A month ago, I asked for Councillor Kevin Saccary’s resignation from the Port of Sydney Development Corporation’s board. My argument was strong without knowing the full extent of what he had really been up to in Louisbourg.

Now he’s back to duping the readers of the Cape Breton Post once again. And I’m back to call for his resignation again - this time due to his conflicted actions on behalf of another shadow organization. Insert suspenseful music here... and I’ll explain shortly.

The last time I wrote about Saccary, he had used the Cape Breton Post to blast Destination Louisbourg (a DBA brand of the Synergy Louisbourg group). His premise was that he was upset with a “blatant conflict of interest” in their hiring of Executive Director, Mitch McNutt.

In a triple scoop of irony he accused them of “creating negativity” and referred to them as “shady”. With a little introspection, he could have found a fitting home for those labels just above his suit jacket pocket.

Just keep in mind that Synergy Louisbourg is the group behind a “Strategic Tourism Expansion Plan” that has the endorsement and commitment of funds from both the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and ACOA (a Federal government agency).

Just to reinforce the CBRM’s support of the group’s initiatives, let’s have Saccary tell you himself:

That video snippet is from the CBRM council meeting on January 14th, 2014, after a well received presentation by Dorothy Payne, Chair of of the Synergy Louisbourg board.

So, why then, does Saccary keep accosting the group through Cape Breton Post reporter Sharon Montgomery-Dupe’s coverage?

In the latest CB Post article, Saccary claims that he intervened to spare the “Welcome to Louisbourg” sign from being replaced by Parks Canada workers acting on behalf of Synergy Louisbourg.

Montgomery-Dupe’s report describes his focus being how the sign was CBRM property and not to be touched. He presented himself as being oblivious to plans for replacement of the sign and suggested that Mitch McNutt had apologized to him for “not following proper protocol” via email.

McNutt’s actual response was:

“It is my understanding that you have asked the Lighthouse sign replacement to be halted.  Apologies if I have missed a step in the process.  If you could direct me as to the particular issue or issues I will do all that I can to come up with solutions.”

Politely apologetic, sure. He is a Canadian from the always-welcoming Cape Breton Island afterall. However, he was ultimately asking -if his group did miss a step in the process - for Saccary to inform him what it was so it could be resolved.

But…

CBRM Public Works Gave Them Permission

In an email dated March 10th, 2016, CBRM Public Works employees sent confirmation to a Synergy Louisbourg project officer. He noted it as being a follow up to a phone call, and that he wanted it to be sent via email for the records of his supervisor, John Phelan (Manager of Public Works, CBRM Eastern Division).

While it indicated the CBRM staff would be installing “street signs”, it expressly gave permission for the Synergy group to take care of sign replacements - including the “Welcome Sign”.

“I figured that I would also send an email regarding our phone conversation for John’s record. John; [name redacted; Louisbourg Synergy employee] and spoke on the phone regarding her latest email. You will remember at our meeting that we agreed to install the Street Signs after they are made up. As for the other signage; Directional Sign, Welcome Sign etc. their contractors can install. Replacing existing signs was no issue and for new signage a location check would be done with Rodney before installation.”

Was Saccary Really Surprised by Synergy Louisbourg Replacing Signage?

Other than when the sign was going to be replaced, Councillor Saccary shouldn’t have been surprised at all. And knowing when isn’t within the scope of his responsibility… though, in my opinion, he shows a propensity for a level of meddling that puts himself in conflict of interest positions. And I’ll provide more supporting evidence of this below.

Saccary shouldn’t have been surprised because he attended a meeting on January 7th, 2016 with Synergy Louisbourg and an estimated 50 community members and stakeholders.

And during that meeting the full signage plan, complete with a slide show, was presented. Included in that presentation was the welcome sign and the lighthouse sign among others.

The signage replacement wasn’t a surprise to anyone who attended that meeting and certainly not Councillor Saccary.

So, no, he wasn’t surprised. He was effectively doing some political grandstanding while simultaneously accosting and misrepresenting Synergy Louisbourg for the second time in a month - courtesy of a cooperative Cape Breton Post.

I referenced “shadow organization” at the start of this article. And though that word might be better placed in a conspiracy novel, I’m going to bring everything together for you now. And you’ll understand what that means and how it relates to Mr. Saccary’s activities.

First, we’re going to try your patience. We have to introduce one more important figure to help understand everything.

Was the Manager of the Harbour Authority of Louisbourg Also Blindsided by the Signage Change?

The CB Post report also included many statements from the manager of the Harbour Authority, quoting her as saying she was “flabbergasted”. Coincidentally, that's the same word Saccary used in the previous CB Post coverage.

Now it is certainly quite possible that she was in opposition to replacing the welcome sign. However, she should not have been flabbergasted on April 21st, 2016.

Though I haven’t confirmed if the manager was present at the January 7th, 2016 meeting when Saccary was there to see the signage plan... she was still aware.

On March 10th, 2016, she sent an email to representatives of Synergy Louisbourg that indicated the following:

"I was just speaking with Rick McCready and he tells me that you are replacing our Welcome to Louisbourg sign with a new one at the entrance.  When do you expect this to take place and we will want our sign taken down and delivered to the Town Hall." 

Note: Rick McCready is the Senior Planner/Heritage Officer for the CBRM.

While she may not have been informed of the date - which turned out to be over a month after her email - she did acknowledge that she was aware it was going to be replaced. That’s why she asked for the current sign to be delivered to the Town Hall.

Let’s take a pause. This issue is filled with all goodwilled community leaders. Good people. Kind people. People I personally know and appreciate. People who want the best for their community even if they disagree with how to achieve it.

But this manager was already aware that the sign change was coming. So the information in the Cape Breton Post article is misleading. And it’s important to note.

What is all this Shadow Organization Nonsense?

It’s a reasonable term as you’ll see. Let me fess up: It’s one that works quite well to maintain your interest long enough to read through an overly lengthy article. One that could be confused as being about a “welcome sign”. But that’s not the real issue. It’s just a symptom hinting at something bigger.

Stick with me.

Remember I mentioned that Synergy Louisbourg was using “Destination Louisbourg” in their marketing? It has nice (and logical) alignment with Destination Cape Breton marketing. And that’s very likely to be their reason for selecting it in the first place.

Back at that January 7th, 2016 meeting with Councillor Saccary present, they invited attendees to join them in the “Destination Louisbourg” partnership.

Then during the February 19th, 2016 CBRM budget consultation session with council - with Saccary in attendance - they also repeatedly used “Destination Louisbourg” in their presentation and slides.

To the surprise of the Synergy Louisbourg and the Fortress Louisbourg Association, just 7 days before the budget consultation meeting, someone filed a society incorporation with the Nova Scotia Registration of Joint Stock called “Destination Louisbourg Society”.

And Councillor Saccary Knew All About It

Councillor Saccary was at the January 7th meeting. He spoke during the February 19th budget consultation - but made no mention of any conflicting “Destination Louisbourg Society”.

I’m suggesting that Saccary knew it existed even though Synergy Louisbourg apparently didn’t. But why?

Councillor Saccary knew it existed because he was one of the founding directors responsible for incorporating it.

Essentially what he did was take the “Destination Louisbourg” brand that Synergy Louisbourg was actively using to build a marketing strategy around.

And for a guy that complains about conflict of interest, it doesn’t stop there. Joining him as a director was the manager of the Louisbourg Harbour Authority. Remember the manager’s quote as being flabbergasted by the attempt to replace the welcome sign? This is despite having asked Synergy Louisbourg for it to be returned to the town hall after its removal a month before.

Were those really her quotes?

Although the Cape Breton Post indicated their affiliations as CBRM Councillor and Manager of the Harbour Authority of Louisbourg, respectively, they are actually co-directors of the nebulous “Destination Louisbourg Society”.

The Cape Breton Post author is also aware of this affiliation. I know this because I was in communication with her on April 11th. She actually explained to me that Saccary was on the “Society” version of Destination Louisbourg, and acknowledged hearing of some “controversy between the Destination Louisbourg groups”.

"It's all tied in. It gets thicker as we dig." - Councillor Kevin Saccary

Another of the directors is an active CBRM employee. So I’m not sure what Councillor Saccary is trying to pull off. However, if he’s the lead plotter behind this strategy, he’s not only putting himself in serious conflict, but also pulling in other good community people too.

But to Councillor Kevin Saccary, District 8, Serving Louisbourg, I must say:

Stop pulling good citizens into such conflicted situations. And stop using the Cape Breton Post to bring critical attention to Synergy Louisbourg while they are working to advance a major project for the town and the entire island.

This is a project that the CBRM is committed to and has already invested in; not to mention also approving the replacement of the signs you chastised them about in the paper.

Councillor Saccary: Please Publicly Apologize and Resign

I’m not talking about resigning from the Port of Sydney Dev Corp board at this moment. I’ve already expressed that in my previous article.

Here are the appropriate action items to set right the misdeeds you have been involved in:

#1 File for a Renaming of “Destination Louisbourg Society”

You knew it was being used by Synergy Louisbourg. Work with your colleagues in the society to choose a new and non-conflicting name. File it with NS Registry of Joint Stock. Then write a letter to Synergy Louisbourg notifying them that you have relinquished utilization of their “Destination Louisbourg” brand.

#2 Resign from the Society

This new society likely has no purpose other than to interfere with Synergy Louisbourg. You are free to provide a response if there is some alternative explanation. However, you are already a director with the same group of colleagues on the Louisbourg and Area Celebration Society.

I’m not sure how many societies and boards you need to join. When you resign as a director, you should encourage the CBRM employee who is also a director to do the same. She does fantastic work. Don’t jeopardize it by leading her into the same conflict you tend to get yourself into.

#3 Apologize

For the former, it will be for interfering with their projects, usurping their market branding of “Destination Louisbourg”, and repeatedly damaging their image in the media without cause.

For the latter, it will be for abusing your role as a district councillor, and doing so against a group that is currently receiving funding from the CBRM and your colleagues on council who support it.

#4 Affirm

Affirm that you will resolve all current conflicted situations you are in. Seek advice if it is needed, or if you feel you lack unbiased perspective. And affirm that you will avoid a repeat of such activities in the future.

It’s  About More Than a Sign

There is no big finish here. If you read this far, you’re likely someone deeply invested in the community of Louisbourg. You care. So just be aware that this goes deeper than simply replacing some signs.

There is nothing wrong with community members having different opinions. There is nothing wrong with vigorous debate. It’s healthy for a community. All ideas need to be challenged so that the best ones emerge.

But there is something wrong with an elected official getting into highly conflicted roles, and taking underhanded action against community groups.

It is certainly conduct unbecoming of a CBRM councillor, whose job it is to help good things happen in the district, not work against it.

Maybe the old sign should stay. Maybe the new consistent signage branding is best. But these are for the development groups of Louisbourg and the town's most committed citizens to decide.