Answers on Port File Unlikely Before Election

Glen Murrant Follow Me

Posted this 2020-09-04 2:42 PM ADT (updated 2020-09-04 3:17 PM ADT)

September 4, 2020 by Glen Murrant - Candidate for Council, CBRM District 3

Residents have been waiting since 2016 for CBRM administrators to release secretive details of business dealings between the various parties involved in the on-again-off-again Sydney container terminal saga.

The “Port file” has a complicated history, involving CBRM Mayor Cecil Clarke, several former and current councillors, local and foreign consultants, Chinese investors, Ontario marketers, the International Longshoremen’s Association, and countless others with possible ties.

To be clear – there is no accusation or insinuation that the CBRM mayor, council, or administration is hiding evidence of wrong-doing. But the lack of transparency on the subject was enough in 2016 to lead private citizens to file an official request (under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy act – FOIPOP) compelling the Cape Breton Regional Municipality to release upwards of 60,000 pages of documents; information that so far has been kept from the public eye.

Suspicions, understandably, began to grow as the FOIPOP request was met by repeated delays and a $43,000 bill from CBRM to prepare photocopies of the documents. ^1.

The private citizens, who for obvious reasons wish to remain un-named, hired Sydney lawyer Guy LaFosse to represent them and to escalate the request to the Nova Scotia Privacy Commissioner’s Office.

According CBC News ^2., the information requested includes:

copies of texts, emails and contracts surrounding the port development
employment contracts for
- (then) chief administrative officer Michael Merritt
- Port of Sydney CEO Marlene Usher
- Mark Bettens and Christina Lamey, who were both hand picked to work in the mayor’s office.
information (municipal expense claims and contracts) on CBRM’s dealings with
- Port of Sydney Development Corporation
- Sydney Harbour Investment Partners (formerly known as HPDP)
- the now-defunct economic development agency Business Cape Breton
- China Communications Construction Company

The latest update (that I am aware of) from the privacy commissioner’s office came in March 2019, stating only that the office is dealing with a backlog of requests. ^3.

Election Issue

Although highly unlikely, if the request were to be fulfilled and the documents were released by the first week of October it could have a profound effect on outcome of the 2020 municipal election.

With the 2020 CBRM election only a month away, issues of transparency are top-of-mind among voters. Candidates who are willing to lobby on behalf of residents for the release of the Port documents will certainly earn points at the polls.

Sources:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/cbrm-43k-freedom-of-information-request-1.3857965
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/cbrm-port-freedom-of-information-1.4007415
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/freedom-of-information-request-on-sydney-port-development-1.5068906

https://cbrm-district3.ca/

https://www.facebook.com/CBRMDist3

Posted by Glen Murrant
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW

Like 3 Dislike 0

FOLLOW 8

965 9

Residents still waiting for CBRM administrators to release 60,000 pages of secretive details on business dealings. Answers are unlikely before election day.

9

Depth
Mathew Georghiou Follow Me 2020-09-04 8:18 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Glen, what is your position on the transparency issue if elected? FYI, to add to your info above, the three political hires cost CBRM an estimated $3.5 million plus another $1 million for the former CAO if lumped into that same category. That's the jobs that we know of ... makes one wonder what we don't know. Glen Murrant My Post Follow Me 2020-09-04 9:50 PM ADT Reply 2 0 If elected - or not - my stance on transparency is the same. We're not dealing with national security secrets and nuclear launch codes. Municipal expenses, contracts, etc., should be fully disclosed. If municipal decision makers feel they must conceal information to avoid public outcry, we have a problem. Mathew Georghiou Follow Me 2020-09-04 10:22 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Agreed!
Joe Ward Follow Me 2020-09-04 9:23 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Glen, as you are a member of the board for the Port of Sydney Development Corporation, is this article implying that that board also feels there is a lack of transparency and is excluded from information within the CBRM? My presumption was that CEO Usher and the port board were all up to speed on the full details of anything related to the proposed container port—despite several councillors feeling that they were left in the dark. I'm also interested in your personal view in the non-competitive hiring of Bettens and Lamey. As a candidate, do you approve of the hiring in this way, with the mayor handpicking staffing choices? Lamey appears also to have moved between the CBRM and the Port of Sydney Development Corporation. Glen Murrant My Post Follow Me 2020-09-04 10:10 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Joe, I am implying nothing whatsoever about views held by the PSDC board. I speak only for myself. The container terminal project is not under the jurisdiction of the Port of Sydney Development Corporation. The portfolio was handed off to S.H.I.P. in 2016.Since then, the board receives the same information as the general public. Regarding non-competitive hiring - it is not acceptable in public sector. Incidentally, for the record, I have temporarily stepped down from the board pending the election.
[comment deleted] Posted 2020-09-06 8:25 AM ADT Glen Murrant My Post Follow Me 2020-09-06 9:23 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Yes, there is a GoFundMe page. In my opinion the fee is simply a deterrent. I have two primary concerns here ... 1) Why the secrecy? Municipal business details are supposed to be fully disclosed to the public. If CBRM were acting transparently, there should be no need to file a FOIPOP request. 2) Photocopying? Most of the information being requested already exists in a digital format. Nobody is asking specifically for paper copies. CBRM just needs to grant access the data.
[comment deleted] Posted 2020-09-06 8:50 AM ADT
Debbie Keating Follow Me 2020-09-06 9:21 AM ADT Reply 1 0 My understanding is a decision came in from the Privacy Commissioner's Office and the cost of the FOIPOP has finally been reduced but the applicant is refusing to pay on principle. Perhaps a Go Fund page could raise the funds in a timely manner for the release of the information before the election. That would be pending permission for the release of the information by CBRM before the election of course. 🥴 That would be interesting to see play out!
Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2020-09-06 9:28 AM ADT Reply 0 0 When i went in to file my nomination papers this guy handed me the bible: All in the Family So who is this “local individual” who owns the train station? He remained anonymous during council’s most recent discussion of the state of the building but Jala named him in his subsequent coverage and anyone who takes the time to look up 3046975 NS Ltd in the Joint Stocks Registry will find him: he’s Patrick Donovan, and he’s the company president, while his wife, Kiki Kachafanas, is the recognized agent. Kiki Kachafanas is the sister of the regional solicitor, Demetri Kachanfanas, and the Spectator reported on another Kachafanas-Donovan property in 2017: the old Department of Fisheries building on the government wharf in Sydney. After the Port of Sydney’s offer on the building was turned down, Kachafanas and Donovan stepped in to purchase it, renovate it, and rent some of its offices to — you guessed it — the Port of Sydney. Donovan, who has other real estate holdings in the CBRM, was also a generous donor to Mayor Cecil Clarke’s 2016 re-election campaign: Copied from The Cape Breton Spectator " Too big to tear down"
Lorna MacNeil Follow Me 2020-09-07 10:33 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Four years and no results. And that is a weird photocopying charge. A PDF would be a little cheaper. :) The lack of transparency around the port file is deeply problematic as it erodes confidence in our government.