1 2 3 4 TORONTO COMPUTER LEASING INQUIRY 5 6 7 8 ******************** 9 10 11 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DENISE BELLAMY, 12 COMMISSIONER 13 14 15 16 17 Held at: East York Civic Centre 18 850 Coxwell Avenue 19 Toronto, Ontario 20 M4C 5R1 21 22 ******************** 23 24 25 November 20th, 2003

2
  1                        APPEARANCES
  2  Ronald Manes   (np)     )Commission Counsel 
  3  Patrick Moore (np)      )
  4  Daina Groskaufmanis     ) 
  5  Linda Rothstein (np)    )City of Toronto 
  6  Lily Harmer             )
  7  Robert Centa   (np)     )
  8  Gordon Capern  (np)     )
  9  David Moore             )MFP 
 10  Fraser Berrill  (np)    ) 
 11  Ken Jones      (np)     ) 
 12  Raj Anand     (np)      )Lana Viinamae
 13  Bay Ryley               )
 14  Susan Rowland           )Margaret Rodrigues
 15  Valerie Dyer    (np)    )Dell Computers
 16  Jennifer Lynch  (np)    )
 17  Edward Greenspan (np)   )Jeff Lyons
 18  Todd White      (np)    )
 19  Hugh MacKenzie  (np)    )Jim Andrew
 20  Patricia Kelly          )
 21  Jennifer Searle  (np)   )
 22  Melissa Kronick (np)    )CUPE
 23  Bryan McPhadden  (np)   )Brendan Power
 24  
 25  Dorothy Button          )Registrar

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 4 Margaret Rodrigues, Sworn 5 Examination-in-Chief by 6 Ms. Daina Groskaufmanis 12 7 Cross-Examination by Ms. Patricia Kelly 25 8 Cross-Examination by Ms. Bay Ryley 49 9 Cross-Examination by Mr. David Moore 76 10 Cross-Examination by Ms. Lily Harmer 112 11 Cross-Examination by Mr. William Anderson 152 12 13 Certificate of Transcript 159 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 64 VOLUME I Bound document entitled 8 4 "Margaret Rodrigues" 5 Tabs 1 - 27 6 7 64 VOLUME I Bound document entitled 77 8 "Margaret Rodrigues" 9 Additional Tab 28 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 --- Upon commencing at 10:00 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: The Inquiry is now open. 4 Please be seated. 5 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Good morning. 6 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Good morning, 7 Commissioner. 8 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Good morning, Ms. 9 Groskaufmanis. 10 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Commissioner, 11 before we begin there are just three (3) small orders of 12 business. 13 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Hmm hmm. 14 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Margaret Rodrigues, 15 who is sitting in the witness stand right now, is -- also has 16 representation from her lawyer, Susan Rowland, who is sitting 17 at counsel table to the left of me at the back. 18 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Good morning, Ms. 19 Rowland. 20 MS. SUSAN ROWLAND: Good morning. 21 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: There is a -- a new 22 exhibit. It's a thin volume of documents marked right now, 23 Margaret Rodrigues, Volume I. It's Tabs 1 through 27. 24 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Yes, I have that. Thank 25 you.

1 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: These were 2 documents that were added by counsel for Lana Viinamae, and 3 the documents were provided to Ms. Rodrigues last night and 4 to her counsel this morning. 5 As I understand, inadvertently, counsel for 6 Ms. Viinamae gave us some of the initial documents but not -- 7 didn't indicate that she also wanted the attachments in that 8 book. We found that out this morning so those are being 9 produced as quickly as possible. 10 But my understanding, from speaking with Ms. 11 Hogan, that it actually creates -- because these books have 12 already been distributed, the attachments will actually 13 create another entire binder that neither Ms. Rodrigues nor 14 her counsel, nor frankly any other counsel, other than -- 15 than Ms. Ryley, has had a chance to look at. 16 Ms. Hogan is -- is working -- is -- is doing 17 the production as quickly as possible, but we may just need a 18 short break at some point in the morning, to allow Ms. Hogan 19 to distribute those books, to have other counsel have a quick 20 look at them and to have Ms. Rodrigues take a quick look at 21 them. 22 My understanding from Ms. Ryley is that she 23 doesn't intend to go into the documents in any depth, but in 24 the interests of fairness, they'll just -- we may just have 25 to accommodate that with a very short break.

1 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Well, I guess the 2 question will be how short the break is. It's not my 3 practice, as you know, to make witnesses show up on the day 4 that they're to be testifying and then find themselves 5 confronted with a huge packet of information that they're 6 somehow supposed to synthesize. 7 So I wonder, Ms. Ryley, just to make this a 8 bit more efficient, if you would be prepared to meet with Ms. 9 Rowland when we have the break and indicate to her which 10 areas of which of those documents you're interested in asking 11 Ms. Rodrigues some questions on. 12 Then that way, at least Ms. Rodrigues will not 13 find herself in the situation of having to read a whole 14 packet of documents, end to end, not knowing which part is 15 what interests you. Are you okay with that? 16 MS. BAY RYLEY: Yes. 17 MADAM COMMISSIONER: All right. 18 MS. BAY RYLEY: And I apologize for the 19 lateness of the documents. We weren't made aware that Ms. 20 Rodrigues was going to be testifying today until yesterday. 21 MADAM COMMISSIONER: No, I understand. I 22 think that the problem -- well, I'm not quite sure that 23 that's totally -- 24 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: I think last week 25 there was a counsel sent to all -- there was an e-mail sent

1 to all counsel that Ms. Rodrigues, Ms. Anderton, and Ms. 2 Harle would be testifying, that the order was unknown -- 3 MADAM COMMISSIONER: I see. 4 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: -- but they should 5 be ready for those three (3) witnesses. 6 MADAM COMMISSIONER: But I think the glitch 7 is that Ms. Hogan simply didn't know that you wanted the 8 attachments, so she's -- I saw her just minutes ago and she's 9 feverishly working on those. 10 But I will take a break when it's time for 11 you, Ms. Ryley, to do your cross-examination, and we'll take 12 a longer break so you can inform Ms. Rowland which parts of 13 which documents you want to -- you want Ms. Rodrigues to 14 address, so that she doesn't have to read through them all, 15 and we don't have to wait while she's reading through the 16 bits that she has to read through. All right? Okay. 17 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: And just as a -- 18 just as a final, I would -- I would then like Ms. Rodrigues' 19 documents be marked as the next exhibit, I'm -- I'm sorry, I 20 forgot to ask the Registrar what Exhibit number that is. 21 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 64. 22 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Sixty-four (64). 23 24 --- EXHIBIT NO. 64: Bound document entitled 25 "Margaret Rodrigues" Tabs 1 - 27

1 2 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: And finally, Ms. 3 Ryley has informed me that she'll be referring, during the 4 course of her cross-examination, to binders that are already 5 in evidence. I've already informed Ms. Rowland and Ms. 6 Rodrigues of that, as well as the registrar. It will be from 7 the Andrew, Viinamae, and Liczyk binders, it will be Volumes 8 VII and XX, and from the Oracle binder, which is Exhibit 54, 9 it will be Volume I. So -- 10 MADAM COMMISSIONER: But do they know which 11 tabs? 12 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Yes, in fact, yes, 13 they do -- 14 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. 15 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: -- they do in fact 16 know the tabs, but -- 17 MADAM COMMISSIONER: All right. 18 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: -- they -- they 19 should be in front of you, Madam Commissioner, they're also 20 in front of the witness, and I just wanted to make other 21 counsel also knew that if they had to go scrounging around at 22 the break. 23 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. Thanks. 24 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: So, I suppose the 25 final order of business then is just to have the witness

1 sworn. 2 3 MARGARET RODRIGUES, sworn: 4 5 IN THE MATTER OF THE TORONTO COMPUTER LEASING INQUIRY 6 AFFIDAVIT OF MARGARET RODRIGUES 7 8 I, Margaret Rodrigues, of the City of Toronto, 9 in the Province of Ontario, MAKE OATH AND SAY: 10 11 1. I was the Commissioner of Corporate Services 12 for the newly amalgamated City of Toronto from1998 until May 13 1999, and as such have knowledge of the matters hereinafter 14 deposed to. 15 16 2. A true copy of my resume is attached hereto as 17 Exhibit A. 18 19 3. I have been asked by Commission Counsel for 20 the Toronto Computer Leasing Inquiry to explain the reporting 21 relationship for Lana Viinamae, the former Director of the 22 Year 2000 Project. 23 24 4. In 1998 and 1999, the Year 2000 Project was a 25 priority for the City of Toronto and I was the "lead"

1 Commissioner for the City on this project. I was a member of 2 the Y2K Steering Committee and reported to the Chief 3 Administrative Officer and the Senior Management Team on Y2K 4 issues. 5 6 5. As the Commissioner of Corporate Services, the 7 Information and Technology Division reported to me through 8 the Executive Director of Information and Technology, Jim 9 Andrew. 10 11 6. Ms. Viinamae was a senior employee in the 12 Information and Technology Division and, in the ordinary 13 course, reported to Mr. Andrew. 14 15 7. However, when Ms. Viinamae was appointed to 16 the position of Director, Year 2000 Project, she also began 17 reporting to me since I was the Commissioner responsible for 18 the Year 2000 Project. From time to time, Ms. Viinamae and I 19 met one-on-one, without Mr. Andrew being present. 20 21 8. While she was the Director, Year 2000 Project, 22 I also expect that Ms. Viinamae continued to report to Mr. 23 Andrew. Mr. Andrew had overall reporting responsibility for 24 the Information and Technology Division and, since Y2K had a 25 significant I&T component, it was only logical that Lana

1 Viinamae reported to him as well. 2 3 9. I left the City of Toronto in May 1999. I had 4 no input on how my employment duties were distributed or 5 managed after my departure. 6 7 SWORN BEFORE ME at the City of Toronto in 8 the Province of Ontario on November 14th, 2003 9 10 MARGARET RODRIGUES 11 12 A COMMISSIONER, ETC. 13 14 15 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Good morning, and thank 16 you for coming. We -- we hadn't anticipated having more 17 witnesses after Ms. Liczyk, but there are a few gaps that we 18 have to close, and I don't mean to refer to you as a gap, but 19 I thank you for coming to assist us. 20 THE WITNESS: You're very welcome. 21 22 EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: 23 Q: Good morning, Ms. Rodrigues. 24 A: Good morning. 25 Q: I understand that to abbreviate and to

1 assist us with your evidence, you've sworn an affidavit in 2 this Proceeding, on November the 14th. 3 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: And, Madam 4 Commissioner, that affidavit has been distributed to all 5 counsel, you should have it as well. And I trust that it's 6 also in front of you, Ms. Rodrigues? 7 THE WITNESS: It is. 8 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Okay. 9 MADAM COMMISSIONER: So, that goes into the 10 transcript now? 11 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Yes, it does. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: 14 Q: Ms. Rodrigues, I understand that you were 15 the Commissioner of Corporate Services for the former -- for 16 the -- for the new City of Toronto, essentially from the time 17 of amalgamation, until around May of 1999? 18 A: That's correct. 19 Q: And Exhibit 'A' to your affidavit is 20 actually a copy of your CV? 21 A: That's right. 22 Q: Looking briefly at your CV, I -- I can see 23 that you have more than twenty (20) years of experience in 24 government, starting with, I take it, the Province? 25 A: That's right.

1 Q: Including in the position of the -- as the 2 Assistant Deputy Minister in the Ministry of Government 3 Services in two (2), I suppose, separate divisions, or under 4 two (2) separate projects? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And from there in the early '90s, you 7 moved into Muni -- excuse me, into Municipal Government? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: At the City of Mississauga? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Where you were the Commissioner of 12 Corporate Services there as well? 13 A: I was. 14 Q: And immediately prior to amalgamation for 15 the new City, you were the Commissioner of Corporate Services 16 for the old City of Toronto? 17 A: That's right, we had a Board of Management 18 of four (4) Commissioners, and I was a member of the Board of 19 Management, and the Commissioner of Corporate Services. 20 Q: I don't want to belabour a point, can you 21 just help me though with what a Board of Management was and 22 how that differs with the governance structure in the new 23 City? 24 A: Well, Council at the time decided that 25 they wanted to streamline the administration of the City, and

1 they had had -- they had had a very large number of 2 Department heads. 3 So, instead of going with a City Manager 4 model, as they did with the new City, they went with a Board 5 of Management model, that consisted of four (4) members of 6 the Board of Management, that were collectively accountable 7 for carrying out the functions of the CAO for the new City. 8 And each of the members of the Board of 9 Management were also Commissioners for one (1) of the four 10 (4) service clusters. And they -- and we were to be rotated 11 through the four (4) positions, during the five (5) years of 12 our contract. 13 So, Mayor Hall started each of us off in the 14 portfolios that we were the most familiar with, so I started 15 off as the -- as the Commissioner of Corporate Services. But 16 the Board of Management made the decisions collectively as a 17 board, and reported to Council collectively, as a board. 18 Q: Okay. And then with the change in the 19 governance structure in the new City, you became the 20 Commissioner of Corporate Services, as that position 21 currently exists, and as this Inquiry has heard a great deal 22 about already. 23 A: Yes, that's correct. 24 Q: Okay. What I'd like to talk to you about 25 is the reporting relationship that you had with Mr. Andrew,

1 Jim Andrew, the Executive Director of Information and 2 Technology, Lana Viinamae, the Y2K Project Director, as well 3 as in her -- her regular or her permanent IT position, and 4 how that relationship -- the relationship between Ms. 5 Viinamae and Mr. Andrew, from a reporting point of view. 6 You state in paragraph 4 of your affidavit 7 that, the Y -- the Year 2000 Project in 1998 and in 1999 for 8 the new City was a top priority, and that you were in fact 9 the lead Commissioner? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: What does that mean? What does it mean to 12 be the lead Commissioner? 13 A: Oh, well, what it meant was that I had a 14 special accountability to the City Manager and to Council, 15 for the overall management of the whole Y2K process. So, my 16 responsibilities were to make sure that the City was -- 17 became fully Y2K compliant by -- obviously by the 1st of 18 January, 2000. 19 And in order to do that, I -- I was 20 responsible for a special organization, which we set up -- 21 Jim Andrew and I set up together, to make sure that we could 22 provide those services and that assurance to Council. And I 23 reported regularly to Council on the progress of -- of the 24 Y2K implementation. 25 Q: When you say that you and Mr. Andrew set

1 up a special organization, what do you mean? 2 A: Well, it was very clear that under 3 amalgamation there was an enormous amount of IT work that 4 needed to be done for the City, we had to combine seven (7) 5 IT organizations, we had to set up a new -- I had to set up a 6 new IT organization. I recruited Mr. Andrew as the first 7 Executive Director of Information and Technology for the 8 Corporation and so on and so forth. 9 And then he and I worked together to -- to 10 hire the Directors below that to -- to carry out the various 11 functions that are required in a large IT organization. When 12 Y2 -- knowing about Y2K, we realized that it could not be 13 handled through the -- the regular line IT arrangements. 14 So, he and I came to the conclusion that we 15 needed to establish a special Director within Information and 16 Technology, whose responsibilities would be to -- to ensure 17 that the Corporation became Y2K compliant. Like -- like a -- 18 a very senior, if you like, Project Manager -- 19 Q: Hmm hmm. 20 A: -- for the whole -- the whole initiative. 21 And so, Jim and I, between us, looked at the 22 candidates that would be suitable for the position, and we 23 selected Lana, and that was acceptable to the City Manager. 24 And then -- and then we -- we set up a special Y2K Steering 25 Committee that was co-chaired between myself, as the lead

1 Commissioner, and Councillor Dick O'Brien, who represented 2 Council. 3 And that Y2K Steering Committee reported back 4 to Council on a regular basis, and -- and the Y2K Steering 5 Committee was the organization that -- that Jim and Lana and 6 any -- and then Commissioners with their own individual Y2K 7 Projects, they reported into. 8 And we retained IBM to do the overall project 9 management for this very large project, because again, we 10 didn't have the resources in the -- in the new City, to be 11 able to manage a project of that magnitude at that particular 12 time. 13 Q: I have a couple of questions arising out 14 of that. First, just as a clarification, when you say City 15 Manager, I take it you mean Michael Garrett? 16 A: I do, yes. Would you prefer me to say 17 CAO? 18 Q: No, that's -- that's fine. As long as we 19 -- as long as we know who -- about whom we're speaking. 20 When you say that Ms. Viinamae reported into 21 the -- the Y2K Steering Committee -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- as did the other Directors, I think you 24 said, and Commissioners in different projects reported in, 25 can you help me understand what that -- what that Year 2000

1 Steering Committee was supposed to be, what its -- what its 2 charter or what its purpose was? How hands-on was it 3 supposed to be, for example, in making sure that the project 4 moved ahead? 5 A: Well, it did -- it did -- perhaps thinking 6 about this, it did a couple of things. 7 First of all, the -- Lana's responsibilities 8 were to manage the -- manage the project office and the 9 consultants in such a way that the progress of the Y2K 10 initiative was reported on a monthly basis into the Y2K 11 Steering Committee. 12 Q: Hmm hmm. 13 A: So the Steering Committee at all times 14 knew where we stood in relation to the original plan that 15 went forward to Council, any changes to the plan, understood 16 the cash flows, understood the progress of the project, 17 understood how the whole thing was unfolding. And -- and -- 18 and the fact that we were going to be able to meet our 19 deadlines to be Y2K compliant. 20 Q: Hmm hmm. 21 A: So it had a -- a project monitoring 22 responsibility. It had reporting to Council responsibility 23 to assure Council that the Y2K initiative was being managed 24 properly and it also had an external oversight 25 responsibility, because one (1) of the things that we did was

1 we -- we invited, through the Mayor's office, we invited 2 three (3) external experts from other -- from private sector 3 companies, who would come and sit on the Y2K Steering 4 Committee. 5 They would review what we were doing and we 6 would ask them their opinion at every meeting, for their 7 opinion and their advice about how we were progressing, what 8 they thought we might be able to do better, what we were 9 doing fine, what their experience was in their own 10 corporation, because they were all implementing Y2K in a 11 bank, or -- or what -- whatever organization that they came 12 from. 13 So there was, also, that external transparency 14 and advice to the Corporation in terms of how we were 15 progressing. It was such a large and serious initiative that 16 we wanted to take every possible measure we could to make it 17 transparent, to make it open and to get as much outside 18 advice as we could in terms of how we were, in fact, we were 19 doing. 20 Q: Okay. Let me turn you a little bit now 21 away from the committee and that overall structure and back 22 down into the actual reporting relationships. You told me 23 that you and Mr. Andrew, I believe you said recruited and 24 hired Ms. Viinamae? 25 A: She was already one (1) of the Directors

1 in the IT group, so we hired her into this new temporary 2 position. She was still, however, on Mr. Andrew's staff, she 3 simply had a special assignment for the -- for the duration 4 of the Y2K initiative. 5 Q: Okay. In paragraphs 6 and 7 you talk 6 about to whom Ms. Viinamae reported. And -- and, in fact, 7 you say in paragraph 6 exactly what you've said now, that Ms. 8 Viinamae, as a senior employee in the IT Division, would have 9 reported to Mr. Andrew. In paragraph 7 you also -- you talk 10 about how her reporting responsibilities were also to you as 11 the Commissioner. 12 Can you flesh that out or give me some 13 understanding of how that worked in practice or -- how that 14 actually worked in practice? 15 A: Well, I suppose Lana really had a, if you 16 like, a dual and a concurrent reporting responsibility. I 17 mean, Mr. Andrew, as the Executive Director of Information 18 Technology for the Corporation, was accountable for every 19 aspect of Information Technology. 20 Y2K was an aspect of that, so in -- in the 21 line sense, Lana, as a special Director, still reported to 22 Mr. Andrew for all Information Technology purposes, but 23 because I was the lead Commissioner, we felt that it would be 24 very cumbersome if everything she did had to go through Mr. 25 Andrew to talk to me.

1 So we had an understanding that -- that she 2 would also report simultaneously to me, on progress with -- 3 of Y2K, and that I was perfectly free to talk to her and have 4 meetings with her to -- to discuss the progress of the 5 overall initiative. And the three (3) of us worked very 6 closely together on the whole thing, in any event. 7 Q: And what -- what was Mr. Andrew's role in 8 the Year 2000 Project? Did he have -- do you know if had any 9 role at all, for example? 10 A: Oh, he certainly had a role. I mean, 11 he -- he was going to inherit all the remediated systems, if 12 you like, once they were all in place. 13 Q: Hmm hmm. 14 A: So he had an -- a -- a longer -- a medium 15 and longer term accountability for what was happening. 16 Q: Hmm hmm. 17 A: He was accountable for making sure that 18 everything that was done in the Y2K Project would fit in, if 19 you like, with the IT strategic tactical operational 20 directions of the Corporation. 21 He came to the Y2K Steering Committee 22 meetings, he came to Council when the items were at Council. 23 I would seek his advice on -- on -- on how the Y2K Project 24 was going. 25 Q: Hmm hmm.

1 A: He did quite a bit of the external 2 liaison and -- and seeking out information on what other 3 organizations were doing, whether it was through web sites or 4 visits or whatever it might be. So he helped to bring 5 information into the project from his own knowledge and 6 experience. 7 Q: Hmm hmm. 8 A: And he also was responsible for making 9 sure that his other Directors were being very supportive of 10 the Y2K initiative. 11 And then there was a final piece of it, which 12 is that there were a series of, I think it was three (3), if 13 you like, corporate components to the Y2K plan. There were 14 all the emergency vehicles, there was the facilities and real 15 estate, and then there were -- was the IT infrastructure, the 16 networks, the desktops, the mainframes, the servers. 17 And the remediation of that Corporate IT 18 infrastructure was -- was also something that Mr. Andrew was 19 -- was in an overall sense, accountable for. 20 Q: Okay. You say that from time to time you 21 met with -- while the three (3) of you worked closely, from 22 time to time you met with Ms. Viinamae without Mr. Andrew 23 present? 24 A: Yes, from time to time, yes. 25 Q: Okay.

1 A: Well, she might ask to meet with me. 2 Q: Right, and I take -- is the opposite also 3 true, did you meet with Mr. Andrew about the Year 2000 4 Project, or aspects of it, without Ms. Viinamae present? 5 A: I had regular meetings with Mr. Andrew 6 anyway, I had regular meetings with all my direct reports, so 7 Y2K would be something that we would talk about, and -- and I 8 don't recall this, but Mr. Andrew and I were on the same 9 floor, so we were in the habit of dropping into each other 10 office -- each others offices to see how things were going. 11 So, I'm reasonably sure there would have been 12 occasions when he would have come and spoken to me about Y2K 13 outside the context of a -- of a scheduled meeting. 14 Q: Okay. And I think this is obviously very 15 clear, Mr. Andrew was one (1) of your direct reports, he 16 reported to you directly? 17 A: He did. 18 Q: Okay. You left the City of Toronto in May 19 of 1999? 20 A: I did. 21 Q: And you say in paragraph 9 that you had no 22 input -- and that you had no input on how the duties that 23 were under your bailiwick were then subsequently managed or 24 distributed? 25 A: No, I didn't.

1 Q: Okay. 2 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Madam Commissioner, 3 I have no further questions for this witness. 4 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Ms. Rodrigues. 5 Who is next? You're last? All right. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Ms. Rodrigues, this is 10 Patricia Kelly, and she is acting for Jim Andrew. 11 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 12 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Mr. Gray, can you assist 13 with the microphones please? Thank you. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 18 Q: Ms. Rodrigues, you just spoke briefly to 19 the issue of reporting relationships, and not to belabour the 20 point, but I would like to explore that a bit more deeply 21 with you. I don't expect to be particularly long. 22 Now, you mentioned that, Ms. Viinamae, during 23 the Y2K Project was still on Mr. Andrew's staff, that she 24 just had a quote, "Special Assignment?" 25 A: That's correct.

1 Q: And that's for the Y2K Project? Now, it's 2 my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm -- I'm 3 asking whether you agree with this, that Mr. Andrew was Ms. 4 Viinamae's, I guess, reporting contact for administrative 5 purposes only, that's what Mr. Andrew has testified to? 6 A: Well, I would not agree with that. I -- 7 it's my view that Ms. Viinamae was still accountable to Mr. 8 Andrew for all aspects of the work that she did. She had a 9 special reporting relationship to myself in the Y2K Steering 10 Committee, because she was responsible for managing this 11 large City wide initiative. 12 Q: Okay, and now when you say that she was 13 still accountable to Mr. Andrew for all work that she did, 14 that's -- that's the work that she did that had an IT 15 component, that Mr. Andrew would have long term 16 responsibility for; correct? 17 A: That's right, all -- all the work she did 18 had an IT component -- 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: -- of some asp -- of some sense -- in some 21 sense. 22 Q: Now, I'm going to actually go over to 23 quote you something from the transcript of Mr. Garrett's 24 testimony, Michael Garrett, who I understand was at the time 25 that you were Commissioner of Corporate Services, he was the

1 CAO for the City? 2 A: That's right. 3 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: And, Commissioner, that's 4 at page 94 of his testimony. 5 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Of which day please? 6 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: December 5th, 2002. 7 THE WITNESS: Which binder would you like me 8 to look at? 9 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: Actually it's not in a 10 binder, I'm just going to read to you from -- 11 THE WITNESS: Oh. All right. 12 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: -- his testimony and you 13 can tell me whether or not you agree with what he said here. 14 THE WITNESS: Okay. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 17 Q: Now, he's speaking to the reporting 18 relationship, and the question was whether I guess Ms. 19 Viinamae reported to Mr. Andrew for administrative purposes 20 only, being things like approval of expenses, vacation, et 21 cetera. And this is what Mr. Garrett said: 22 "Andrew? No. Y2K was a special task 23 force, a special project, if you like, a 24 project specific initiative. Setting up a 25 special Steering Committee to manage a

1 special initiative was not uncommon, it's 2 the way that we dealt with specific 3 problems. If I thought long enough, I 4 could probably provide you with other 5 examples that had -- of that in the City, 6 you know, for example, I think there was 7 one (1) that existed for the down -- for 8 the downloading of housing response of the 9 Ontario Works Changes and Family Benefits 10 over General Welfare. 11 There was a staff and inter-departmental 12 group set up to manage that as well. So 13 setting up a special task force, task 14 group, Steering Committee structure and 15 seconding staff to it is not an uncommon 16 technique to deal with high priority 17 problems. 18 Q: Yes." 19 Mr. Garrett's answer: 20 "They don't show up on the org chart. 21 Q: It's just like -- 22 A: So often what happens in that situation 23 is the again going -- using the performance 24 appraisal as the example, a person might be 25 seconded, but their performance appraisal

1 will --" 2 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Can you just slow down a 3 little bit. 4 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: Apologies. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 7 Q: "-- but their performance appraisal would 8 be done by the home department boss." 9 So, he's speaking to -- to the issue of 10 performance appraisal, which has already been testified to, 11 was signed off by Mr. Andrew after your departure from the 12 City. 13 And just going -- going on from there. It -- 14 it seems that what Mr. Garrett is saying is that Mr. Andrew 15 had administrative responsibility for managing Ms. Viinamae, 16 now you -- from what you've said here today, you would 17 disagree with Mr. -- Mr. Garrett's statement on that point? 18 A: Yes, I would. 19 Q: You would? Okay. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: Now, at paragraph 8 of your affidavit, you 24 state that: 25 "Y2K has a fairly significant IT

1 component." 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: What it says is that: 4 "Mr. Andrew had overall reporting 5 responsibility for the Information and 6 Technology Division, and since Y2K had a 7 significant I&T component, it was only 8 logical that Lana Viinamae reported to him 9 as well." 10 You still adopt that statement? 11 A: I do. 12 Q: But in truth, Y2K was -- was a much 13 broader project, it didn't just involve IT; correct? It 14 involved other departments in the City? 15 A: Oh, it involved Information Technology and 16 related technology throughout the whole Corporation. So, for 17 example, if -- if there was some form of computerized 18 microchip in fire trucks, right, it would involve that as 19 well. Yes, indeed it would. 20 But the line Commissioners, we're six (6) 21 Commissioners, were responsible for identifying the areas of 22 their own departments that needed remediation, and providing 23 that information to the Y2K Project, so that the resources 24 could be obtained to assist them to -- to -- to remediate 25 whatever needed to be remediated, whether it was equipment or

1 computers, or whatever it happened to be. 2 Q: Right, so it was seen as too broad, too 3 large a responsibility for the IT Department, per se, to deal 4 with on its own? 5 A: I think it was more a question of 6 workload. I think that the IT Department had such a heavy 7 workload going into amalgamation, that it was not something 8 that you could manage through the normal -- the normal line 9 accounting relation -- accountability relationships. 10 You needed to have a special Director who 11 would take responsibility for project managing the whole 12 thing. But that project Director was within the I&IT 13 Department. 14 Q: Okay. Thank you, I think the org charts 15 that -- that we've seen reflect that -- that Ms. Viinamae's 16 position was actually listed as reporting to Mr. Andrew. And 17 then reporting Mr. Andrew through you? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Now, I understand that Mr. Andrew was -- 20 was on the Y2K Steering Committee, I believe you spoke to 21 that briefly -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- already? 24 A: He came to the meetings. 25 Q: Right, and was he a member of that

1 Committee? 2 A: I do not recall whether he was a member of 3 the Committee, I've been trying to remember that, or whether 4 he was part of the support to the Committee, as the Executive 5 Director of Information and Technology. 6 Q: Okay, but his attendance and/or membership 7 there would be understandable, given his position in the 8 Information and Technology group? 9 A: Oh, yes. 10 Q: Now, are you aware that he had a prior 11 working relationship with Ms. Viinamae? 12 A: Yes, she was one (1) of his staff when he 13 was the Director of Information and Technology for Metro. 14 Q: So -- so given his -- his position as a -- 15 a quote, "IT expert," and his prior working relationship with 16 Ms. Viinamae, it would be logical and understandable that she 17 would be keeping him in the loop on what was going on with 18 the -- the Y2K Project? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And that's also because Mr. Andrew would 21 be, I guess, saddled with the long term responsibility for 22 the IT components of the Y2K Project? 23 A: And he was also responsible for 24 Information Technology in the short run as well. So the 25 impact of the interface between what was happening in the Y2K

1 remediation and the day to day running of the -- of the IT 2 organization, was very -- it's very -- it's almost impossible 3 to disentangle those. 4 So he -- he also had -- he had a short term 5 involvement and responsibility in any event, because it 6 affected -- it affected his core responsibilities in a very 7 material way. 8 Q: Okay. Now, just -- just going on from 9 that, who had signing authority for the Y2K Project? I 10 understand that there were two (2) individuals who carried 11 that? 12 A: There was a special signing authority 13 that was set up for the CAO, to -- so that we didn't have to 14 go through the Council process of getting Council approval 15 because we needed approvals very quickly. 16 And then the below that there were signing 17 authorities, and I don't recall what they were. 18 Q: Okay. If -- if I suggested to you that 19 signing authority for Y2K further down the line from the 20 Chief Administrative Officer fell to Ms. Viinamae and Mr. Al 21 Shultz from Finance, would that ring a bell with you? 22 A: Not at this particular moment, no. 23 Q: No? Now, Mr. Andrew has testified that 24 he had no budget control and no signing authority for the Y2K 25 Project writ large. Would you agree with that?

1 A: Yes, I would. Because the Y2K budget was 2 set up as a separately managed budget. 3 Q: For the Y2K Project? 4 A: For the Y2K Project, yes. 5 Q: Which was considered a business 6 continuity project -- 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: -- for the City? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: It was a special project? 11 A: But I would expect Mr. Andrew to keep a 12 very close eye on the Y2K budget. And as a member of the Y2K 13 Steering Committee, he was fully aware of the Y2K budget, he 14 would have advised me on aspects of it if I asked for his 15 advice. 16 And it would have had a very strong bearing on 17 the core budget of the I&IT Division because the expenditures 18 on Y2K also had an impact on the day to day expenditures on 19 the rest of I&IT in the Corporation. 20 Q: Okay. And -- but that -- that's, the 21 fact that Mr. Andrew was in the loop and kept up dated in 22 terms of spending and -- and acquisition of assets, that 23 would have been the case with most anyone else on the Y2K 24 Steering Committee? 25 A: That's correct.

1 Q: Okay. Now, you -- you -- you testified 2 that you have fairly substantial experience in the public 3 sector? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Both at the provincial and the municipal 6 level? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Now, generally, as I understand it, 9 and -- and you can educate me on this, signing authority or 10 budget control is generally seen as a fairly significant 11 indicator of control over a project or a function? 12 A: It's significant, yes. But it's not the 13 only indicator. 14 Q: So an individual who did not have any 15 kind of signing authority for a project could still be -- 16 have defacto responsibility for the project or be seen as 17 running the project, for administrative purposes? It just 18 seems strange to me that someone would be responsible for a 19 project that he or she did not have any kind of signing 20 authority or budget control for. 21 A: Oh, I don't think I would agree with 22 that. I mean, you can have financial management of a -- the 23 financial management aspect of a project can be -- it can be 24 the accountability of the Project Manager, but you can still 25 have additional accountabilities for other aspects of the

1 project over and above -- over and above the financial ones. 2 And there are many of those, of course. 3 Q: So it -- it seems reasonable to you 4 that -- that an individual who is directly accountable for -- 5 for something like the Y2K Project, it would be 6 understandable that he would not have any kind of signing 7 authority over the finances for that? Any authority to veto 8 or approve? 9 A: I think the way we set it up, yes, I 10 think we set up the financial management of the project 11 separate from the responsibilities that Mr. Andrew had for 12 Information Technology in general and -- and his 13 responsibilities for the Y2K initiative, yes. 14 Q: Okay. I'm going to take you to the new 15 binder that we received today, I guess it is the Margaret 16 Rodrigues binder. I understand it's marked as Exhibit 64? 17 If you could go to Tab 2 of that -- 18 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Are you going to need 19 any of the attachments, because they're just walking in the 20 door. 21 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: No. 22 MADAM COMMISSIONER: No? Okay. 23 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: No. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY:

1 Q: So if I could have you just review, 2 briefly, Tabs 2 and 3 in that binder? Those would be reports 3 to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee from you, 4 and the second would be a report to the Corporate Services 5 Committee from you. 6 MADAM COMMISSIONER: And could I have the -- 7 MS. BAY RYLEY: Sorry, which tab was this? 8 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Two (2) and three (3). 9 And the Begdoc number is -- 10 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: Actually, Commissioner, 11 I'm only going to be dealing with Tab 2, which is Begdoc -- 12 Begdoc 3. 13 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. 14 THE WITNESS: Okay, go ahead. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 17 Q: You've had a chance to review that? 18 A: Yeah, go ahead. 19 Q: Okay. Now, from -- from what I see here, 20 part of the Y2K responsibility was to report to Committees of 21 Council on -- on the progress of the project, you stated 22 that? 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: Now, this report is signed by you as the 25 Commissioner of Corporate Services, and you've already said

1 that you had the reporting responsibility for Council? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: For this project? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Now, on the last page of that document, if 6 you flip over, and that is Begdoc 7, the last page. Lana 7 Viinamae is listed as the contact for that particular report. 8 Now, would she have generally been the contact for your 9 reports to -- to Committee on Y2K progress? 10 A: Yes, she would. 11 Q: Okay, and there's no indication here that 12 -- that Mr. Andrew was -- was listed as the formal contact 13 for that project? 14 A: No. 15 Q: No. Now, these reports, when they came to 16 you, I understand that you -- you made these reports to -- to 17 Committee fairly frequently? 18 A: We made the reports -- we -- we tried to 19 make the reports on a monthly basis, yes, we did. From the 20 middle of '99, we made the reports on a monthly basis. Once 21 the Steering Committee was set up, we set up a process of 22 regular reporting. Before then, we reported on a couple of 23 occasions earlier in 19 -- I'm sorry, earlier in '98. 24 Q: Right. Now, these reports came to you 25 from Ms. Viinamae then, the drafts would come for your

1 approval? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: From her? Did you have any indication at 4 any -- at any point, that the reports were coming to you from 5 Mr. Andrew, after he had approved them? 6 A: I would -- I would have always, I think, 7 gone to see Mr. Andrew about the reports to make sure that A, 8 he had seen them, and B, he was comfortable with them. 9 Q: But they didn't come to you from him, they 10 came to you from Ms. Viinamae? 11 A: I don't recall the routing process that we 12 used. 13 Q: I'm going to take you actually back in 14 time to when Ms. Viinamae was hired into the Y2K Director 15 position, this is going to be my last line of -- of 16 questioning. And if we could go to paragraph 7 of your 17 affidavit. 18 I know that Ms. Groskaufmanis has briefly 19 touched on this, but I'd like to take you into it, in a bit 20 more detail. If you could read paragraph 7 of your affidavit 21 for me? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: If you could read it out loud?

1 A: Oh, out loud. 2 Q: Thank you. 3 A: "However, when Ms. Viinamae was appointed 4 to the position of Director, Year 2000 5 Project, she also began reporting to me, 6 since I was the Commissioner responsible 7 for the Year 2000 Project. From time to 8 time Ms. Viinamae and I met one on one 9 without Mr. Andrew being present." 10 Q: So, you worked with her fairly frequently 11 without Mr. Andrew present, you've already testified to that? 12 Is that -- 13 A: Well, on an as required basis, yes. 14 MADAM COMMISSIONER: I didn't hear fairly 15 frequently, is that what -- you may have said that, I just -- 16 THE WITNESS: I didn't meet with her any more 17 frequently than was necessary -- 18 19 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 20 Q: Which would be how frequently? 21 A: Well, formally, probably once or twice a 22 month, maybe informally she might make an appointment to 23 speak to me about some aspect that she was particularly 24 concerned about, but she also consulted Mr. Andrew as well. 25 Q: But those meetings did not always include

1 Mr. Andrew, as you've mentioned in your affidavit? 2 A: Not necessarily, because I made a 3 management practice of meeting with people within my 4 department who had the -- who had particular responsibilities 5 for particular initiatives. 6 And as long as the Executive Director or 7 General Manager was aware of that, and was comfortable with 8 that, I would for example, meet with Mr. Stewart, who was the 9 Director of real estate, within the facilities of the real 10 estate area, separately from the Executive Director of 11 facilities in real estate. 12 We were all so incredibly busy that we didn't 13 always have time to follow the niceties of always having the 14 more senior person present. Nor do I personally believe in a 15 management style which has to be totally hierarchical either. 16 Q: But -- but this particular meeting 17 strategy with you meeting directly with Ms. Viinamae would 18 seem to make sense to you, given the fact that Ms. Viinamae 19 was reporting directly to you on the Y2K Project? 20 A: Yes, that's correct, yes. 21 Q: Right. Now, I -- I'm going to read again 22 from -- from a transcript, the transcript is October 15th, 23 2003 and it's the testimony of Ms. Viinamae. 24 MADAM COMMISSIONER: It's what again? Sorry. 25 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: It's Ms. Viinamae's

1 testimony -- 2 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Hmm hmm. 3 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: -- from October 15th, 4 2003. 5 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Right. 6 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: And if we could look at 7 page 169, please? 8 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Hmm hmm. 9 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: I will be reading from 10 line 18, and it's Ms. Viinamae speaking. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 13 Q: Now, Ms. Viinamae, Ms. Rodrigues, says 14 something totally different from what you've just told us 15 here, and I'm going to read to you what she says about the 16 meetings that she had with you. 17 "Then for Y2K I was actually interviewed by 18 a Board and Margaret was not there that 19 day. So when Margaret returned I was then 20 interviewed by Margaret personally, I think 21 it was the Wednesday, that's when my 22 position was fully confirmed." 23 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Could you just read a 24 little bit more slowly because the witness doesn't have this 25 in front of her.

1 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: Yes, Commissioner. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 4 Q: "I would say that that was probably the 5 only one on one meeting I'd ever had with 6 Margaret. All other times Mr. Andrew was 7 there." 8 Do you agree with that? 9 A: No, I don't agree with that, actually. 10 Because I met with Ms. Viinamae, who was also on the same 11 floor that I was in Metro Hall, I would go into her office 12 and meet with her if I needed to. And I don't recall, 13 specifically, setting up meetings with her in my office, but 14 it wouldn't have been unlikely that I would have done. 15 But certainly, we had many occasions to speak 16 to each other without Mr. Andrew necessarily being there. 17 Q: Okay. I -- I'm going to read to you from 18 another transcript, it's the next -- 19 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Sorry. If I just 20 understand this correctly, are you making a distinction, 21 then, between a formal meeting and just meeting someone in 22 the hall or meeting someone in their office? 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, I am, I think. I'm -- I 24 mean, there were a whole series of regularly scheduled 25 meetings for the conduct -- for -- for conducting the

1 business of the Corporate Services Department. And then 2 there were -- there were sort of ad hoc meetings that had to 3 be scheduled quickly. 4 And then there were meetings where -- where 5 somebody might come down to my office and ask my assistant 6 if -- if he or she could speak to me, or I might go down to 7 their office and ask if I could speak to them. So there were 8 different kinds of meetings -- 9 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Right. 10 THE WITNESS: -- during the course of doing 11 business. 12 MADAM COMMISSIONER: So when Ms. Viinamae 13 says that she had had -- the only real meeting that she had 14 had with you was the day that she was being interviewed by 15 you, I think that was what the transcript indicated, was that 16 the only time that you can remember having a -- that that 17 being a specifically set aside meeting for Ms. Viinamae 18 specifically? Or whether that was the only meeting where she 19 was there by herself? I guess she wasn't there by herself 20 then, anyway. No, I think at that one (1), she was, that's 21 right. 22 THE WITNESS: That's right. 23 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Sorry, she was on that 24 one (1). Do you remember any others where she was just alone 25 with you?

1 THE WITNESS: Perhaps I -- I -- it would be 2 fair to say that I don't specifically recall. But I did make 3 a management practice of having Jim Andrew present at 4 meetings with Ms. Viinamae, to the extent I possibly could, 5 because he had a much greater level of technical knowledge 6 than I did, and I wanted to make sure that I had all the 7 advice I needed in relation to Y2K. 8 So I tried to involve him in -- in every 9 meeting that I could, whether there was ever one (1) where he 10 wasn't able to be there for some reason or another, I don't 11 remember. 12 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. Thank you. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. PATRICIA KELLY: 15 Q: Now, just -- just building on that, I'm 16 going to leave the transcript aside for a moment. You're -- 17 you're reason, then, for having Mr. Andrew present at as many 18 meetings as you could was -- was simply for his expertise? 19 A: Well, not only for his expertise but 20 because he was responsible for Information Technology for the 21 Corporation and I didn't want to put him in a situation where 22 decisions were being made around Y2K that would have an 23 impact on his overall responsibility. 24 Q: Right. 25 A: So I had him -- I -- I invited him, and

1 also it was courteous to have him invited. And -- and -- and 2 I try to operate on a team basis and involve as many of the 3 team players as I can in dealing with particular issues. 4 Q: So for instance, if you were having a 5 meeting that affected Human Resources, you would make, then, 6 an effort to have Human Resources involved in the meeting to 7 a similar extent as -- 8 A: Yes, I would. 9 Q: -- as Mr. Andrew's involvement? 10 A: Yes, I would. 11 Q: Okay. So it's not necessarily, then, the 12 fact that someone is directly involved in the Y2K Project, 13 the fact that they will be affected by it and that they would 14 have some knowledge of the area that you're dealing with -- 15 A: That's true. 16 Q: -- In a particular meeting. 17 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: I believe, Commissioner, 18 that that concludes my questions. 19 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. 20 MS. PATRICIA KELLY: Thank you. 21 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Ms. Kelly. 22 And Mr. Andrew -- Mr. Anderson, do you have 23 any questions? Or are you -- no? 24 MR. WILLIAM ANDERSON: No, I don't believe 25 so.

1 MADAM COMMISSIONER: You don't have any. Ms. 2 Ryley, are you next, then? 3 MS. BAY RYLEY: I am. 4 MADAM COMMISSIONER: All right. So I guess 5 we need to take a break? 6 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: This would probably 7 be a good time for a break, so we don't break in the middle 8 of Ms. -- 9 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. 10 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: -- Ms. Ryley's 11 examination. 12 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Why don't we, then, take 13 a half an hour? Are you, in light of what you've heard, do 14 you still need to go through all of the documents? 15 MS. BAY RYLEY: I -- I will not be going 16 through every single document. 17 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. 18 MS. BAY RYLEY: I will probably group things 19 together and ask questions -- 20 MADAM COMMISSIONER: All right. 21 MS. BAY RYLEY: -- general questions. 22 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. Well, we'll take 23 our morning break now and we'll add another ten (10) minutes 24 to our morning break so we'll come back at say quarter after. 25 Does that give us enough -- that's not quite half an hour but

1 if you need more time then let me know. 2 MS. BAY RYLEY: I will. 3 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Quarter after. Thank 4 you. 5 THE REGISTRAR: The Inquiry is recessed until 6 11:15 a.m. 7 8 --- Upon recessing at 10:47 a.m. 9 --- Upon reconvening at 11:40 a.m. 10 11 REGISTRAR: The Inquiry is now resumed, please 12 be seated. 13 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay, well we took a lot 14 longer than we would normally take, but I'm sure it was all 15 for a good cause, because it permitted Ms. Rodrigues to read 16 the information and I gather Mr. Moore has provided some 17 documents for Ms. Rodrigues to read as well. 18 MR. DAVID MOORE: Yes. 19 MADAM COMMISSIONER: So, I'm content to have 20 taken the time to make sure that the witness has all that she 21 needs to have. All right. 22 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Madam Commissioner, 23 at some point there will just be a housekeeping issue about 24 the numbers of Tabs. But, just because we were -- we've 25 produced the most minimum number of binders necessary, I've

1 offered to Ms. Hogan, that I'll follow along electronically. 2 So, I'll just -- perhaps just before we break 3 for lunch, I'll let you know what the news Tab numbers are -- 4 MADAM COMMISSIONER: All right -- 5 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: -- so they can be 6 properly recorded for the Court Reporter. 7 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay. 8 Ms. Rodrigues, this is Bay Ryley, and she's 9 the lawyer for Lana Viinamae. 10 11 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 12 Q: Good morning. 13 A: Good morning. 14 Q: Ms. Rodrigues, do you recall that shortly 15 -- or leading up to amalgamation or perhaps around the time 16 of amalgamation that the seven (7) CIO's of the former 17 municipalities, had a -- were -- comprised a team known as 18 the IT Service Review Team? 19 A: Yes, that's correct. 20 Q: And that team would have included Wanda 21 Liczyk from North York, as well as, Stephen Wong from 22 Etobicoke, Jim Andrew from Metro and John Birss from the 23 former City of Toronto? 24 A: I was not aware that it included Wanda 25 Liczyk from North York, because she was the City Manager at

1 the time. It was my understanding that the team consisted of 2 the Director of Information Technology from the -- from the 3 seven (7) municipalities. 4 I was simply not aware until the moment that 5 Wanda Liczyk might have been a member of the team. 6 Q: Were you aware that John Birss from the 7 former City of Toronto was a member of that team? 8 A: Yes, and it was my understanding that he 9 actually chaired the team -- chaired the team. 10 Q: If we could turn to Volume -- your Volume 11 of documents, at Tab 3. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 Q: It's a February 4th, 1998 report, and the 16 Begdoc is 40456. Now, we've heard evidence that it's likely 17 this report never went forward to Committee or Council. This 18 is a report from you, with a contact name of John Birss. 19 Do you have any information about this report 20 and whether it went ahead or why it didn't go ahead? 21 A: No, I don't. 22 Q: Were you aware, at the time, or around 23 this time that Mr. Birss was drafting this report in his 24 capacity as a member of the IT Service Review Team? 25 A: I was aware that the IT Service Review

1 Team were working on this issue, among many others that they 2 were working on for -- to facilitate the amalgamation of 3 Information Technology for the New City. 4 And I was aware that there were discussions, 5 in terms of consolidation the Oracle licenses to save the New 6 City a very considerable amount of money. So this report is 7 consistent with my general recollections of the issue. 8 Q: So you were aware that this group came to 9 the conclusion that an Oracle enterprise license agreement 10 was an acquisition that merited consideration by City 11 Council? 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 A: I was certainly aware of the -- of the 16 issue and the cost savings that could be derived from doing 17 this. What I do not recall is the approval process in going 18 forward to City Council, or not, on it. 19 Q: It was your understanding that that -- the 20 IT Service Review Team, they also thought that the enterprise 21 license agreement was a good idea? 22 A: Absolutely, yes. 23 Q: And did you know that this report was 24 based on a proposal from Oracle that Oracle sent to members 25 of that team in December 1997?

1 A: Well, on re-reading -- on reading the 2 report yesterday evening, it's clear that that's what 3 happened. 4 Q: And for our record, that is Tab -- Volume 5 I of the Oracle binders, Tab 3. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Sorry, what was your 10 point, Ms. Ryley on that? 11 MS. BAY RYLEY: I just asked Ms. Rodrigues if 12 she was aware that the report drafted by Mr. Birss was based 13 on the December 1997 proposal from Oracle? 14 MADAM COMMISSIONER: I see. Okay. 15 MS. BAY RYLEY: It's Begdoc 5466. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 18 Q: Did you ever actually review this report, 19 the February 4th, 1998 report? 20 A: I think so, but I'm not absolutely 21 certain. 22 Q: The contents were familiar to you -- 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: -- the concepts? 25 A: Yes, the contents are familiar, yes. My

1 signature isn't on it, so whether I reviewed it in draft, I 2 couldn't say definitively, this morning. 3 Q: Do you recall that Mr. Andrew became the 4 Executive Director of IT in -- around May of 1998? 5 A: Yes, he did. 6 Q: And prior to that, he was in an acting 7 role in that position and his title was Interim Functional 8 Lead? 9 A: That's correct, yes. 10 Q: And he would have been in that interim 11 position around the time that this report was edited? Since 12 it was prior to May 1998, when -- 13 A: I don't recall when the Interim Functional 14 Leads were appointed. Mr. Birss, unfortunately, was 15 diagnosed with cancer around that time and subsequently died 16 a few months later. 17 I don't recall when Mr. Birss went off on sick 18 leave and when Mr. Andrew, in fact, took over the lead of the 19 team. 20 Q: But at one (1) point you would expect that 21 Mr. Andrew, if -- when he was in that acting role was 22 superior -- in a superior position to Mr. Birss? If he was 23 acting -- 24 A: Well, the Acting Functional Leads were 25 like team leaders. And it's difficult to say that they were

1 in a superior role, if you like. They were in a team 2 management role. 3 What we were doing in setting up the 4 organization of the new City, was that we had set up teams of 5 people for each of the functional areas in the City, made up 6 of the individual directors from the seven (7) previous 7 municipalities, or however many that there needed to be, 8 right? 9 And one (1) of those people would be the 10 Interim Functional Lead, either because the team members 11 chose them or because they had an interest in it. I don't 12 believe there was a competitive process for it. 13 So, it's not correct to say that the members 14 of the team reported to this person. This person's 15 responsibility was to coordinate the team. 16 At the same time, we were running competitions 17 for the permanent -- well -- at the same time we were 18 designing the new organizations and then we were running 19 competitions for the new -- the new official position that 20 Jim -- Mr. Andrew eventually won. 21 So, there is not necessarily a hierarchical 22 reporting relationship between the functional lead and the 23 other members of the team. It's not necessary that -- it's 24 not necessarily the case that Mr. Birss functionally reported 25 to Mr. Andrew.

1 They were part of a team of people who were 2 working together to implement the IT requirements of the new 3 Mega City. There were similar teams in Parks and all over -- 4 for every functional area, we had teams of this kind. 5 And as soon as the permanent executive was 6 appointed, then the team was disbanded. 7 Q: And when Mr. Birss was drafting this 8 report, would there have been an intermediary between him and 9 you, as Commissioner, between Mr. Birss who was drafting the 10 report? 11 A: Well, if this was at a time when Mr. Birss 12 was still the leader of the team, there would not have been. 13 If it was -- if it was drafted after Mr. Andrew was appointed 14 the Interim Functional Lead, it would have gone through Mr. 15 Andrew. 16 But, as I say, I don't recall the timing of 17 the hand off from the one (1) gentlemen to the other. 18 Q: If you could please turn to Volume VII, of 19 the other binders, Tab 11. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: This is Begdoc 1304, it's an e-mail dated 24 February 28th, 1999, and it's from the CAO Mike Garrett to 25 you and to Mr. Andrew and copied to Laurel MacIntosh. Do you

1 know who Laurel MacIntosh is? 2 A: I believe Laurel MacIntosh was one (1) of 3 Mr. Garrett's staff in his office. 4 Q: And I won't get into the contents of the 5 e-mail in any great length, but he says: 6 "I need to have an accurate accounting of 7 our spending to date, on Y2K. We need to 8 keep constant tabs on our deliverables and 9 the spending to date." 10 And Ms. Viinamae is not copied on this e-mail 11 is she? 12 A: She isn't -- no she's not. 13 Q: So there are occasions when, Mr. Garrett, 14 would have communicated with you and Mr. Andrew independently 15 from Ms. Viinamae? 16 A: Based on this one (1) -- we have an 17 instance of that here, yes. 18 Q: And do you recall that happening on 19 occasion, where there would be communication between you and 20 Mr. Andrew and the CAO without necessarily involving Ms. 21 Viinamae? 22 A: I don't recall any specific instances, but 23 the City Manager's Office staff were responsible for routing 24 information to the appropriate Commissioner, and sometimes 25 they would copy members of the Commissioner's staff and

1 sometimes they wouldn't. And depending on who was doing the 2 routing of the correspondence at the time, one (1) member of 3 his office might follow one (1) practice, one (1) member of 4 his office might follow another. 5 Q: Are -- are you aware that -- that -- or 6 are you aware whether Mr. Garrett would have viewed Mr. 7 Andrew as having a leadership role in the Y2K preparation? 8 A: Oh, I think he would certainly, yes. 9 Because Mr. -- Mr. Andrew, as I said earlier this morning, 10 had a responsibility for Information Technology for the 11 entire Corporation. 12 Q: Please turn to Volume XX, Tab 6? 13 A: I don't believe I have Volume XX here. 14 MADAM COMMISSIONER: It's probably around 15 there somewhere. 16 THE WITNESS: Can you give me one (1)? 17 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Can you assist? 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Tab 6. 22 THE WITNESS: Thank you. Okay, I found that. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 25 Q: It's Begdoc 1255.

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: The bottom is an e-mail from Mr. Garrett 3 to -- to Mr. Andrew and to you and Mr. Gutteridge. And Mr. 4 Andrew replies to that e-mail, this is about -- well, it 5 says, re: Y2K and -- and gives a brief update on a number of 6 points. 7 So again, it wasn't -- it -- it -- there were 8 times when the three (3) of you, meaning Mr. Andrew and Mr. 9 Garrett and you would have communicated together on 10 significant Y2K issues? 11 A: Yes, that's true. 12 Q: Turn to Tab 1 of your binder? Begdoc 13 01900. 14 A: Are you speaking -- excuse me, are you 15 speaking about Binder XX or the original binder. 16 Q: Your -- your binder. I -- I -- we'll 17 move away from those bigger binders now and we'll stick with 18 your -- your binder. And it's Tab 1. 19 A: Okay. 20 Q: Begdoc 1900, and it's an announcement 21 appointing Ms. Viinamae to the Year 2000 Project Director. 22 The second paragraph in the announcement says: 23 "In her new position, Lana will have a 24 joint reporting -- will have joint 25 reporting responsibilities through the

1 Information and Technology Division and the 2 Commissioner of Corporate Services." 3 This announcement was signed by you and by Mr. 4 Andrew? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And do you know who drafted this letter? 7 A: No, I don't recall. 8 Q: But this -- this issue about Lana having 9 joint reporting responsibility, that comment would have 10 reflected your view that in fact Ms. Viinamae would have had 11 joint reporting responsibility to you and to Mr. Andrew? 12 A: Yes, that's correct. In fact, it would 13 have been unreasonable to set it up any other way, insofar 14 as, if I were not available for a project of this magnitude 15 for various reasons, it would be important for Jim -- for Mr. 16 Andrew to be in a position to act for me. 17 And since I'm not a technical IT specialist, 18 it would be extremely important to have somebody like Mr. 19 Andrew involved in this, to carry out the kind of technical 20 due diligence on the Y2K Project that I, with a background in 21 urban geography and administration, couldn't quite hope to 22 do. 23 Q: Turn to Tab 6, please, in the same 24 binder. Begdoc 02195. 25 A: Yes.

1 Q: And this was an -- an e-mail to Ms. 2 Liczyk and Ossie Doyle, the City Solicitor from Frank 3 Vizzacchero, Director of MIS North York Civic Centre from 4 March 11th, 1998. Do you recall what Mr. Vizzacchero's 5 position was at this point? 6 A: Well, I believe, from this, that he 7 was -- he was still the Director of IT, MIS, in -- for North 8 York. And he was a member of that same Committee that you 9 mentioned earlier on, that was coordinating the 10 implementation of IT within the -- within the Megacity. 11 Q: So, he would have effectively had, before 12 Ms. Viinamae took on the role of Y2K Director, he would have 13 been in that type of role? 14 A: I don't believe Frank Vizzacchero was ever 15 responsible for I -- for Y2K, as such. I know he was very 16 interested in -- in the whole issue, and different members of 17 that IT working group, if you like, took on different 18 responsibilities for different aspects of -- of the Y2K 19 issue. 20 And -- and -- and Frank, I believe, had a -- 21 Mr. Vizzacchero, had a particular interest in -- in these 22 kind of legal and compliance aspects of it, and on behalf of 23 the team he wrote this -- this memo, and it was an important 24 piece of background work that he did on behalf of the City. 25 Q: And this -- this would have been some of

1 the earliest documents on Y2K preparation, starting in -- 2 this would be late winter of 1998? 3 A: Yes, because the -- the very -- the seven 4 (7) previous Municipalities were -- were very concerned about 5 Y2K, and they had, to varying degrees, taken steps to protect 6 themselves against it. 7 But when we went into the Megacity, not only 8 were you amalgamating the seven (7) IT departments, but you 9 also had to amalgamate the applications, because the kind of 10 application that you need for a City of 2.4 million and a 11 budget of over $6 billion, is a very different -- a very 12 different -- in a very different order of magnitude from the 13 kind of IT application that will do the same thing in a small 14 Municipality like say, where we are today, like East York, 15 you know. 16 So, we were in a position of -- of having to 17 look at all the existing applications and either choose one 18 (1) that looked like the most robust for the new City and 19 remediate that, or conclude that the app -- none of the 20 applications were suitable, as we did in the case of the -- 21 the Finance system, and then -- and then introduce a new 22 application that would both deal with the volumes of 23 transactions that were required in the Megacity, and would 24 also be Y2K compliant at the same time. 25 So, there were different strategies used in

1 relation to different -- different applications and different 2 user requirements. 3 Q: And this -- this particular document was 4 copied to -- to you and to Mike Garrett and Mr. Andrew, so 5 you'd agree that as well -- sorry, as well as the -- someone 6 from City Legal, you'd agree that the three (3) of you were 7 from the -- from the early days of -- of post-amalgamation 8 and from the early days of Y2K preparation, that you all had 9 a -- a significant role in getting the new City ready for 10 Y2K? 11 A: Yes, we did. 12 Q: Tab 11, Begdoc 14805, this is the June 13 8th, 1998 Year 2000 action plan, which was signed by -- 14 signed by you and -- and Mr. Andrew, and with the contact 15 name of Ms. Viinamae. 16 So, again, you'd expect that -- that Mr. 17 Andrew would be heavily involved in drafting such a report? 18 A: I don't know whether he drafted the 19 report, I believe that Ms. Viinamae drafted the report, but 20 he certainly reviewed the report, and certainly discussed it 21 with me, and co-signed it. 22 Again, because he had the -- you know, he had 23 the technical knowledge and expertise to be able to assure 24 Council that the steps that were proposed were the 25 appropriate ones under the circumstances.

1 Q: And even on a report such as -- that Ms. 2 -- Ms. Kelly took you to a report at Tab 2, where only you 3 have signed -- you -- you signed this report, this doesn't 4 seem to be a signed version, but the contact name is Ms. 5 Viinamae, but regardless, you would expect that Ms. Viinamae 6 would have briefed Mr. Andrew, that he perhaps was involved 7 in drafting this report, insofar as providing assistance to 8 Ms. Viinamae? 9 A: I would expect so, but, I have no way of 10 knowing that. 11 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Just for our files, for 12 our record, that was Begdoc 00003. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 15 Q: There are a number of action slips in this 16 binder and I -- 17 A: Excuse me, could I just make a point? I 18 believe the date on that report is incorrect. I believe that 19 date should be January 12th, 1999, should it not? Because 20 it's a status report for December 1998, so the report would 21 be January 12th, 1999. I think that's a typo. 22 Q: So, it should be June 8th, 1999? 23 A: I'm sorry, I'm looking at the one (1) 24 under Tab 2. 25 Q: Oh -- okay.

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: There are a number of actions -- 4 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Excuse me, because you 5 see the in background, it refers to at its meeting of July 6 29th, 30th and 31st, of 1998. And it wouldn't have been able 7 to do that if the report was written in January of '98. All 8 right. Thank you for pointing that out to us. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 11 Q: I think you've seen a number of action 12 slips, documents called action slips that are in this binder 13 and the attachments have now been added. 14 Perhaps if we could go to one (1) as an 15 example and then if I could ask a general question about 16 these. Let's go to Tab 14, Begdoc 01812. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And this is from you and its sent to Ms. 19 Viinamae and Mr. Andrew. And then can you perhaps just 20 explain what these action slips were meant to -- what these 21 were? 22 A: Oh, well, I think all the Commissioners 23 and the City Managers used these kind of action slips and we 24 all had a very, very large volume of material coming into our 25 offices. And so my executive assistant would review all the

1 material and she would make a judgment call about who the 2 materials should go to and who they would be interest to. 3 And as far as Y2K was concerned, the practice 4 that she and I established was that everything would go to 5 both Ms. Viinamae and Mr. Andrew. So, I would not have 6 probably seen this action slip. It would have gone directly 7 to the individuals responsible wherever they might be in the 8 Corporate Services Department. 9 If my executive assistant thought that 10 something was particularly important for me to see, she would 11 copy it and leave it in my in tray. If there was a response 12 required then I would get the action slip and the original 13 material and the response back in a package, when the 14 response had been prepared, for me to review and sign. 15 Q: And there are other -- other versions 16 where it's to -- there's not a c.c., well actually if you 17 could turn to the action slip at Tab 16, which is Begdoc 18 1708, this one (1) is to Mr. Andrew and c.c.'d to Ms. 19 Viinamae, and there are others, as well, where it's -- 20 there's no c.c.ing, it's from you to Mr. Andrew and Ms. 21 Viinamae. Did that -- was there a distinction made in your 22 mind how it was addressed? 23 MADAM COMMISSIONER: In Tab 16, it's not 24 c.c.'d, it's -- Tab 14 is c.c.'d? 25 MS. BAY RYLEY: Tab 16 there's a -- looks like

1 one (1) c beside Ms. Viinamae's name. 2 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Oh, I'm sorry, yes, I was 3 on the wrong Tab. Sorry. It still goes to both people, is 4 that -- 5 MS. BAY RYLEY: Yes. 6 THE WITNESS: Yes. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 9 Q: Was there any distinction in your mind 10 whether it was c.c.'d to one (1) and not the other? 11 A: Well, first of all, it would depend on the 12 decision that the person in -- my executive assistant would 13 make on where to send it. Sometimes I would make a decision, 14 if she would ask me where to send it, I would look at who 15 seemed to have the primary interest in the issue concerned, 16 and suggest she send it to that person with a copy to the 17 others. 18 But then in other circumstances, if another 19 person had the primary interest in it, I might suggest that 20 she send it to them. You know, reverse the proceedings. But 21 I don't imagine that I saw this action slip when it was being 22 prepared in any event. 23 Q: And as an example, on Tab 16, where it's 24 sent to Mr. Andrew and copied to Ms. Viinamae, the attachment 25 is a memo from -- of August 10th, 1998, from Mr. Garrett to

1 you, attaching a report to the Strategic Priorities -- 2 Strategic Policy and Priorities Committee, SPPC. 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And he asked: 5 "Please ensure the appropriate reports are 6 drafted for my review and that a briefing 7 session be set up to review the status 8 report." 9 A: If it was something specifically about 10 Council business, or it was something that the CAO -- the 11 City Manager particularly wanted to know about, I would most 12 certainly, I think, have -- I would generally have made the 13 decision to send it to the -- the Executive Director with a 14 copy to the person who would be responsible for putting the 15 material together, so that the Executive Director could, on 16 my behalf, make sure that the work was being done properly. 17 Q: So you would, in these cases, and -- and 18 I won't -- I'll just, for the record, there are action plans 19 at Tabs 10, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18 -- 20 A: Hmm hmm. 21 Q: -- 18 up to 26, with the exception of 24. 22 You -- sorry, you just stated that you would expect, in that 23 case, Mr. Andrew to ensure that whatever action you required 24 was carried out, and you would expect him to oversee that? 25 A: Yes. I mean, I'm hard put to -- to

1 find -- to find a sort of a definitive pattern from these 2 action slips, but generally speaking, that's what -- what we 3 did. 4 Q: Tab 15, Begdoc 01125? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: July -- it's a July 24th, 1998 letter, to 7 you from Mr. Andrew. And have you had a chance to -- to 8 review this -- this letter? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: Okay. It looks like they were -- Jim -- 11 Mr. Andrew was attaching a document from the Institute of 12 Chartered Accountants to -- about the Y2K bug. And at the 13 bottom he indicates to you that you could contact him or you 14 could contact Ms. Viinamae. 15 So I take it you probably don't recall 16 receiving this letter? 17 A: Well, it looks generally familiar. What 18 Mr. Andrew did, as part of his responsibilities, was that Ms. 19 Viinamae was extremely busy on a day to day basis, as you can 20 imagine, trying to manage this entire initiative. 21 So one (1) of the roles that Mr. Andrew played 22 was that he would -- he would explore with other 23 jurisdictions and organizations the kind of good practices 24 that they were following. And he went to conferences, he met 25 with people, and then he would bring this information back to

1 the City, and then he would share it with me, for my 2 purposes, and he would share it with Ms. Viinamae for her -- 3 you know, her information. 4 She'd share -- he'd share it with Mr. Garrett 5 or anyone else that he thought would find it useful and 6 helpful. 7 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Well, and in this case, 8 another eight (8) people? 9 THE WITNESS: Yes. He shared it with all 10 the -- the City -- the City Manager and all the 11 Commissioners, and the -- and the -- the -- the Project 12 Director for Y2K. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 15 Q: And so he -- he would have, by indicating 16 that he could be contacted about -- about this, or Ms. 17 Viinamae, he would be known by you and -- and others copied, 18 that he had a directing -- some sort of directing role in 19 Y2K, or a leadership role? 20 A: Yes, a leadership role. 21 Q: Tab 20? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: There's a -- the -- the first page here,

1 is Begdoc 01417. And it's hard to see if there's a date. I 2 couldn't say for sure the date, it looks like 1998, but -- 3 and the note says: 4 "Margaret, for your info. Instead of 5 sending this, Jim Andrew agreed to fund 6 through the Y2K budget. Thanks. B." 7 And I assume Margaret is you and B is Brenda 8 Glover, the -- at that time, Executive Director of Human 9 Resources? 10 A: That's right. 11 MADAM COMMISSIONER: This seems to be the 16th 12 of December is that what that would be, the 16/12? 13 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: That's what it looks 14 like to me and I can blow that date stamp up electronically 15 and that's what it looks like to me. 16 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Okay, thanks. 17 MS. BAY RYLEY: And that -- that would make 18 sense, because the attached report is December 14th, '99 -- 19 1998, from Ms. Glover to the Budget Committee. 20 21 CONTINUED BY MS. BAY RYLEY: 22 Q: And this morning Ms. Kelly asked you about 23 Mr. Andrew's budget authority, and the comment here that Mr. 24 Andrew agreed -- Jim Andrew agreed to fund through the Y2K 25 Budget, suggests that Mr. Andrew would have had some say on

1 -- on Y2K Budget spending; is that correct? 2 A: Well, perhaps I can describe it a little 3 bit differently. See we had -- we had a huge IT Program 4 going on in the new City, and there were -- we tried to 5 separate out those IT initiatives that were -- that required 6 -- that those IT systems that required remediation for Y2K 7 purposes, that were legitimate to be funded out of the $150 8 million Y2K budget, and those that -- that did not, and -- 9 and those that did not then were funded in priority order out 10 of the -- the regular IT budget. 11 And then there was always -- there was often a 12 debate as to whether or not there was a significant enough 13 Y2K aspect of a particular project, to fund it out of the Y2K 14 budget, because what we didn't want to do was to -- what we 15 didn't want to do was to have things put through the Y2K 16 budget that weren't Y2K related, because they just looked 17 like -- they looked like good things to do, and the 18 particular department was not able to get the money through 19 the normal budget process. 20 So, we played a kind of -- Jim and I played a 21 kind of controllership role in relation to the Y2K Budget. 22 And in this particular case, clearly there was 23 a proposal for -- from Human Resources to go forward for some 24 funding independently from the Budget Committee. 25 I am assuming that there was some discussions

1 between Ms. Glover and Mr. Andrew about whether it would be 2 appropriate to fund it out of the Y2K budget or not, and Mr. 3 Andrew had agreed with Ms. Glover that it would be fine to 4 fund it through the Y2K budget, so it became a Y2K Project, 5 as opposed to a general project. 6 But I would certainly have relied on Mr. 7 Andrew's advice as to whether -- and Ms. Viinamae's too, but 8 Mr. Andrew's advice as to whether things should -- were 9 appropriate funded through the Y2K budget, or they were more 10 appropriately funded in some other way. That's a little 11 different from having responsibility for the financial 12 management of -- and tracking of the Y2K budget, which was 13 what I understood the question was this morning. 14 Q: At around this time -- this is December 15 1998, Ms. Viinamae was appointed or began her tenure as Y2K 16 Director in December 1998, so prior -- prior to that time, 17 when -- when Ms. Viinamae was -- was in that position, there 18 would have been even greater reliance on Mr. Andrew? 19 A: Yes, there would. I'm just trying to look 20 up the date of Ms. Viinamae's appointment. 21 Q: It wasn't on the announcement. 22 A: No, it's not. 23 Q: But it was in December 1998, and I don't 24 have the date -- 25 A: Okay, thank you.

1 Q: -- either. The -- the action slips and I 2 appreciate we didn't go over all of them, but you are 3 generally familiar with them. Those weren't sent to other 4 members of the Steering -- the Y2K Steering Committee were 5 they, be -- besides Mr. Andrew? 6 A: There may have been action slips that were 7 sent to the Y2K Steering Committee, it's not impossible that 8 there would have been, none of these clearly were. 9 I don't recall any going to the Y2K Steering 10 Committee, we had a very formal process of building the Y2K 11 Steering Committee agenda, and I -- I don't believe I was in 12 the practice of simply sending materials to the Y2K Steering 13 Committee. As a Steering Committee, I might possibly have 14 sent, for example, an interesting article to Councillor 15 O'Brien, who was my co-chair, for example, or passed on 16 information to him that I thought would be helpful to him. 17 Q: And you were aware that Mr. Andrew's Y2K 18 responsibilities existed independently of his Steering 19 Committee responsibilities? 20 A: Well, as I said this morning, I can't 21 recall whether he attended the Steering Committee as a member 22 of the Steering Committee, or he attended the Steering 23 Committee as a staff support to the Steering Committee, 24 because I don't have the documents here that would enable me 25 to check that out. He certainly came to the Steering

1 Committee meetings. So from a defacto point of view, he was 2 a member of the Steering Committee. 3 Whether he was technically a member of the 4 Steering Committee, I don't recall, I'm afraid. 5 Q: You don't recall that Mr. Andrew, Ms. 6 Liczyk, and Mr. O'Brien, were the voting -- I think you could 7 say voting members of that committee, but Ms. Viinamae 8 reported to them, but was not a voting member? 9 A: Well, Ms. Liczyk -- I don't recall the 10 member -- I don't recall the membership of the Y2K Steering 11 Committee in the eighteen (18) months that I was the co-chair 12 at this point. 13 If I were to see the minutes, I would clearly 14 recall it, but we don't have the minutes of the Y2K Steering 15 Committee in front of us. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: And I take it you'd agree that the work of 20 the IT Division, as a whole, was central to Y2K preparation? 21 A: Yes, it was. 22 Q: And, in fact, that those two (2) could not 23 be disentangled, you couldn't separate or segregate IT as one 24 (1) thing and Y2K preparation as something else? There had 25 to be cooperation?

1 A: Yes, I don't see how you could separate 2 them. It's not a case where there was a whole new initiative 3 of a completely different kind, in which you set up a special 4 project executive and a special project team. 5 This was completely in -- this was so 6 cross-connected if you like, into the information technology 7 business of the City, that we really couldn't, in any 8 meaningful way, disentangle it. Kind of like a matrix 9 arrangement, if you like. 10 Q: And as a result, it was critical to the 11 success of the Y2K Project, that the Executive Director of IT 12 would be a major player in Y2K preparation? 13 A: I think it would be impossible for the Y2K 14 project to be successful if the Executive Director of IT were 15 not a major player. 16 MS. BAY RYLEY: Thank you. Those are my 17 questions. 18 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr. Moore, 19 are you next? 20 MR. DAVID MOORE: Yes, thank you, 21 Commissioner. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Ms. Rodrigues, this is

1 David Moore, and he's the lawyer for MFP. 2 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Do you have a sense, Mr. 7 Moore, of how long you're going to be? 8 MR. DAVID MOORE: I'll be finished by lunch. 9 MADAM COMMISSIONER: By lunch? 10 MR. DAVID MOORE: Yes, maybe before. 11 12 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DAVID MOORE: 13 Q: Ms. Rodrigues, I have some questions, as 14 you know from our brief discussion about a report which is 15 under Tab 4 of your Book. It's Begdoc 61751. That 16 particular report in the database is missing a section, which 17 we'll see as we go through. 18 As you know, I have added some documents or 19 brought some documents with me, Commissioner, I've provided 20 copies of these to the witness and to everyone that's here 21 and there's an extra copy both for the Registrar and 22 yourself. 23 I was going to suggest that these all together 24 be added, as I guess the last Tab of the book, at this 25 juncture.

1 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: I've just been 2 speaking with Ms. Hogan. I believe that's what we're 3 probably going to do. It will be Tab 28 and we'll just have 4 one (1) Volume number. If there's any change, I will 5 certainly let you and the Court Reporter know. 6 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Thank you. 7 MS. DAINA GROSKAUFMANIS: Or the Registrar. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. DAVID MOORE: 10 Q: And I have put handwritten page numbers in 11 the lower right-hand corner of that bundle of documents to 12 facilitate our going through them. 13 And the first document indeed that I have 14 intended to add or have added, was that same report that I 15 just made reference to, February 27th, 1998. And that's a 16 report that concludes on Begdoc 61752, it's supposed to be 17 the third page of the report, but as you see, there's a 18 section missing. 19 "The conclusion is that leasing provides 20 the most cost effective method of acquiring 21 and maintaining desktop hardware. And in 22 addition, it will result in an enhanced 23 ability to provide service to internal and 24 external customers through the maintenance 25 of current technology."

1 Mr. Andrew is designated as a contact name, 2 and then, I take it, that's your signature on the -- on the 3 bottom of that third page? 4 A: It is. 5 Q: All right. I just want to trace through 6 with reference to some Council -- City Council committee 7 documentation and Council documentation that -- that we at 8 MFP have been trying to -- to segregate and download from the 9 City's web site. 10 And if you -- in that regard, the starting 11 point would be page 13 in the lower right hand corner. 12 There's -- there's no Begdoc for this material -- 13 MADAM COMMISSIONER: Hmm hmm. 14 MR. DAVID MOORE: -- Commissioner. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. DAVID MOORE: 17 Q: And again, from time to time, you'll see, 18 unfortunately, the way it comes off the web, part of it ends 19 up being cut off. But -- but I think -- I don't think that 20 will be too much of a problem. 21 A: No. 22 Q: The date, this -- this first document 23 that I want to go through with you, it's entitled, "Minutes 24 of the Corporate Services Committee". And you'll see, after 25 the -- the heading, the introduction says that the committee

1 met on February 16th, 1998. Do you see that? 2 A: Yes, I do. 3 Q: All right. And -- and this is just an 4 extract from some nineteen (19) pages of those minutes. Over 5 the next page, it's page 14 in the lower right hand corner, 6 you'll see Item 40, "Tax Manager 2000, Purchase/Upgrade of 7 Desktops"? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Do you have that? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And -- and that refers to a February 2, 12 1998 report from the Interim Executive Commissioner of 13 Corporate Services, seeking authority to acquire work 14 stations for the implementation of the new tax system. You 15 see that reference? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Then Sub A records that, Councillor -- is 18 it Mihevc? 19 A: Mihevc. 20 Q: Mihevc. 21 " -- moved that the Corporate Services 22 Committee [and part of it's cut off, but] 23 recommended to the Budget Committee and 24 Council that the aforementioned report be 25 approved in principle."

1 And then it goes on: 2 "And further, that the Commissioner of 3 Corporate Services be requested to submit a 4 report directly to Council for its meeting 5 scheduled to be held March 4th on the 6 relative merits of purchasing versus 7 leasing the work stations." 8 And then over to the next page, on page 15 in 9 the lower left -- lower right hand corner, there's an Item B, 10 where it says: 11 "Councillor Lindsay Luby moved that the 12 Commissioner of Corporate Services be 13 requested to report to the Corporate 14 Services Committee as to why she is 15 suggesting that Tax Manager 2000 be 16 purchased and not leased, recognizing the 17 high obsolescence rate." 18 And -- and both of those Councillors, Mihevc 19 and Luby, go back to page 13, were members of the Corporate 20 Services Committee? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And -- and the outcome is, that -- that 23 the -- that that was -- the motion A by Councillor Mihevc was 24 adopted, it appears, from page -- page 15. And in light of 25 the -- it appears that in light of the provision of that

1 motion for a further report, Sub B, the motion by Councillor 2 Luby requesting an explanation, that wasn't dealt with 3 further, as I read these minutes. 4 Now, having -- having -- 5 A: Well, I mean, the report that was 6 submitted to City -- directly to City Council was the report 7 that -- that dealt with these concerns about leasing versus 8 purchasing. The -- the one (1) that's dated February 27th, 9 1998 -- 10 Q: No, I appreciate that. 11 A: -- was the report that was written in 12 response to that. 13 Q: I -- I appreciate that. 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: One (1) -- one (1) of the reasons I'm 16 going through this is -- is, I'm -- I'm trying to fill in 17 the -- the record or -- or get on the record, if possible, 18 some of the origins of -- of Council's interest in leasing, 19 the extent to which Councillors were familiar with or 20 supportive of leasing, and some of this material provides 21 some context or some -- some background for that. 22 A: Hmm hmm. 23 Q: That's why I'm -- I'm going through this. 24 A: All right. 25 Q: And -- and my observation was simply

1 that, at least judging by these minutes, there was no formal 2 action taken, and there doesn't appear to be any formal 3 action taken in connection with Councillor Luby's request for 4 an explanation. 5 But having -- having drawn that to your 6 attention and -- and you had some brief opportunity to look 7 at this over the break when we spoke, do you recall anything 8 about this? Were -- were you present, do you know, at this 9 February 16th, 1998 Corporate Services Committee meeting? 10 A: I believe I was. I don't real -- I can't 11 say for absolutely sure, but I believe so. 12 Q: All right, but it would have been in 13 accordance with your practice to be present at -- at such a 14 meeting, given -- given the fact that the matters involved 15 your -- your matters of interest to you? 16 A: Oh, yes, because I was the lead 17 Commissioner with respect to this Committee, in any event. 18 Q: All right, now, the -- the portions of 19 this that I've read to you with respect to Councillor Mihevc, 20 and -- and Councillor Luby, would appear to suggest on the 21 face, that -- that those Councillors had an interest in 22 leasing, and -- and seemed to have some support, or at least 23 -- at least tentative support in their minds, for the concept 24 of leasing, as opposed to Purchasing. Can you shed any light 25 on that, or can you help the Commissioner in terms of -- of

1 any background as to what their interests or -- or position 2 may have been? 3 A: Well, I can't speak to the -- the personal 4 interests of those two (2) particular Councillors, but 5 leasing versus buying hardware and software is -- you know, 6 is -- is a very fundamental business decision, you know, in 7 any IT transaction. 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: And -- and depending on the extent to 10 which Councillors have been involved in Information and 11 Technology issues in the past, or leasing versus buying 12 decisions in other areas, whether it's for, you know, for 13 either vehicles or whatever it may be, it's something -- it's 14 a question that you would always expect a Councillor to raise 15 in relation to an acquisition. 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: I would expect Councillors to come to the 18 -- to come to the Corporate Services Committee on this kind 19 of issue, and ask why we were recommending leasing, if we 20 were, or buy -- purchase, if we were. 21 Q: Right. 22 A: It would be a very standard question that 23 they would ask. 24 Q: All right, and -- and certainly I 25 interpret, or at least one (1) interpretation may be a better

1 way of putting it, of -- of the specific aspects I've read 2 out, with respect to those particular Council -- Council 3 members. One (1) interpretation might suggest that those 4 Council members did have some awareness of leasing, some 5 knowledge of leasing, and some interest in leasing, would 6 that be a fair inference or observation from your standpoint, 7 or not? 8 A: Well, I think they would have obviously 9 had to have some knowledge of leasing, otherwise they 10 wouldn't have asked the question in the first place. 11 Q: All right. 12 A: The extent of the knowledge, I could -- I 13 couldn't say. 14 Q: All right. And -- and do you recall 15 whether you had any -- any dialogue with -- with -- with 16 those Councillors, proximate to this meeting, about what 17 their questions were or what their inquiries were? 18 A: No, I don't believe I did. 19 Q: All right. Anyway, that's February 16th.