In an attempt to try and convince the residents of Georgina that their feedback is important to the defamation indemnification discussion, a Q&A has been posted on the Town’s website. Well, here are a few questions I would like included in their Q&A document:
1. Why now? The report on the agenda said it was an “administrative matter” and no public notice was given. Why all of a sudden are you trying to convince people their opinion matters?
2. Why was the indemnification matter put on a Tuesday morning agenda and not a Wednesday evening agenda? Was it because you thought you would have had a better opportunity to slip this past the public on a day that is not normally considered a council meeting day?
3. Why was the final by-law attached to the report on July 14 if you didn’t intend for it to be passed that day? Why wasn’t it in draft form and/or why wasn’t there a recommendation to have staff draft a by-law for consideration at a later meeting as is a common procedure with other by-laws?
4. Why did the CAO spend 15 minutes of an hour long interview on the subject of defamation when Karen Wolfe met with her and the Mayor to discuss the Town’s response to a story the Georgina Post was working on?
5. Why did both the Mayor and CAO deny that those 15 minutes were an attempt to intimidate Karen Wolfe? In 35 years of conducting interviews for stories, Karen Wolfe says the subject of defamation has never arisen during a story interview. Why was the subject even brought up if it wasn’t to intimidate?
6. Why during the 15 minute defamation discussion did the CAO use the following language before she would even answer Karen Wolfe’s first interview question?: 1) “you’ve actually just implicated yourself”; 2) “that is your house to keep”; 3) “we need to have a discussion about defamation at some point”4) “I really want to make sure we get closure on this defamation”; 5) “I have to make some decisions from a defamation perspective”; 5) “there are decisions that need to be made from a defamation perspective”.
7. Hundreds of people have posted comments rejecting this defamation indemnification by-law and no one has posted they are in favour of it. If the majority of comments are not in favour of this by-law, will you still pass it?
I would love to have the answers to these questions!