Comments on: (Updated) Evidence Supports Claim Burlington City Hall More Secretive Than in 2018

By: Nicholas Leblovic

Nicholas Leblovic — Tue, 26 Apr 2022 01:51:06 +0000

In reply to Jim Thomson. Your comment can be summarized by the famous saying “ "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics“.

By: Penny Hersh

Penny Hersh — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:09:09 +0000

Councillor Stolte chose to not run again, because she WAS in effect “forced from office”. How could anyone work effectively with a council that at least 3 members felt there was no issue in the city’s handling of closed sessions, something that she was advocating for?

If all existing councillors are re-elected for an additional 4 years there is a very good chance it would be “business as usual” no mater what the investigation report determines on this subject.

By: Jim Thomson

Jim Thomson — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 05:22:53 +0000

Your 8 vs 20 is very misleading. I note that in 2022 many of the sessions are on the same items F-02-22, L-02-22 and L-03-22. There are no repeated items in 2018. Maybe you need a longer sample period.

There is also a lot of legal fallout from changing the City Plan and the development freeze. So it’s hardly surprising that there are more closed sessions.

I don’t dispute the cryptic nature of many of the items but I don’t see much difference between “Confidential update on a potential litigation matter (L-05-18)”
and “Confidential update on a litigation matter (L-02-22)“

Also, Councillor Stolte was not forced from office she has chosen to not run again.