Lidstone Report exposes Green's true character
Editor: The release of the Lidstone Report ends a sad and disturbing saga in Langley Township history.
Mayor Rick Green, in his subsequent press release, has admitted that he misled his council and three independent lawyers several times and asserts that that is nothing new. This is in fact an admission of his guilt.
Mayor Green asserts that a mayor being censured is nothing new.
Mayor Green asserts that providing false information about members of the public and blaming others is nothing new.
Sadly, that is nothing new for Mayor Green.
The Lidstone Report exposes his character. Green says that misleading people, blaming others, and making up excuses is nothing new. With this track record, what is left? Can there be more? Yes, sadly there is.
What is left to determine is who wrote the anonymous letter.
As is evident in the Lidstone Report and in documents recently released by the Brownshak company officials, only two parties had the materials necessary to write the anonymous letter, unless you believe the mayor suffered from a Watergate-style break-in.
One party is Calvin Patterson, the only person who asked for and obtained corporate records necessary to write the anonymous letter. The other is Green himself.
Why Mayor Green asked Patterson to obtain the records is not known, however only Patterson (financial contributor and campaign supporter of Green) obtained the official records that were part of the anonymous letter.
When confronted with the fact that only Green or Patterson could have written the anonymous letter, Green responded that the explanation was someone broke into his office, took this document, that document alone, photocopied it, returned it to its original place, then went and wrote an anonymous letter that they could place in Green’s personal rural mailbox.
In summary, someone took a document from Green so that they could give it back to him. Does that make sense?
Come clean, Mayor Green.
Now, after many months of wrangling and attempts to block release of the Lidstone Report, council has released it for the public to see.
When legal counsel suggested a committee of inquiry, Green refused. Why? Why not testify under oath?
It is now up to the public to determine if any elected official who misleads other elected officials, not one, not two, but three lawyers, and tries to suppress the release of documents bought and paid for by the public, is nothing new.
Unfortunately it did cost money to get to the bottom of things, but the only reason it cost money was because Green did not come forth and state what actually took place or what happened. The mayor could have done his due diligence in the three months he had access to the material, and researched council policy on receiving anonymous letters, or made inquiries to find out that in fact this incident had been dealt with and was resolved some 10 years earlier.
So who wrote the anonymous letter? Why attempt to prevent release of the Lidstone Report?
If Green had done his homework, this issue would not have surfaced at all. Why not agree to a public inquiry?
Councillor Charlie Fox