As well as paying $45,000. for legal fees for a personal suit by the former Mayor against town residents and $8,500. to an external lawyer to advise.
In addition there was termination for cause and severance of $186,000.or thereabouts , paid to an employee of barely two years.
No insurance to cover any of it. Straight out of taxpayers' pockets. Paid by the new Council with nary a hint of concern or doubt as the cost of doing business.
A town carries insurance against losses from employee miscreant conduct.
****************
I have until the Council in July to decide if I have a conflict of interest in the
question of increase in insurance premiums.
I have had no pecuniary advantage from town insurance coverage.
No part of my costs of litigation are paid by the company.
No decisions made by the company were influenced by a decision of mine.
Would disclosure of facts and figures resulting from decisions made by the company benefit me financially? I don't see how.
If a citizen were to file charges of a Conflict of Interest , would I be entitled to a legal defence paid by the insurance company?
Would that be different to the elected representative already charged with Conflict of Interest?
D'you know, I never thought of that. Would that be another cost that contributed to increase in premiums?
Does anyone have particulars of cost of doing what the Conflict of Interest Act requires?
Monday, 23 June 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
You do not want to even think about it. It is a can of worms.The defence of the CoI would have been paid by the town.
As to your question about a possible conflict of interest re the insurance premiums, I believe you have none. Your call.
Mayor Dawe has a Notice of Motion on the Agenda for tomorrow's Council meeting that deals quite specifically with the Town's annual insurance premium. What is not stated so clearly is that the reference is to liability insurance to protect staff and elected officials against legal action that may be brought against them.
'NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT BFL Canada, being the Town's insurer, be requested to publicly present updated information to Council as soon as possible regarding significant insurance matters/claims affecting the Town directly, including any amounts and legal costs paid to date for existing claims, and ways to reduce the Town's insurance premium in future years."
As to your question about a personal conflict of interest insofar as the six defendants in your action against them are being defended at taxpayers' cost under the town's liability insurance policy, you should seek counsel from your lawyer.
Obviously, as a member of Council you have a legitimate right to know and access any and all documentation in connection with the town's insurance coverage, liability or otherwise, but you are in the unusual position of being the plaintiff against the six.
I would guess from figures in the press during the past few years that costs could run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The judge in the inquiry against the Mississauga mayor suggested in his report that there should be an option for the office of the Attorney General to be involved, so that individual citizens didn't have to mortgage their homes when pursuing a perceived breach of the Act.
Isn't your suit partly responsible for the increase in the Town's insurance costs?
Just for once, going back some 20 years in time, let the election this October result in at least 5, and preferably 6 members of Council chosen to be individuals with an above average intelligence, and an above average ability to think and speak precisely and simultaneously.
We need decision makers, not referrals and deferrals until everyone loses track of what was intended at the outset.
I doubt if the above is going to happen, so I feel sorry in advance for the minority.
Post a Comment