Monday, August 24, 2009

Ottawa CAS Attempts to Confuse Crown

From: John Dunn (

Sent: August 24, 2009 12:38:27 PM

To: yvonne goebel (; (

Cc: Tracy EngleKingCASOtt (; Barbara Mackinnon (; Pierre Viger (; Rick O'Connor (

Yvonne Goebel
Crown Attorney, Ottawa
Robert C. Morrow
Ottawa Children's Aid Society Externally Retained Counsel
Tracy Engleking
Ottawa Children's Aid Society Internal Senior Counsel
Barbara MacKinnon
Executive Director, Ottawa Children's Aid Society
Pierre Viger
Director of Professional Standards - Ottawa Children's Aid Society
Rick O'Conner
President - Children's Aid Society of Ottawa - City of Ottawa Solicitor & Clerk

Please forward a copy to Barbara MacKinnon

Yvonne Goebel,

It appears to me from Robert's latest e-mail of Monday, August 24, 2009 that he is again attempting to cause confusion or to be deceitful with you by making false allegations which omit things we have already discussed (included below).

It appears as if his intent is to make short misleading statements that require my responses to be longer than necessary in order to ensure their accuracy when he knows you are far too busy for these type of games which in my opinion are an abuse of process and do not demonstrate good faith behavior, or behavior which is becoming of a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada or the Bar.

In their latest communication, the Society, through Robert, appears to be attempting yet again interfere in the direct communication between myself and the members. They are also falsely alleging that I want to make as many 307 demands as I wish, all the while failing to mention that on July 22nd, 2009 Robert asked me via an e-mail message if it was my position that I can make as many 307 requests to the Society as I wish to which I responded with the following:

"I do not think it is, nor would be reasonable for any person in any position to bombard a corporation with several unnecessary Section 307 Corporations Act requests per year or every year or at any interval for no good reason. I would even go as far as saying that if more than two requests for a corporation's list of members was made in a single year by the same person that those requests could be suspect as being abusive, frivolous, or not made in good faith, however without knowing the circumstances we can not speculate. As for myself and the work I am engaged in, I do not however see myself ever making more than one request in any given year for any reason. I only see it being done as the need arises. I have a legitimate issue to be raised to the members just as I did in February of 2007 when I wanted to contact the members to advocate for kids in care to become members of the Society (non-voting). That purpose was only supported by one member of the Society therefore, I let it go at that as agreed and did not attempt to bring the Stayed charge back because everything was done as agreed and the issue was finished.

Then, a couple of years later (June 2009) I made another request for a list of the Society's members because I had learned that former wards of the Ottawa CAS were not allowed to become members because they might happen to live just outside the City of Ottawa. Therefore, I wanted to propose to the current members (unsure of the 2009 number of members) that they requisition the Board for a meeting as per section 13 of the Society's By-Law (if I recall correctly which refers members to section 295 of the Corporations Act) to see if they would support a by-law amendment which would enable adult, former wards of the Society to become members of the Society since it was this Society that affected their entire lives not another Society in another region."
John Dunn - July 22n, 2009

Justice Swords recommended that I attempt a similar solution as we last agreed to in order to resolve this matter and failing that he would not bar me from pressing the charges.

Therefore I respectfully request from you Yvonne, that we resolve this matter in a similar manner as the previous matter wherein:

1. I submit a copy of the "letter to the members" to your office

2. The Society submits a current copy of their 2009 members list to your office with properly addressed, stamped envelopes containing the residential addresses of all of their members

3. Yvonne will place copies of my letter into the envelopes and mail them directly to the members at their residential addresses as required by ss. 307 (1) of the Corporations Act

4. The letter to the members will ask those members who support the proposal to amend the Society's By-Laws to return their requisition form directly to Yvonne's office by a proposed deadline

5. If less than 1/10th of the members respond in support of the proposal by the deadline date, the entire matter of 2009 will be resolved at that point and no charges will be pursued

6. In the alternative, if the required number of members respond by the deadline date in support of the proposal, Yvonne will contact John to let him know, and she will then deposit the requisition forms with the Society at her earliest convenience. ( 1/10th according to section 295 of the Corporations Act and article 13 of the Society's corresponding By-Law)

7. Upon receipt of the requisitions by the Society from Yvonne, the Society's Board will then, according to ss. 295 (3) of the Corporations Act, and article 13 of the Society's By-Law, call a general meeting of the members for the transaction of the business stated in the requisition and I will agree to the Society calling a meeting of the members within 60 days from the date of deposit of the requisitions for the purpose of voting on the proposed resolution

8. Once the meeting has been held, and a vote recorded in the meeting minutes, a copy of the minutes of the meeting will be forwarded to Yvonne Goebel verifying that the meeting was properly held, displaying the wording of the proposed by-law amendment, verifying that the vote took place, and indicating the result of the vote

9. Upon receipt of the meeting minutes, Yvonne will allow John Dunn to pick-up a copy of the minutes mentioned in paragraph 8 of this agreement and the matter of 2009 will be resolved and charges will not be pursued

Related Legislation

Requisition for meeting
295.(1)Shareholders of a company holding not less than one-tenth of the issued shares of the company that carry the right to vote at the meeting proposed to be held, or not less than one-tenth of the members of a corporation without share capital entitled to vote at the meeting proposed to be held, as the case may be, may request the directors to call a general meeting of the shareholders or members for any purpose connected with the affairs of the corporation that is not inconsistent with this Act.

Duty of directors to call meeting
(3)Upon deposit of the requisition, the directors shall call forthwith a general meeting of the shareholders or members for the transaction of the business stated in the requisition.

Where requisitionists may call meeting
(4)If the directors do not within twenty-one days from the date of the deposit of the requisition call and hold such meeting, any of the requisitionists may call such meeting which shall be held within sixty days from the date of the deposit of the requisition.

John Dunn
Executive Director
The Foster Care Council of Canada

No comments:

Post a Comment