Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Mayor
Rob Ford ponders losing his job in conflict ...":
Please do not
forget that Councillor Ballard has signed onto the Morris team and consistently
votes to keep information in-house. The Hervey Conflict of Interest suit needed
documentation from Aurora and is working without it. Specifically they needed
the entire Rusty D'Eye report. It has been termed ' privileged' information,
which means that taxpayers do not have access to it either. It is difficult to
reach a decision without full disclosure.
******************
Aurora taxpayers paid the fee for George Rust D'Eye to review the circumstances and report to Council how a decision was made to sue three residents of the town.
On receipt, I moved solicitor/client privilege be waived and the report be made public.
Mr. Rust D'Eye suggested a summary as an alternative.
Council has authority to waive solicitor/client privilege at any time. So long as the municipality's interest is protected.
I am not aware a request was made for the report.
If made, I am unaware of a Council refusal..
Councillor Ballard has only one vote .
A single vote does not serve to keep information "in-house"
Councillor Ballard was not a member of the Council that passed a resolution drafted previously that evolved into litigation against three residents during an election campaign when Council was not available to authorize that action.
Councillors Gaertner and Gallo are the only current Councillors
who attended the fateful meeting that gave the solicitor carte blanche ,adjourned after one a.m., and resulted in lurid headlines of three citizens being sued, with their own resources, by people elected to represent their interests.
Like the meeting when they stripped the Integrity Commissioner of his authority after he filed a decision that did not reflect to their credit. It ended after midnight as well.
Friday, 31 August 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I believe it is more likely that BOTH sides involved in the Conflict of Interest case requested that documentation.
To Anonymous 31 August, 2012 11:10 AM.
Wouldn't one side already know what went on in that meeting? Why would they request the documentation?
I'm sure they will tell nothing but the truth when appearing before the Judge.
Post a Comment