Sunday, 26 August 2012

Closed Meetings

Last week's news story on  court proceedings  on  Conflict of Interest charges against the former Mayor  brought back  bad memories of the previous Council term.  From the outset they began. Like a floodgate opened.
An early  meeting was called  to discuss  what the new Mayor  considered  an invasion of her privacy and subject to litigation. 
Under the Municipal Act, the imperative is the public's  business shall be conducted in public.
Exceptions are precise and  specific .
Litigation between the town and other parties: real estate negotiations on behalf of the town;privacy of  an individual is the third.
Elected officials  are not private. They are public .
At the time of the election, the town solicitor was on  leave. An interim  solicitor was retained when needed . 
In  this instance,  need had not apparently been determined. 
The scene. like many others, is etched clearly in my memory. 
We used the Councillor's lounge for in-camera meetings. The Mayor occupied a couch..
A visual  image of  domination and control had already been adopted.
A  gaping  red shiny handbag at her feet. A file folder crammed so full, two arms were needed to hold it. A bunch of keys, twice as big as her fist and an impression of  white legs and red vinyl high heeled  shoes. A mouth crammed with food  sometimes  completed the picture.
Council were informed telephones in the Councillors' room had been monitored during the previous term. The position  was her privacy had been invaded.  That was cause for litigation for damages against  her predecessor and she had "no intention of spending my money" to pursue the matter. 
To cut a long story short, the new Council voted, eight to one,  to authorize  legal  counsel to be retained.
The municipal clerk was present. He had two years to serve  before retirement. He offered no advice. 
Two years and at least two solicitors later. I can't be sure.in a legal conference, again behind closed doors,  the matter was finalized.
There was no case to answer.Taking the matter to court would not result in  damages being awarded, The solicitor was surprised to discover Council  members had not been privy to various  communications on the issue.
It was the former Mayor's practice to read to Council excerpts  from letters only she  had apparently  received. Copies were  not circulated.
Thinking back,  the purpose of the final conference seems clear. The solicitor  was being  leaned upon heavily for different advice. 
Present at the meeting were the CAO,  town solicitor returned from leave and the municipal clerk,
As I recall , advice to Council from staff  was in the form of support for the outside solicitor present for the conference.  
It was  decided there was no merit in pursuing  legal action against the  former Mayor's predecessor.
How much  was expended ?  Heaven knows. How many lawyers? At that time, at least two..Switching  lawyers became a familiar pattern over the years  If one  failed to deliver the desired objective. they were not used again. 
The Council of the day had five new members . 
All of  the Morris slate had not been elected, Just enough to create  obligation and a  majority.
Lawyers, and public resources   were not the only tools used to wreak vengeance against anyone who dared to oppose.
After his defeat, town hall staff had posed for a  photo with the outgoing Mayor.
We  immediately heard of  the repercussion.
Staff  it seems ,were informed individually: 
"If you work for the town,you work for me  Be careful who you choose as friends. There's a list"
 I  have  made the point; the Municipal Act  is not  intended to cover for  politicians plots against opponents at public expense.
It is unthinkable.
Hundreds of thousands of  tax dollars were expended .Staff were eventually complicit in obscuring the numbers .
All of it  was cloaked in secrecy.
It had never happened before. 
The current Council has passed a bylaw making  it impossible ever to happen again. 
At the time though ,during that one and only term, everyone, particularly staff, knew their  fate if they dared cross the dreadful duo's determination  to wreak  terrible vengeance on their foes; real and imagined.
It started before the ink was dry on Certification of the 2006 election.
The slide continued downhill all the way until  litigation  again at town expense was processed  against town residents during the  2010 election.
It's 2012 and we are not done yet.           

13 comments:

  1. Wow! Made my day !

    ReplyDelete

  2. This should be scripted and turned into a stage play.

    "Queen for Four Years"

    Act One, Scene One:

    Narrator:-

    "The scene, like many others, is etched clearly in my memory.".........

    ReplyDelete
  3. I wonder if there was ever a moment when they realized that it had all gone terribly wrong ? Haven't seen any evidence of it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The last time someone did a rough estimate of how many lawyers had found work due to Morris & her Gang, the number was more than 2 dozen. And there were likely at least 9-10 more that we could guess.
    But, I expect she will not be receiving the same # of Xmas cards as she did when she was on a roll towards the big money.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you for the awesome word picture of Morris. Laughter was something she and the others simply could not understand.

    ReplyDelete

  6. It's really too bad that the town doesn't bring an action, even at this late date, against the person with the "gaping red shiny handbag at her feet. A file folder crammed so full, two arms were needed to hold it. A bunch of keys, twice as big as her fist and an impression of white legs and red vinyl high heeled shoes. A mouth crammed with food...."

    She is surely guilty of various crimes and misdemeanours as she threatened our staff with her monstrous statement "If you work for the town, you work for me. Be careful who you choose as friends."

    What misguided arrogance, what gross malfeasance was let slip into our town hall?

    And she has not changed, merely grown more vitriolic with the passage of time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No one seems to believe that she has spent a penny of her own money. There are plenty of people who did well and continue to do well because of that spell as Mayor. Fill in your own blanks as to who could be footing the bills.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Please be careful out there. A cornered rat can be very dangerous. Nothing left to lose.

    ReplyDelete
  9. a very sad but true account of the past, the only good thing to come out of that nightmare is that the Queen of Cloths lines and her washerwoman and men will never darken the doorstep of town hall again

    ReplyDelete
  10. 7:00 PM Please do not forget to include on your list Ms. Walmer & Associates. Do not let her get the keys to the town hall with another candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Put that champagne bottle back on the shelf. There are still 3 residuals on Council. Still work to be done.

    ReplyDelete
  12. How does one determine if something qualifies for the G. Book of Records? Most people know about the 3 large lawsuits involving Morris & Company. If you add in all the suits against perceived enemies, former staff, the Region and other assorted victims, the number is quite amazing. It could be a cautionary tale to small towns who find themselves with such an individual in charge of litigation.

    ReplyDelete
  13. To 27 August, 2012 8:23 AM....

    Don't forget the Buck vs. Morris et al suit too. This is using Town resources for the "defence".

    ReplyDelete

If you've got a comment, this is the place to leave it for me. Please feel free to leave your name, or even just an email address if you'd like a response. You can also email me directly.