Jamie Burke, Sackville’s new CAO
Sackville Town Council has chosen one of the town’s senior managers as its new Chief Administrative Officer (CAO).
During a telephone meeting Monday night, six councillors and the deputy mayor voted to appoint Jamie Burke to the top administrative post while Councillor Bruce Phinney voted against it.
In 2019, Phinney called for Burke’s removal as senior manager of corporate projects, a post Burke has held for the last six years.
A news release announcing Burke’s appointment says the headhunting firm KBRS came up with a short list of seven candidates.
It adds that council ended up interviewing six of them and then brought the top two back for a second round.
To read the release, click here.
Burke replaces Phil Handrahan who retired in February.
His appointment took effect today at a salary that falls somewhere between $100,273 and $133,697.
Last year, Phinney called for Burke and other senior managers to be fired after the discovery of about 14-thousand tonnes of contaminated soil on land the town had acquired from CN Rail for its Lorne Street flood control project. The cleanup cost taxpayers $525,000.
Burke also generated controversy in 2018 when he told two citizens not to talk to a consultant on the flood control project unless they were willing to pay for the consultant’s time.
Great news! Sad to see Phil go. But Jamie is an excellent choice.
Sad day for Sackville. Promoting a pit bull with his teath on the thigh of the body politic cum unruly public presence? An insult to the citizens of our town. More chaos and unwanted consequences for our tiny peaceful haven.
Bingo!
I agree it is a sad day for our little town, I predicted two years ago that this would happen and not a good day for Sackville.
So let’s get this straight — the individual who told council last year that he was the main person involved in acquiring land from CN where about 14-thousand tonnes of contaminated soil were discovered, not only does not face consequences for his apparent lack of due diligence, but is instead promoted? Removal of that contaminated soil cost taxpayers more than half a million dollars. Was this example of poor judgment taken into consideration by the headhunting firm or by Town Council when considering who the best candidate was for the CAO position? What is wrong with this picture?
Could Councilman Evans please remind me why we spent in excess of $ 25,000 on a ‘head hunter’ when the committee had their sites set on an internal candidate ?
I would sure like to see the list of “the 64 individuals that formally expressed interest in the role” of our Chief Administrative Officer. It is certainly way past time to set up various Citizens Advisory Committees to assist and oversee the happenings at ‘OUR’ Town Hall.