Newspapers also served with legal papers
By Sean Pearce, Staff Writer

Mayor Phyllis Morris and councillors Evelina MacEachern, Wendy Gaertner, Stephen Granger, John Gallo and Al Wilson were served with legal papers Tuesday informing them of Ms Buck’s intention to pursue a civil libel lawsuit against them.

The notices of intent stem from the “Statement From Town of Aurora Council” advertisement in The Banner and another local newspaper following council’s July 21 decision to file a formal code of conduct complaint with then-integrity commissioner David Nitkin over alleged comments published by Ms Buck in online blogs and elsewhere.

In the June 1 entry of Councillor’s Buck’s political blog, she accused the town’s solicitor and CAO of “doctoring” the minutes from a council meeting.

The Banner and The Auroran are also named as defendants in the legal documents prepared by Richmond Hill law firm MacDonald Associates.

Ms Buck referred to the advertisement as libelous during an interview yesterday, adding the complaint was “unfounded and unsubstantiated” and the six councillors named in the suit used “every venue they could to publish it”.

In the ad, the town lays out the reasons why it chose to file a complaint against Ms Buck with its integrity commissioner.

The complaint was filed to Mr. Nitkin July 22 and his response was delivered to the town Aug. 5. One day later, Mr. Nitkin was dismissed.

Only six of nine councillors attended the Aug. 6 meeting, with some members saying too little information was given prior to the session.

Mr. Nitkin’s one and only report was made available to council and the public earlier this week.

In it, he stated he had not evaluated the “merits or lack thereof” of the complaint and said no investigation would occur on the grounds it was “ill-formed”, “incomplete” and “inappropriate”.

In the legal document, Ms Buck alleges the published statement from council called into question her ability to serve as a councillor, suggested she abused unnamed town staff and refused to retract her statements and apologize.

No refusal to apologize ever occurred, Ms Buck said, adding she simply asked her colleagues to cite specific actions for which she should be sorry.

Ms Buck is quick to point out she’s not suing the town; only the six individuals involved.

“It’s against the mayor and her five cohorts,” Ms Buck said.

“If I were to sue the town, I’d have to resign. I’m part of the town and my role is to save it from harm... I don’t recognize these six people took this action as the town.”

For her part, Mrs. Morris said she was limited in her ability to speak, pending her own legal advice. It appears the legal notice is seeking an apology from those listed, she said.

A formal response may come forward as early as next week, she added.

“It seems to request an apology (and) will get more headlines for Ms Buck,” she said.

“It contains a number of unfounded allegations and it is wholly without merit and cannot be taken seriously,” Mrs. Morris said.

“It was inappropriately filed as it included the names of individuals, whereas (the statement) was a council action. To be be proper, it would have to be served to council rather than individuals. I’ll leave that to their lawyers to sort out.”

Ms Buck’s documents aren’t the only ones Mrs. Morris has received. Mr. Nitkin has also sent legal papers, she said.

His lawyer sent a letter to the mayor demanding she cease making negative comments about his performance.

“It was surprising it was directed to me because it referred to other people,” she said.

It remains to be seen how this latest development will play out as Ms Buck isn’t certain what will balance the scales from her perspective.

From the newspapers, Ms Buck said she wants an apology and retraction.

The Banner publisher Ian Proudfoot and The Auroran publisher Ron Wallace chose not to comment when contacted yesterday.