We should all be concerned about the recent articles in the local newspapers about the expenditure of almost $500,000 without Council approval, after all, it is our money. But before we start pointing fingers we need to have the facts — or as many as we are able to get.

The questions that need to be asked, must be asked and publicly shared. This will be the true test of openness and transparency.

The other thing we must insist on is that Council stop pointing fingers at staff until the facts are know. This is the true test of leadership. The captain of the ship goes down with the ship — they don’t start pointing fingers as soon as trouble appears.

One must also wonder why Council, particularly Mayor Morris and Evelina MacEachern, both who have a reputation for reviewing the cheque lists, never spotted a cheque of this size. Does that suggest it was purposely not listed?

Based on news reports, another troubling question is regarding the May 2007 letter from NORR (the original architects of the building) where they state that compensation for the repairs would be paid through their insurance company, Pro-Deminity Insurance based on independent tests conducted by NORR that concluded the issues that were brought forward by staff were correct (Feb 2007 letter).

However, after partial payment was received for the repairs, NORR informed staff that the insurance company was not paying any additional funds, leaving the town on the hook for the balance of approx. $60,000.

So a few issues that need review include;

1. Should staff be authorizing payment for expenses that are part of traditional operations? This seems to be a typical operation issue — work was completed with full Council approval but was not completed correctly and staff followed up to get it done.
2. Is there are dollars amount for all staff purchase above which needs explicit Council approval?
3. Should staff not issue a purchase order for a “flow through” expense that will be paid by a third party — in this case an insurance company.
4. Why is Mayor Morris quoted as stating that the focus is getting back the $442,000? Didn’t the insurance company already pay the largest portion of that with the amount not yet recovered closer to $60,000? Or is that mis-information?

Clearly this is not an exhaustive list, just some of the issues that Council needs to investigate and questions that deserve accurate answers.

The concern is that already residents are being spun that;

1. this is a staff issue and Council has no responsibility,
2. the firing of John Rogers is connected, and
3. information is being communicated by Council that is possibly not accurate (or possibly the papers have added their own spin).

However, until all the facts are know, Council should remember, good people who never signed up for public office are having their reputations tarnished by the conduct of Council. Surely that is outside the code of ethics.

For a different view from the 2 local papers, check out Councillor Buck’s blog, as always she has her own view on the subject.

First get the facts — then communicate them accurately, fairly and openly. The community deserves the truth without the spin!

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