Scanned, recopied or Internet copy, if there are errors, please e-mail me with corrections:
Opening comments: More at the end.
To the main Judicial Inquiry page - to the Hazel McCallion page.
Mississauga News - May 27, 2010 - By Joe Chin - jchin@mississauga.net
Former City manager vague in details
Did he tell all to Hazel?
On the hotseat.
Former City Manager David O'Brien testified today at the Mississauga judicial inquiry.
Staff photo by Fred Loek
Mayor Hazel McCallion may or may not have known about a key provision that gave Borealis unusual veto power, considering the company had purchased only a 10 per cent share of Enersource from the City of Mississauga.
“I don’t recall meeting with her, but I probably did discuss it and other things with her as we were bringing this forward because Hazel McCallion and I spoke sometimes four, five times a day,” said former City manager David O’Brien, who was the “point man” for the City in the 2000 deal.
O’Brien took the stand today during the third day of testimony at the judicial inquiry into two controversial City deals.
McCallion has said that she signed the final deal without reading it and was not aware of the last-minute change until it was later brought to her attention.
Testimony revealed the “final” agreement was presented to councillors on Nov. 29, 2000 and subsequently ratified by Council on Dec. 6. The “blackline” amendment was forwarded by Borealis to O’Brien on Dec. 4.
“You have no specific recollection of raising this issue, i.e. the negative veto, with Hazel in that time period?” asked Freya Krisjanson, the lawyer representing McCallion.
“No,” O’Brien replied.
The change, which only came to light a few years ago, gave Borealis, a subsidiary to the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS), veto power over certain actions, such as the pay levels of Enersource board members.
O’Brien, 60, served for nearly a decade as City manager. He left the City to become deputy minister with Ontario’s Ministry of Energy and then president and chief executive officer of Toronto Hydro. The Sawmill Valley resident retired last year.
Borealis’ commitment to the City in the deal included a $750-million acquisition fund, a $1.25-billion commitment to carry debt and a “put” agreement that could have allowed Mississauga to force OMERS to buy the City out for a guaranteed price of $360 million within four years.
“There was substantial economic risk that OMERS was taking in this entity from the outset,” Michael Barrack, the lawyer for OMERS, said yesterday.
“Against this backdrop, it would not be unreasonable for someone with that kind of exposure to have a fair degree of control over the enterprise.”
McCallion is scheduled to take the stand on Monday.
The transaction is one of two major issues the inquiry, under Justice Douglas Cunningham, is examining. The other concerns a failed $14.4-million land deal in the City Centre that involved McCallion’s son, Peter McCallion.
Comments by others - 3 - to this web-page at time of posting;
MISSISSAUGAWATCH May 27, 2010 4:54 PM
This comment on yesterday and today's Mississauga Judicial Inquiry brought to you by Peter Gabriel
I don't remember, I don't recall I got no memory of anything at all I don't remember, I don't recall I got no memory of anything -anything at all Strange is your language and I have no decoder Why don't you make your intentions clear With eyes to the sun and your mouth to the soda Saying, "Tell me the truth, you got nothing to fear Stop staring at me like a bird of prey I'm all mixed up, I got nothing to say I don't remember I don't remember I don't remember, I don't recall I got no memory of anything at all I don't remember, I don't recall I got no memory of anything Anything at all I don't remember, I don't recall I got no memory of anything at all I don't remember, I don't recall I got no memory of anything Absolutely anything at all I don't remember.
MISSISSAUGAWATCH May 27, 2010 4:51 PM
Yesterday's testimony (and it looks like today's too) reminds me of Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General
Quote: "On April 19, 2007, Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Gonzales received intense questioning from both the Democratic and Republican members on the committee. Many Republicans on the committee openly criticised the attorney general and his handling of the matter questioning his honesty, competence etc etc etc... With regards to Chiara, Gonzales stated, "Quite candidly . . . I don't recall the reason why I accepted" staff advice etc etc etc... In another interesting exchange, Gonzales stated that he had approved the decision but didn't recall when the decision was made. (''Well, how can you be sure you made the decision?' Mr. Leahy asked."'Senator, I recall making the decision from this -- I recall making the decision,' Mr. Gonzales replied. ''When?' Mr. Leahy responded."'Senator,' Mr. Gonzales replied. 'I don't recall when the decision was made.') Gonzales stated more than 60 times that he "couldn't recall" certain incidents." etc etc. Wait for yesterday and today's Judicial In
MISSISSAUGAWATCH May 27, 2010 4:45 PM
The article fails to mention that the veto clause could've been temporary
Article quote: "'There was substantial economic risk that OMERS was taking in this entity from the outset,' Michael Barrack, the lawyer for OMERS, said yesterday. 'Against this backdrop, it would not be unreasonable for someone with that kind of exposure to have a fair degree of control over the enterprise.'” The article fails to mention that the "exposure" was temporary (sorry for being vague here but not quite understanding it) something about a Put. And why was the veto clause also not temporary? (Will cut-and-paste from transcript once available).
Home Page - Main Table of Contents - Back up a page - Back to Top
[COMMENTS BY DON B. - ]