| |
When integrity and due process in government
break down...
We depend on
the social structures of law, order and good governance. When any of these
fail ---the "public interest" suffers.
INTIMIDATION OF A WITNESS
When a powerful corporation ---or
government--- exerts its might, and
misuses the Courts, to silence dissenting opinion or suppress evidence by litigating against an
ordinary Citizen without just cause, (as, in this case: of
a "Whistle-Blower" who agreed to
testify with important evidence against that entity): it's
called a "SLAPP Action" - (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public
Participation).
In this specific
case, the
City's hired Consultant sued an
ordinary ratepayer, for
$4,200,000, in order
to suppress his
evidential PROOF of a 'Pipeline Fix'.
Instead of protecting that Citizen
(who acted in the public interest, in a volunteer capacity for the City),
the City of Ottawa ---under the cover of its Agent's litigation against that
Whistle-Blower, and in defiance of the OMB Order--- used the SLAPP-litigation
as a means to speed ahead with its plans
for a Pipeline-Lagoon System for Munster.
CURRENT STATUS of LITIGATION (December
9, 2004)
The 'SLAPP Action' lawsuit
against a Public Liaison Committee (PLC) member occurred on
December 9th, 1999,
at a time when Goulbourn's Mayor, the Region and its Consultants were trying to put a lid on
further evidence, that would have shown that the City's
pipeline/lagoon selection was a "FIX", and was vastly inferior
to the alternative, on-site mechanical treatment plant.
The City has delayed the
Court proceedings, first, by using the excuse that the EA process was still
underway, second by arguing that the OMB Hearing was still pending, third,
by pleading that the
OMB-ordered third re-evaluation still had to be done ...and so on.
Now that the city has
completely "side-stepped" the third consultant's recommendation (to
eliminate the pipeline option, and apply an on-site, communal solution) ---and work has
actually commenced on the illicit forcemain scheme (the city's intention all
along) ---
THERE IS NO LONGER A NEED FOR THE SLAPP-SUIT AGAINST THE PUBLIC MEMBER.
Therefore, the city's
consultant, who launched the SLAPP-suit in an effort to financially destroy,
and silence,
the Defendant, is now attempting to force a
"Mutual Release" to be signed by the Defendant, without any consideration
for legal costs or damages.
| |
| |
Exposure
of these unethical practices, along with outright misrepresentations about
true project costs, breeches of public trust, and public endangerment, have largely been kept
from public view, until the creation of
this website.
|
|
|
|
|
Under its previous 'cover' of obfuscation
and back-room dealings, the City has
acted dishonestly and irresponsibly with our tax dollars on several fronts:
1.) It
had proceeded with haste, (counter to the OMB Order), to prepare the Richmond lagoons,
the Jock
River twinned pipeline crossing and Richmond pump station up-grades to
prepare for its planned
Munster-Richmond connection.
2.)
Now, work is actually underway on a pipeline, that:
3.)
In order to advance its own agenda, "the City" (i.e.: those members of staff,
mayor and ward councillor, who are responsible), misrepresented the truth with regard to
both cost and risk ---to the public and to the Ministry of the
Environment. As well, "the City" broke many of its own land-use-planning
provisions, it withheld vital information from the public, from MOE, from
Department of Fisheries and Oceans, it
manipulated and influenced the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority in order
to circumvent the correct solution; ...the list goes on and on.
The City's game plan is to rush the work through,
such that, if it could get away with ignoring the OMB-Ordered Independent Review (R. V.
Anderson) - results (released December 16, 2002), finding against the
pipeline--- and ultimately complete the pipeline--- then it can say: "Oh, we may as well proceed with the $17
million pipeline, because most of the money has been spent".
All things considered (even with the money spent in Richmond), and even if a
forcemain were fully installed and ready to operate: an on-site treatment plant
---at $3.5 million, with its environmental benefits, and
greatly reduced risks to the Richmond Fen and to shallow well owners along
the route--- would
still
be a substantially better alternative to choose.
Remember: Walkerton ended up costing
taxpayers $155,000,000,
and Richmond's case has the potential to become MUCH
WORSE!
What does all of this have to do with an apparent 'no-body' getting sued by
the city, or city's agent? According to the Sierra Legal Defence
Fund:
| |
"SLAPP suits can silence
individuals and organizations who would otherwise make invaluable
contributions toward issues of public importance." |
|
Regardless of one's ability to contribute,
what the city did was wrong. The Mayor, personally, should
immediately address this SLAPP-action case.
To say to Mayor Bob Chiarelli,
what someone else has said:
| |
“When you know that an injustice was done and you find
yourself in a position to fix it and you choose not to – you
inherit responsibility for that injustice.” |
|
| |
Re: The
matter of wasted taxpayers' resources:
Educated, best-guess, estimates indicate that the City spent in the neighbourhood of $12, 000,000 to $15,000,000, BEFORE a shovel even
went into the ground. Most of this expense was incurred by the City
fighting the public interest: to have a safe, low-cost, on-site
treatment plant installed to treat the Munster wastewater treatment
problem. The six-year battle resulted in an OMB Hearing, extra
engineering cost for a re-evaluation (which the City ignored),
tanker-truck hauling of sewage each winter, and many other
pipeline-related retro-fits to Richmond's infrastructure (lagoons,
twin-crossing of the Jock River, and pump station upgrades), and other
administrative expenses.
The actual work is has been
expertly estimated to cost in the range of $16,000,000.
Add the two together... at total
cost of $30,000,000-plus for
the high-risk forcemain, which
will continuously threaten the, shallow-well, drinking water
supply of 5,000 residents, when an on-site treatment plant ---100%-safe to the water supply--- could have been constructed, at
a TOTAL COST OF UNDER $4,000.000:
...and you have a full-blown scandal.
|
|
|
|
One of the first
project assignments the city's new Independant Auditor must do is to
investigate
the "Munster Sewergate" issue.
When all the stories are told, this case will likely go down in history as
'one of the most nefarious and debauched infrastructure examples in Canadian history'.
| |
IMPORTANT NOTES:
The resident's battle with the City ---for a no-risk solution to
the Munster Wastewater treatment problem--- will continue until the forcemain is stopped and the obviously safe
communal solution is instituted. Only then, will the
"PUBLIC INTEREST" be served.
The wider reason
why this fight is so important...
|
|
|
Related Links:
|