Judge's review of Collus sale could cost town as much as $1.6 million

The latest estimate of the cost of the judicial review into the town’s sale of 50 per cent of Collus in 2012 is between $1.4 and $1.6 million.

Collingwood’s CAO, Fareed Amin, presented a report to council at Monday's meeting with a breakdown of cost estimates and background on the purpose and scope of a judicial inquiry.

“Our costing assumptions are based on a nine-month inquiry however, after the documentary phase is complete we will have a better idea of the costs and timelines,” states Amin’s report.

The report further states a time limit cannot be established by the municipality for an inquiry. All that is required by the Municipal Act is that the commissioner “report the results of the inquiry to council as soon as practicable.”

Amin reported having several meetings with court staff and Justice Frank Marrocco (the judge who will serve as Commissioner for the inquiry) to discuss requirements. Using this information and the example of a judicial inquiry in Mississauga, Amin came up with the cost estimates around $1.4 to $1.6 million. The costs will be funded by the Working Capital Reserve Fund. Amin’s report also suggests it is difficult to estimate potential costs due to unknowns, but said he would keep council informed of developments related to the inquiry.

“Once the inquiry has been launched, and it has been launched . . . we lose control over the process. The process is now up to the Commissioner, to handle the timing, the document review the examination of witnesses,” said Amin. “I will do my best to keep council up to date, but that will be largely driven by the commissioner himself.”

The staff report presented to council April 30 included several points made by the solicitor, Mary Ellen Bench, for the City of Mississauga regarding a judicial review undertaken there.

“A public inquiry is a public investigation, carried out in the public eye and is not a trial,” quotes Amin’s report. “A public inquiry seeks to explain why something occurred and not to determine guilt or liability. Unlike a court, it is not an adversarial proceeding.”

At the end of the process, quotes the staff report, the Commissioner will report his or her factual findings, make observations and issue recommendations that may include legislative policy or procedural changes to be implemented.

Councillor Mike Edwards said he was “extremely upset about spending this money,” on the inquiry. But said he would vote in favour of the report by Amin and the attached terms of reference for the inquiry “because the process can’t be stopped.”

Councillor Deb Doherty said having the money come from the Working Capital Reserve fund was “preferential to having it attached to a tax bill.” She said she was glad it didn’t come out of the taxpayer’s pocket on an annual basis.

Councillor Edwards responded contrarily.

“Any money we spend comes from the taxpayer’s pocket,” he said.

“This is not coming from the taxpayer’s pocket this year,” responded Doherty.

Councillors Kevin Lloyd and Tim Fryer voted against receiving the staff report and the terms of reference included in it.

Mayor Sandra Cooper said she did not support spending the money on the inquiry, but voted in favour of the report and terms of reference.

The terms of reference are there to define the scope of the inquiry. They can be found here in Amin’s staff report.

The terms of reference direct the Commissioner and his team to inquire into all aspects of the transaction from 2012, including the history, price of the shares, impact on the ratepayers, and impact on good governance and public business of the municipality.