and reversed the previous decision.

I have given Notice of Motion,to be presented in January,to Waive Solicitor/Client privilege and release legal advice provided which led to litigation against town residents.

I do not believe the town's interest was served by the action taken. I do not expect the town's interest to be damaged by releasing legal advice that led to it.

I am prepared to argue the case for transparency.

Viewing the blog, I just realized something. new.  The Council meeting was scheduled for September 14th

Council re-convened at 1.11 a.m on the morning of September 15th and adjourned again at 1.14 a.m.

Extending the hour of adjournment beyond 11.p.m. required a two-thirds majority vote.

No record exists of such a vote. Does that mean the meeting didn't happen and therefore neither did the decision.

Making corporate decision at such an ungodly hour has always seemed entirely inappropriate to this pilgrim.