Listen to this article
Estimated 4 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
Some Halifax councillors and a political expert say an audit flagging errors with the mayor’s expenses raises valid public concerns.
A report from Halifax’s auditor general on Monday found four transactions from Mayor Andy Fillmore’s office did not follow city policy.
The auditor general forwarded all the expenses to police, and the Nova Scotia RCMP began investigating in May.
The items in the audit include two of Fillmore’s external legal expenses charged to the city last June and November, totalling more than $7,500.
The audit said the mayor’s chief of staff incorrectly labelled the second November legal expense as “other goods and services,” even after the municipal solicitor had reminded her in writing that pre-approval from his office would be needed for any such legal services.
;Resize%3D796)
On Tuesday, Coun. Shawn Cleary said it is too early to say whether Fillmore should step down.
“But I think, you know, like many people I’ve heard from just in the last 20-odd hours, this is concerning. So people want some answers,” Cleary told reporters at City Hall.
Fillmore has said the legal expenses were related to two code of conduct complaints made against him last year.
Cleary said it is always a “personal issue” for elected municipal officials to handle code of conduct complaints on their own dime. In dealing with his own code of conduct complaint in the past, Cleary said he never hired a lawyer, but “certainly wouldn’t have expensed the city” if he had.
“The policy is clear. And to do it a second time after you’re told — that’s concerning,” Cleary said.
Speaking with reporters Tuesday, Fillmore disagreed with Cleary’s view and said again that those legal fees were “patently and declaratively not personal expenses.”
Fillmore said because the complaints arose while “in the course of doing my duty as mayor,” he believes he was entitled to a defence.
“I did not offend somebody when I was water skiing or walking my dog. I was executing the job as mayor, so these are directly related to the execution of my job,” Fillmore said.
Fillmore said Monday that it is a flaw in the current system that elected officials cannot use in-house municipal lawyers for legal advice about code of conduct complaints.
The mayor has since paid back the municipality for those legal expenses from his personal funds.
In a blog post Tuesday, Coun. Sam Austin said what the audit found is “troubling.”
“This scandal might be the mayor’s, but it ultimately reflects badly on everyone,” he wrote. “We live in cynical times and stuff like this only fuels more political cynicism.”
Tom Urbaniak, a political science professor at Cape Breton University, said even if the police investigation does not lead to charges, the audit has raised serious issues “worthy of public attention and scrutiny from a good governance perspective.”
;Resize%3D796)
Urbaniak and Austin both raised concerns this kind of audit would not have happened under a strong mayor system like Ontario’s, which Fillmore advocated for last year.
The Ontario model allows mayors to make decisions without the majority of council, and hire and fire municipal chief administrative officers and department heads.
The auditor general has said the city’s chief financial officer first brought concerns on the mayor’s expenses to his office, triggering the audit.
“That might have been a little bit more difficult where senior managers’ employment would depend directly on the pleasure of the mayor, and where they could be replaced in a matter of a day,” Urbaniak told CBC Radio’s Information Morning.
Fillmore has said he accepts the conclusion of the auditor general’s report, and staff in his office have now received training around the city’s procurement policy.
MORE TOP STORIES
