Kilger Disputes O’Shaughnessy as Hickley Whistle Blowing Funding Hearing Continues Tuesday July 16 in Cornwall Ontario

Deputy Fire Chief Rob Hickley
Deputy Fire Chief Rob Hickley

CFN – The hearing to see if Cornwall Ontario Deputy Fire Chief and Whistle Blower Rob Hickley continues at the court house at 10 AM Tuesday July 16th.

Viewing the transcript of Mayor Bob Kilger was bewildering.

Mystically even some of the most benign questions from Attorney Fay Brunning have been met with a

Super Lawyer Will McDowell

wall of objections from Super Lawyer Will McDowell and the Mayor’s attorney.  During one stretch reading the transcripts of the sessions councilor Rivette went pages without answering a single question.  Talk about earning your money!

At the root are some very basic questions.   Why, even though there is no language in the city bylaws for paying for whistle blower fees that the city paid for former CAO Paul Fitzpatrick’s in spite of being found guilty, but are refusing to pay for the proven true Diane Shay and now Deputy Fire Chief Rob Hickley?

The niggly language is that the only people that could charge Mayor Kilger with a conflict of interest is a citizen of Cornwall; but only after the conflict becomes public unless the mayor admits his conflict over the hiring of his son at the fire department as alleged in court document from Mr. Hickley.

Bob n Fitzy May 14 2012At root also is the fact that Mayor Kilger, former CAO Fitzpatrick and council as a whole have deceived the public and city workers by simply not informing them of whistle blowing and the punitive manner in which they treated the whistle blowers once in the open potentially frightening others from stepping forward.

Sifting through the mountains of documents at court can give any scribbler a brain cramp.

If Mr. Hickley’s proof eventually comes into open court it will be explosive.

Allegations that the  Mayor and his son applied some elbow grease to ensure a position on the fire department for Chad Kilger.

It also as incredulous as it sounds, that Mayor Kilger confirmed that he presided over in camera meetings of council where the Hickley case was discussed while at the same time claiming that he didn’t influence or participate.  I leave it to you dear viewers of CFN to figure that whopper out; but of course that’s what lawyers try to make sense of.

It appears from the Mayor’s testimony that he negotiated the settlement agreement with Mr. Fitzpatrick but that it didn’t go to open council in camera or out for a vote.  It of course could not go in camera as that would violate the municipal rules.

Some of the gems from the questioning of Mayor Kilger:

Q:  Do you agree that council was lied to in reference to Former Councilor Leslie O’Shaughnessy’s statement? (below in BLUE)

Doesn't Economic Development's Bob Peters make pretty banners while at work at City Hall during elections?
Doesn’t Economic Development’s Bob Peters make pretty banners while at work at City Hall during elections?

Bob Kilger

No.

The simple answer to the question of why I resigned is that I felt that I could no longer be accountable for the decisions that were being made during closed door meetings. Without accountability there cannot be transparency.  During my tenure on City Council, I can show that I was lied to, that I had been mislead on various issues, and that information that was pertinent to the decision-making process was willfully withheld.

Fay Brunning

Did Councilor O’Shaugnessy ever speak directly about the fact that he was concerned you were withholding information from council that was pertinent to the decision making process?

kilger slumpMayor Kilger

I have no such recollection.

 Mr. Cameron, the mayor’s lawyer refused to provide the Fitzpatrick settlement contract.

A huge admission is that when Mayor Kilger gave his press release stating that the lawyer of the moment stated he was not in conflict of interest that it was only an oral opinion and that he has no document in writing with such an opinion from legal meaning that the Standard Freeholder and other media ran a poof piece with no substance.

Mayor Kilger refused to take the “Lastman Test” where former Toronto Mayor Mel Lastman asked a judge to verify if he was in conflict of interest.

Kilger feb 2012Mayor Kilger

We don’t vote in closed session; but we do give direction.

Um, how do you do that precisely?

In one four page section of the transcript lawyer Cameron objects 17 times to questions asked by Fay Brunning.

Mayor Kilger appeared frail, being asked to speak up or if he needed to use a microphone.

Fay Brunning

Did you promise to abide by the terms of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act?

MissingBobBob Kilger

I can’t say for sure.

So the taxpayers of Cornwall Ontario have probably spent about $25,000 during the deposing process simply to get to the point where Deputy Fire Chief’ Rob Hickley’s legal bills will be paid for by the city that has tried to crucify him metaphorically speaking for outing yet another scandal plaguing Mayor Bob Kilger.

Imagine the total by the time this mess is done.    Imagine spending hundreds of not thousands of dollars having high priced lawyers object to basic questions simply to try and cover their behinds?

At the end of the day this scribbler wonders a few things.  First off did any of council read their declaration of office?

1. I will truly, faithfully and impartially exercise this office to the best of my knowledge and ability.
2. I have not received and will not receive any payment or reward, or promise thereof, for the
exercise of this office in a biased, corrupt or in any other improper manner.
3. I will disclose any pecuniary interest,direct or indirect, in accordance with the Municipal Conflict
of Interest Act.
4. I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second (or the
reigning sovereign for the time being).

And I make this solemn promise and declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath.

Did any of them mean it when they signed?  Do the people of Cornwall even care about this scandal that now is alleged to be over the $3M mark with no sign of ending?

Ultimately if the Municipal Act had teeth or if perhaps Mayor Kilger had been a Conservative instead of a long time Liberal perhaps the Province would be saving taxpayer’s a lot of money and step in and take some action and conduct a proper investigation?   Premier Kathleen Wynne has been silent about Mayor Kilger while making comments about conflicted Toronto Mayor Rob Ford.

Video of councilor Rivette that blew the doors off the barn!

The hearing for Mr. Hickley is at 10 AM at the Court house.  It’s open to the public.  Will you be there?   You can post your comment below.

Please support Independent media by clicking the banner below and subscribing to CFN.

subscribe to cfn

9 Responses to "Kilger Disputes O’Shaughnessy as Hickley Whistle Blowing Funding Hearing Continues Tuesday July 16 in Cornwall Ontario"

  1. jules   July 15, 2013 at 9:22 PM

    Mr. Hickley I will be with you in spirit since I live in Ottawa and all I had on my mind was your court date. Be strong and give a good fight.

    I would like to see as many people going to the court to support Mr. Hickley. Jamie I am looking forward to hear the results. My prayers and good toughts are with Mr. Hickley, Mrs. Shay and even yourself. Take care.

  2. boycott the system   July 15, 2013 at 11:06 PM

    So glad someone is speaking up in regards to the disgusting ways our City will be affecting every taxpayer in this town due to their own negligence and stupidity!!! Shame on the Mayor and I hope next election we as citizens of Cornwall open our eyes more and get rid of the corruption that has been going on for too damn long!!! I am glad Andre spoke out about this with you Jamie. Takes real people with no agenda to come forth and fight for what is right. If we fight as a society against this outrageous pay outs, lawyer’s fees that is insanely without a doubt should not have us be liable for their bs mistakes!!!! I hope by all means that under what reason as taxpayers should we be responsible to cover these costs of when the accountability is in fact the Mayor’s problems, excuse my language, with all the f-ups and cover ups he has inflicted in our city. This makes me ill to see what more damages could continue while he is still the Mayor!! Pay for your own damn lawyers and stop making us pay for your mistakes!!! We are accountable by law for any law we break but seems that they break it, they get these high paid lawyers to cover their butts and get away with everything!!! And oh, at who’s cost?? They don’t care, it’s us taxpayers who have to suffer for their BS!!! Wake up Cornwall and get with the program!!! Where’s the justice for our citizens?? I see he only gives a crap about saving his own dirty butt instead. Blows my mind!! Go big or go home the saying goes.. Well, Mr. Kilger, it’s time you go home!!! :/

  3. mariah   July 16, 2013 at 6:33 AM

    I support you Rob & best of luck this morning The city should pay a whistleblower lawyer fees, it is only right!

  4. tea & biscuit   July 16, 2013 at 6:59 AM

    So is the goal of the hearing to have a judge say Yay or Nay to Hickley’s request to have his legal fees paid for by the city…as the headline suggests, or are there other goals for the hearing?

  5. admin   July 16, 2013 at 7:01 AM

    the hearing is to determine if the courts will force the city to pay for Mr. Hickley’s legal bill.

  6. tea & biscuit   July 16, 2013 at 7:14 AM

    Sorry, I’m not knowledgable about how these things work. So the transcripts will inform the judge on the city’s position of denying to pay the legal fees, based on the city’s claim there is no conflict? If that’s the case, the hearing should also determine a conflict is present and therefore Hickley is entitled under law?

  7. admin   July 16, 2013 at 7:15 AM

    T&B I’m sure we’ll know more by the end of the day 🙂

  8. stellabystarlight   July 16, 2013 at 9:51 AM

    I personally do not know Mr. Hickley, but understand and sincerely sympathize with his situation, however, I am somewhat at a lost in understanding what effect the outcome will generate.

    We, the tax payers, complained and rightfully so, how our mayor’s legal fees were paid by the tax payer.

    On the other hand, we are hoping Mr. Hickley wins his case by having his legal fees paid by the city.

    Are we not setting a precedent and shooting ourselves in the foot? Are we not opening the door for all city employees who have a complaint and who seek legal council have legal fees paid by the city which comes from the tax payer’s pocket?

    If in fact the tax payer did pay Kilger’s legal fees, why would we not be fighting that through the powers that be, instead of hoping that Mr. Hickley wins his case?

    The tax payer is once again on the losing end. Mindboggling to say the least.

  9. jules   July 16, 2013 at 11:32 AM

    Best of luck to Mr. Hickley that is all I have on my mind this morning. Stay strong Mr. Hickley and all the very best to you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.