Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
REPORTING · 18th November 2011
Walter McFarlane
The seventh question came from Tony Brady. He asked why the Council spent over a quarter of a million dollars to get rid of an employee from the district when there is no legal ability to do so.

Randy Halyk said it is a good point. He agreed with Brady’s sentiment as they should not be spending money where it does not need to be spent such as Shames or spending money where it would not bring value back to the community. Halyk then said he could not speak to the dismissal of the CAO because it was an In Camera item.

Joanne Monaghan said the CAO and herself spoke to Staff Sergeant Steve Corp and it was his idea for these two positions to be cut. She told people the money given to the CAO was a part of a contract, which, if the city did not honour, would have cost the city more money in court.

Jim Thom said the money, $400,000 was 4% of the taxes. He was choked to see it go. He would have kept the CAO here, had him do some work. Monaghan rebutted telling him it was $250,000. Thom said it was probably closer to $400,000.

OUR PICK FOR BEST ANSWER: Halyk