Breaking News from December: Judy is gone
Whoa! Stop the presses. Judy Rogers fired? Okay, I know that we already broke this story 11 months ago. By all accounts, except of course according to the Mayor's office, Judy Rogers was given her walking papers by Gregor and Mike Magee during that fateful second week of December, right after the lavish $85,000 inaugural bash.
So was she fired, or wasn't she? Well, according to one guy who seems to know Vision's business almost better than they do is retired city councillor and well-known political scrapper Jim Green. On Tuesday morning's Civic Affairs Panel on the Bill Good Show, yet another testy exchange broke out between the panelists. As usual, Jim and Frances did their tag team wrestling on CityCaucus.com's Daniel.
In the 2-minute exchange Jim Green assures a caller that Vision had done the right thing by firing "people" for bad decisions on the Olympic Village. When pressed by Daniel, Green changed his story to "a person," the former City Manager Judy Rogers:
Fontaine: Who at the city lost their job because of the Athlete's Village?
Green: I think somebody was gone, it was the City Manager I believe.
Fontaine: She was fired because of the Athlete's Village?
Green: I don't know why but that's one of the factors. That's one of the factors, I'm sure...
You can listen to the full the clip here.
However, the messaging from Gregor Robertson has always been that it was a "mutual agreement" to part company. We'll never really know because, like with so many separations, Judy Rogers is likely held to a gag clause as part of her severance package. We know that Rogers is not allowed to talk about the terms of her severance, but what else is off limits?
Now that some of the KPMG Olympic Village analysis is public knowledge and Green confirms that Roger's handling of the project was partly to blame for her being fired, why doesn't Vision simply lift the gag clause and let the former city manager provide her side of the story? Doesn't the public deserve the right to know Rogers' version of events?
Just imagine if a similar situation occurred at the provincial or federal level and a senior deputy minister played a key role in a political controversy as big as the $1 billion dollar Olympic Village. How do you think senior political pundits would have reacted if the government paid the deputy a hefty severance, then slapped a gag clause on them before telling them to go away?
Clearly both the media and public would have demanded some answers. In particular, they would be asking some serious questions as to why one of the key players in this whole Olympic Village affair has been silenced by the Vision government.
There remain many questions unanswered regarding the Olympic Village and unfortunately we've not been able to hear from the one person who might have some answers. It's too bad that Robertson and crew slapped on a gag clause, rather than calling for the kind of openness and transparency they campaigned on only a year ago.