Ward 12 Coun. Joscelyne Landry-Altmann said Tuesday the conflict of interest case filed against her has ended because there was no evidence to support the claim.
But the man who filed the complaint says he dropped it because he has no confidence city council would pursue the case, even if a judge ruled in his favour.
Businessman Andre Dumais made the complaint last December, accusing Landry-Altmann of being in a conflict when she voted to build a new arena on the Kingsway, alongside a casino and hotel. Dumais and other advocates fought to keep the arena downtown.
In his complaint, he said Landry-Altmann failed to declare a conflict before the vote in June 2017. Dumais said she was on the board of directors of the Sudbury District Motorsports Association at the time of the vote, and was therefore in a pecuniary conflict of interest.
While not part of the June vote, the Motorsports Association is a non-profit group working on a long-term plan to develop a racing facility adjacent to the Kingsway Entertainment District.
Landry-Altmann said she resigned from the association's board in March, months before the vote, and later provided documents she said proved she had resigned. Her court filings in response to the accusation said the documents Dumais relied on hadn't been updated for years, because as a non-profit, they don't have resources to go through the process to formally update them. In fact, only one name on the list was still part of the Association.
The case formally ended Aug. 2, and Tuesday, Landry-Altmann released a statement calling Dumais's actions “reprehensible.”
“Mr. Dumais's court case never got to trial ... because he could not produce any evidence under oath to support his accusations,” the statement said. “The court file is now closed and I am left with this upsetting feeling that I have been falsely accused of a conflict of interest that I never had.”
Despite a lack of evidence, she said Dumais was able to get considerable media attention just by making the accusation, “knowing fully that his case was a sham and that his accusations were politically based.
“As a municipal councillor I understand that I cannot satisfy all of my constituents and that not everyone will agree with some of my decisions. This comes with the job and although I respect and will defend everyone's right to complain, I also expect that before a complaint is made against any political official, that the complainer will have done his or her due diligence and verified their facts before complaining.”
Such complaints further discredit politicians in the eyes of the public, she said, and caused unfair damage to her reputation.
“Manipulating the media by contriving accusers should be a warning to all of us that may be concerned about false allegations and the damage such false news can have on our opinions or on how we think,” Landry-Altmann said in her statement. “Mr. Dumais’ actions were and remain reprehensible. To add to the stress, it should also be known that I advanced the funds to support my defence.”
In response, Dumais said in a message that he dropped the case not because he had no evidence, but because he doesn't believe council would pursue the case even if a judge ruled in his favour.
“In the end, I dropped the case cause I am not confident that the city would revisit the issue,” Dumais said. “They've gone too far down the path to recall the vote, and there is no legal obligation to do so.
“The case would have been 50/50, and she asked to drop it at no cost. I took the opportunity.”
While the conflict of interest case has now ended, an appeal to the province's Local Planning Appeals Tribunal has been declared valid, meaning the project likely won't begin construction as planned next spring. Opponents are fighting the zoning changes needed for the project, with a conference set for November. A decision is mandated by June 2019, under provincial law.
