As many now know, there has been a further delay with regard to Lansdowne Park pending the outcome of more studies. These studies will undoubtedly be completed in a concerted rush prior to an attempt to vote things through on the next council vote of June 10 2010.
There is however something that has the power to prevent a rush to judgement, namely the thoughtful examination of the facts in a court of law. A legal challenge has been initiated and is currently before the Superior Court of Ontario.
What has been proposed so far by the city is a non-competitive situation where only one tender was examined to develop the park. This cut short a competitive initiative that was underway.
The most basic and fundamental issue, namely the process, is the issue that is before the court.
Some have falsely been led to believe that what has taken place, though distasteful, is legal. Such pronouncements are incorrect. Only a court of law can decide on the legality of the process.
Some have said that there is no argument since sole-source or non-competitive procurement is allowed at the City of Ottawa.
However, non-competitive procurement is only permitted in extremely rare cases, such as during an ice storm (where time is of the essence) or in truly unique situations where, for example, the only manufacturer of a medical device for ambulances has demonstrated that the device can save lives but that there is only one supplier due to its truly unique capabilities.
It is true that the city's procurement policy has special provisions for “unsolicited bids.”
However, an unsolicited bid may only be examined if there are no initiated projects either going on or planned.
The city had an initiated project with the design competition at Lansdowne Park, which was, contrary to the directive, stopped by the city manager to examine an unsolicited bid.
The fact that the administrative branch, the city manager’s office, stopped an executive branch, the city council, voted design competition, leads to another odd situation of the tail wagging the dog.
An application for judicial review and an injunction motion on the process at Lansdowne Park have been accepted by the Superior Court of Ontario.
The motion for injunction will be made should there be any threat of material change to cause “irreparable harm” such as shovels in the ground or an agreement to commence work.
However, a legal challenge is expesnive and your help is needed. Research and preparation by a trained litigator are required. One has been selected.
The process will require time and money. A legal trust at Maclaren Corlett LLP has been set up to collect and administer funds.
It will cost $15,000 for the injunction motion and an additional $15,000 is anticipated for the review. The total goal is $30,000.
Contributions of $100, $250, $500 or more may be made at any Scotia Bank to Maclaren Corlett LLP in Trust with reference to Lansdowne Park File #83540 or mailed to Maclaren Corlett, Suite 1625, 5O O’Connor St., Ottawa, ON, KIP 6L2
John. E Martin,
Ottawa