Aurora Citizen

News & Views from the Citizens of Aurora Ontario

Archive for the ‘Conflict of Interest’ Category

Councillor Steve Granger Demonstrates His Leadershp Skills

Posted by auroracitizen on March 3, 2010

The town is positively a twitter with news about Councillor Granger’s latest demonstration of his leadership skills. He must be in full election mode.

After Council was finished last night, Councillor Granger accosted Brock Weir, the new staff writer at The Auroran, about the accuracy of the article in this week’s edition.

It seems Mr Granger took offense to the fact that a writer was reporting the truth — that members of the Farmer’s Market found him “typical self- indulgence of trying to be a leader”. 

There was also excerpts from an email from one of the committee members that described Councillor Granger as late arriving, disorganized, unprepared and “such poor leadership as witnessed by Councillor Granger this afternoon when challenged with effective and direct questions on organization…”

Another email counter these claims stating Councillor Granger “has been working very hard … and he did most or all of this work unilaterally.” However, this writer was Sher St Kitts, friend of Mayor Morris and benefactor of this Council, and hence with limited credibility.

However, even Sher St Kitts indicated that he had developed the constitution “unilaterally” — which our dictionary defines as “decided or acted on by only one involved party or nation irrespective of what the others do”. Interesting, even his supporter admits he wrote a constitution for the Farmers Market without input.

Unilateral decision-making is not the type of leadership usually associated with a community leader anywhere outside of Aurora. However, it now sees to the be the only method of leadership since Mayor Phyllis Morris came to power.

Oh, and then Councillor Grander resigned form the Farmer’s Market committee — or as we used to say in the playground “picked up his ball and went home”.

Well we are glad that The Auroran is reporting the facts for Aurora to make informed decisions and look forward to reading more of the same in the future.

Of special note, Mr Brian Morris (Husband of Mayor Phyllis Morris), joined the fray and accused The Auroran of being a “rag” desperate to “..bring down this council”.

Fortunately Mayor Morris was available to quell the angry twosome and peace was restored.

Congratulations Brock — you have now been officially welcomed to Aurora politics. We look forward to reading another fact based report of the events in next weeks

Oh and the good news for Councillor Granger? There is no such thing as bad publicity 🙂

Advertisements

Posted in Conflict of Interest, Integrity, Leadership, Town Council | 44 Comments »

Is What You See — What You Get?

Posted by auroracitizen on February 20, 2010

Why is Council sticking their nose in where it doesn’t belong — the Board of Education and Wells Street School.

Answer: Votes!

Aurora Council has no business messing with the business of the Board of education. Council would be offended if the Board messed with their business.

They hate it when the Province (i.e. OMB) steps into Town business, but don’t share the same view about them stepping into Board business. Why? Because the folks who live around Wells Street School are active and vocal and represent a significant voting block.

Sound familiar? Does STOP ring any bells? That was the group who were upset about Transmission lines being increased backing on to their properties (Richard Johnson can provide significantly more information for those who are unaware).

Mayor wanna be Morris was all over that group when she ran for Mayor. In fact, that group was instrumental in getting her elected.

But what did she actually do for them – nada, zip, zilch. In fact, she rarely attended meetings and when the poop hit the fan, she was long gone and left them blowing in the wind.

To be clear, we are not advocating for or against the interested folks at Wells Street School  — or the folks at STOP — so don’t bother getting mad at us about either issue. That’s not what this post is about. It’s about the Mayor getting involved where she doesn’t belong and making promises that are more about votes than getting anything done.

Even better, she has the nerve to state “It almost sounds like the review process has a bit of a flaw in it”. Well, if anyone is an authority about flawed process Mayor Phyllis Morris would be an expert after the process of our Integrity Commissioner.

We are just highlighting the methodology of Mayor Morris. She will parade around gathering press coverage, fighting a battle she shouldn’t be involved in, for no other reason than  it suits her election plans.

And before you say this was council decision, another quote “I have met with Councillor Gallo and I have contacted Mr Revington, and it has been decided that a letter should go from my office …”

So beware CAWS, don’t be fooled into thinking that you have Town support. You don’t. You just have the mirage of someone who is pretending she cares when all she really cares about is your vote in November.

Posted in Conflict of Interest, Election 2010, Hydro, Integrity, Leadership | 22 Comments »

Role of New Aurora Spokesperson Unclear

Posted by evelynb on January 16, 2010

It’s odd for a sitting Councillor to learn of dramatic new initiatives in town communications from the media.

This week the Chief Administrative Officer, acting as spokesperson for the town (the Mayor) announced the town’s intention to add a spokesperson to the administration to improve communications. Speech-writing and perhaps engaging with Facebook will be part of the job.

Council last met on December 8th. The budget will not be ratified before January 26th.

Already we are off and running. So fast off the mark, no time has been allowed for discussion at the Council table.

Everyone who reads this blog knows, because I say so, I do not present as competent in computers.

But Facebook, for God’s Sake. Facebook !!!! Can anybody at the town hall possibly not understand what Facebook is about.

We are to pay for someone. with a Masters Degree in Communication , at a cost of $100Ks annually, to engage Facebook !!!!!

Oh My God!!!

Facebook is the domain of the Rampant and Reckless, Totally Irreverent and Sacrilegious Youth.

I keep tabs on my grandchildren on Facebook.

The Town has a Corporate Communication Division. The Mayor monopolised it from the start as her personal public relations flack. Along with Notice Board in the Aurabanana which costs probably $75Ks a year. And various and extravagant resources expended in the ongoing effort to vanquish dissent and destroy her enemies.

Despite all that, there’s still an apparent lack of confidence that the community fully appreciates the myriad of marvelous Mormac accomplishments of the administration.

So now we are to have a Masters Degree in Communication on hand to polish that which may be tarnished, in time for the next election.

Speeches will be professionally prepared for the Gala opening of Church Street School Heritage and Cultural Centre, the pitch of the first ball at the new diamond in the summer and all other possible occasions.

We may even have articulate speeches from the Throne at the opening of every council meeting.

If Buckingham Palace has a Spokesperson, why not Mayor Morris’ Town Hall in Aurora? May we not aspire?

The Press Secretary/Spokesperson may possibly hold press conferences with the Town Hall Press Gallery There may occasionally be scripted appearances by her Worship.

All on the taxpayers’ dime.

Remember the admonitions of righteous Professor Robert McDiarmid of York University, an invited guest of Her Worship to read scripture to Council on the evils of incumbent advantage over challengers and how corporate contributions need to be rigorously controlled in election campaigns.

Little did the naive but well-meaning Professor know how many municipal corporate contributions can be used for a campaign without a single red cent showing up in the candidate’s mandated Statement of Expenses.

Posted in Budget, Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest, Election 2010, Integrity, Leadership, Legal | 20 Comments »

Community Corner: Do the Friends of Councillors Get Special Treatment?

Posted by auroracitizen on November 25, 2009

To the Aurora Citizen

What seems to be missing in the debate (debacle?) around the November 10th meeting, is the fact that Walter Mestrinaro was making his second appearance before Council to get a decision on the bleachers overturned, because his company did not get the award.

Despite the fact that Mr. Mestrinaro was disqualified for the most of basic of reasons – he didn’t respond on time, he did not provide the proper certifications and his bid was more expensive – he appeared at multiple Council meetings to protest that he did not get the work, culminating in the Nov 10th meeting, where he impugned the town staff for not following procedure.

Mr. Elliot & Mr. Christopher both advised Council (at a previous meeting) that the matter was administrative, strictly within the purview of Staff. They advised Council again on the 10th. Yet, Mr. Mestrinaro was allowed to carry on, impugn town staff, with no input from Mayor Morris nor the sidekicks. Interesting, considering that Councilor Wilson had just recently professed his undying support/respect, etc., for town staff.

The other interesting point is that Councilor MacEachern was “sick” that evening – perhaps the “my friend is appearing a Council to whine about something, and I don’t really want to be a part of it” flu.

And, the kicker? Walter Mestrinaro is a member of the Committee of Adjustments: “The committee considers the merits of applications for land severance and minor variances to land, buildings or structure, in accordance with the Planning Act.” A PAID position.

Yes, good citizens of Aurora. You are paying for Mr. Mestrinaro to sit in judgment of merits of an application as it pertains to the Planning Act (a fairly extensive document) – and he can’t even follow the basic rules of tendering.

I would be concerned, but then I am not Mayor – at least not yet!

From Junius — belatedly and with apologizes added by Aurora Citizen 😉

Posted in Code of Ethics, Community Corner, Conflict of Interest, Leadership, Local Business, Town Council | 15 Comments »

Integrity Commissioner needed… but who should decide?

Posted by elizabethbishenden on November 18, 2009

 The article “Search Continues for Integrity Czar”  by Sean Pearce in the November 17 Banner states that the Town of Aurora is continuing its search for a new Integrity Commissioner (IC). 

A search of the Town website and re-reading of the Code of Conduct by-law and Town postings reveal no reference as to  who actually decides who the IC should be, what their credentials are to be, and how the person will be chosen.

Neil Garbe, the town’s CAO is quoted in the article as saying that the town is looking for “a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada, who has practiced in some sort of a judicial capacity”.  The candidate could have experience as a lawyer or a justice of the peace, the article states.  So, are we in the situation where only legal eagles need apply?

The article later has information from Mayor Morris.  It’s up to staff to determine candidates, Mrs. Morris said, adding she’s not aware who is under consideration.  Council will not be involved in the process until a report is brought forward, she said.

Statements in the article about Mr. Garbe’s comments also indicate that the hiring will be done without a job competition.

Since the first and only complaint to the first IC involved the interaction between a councillor and staff, it seems incongruous that the new IC will be hired by council from a list of staff-recommended candidates.  Both council and staff are now implicitly involved in the failure of the first Integrity Commissioner.  Can we citizens entrust them with hiring the next Integrity Commissioner?

Perhaps when the Code of Conduct was formulated a better system of choosing the IC should have been decided and adhered to at the same time as the key to all of this would appear to be who “rules” as IC and who can hire and fire that same person. There are predictions that a bigger mess of this whole situation is still to come.

The whole program seems to lack, let us say, integrity.

Posted in Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest, Integrity, Leadership, Town Council | 58 Comments »

An Unbiased Opinion: The Globe and Mail

Posted by auroracitizen on October 18, 2009

Special to The Globe and Mail

Aurora: Toronto’s most dysfunctional suburb

Ivor Tossell: From Saturday’s Globe and Mail Published on Friday, Oct. 16, 2009

An 80-year-old councillor with a robust set of lungs, Evelyn Buck has become the mayor's implacable foe.

 

An 80-year-old councillor with a robust set of lungs, Evelyn Buck has become the mayor’s implacable foe. THE GLOBE AND MAIL

The town’s mayor tried to bring decorum to her city and wound up facing rancour, resignations, and an irrepressible granny blogger

Perched on Yonge Street, about 40 kilometres north of Toronto, Aurora is perhaps best known for being home to the Stronach family, who rule over the auto-parts company Magna and whose daughter, Belinda, once represented the riding in Ottawa.

On first blush, this town of 50,000 seems decorous, right down to its gingerbready GO station. Locals have a habit of badging each other with labels like “20-year resident” or “50-year resident.” Adults sing along to Jerusalem at a concert in a local park, sometimes led by the mayor herself. In a nod to its Asian residents, the city has allowed them to remove numbers they deem unlucky from their addresses.

But behind this courtly setting is a political vortex of loathing and retribution, a sterling example of urban politics at their most dysfunctional: An integrity commissioner fired. Accusations of slander, conspiracy and harassment. Angry, anonymous ads popping up in the local newspaper. At the heart of this conflict is an 80-year-old politician, who one leading counterpart suggested should be checked for Mad Cow disease after she took to a combative form of blogging.

What on earth happened in Aurora?

The first thing to know about Aurora is that it’s not Vaughan.

Unlike that sprawling, scandal-plagued city – its image tarnished by questions over expenditures and conflicts of interest – everything in Aurora is smaller, prettier and more personal.

An election in 2006 brought changes to the clubby old ways. In a tight three-way race, Ms. Morris – then a town councillor – upset the incumbent, Tim Jones, who’d held the job for 12 years. A long-time backer of MP Stronach, Mr. Jones also had the endorsement of her auto magnate father, Frank.

Mayor Morris – Phyllis to most everyone – had made a name for herself during the campaign as an environmentalist. With a sing-song, Shropshire accent that vibrates with nervous energy, she took power with promises of decorum. “Many of us don’t see it as a blood-sport,” she says, “We see it as a public service.”

From the outside, at least, things seemed to be going well. The New York Times sent a writer up to report on Ms. Morris’s quest to legalize backyard laundry lines. (To this day, people keep sending clothes-pegs to her office.) She also brought in a code of conduct in 2007 that required councillors to “accurately and adequately communicate the attitudes and decisions of council, even if they disagree with the majority of council” and forbade them to publically disparage town staff.

Rancour ensued, the council splitting into pro- and anti-mayor groups with the mayor’s side holding a majority.

“The level of hostility and animosity has been present from the very first day,” says Alison Collins-Mrakas, one of the new councillors at odds with the mayor.

Closed-door council meetings were marked with “cursing and screaming” says Grace Marsh, another rookie councillor who found herself on the wrong side of the majority.

Some councillors also didn’t seem interested in staff advice they didn’t agree with. In one instance, they overruled the advice of their chief planner during a road-paving project, and spent tens of thousands of dollars improving the driveways of well-organized ratepayers. The town was upgrading the street from suburban to city standards, lowering the levels of the road and making for awkward access to driveways.

Bureaucrats would find their judgment being questioned in public council meetings. Ms. Marsh – herself a former town employee of 10 years – says she saw city staff being berated at closed-door meetings. Council members – though not the mayor herself – were “calling people stupid, [saying], ‘You’re an idiot, you don’t know how to do your job.’ I had staff members calling me in tears,” she says.

Since the council took office, all but two of the town’s top tier of public servants have retired, left for other municipalities or were terminated.

Ms. Morris denies the charges of discord. She says the staff turnover is on par with previous administrations.

“You can’t keep everyone forever, but you can make it [look] ugly if you want to.”

In June, 2008, Ms. Marsh resigned in disgust, and rather than have the town pay for another by-election, Ms. Morris led council to appoint a runner-up from the last election – who became a loyal ally. The decision divided council even further.

“I often feel that it’s difficult to have any constructive or rational debate,” says Ms. Collins-Mrakas, an academic by trade. “If you take a position, it’s all very personal.”

But it was the new council’s lone elder voice who really roiled the water.

Sitting on her back porch in one of Aurora’s twisty, low-slung 1950s suburbs, cradling her silver-tipped cane between her legs, Ms. Buck lets out a hoot. At 80, she’s been in politics longer than many constituents have been alive, even having been mayor herself in the mid-seventies.

“Politicians, by their nature, are congenial people. They want to be liked,” muses Ms. Buck in her thick Scottish accent, shaking her head. “This council is an aberration.”

First elected in 1967, she’s known for having encyclopedic knowledge of the town and the lungs to vent it. She’s known for being ornery, having once whacked a fellow councillor, a newspaper proprietor, over the head with a rolled-up copy of his own publication. (All was soon forgiven, though Phyllis Morris was appalled.) And more recently, she’s famous for bringing city hall into a legal morass.

From the get-go, a member of the mayor’s faction expressed dislike of Ms. Buck – her polarizing style and her cantankerous approach. One was an e-mail from a mayor’s ally sent to the council that advocated that Ms. Buck be checked for Mad Cow disease. In another email, the same councillor called Ms. Buck a “jack ass” – followed by eleven exclamation marks.

In the meantime, Ms. Buck felt she was being shut out of discussions, constantly interrupted, her motions largely ignored.

“I said,” she recalls, “if they won’t give me a role, I’ll create a new role for myself.”

So, in the spring of 2007, she started a blog.

Entitled “Our Town and Its Business,” with a picture of a smiling Ms. Buck in the margin, it was at first more opaque than incendiary, full of writing that alludes slyly to incidents and avoids naming names. (Still, she hadn’t gotten six months in before calling her own nephew “abysmally bloody ignorant.”) One of Ms. Buck’s postings in November, 2007, which attacked council for the road upgrades, especially raised hackles.

“Do I take exception to mine and my neighbours’ tax money being spent that way? Damn right, I do,” she wrote. “Had I voted for that, I would have been in breach of trust to the people who elected me. Malfeasance is the term used in the Oath of Office.”

Ms. Buck also used the old media, filling countless column-inches of local newspapers with critical commentary. (Among her many topics: How much money was the town spending on outside lawyers?) “It was always my primary role anyway to keep people informed of what the issues were and what my position was,” she says. “I don’t believe in being shy or backward about telling people what I think. A lot of people like you to tell them what they think.”

It was enough to drive the majority on the council to distraction. And it put Ms. Buck’s candour at odds with the mayor’s desire for civility.

“What is difficult is if council has made a decision, and it’s time to move on then. The vote is over. You move on,” says the mayor.

Over the past summer, a nasty dispute erupted about how some remarks a citizen made before council were recorded in the meeting minutes. This led Ms. Buck to muse online about how the minutes could be “doctored.”

Having instituted a code of conduct and hired an integrity commissioner – respected ethicist David Nitkin – Ms. Morris handed him the first and last case he’d see: a formal complaint against Ms. Buck, broadly accusing her of maligning staff in public.

Exactly what that case was remains a mystery; the full complaint has never been released, nor has exactly what Ms. Buck is said to have said. A posting on the town website accused Ms. Buck of breaching the code of conduct in several places, including “unfounded and completely unmerited public criticism of staff” on her blog. A legal opinion was attached, though exactly which blog posts were thought to be troublesome, and why, were never specified.

Mr. Nitkin was not impressed by the complaint. He declined to be interviewed for this story, citing contractual obligations, but in a report he sent back to council, he slammed the complaint as “inappropriate in that the way in which it was crafted, politicized and communicated may be, and may be seen to be, wholly political.”

The next day, the mayor’s faction of council met in camera and voted to dismiss him. The remaining three councillors, sensing trouble from the e-mails flying around, stayed away. Within days, a senior bureaucrat in charge of keeping the town in line with provincial laws – who had joined the town six months earlier – abruptly retired.

“It’s unfortunate that Aurora would find itself – with all the good that’s going on in this town – even remotely being questioned for the simple fact that we’re trying to raise the bar of decorum and accountability,” says Ms. Morris.

The dismissal of Mr. Nitkin exacerbated the tension, bringing unfavourable media attention.

An anonymous blog, called Aurora Citizen, has become a hotbed of anger. Widely suspected to be run by a former councillor, perhaps with political ambitions of his or her own, its posts attract dozens of heated, nameless comments. Ms. Morris also finds herself facing a series of increasingly hostile ads that an anonymous group, calling itself the Aurora Coalition, has been printing in a local newspaper owned by a former councillor. One of them presented a statement of the town’s legal fees, tallying up hundreds of thousands spent on legal opinions, many relating to the code of conduct and Ms. Buck’s blog.

Ms. Buck has announced her intention to sue the mayor and most of council for libel, stemming from the affair. (Ms. Marsh is helping her set up a fund, and says she’s already accumulated thousands of dollars in donations.) Still, she will likely face a new integrity commissioner, and a new attempt to censure her.

Elections, which once brought hope for change to the city, are coming in 2010. Will the mayor run again?

“I hope to retain that commitment without having that light taken away. I have to believe that it’s the right thing to do. I have to believe it. I do believe it. As long as I have that commitment burning in me, I’ll continue to put myself up for office.”

Ms. Buck also sounded determined. “Oh yeah,” she said. “Unless I’m dead.”

Special to The Globe and Mail

Posted in Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest, Integrity, Leadership, Legal, Media, Special Meetings, Staff Turnover, Town Council | 26 Comments »

The State of Volunteerism

Posted by auroracitizen on May 14, 2009

Volunteers have recently come into the spotlight here in Aurora.

First, Sher St Kitts has come to our attention because the committee she heads has been unclear on how funding for the July 1st parade and how the Dream Team is associated with a Town funded and endorsed committee. This lack of transparency and potential conflict of interest has raised eyebrows and concern in some quarters. At a meeting on Tuesday, this issue was raised in a very confrontational manner — endorsed by the Mayor and Council.

Before you ask why we used the word endorsed — understand that when someone attacks a Councillor directly (versus Council as a whole) on a civil matter that is outside the mandate of Council and this is allowed only because Council waives the procedural by-law – that implies endorsement.

The same week, we have seen the resignation of Dave Giroux, the President of the Aurora Minor Ball Association (AMBA) in frustration because Council continues to refuse to honour their commitment to build a senior ball diamond. Not everyday one sees that!

He communicated his reasons through the local papers and has encourage stakeholders to rally around the issues because of the lack of movement on this issue.

We all recognize that stuff happens — but when they escalate to this level it links directly back to leadership — by the Mayor and Council.

Why have they not been able to deal with issues without this level of escalation?

Council needs to immediately take the following steps;

  1. Clarify the conflict of interest and financial questions associated with the Dream Team and the Town endorsed parade committee.
  2. Communicate with the stakeholders in the AMBA about what has happened and why they have not moved forward on resolutions that are a year old. Plus indicate what next steps and timing are in place to resolve the outstanding issues.

We predict if Council doesn’t move quickly to address these issues they will continue to fester and will become significant issues at the next election. We all know that is the last thing the Mayor wants. Unfortunately, she may not get her wish.

Stay tuned.

PS — There are a number of comments related to this post in the previous post When Is An Invitation Not An Invitation?

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Posted in Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest, Legal, Recreation, Town Council | 26 Comments »

Integrity Commissioner

Posted by auroracitizen on November 30, 2008

Now that Council has hired their Integrity Commissioner, it will be interesting to watch how they are utilized. There have been a number of accusation made about integrity that would be worthy of consideration.

There has been the refusal to sign the Code of Conduct by Cllr. Buck, and possibly some citizen members. Is it even appropriate to force citizen members to sign? Or the Conflict of Interest accusations around the appointment of Ken Whitehurst? Or even the dismissal of the CAO?

Will the new position be used as a weapon to try to quiet dissenting opinions? Will it be used for a little self-evaluation of their own conduct?

Most importantly, will this third party be able to render third party opinions without having to vet them through Council under the cloak of “In Camera” meetings because of the personnel nature of the issues?

How broad or narrow will the scope be? Remember, they are not full-time. Will they only be used at the discretion of Council, or will citizens have the ability to contact the Commissioner to investigate and report on the behaviours of Council or specific members?

All of these are important questions that need to be answered. Stay tuned, I am sure that activities will shortly start to tell the story.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Posted in CAO, Conflict of Interest, Town Council | 5 Comments »

Let the Facts be Known

Posted by auroracitizen on November 19, 2008

First, let’s congratulate Council for taking the initiative to print ads about some recent issues affecting the town. It seems that the awareness created by this blog and the local newspapers has caused them to recognize that pretending that there are no issues doesn’t make them go away.

Hopefully this will be the first of many ads communicating the facts about issues of importance to the community. Let’s hope that the oft repeated commitment to “providing open and transparent government” is more than just these couple ads.

With regard to Mr Whitehurst, this issue will continue to dog the Mayor right into the next election. She and others continue to ignore the point about a conflict. The issue is not that he resigned or what he is billing the town — the conflict is that he voted on an item that had a financial impact on himself personally. It is one of the most clear cut cases of a conflict ever seen. Given the number of times this comes up with regard to members of Council — it is amazing that they continue to pretend it doesn’t exist in this case.

Did we really pay a lawyer $2,144.63 to attend a single meeting as part of an overall $12,345.83 expenditure. To be clear, the taxpayers of the community had to pay a lawyer to defend Council against the very people they were elected to serve so Council could act against the will of the taxpayers and appoint a person of their choosing. Talk about a slap in the face.

As for the unauthorized spending by staff, let’s hope a lot more questions get answered. Here are a few– you probably have more. Send them along and we will publish them.

  1. How did Council miss this issue when the Auroran reported on it a number of times?
  2. How did cheques get distributed without Council being aware of them? The Mayor and at least 2 Councillors regularly review — and question staff – on the cheque registry. Where were the questions in this case?
  3. If proper procurement procedures are in place — then how did this slip through? Don’t taxpayers deserve to understand what happened and what is being done to fix it. General statements about changing roles and working hard don’t provide much reassurance.
  4. Was this used as an excuse to dismiss the CAO? It seeems the issue has been known for awhile, but only became public when the CAO was asked to leave. Are staff being blamed to cover the real issue — that Council simply wanted John Rogers out?

It is offensive that Council is pointing the finger squarely at staff about not following procedures. Where are the checks and balances by Council that should also have been followed. If The Auroran spotted the issue, them why didn’t Council?

Hopefully the media will continue to keep up the pressure until all the facts become known.

Keep your comments coming. Only through open dialogue will these and other issues get broadly discussed.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Posted in CAO, Conflict of Interest, Legal, Town Council | 19 Comments »

Code of Ethics?

Posted by auroracitizen on November 3, 2008

So do tell — under what part of the much vaunted Code of Ethics is it covered that when the public show concern about an action of Council that you just wait until the issue dies down and do what you want anyway?

This exactly what happened with the appointment of Ken Whitehurst to the position of interim Director — a mere 2 months after the issue was front page news in the local paper and reported in this blog. I guess they hoped everyone would forget about the issue and they would slide it by without anyone noticing. Thanks to Councillor Buck for bringing it to our attention at a recent Council meeting.

We won’t “rehash” this item because we know how much this offends the supporters of the Mayor. It just gets in the way of doing what they want without people being aware of their behaviour.

Well we thought it was important to bring it to people’s attention.

Judge for yourself — agree or disagree — then talk to your neighbours. But make sure you are aware of what your elected representatives are doing without telling you. So much for transparency!

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Posted in Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest | 4 Comments »