Lawyer dogged by conflict claims in Brampton case

Documents show lawyer George Rust-D'Eye's former firm was paid almost $2M by City of Brampton before it hired him for investigation

Thestar.com
Aug. 7, 2015
By San Grewal

Municipal lawyer George Rust D’Eye’s former legal firm performed more than $2 million worth of work for the City of Brampton - including legal work on a $500-million downtown development plan - before he was hired by city staff to investigate alleged wrongdoing by staff on the same project, documents obtained by the Star show.

The documents, obtained after an appeal to the Information and Privacy Commissioner following the city’s original refusal to release the information, show that Brampton paid law firm WeirFoulds $2,309,012 for municipal law work between 2007 and 2014. In total, the city made 542 separate payments to WeirFoulds during that period.

Rust-D’Eye left the firm in 2013, but not before part of that total - it’s not clear how much - was paid out for work WeirFoulds did on the very project Rust-D’Eye was later hired to probe.
Rust-D’Eye was a partner with the firm and co-chair of its municipal law group prior to his departure.

The controversial development, known as the South West Quadrant project, was to include three phases of a downtown redevelopment, but is now primarily just a city hall expansion that is more than a year and a half behind schedule. The final two phases have been dropped and the entire plan has been mired in controversy as council tried to get information from staff.

On May 4, council held a special meeting to receive Rust-D’Eye’s report, which exonerated staff of any wrongdoing. Councillors dismissed its conclusions because it relied heavily on information from the very staff who were being investigated. Mayor Linda Jeffrey called for the province to hold a public inquiry.

At $308,000, the report cost more than five times the original estimate.

At the May meeting, council parsed the report, pointing to areas where they say Rust-D’Eye failed to scrutinize staff responses and ignored key elements that council had directed him to focus on. “In my view, this report presented to council is a useless and grossly expensive account taken from the staff reports that dealt with the South West (Quadrant) project,” Councillor John Sprovieri said at the time. “His findings are solely based on staff’s input.”

Some members of council, including Sprovieri, and the public called the investigation a “whitewash.”

Following the release of documents detailing city payments to WeirFoulds, Sprovieri is renewing calls for a full probe into the development deal.

“He was head of the municipal group there and a partner, so I don’t see how he wasn’t in a clear conflict when he took the job to investigate senior staff. His investigation was a whitewash. It was no surprise,” Sprovieri said.

Rust-D’Eye told the Star on Wednesday: “I don’t intend to respond to your questions.”

The City of Brampton documents released to the Star include amounts paid to WeirFoulds over eight years, with the payment dates redacted. Total amounts paid during each year are included.

WeirFoulds did not respond to questions.

In a letter that accompanied the FOI documents the city provided the following statement:

“The city can confirm that to the best of its knowledge, George Rust-D’Eye has never had any involvement in any work done by WeirFoulds LLP on the SWQ project. WeirFoulds LLP has categorically confirmed to the city that at no time did Mr. Rust-D’Eye ever have any involvement whatsoever, either directly or indirectly, in any work by WeirFoulds LLP on the SWQ project.”

The city had originally denied the Star’s request for the documents, citing solicitor-client privilege. Their release on Friday followed an appeal to Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner.

City councillors only learned of WeirFoulds’ work on the project after Rust-D’Eye was hired for the investigation last September, on the recommendation of former Brampton chief administrative officer John Corbett.

Rust-D’Eye confirmed to the Star in January that his former firm had worked on the project, but said, “I cannot remember if I was personally involved.”

The Star has also filed, and been denied, a freedom of information request to learn who authored WeirFould’s work on the project. A ruling has not yet been made by the Information and Privacy Commissioner as to whether that information must be released.