Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Catherine Neddow's avatar

Who owned the drone that was used to survey the Wynn property? It seems that the surveillance was done by a third party and that left no guarantee that personal data would be kept securely. The information collected by that drone could have been shared to any number of computer systems anywhere. To whom was the drone registered? Did the bi-law officer actually have a pilot's certificate? Did the Municipality file an Impact Assessment Statement with the Privacy Commissioner BEFORE sending that drone over the Wynn property? Did the Municipality have a Personal Data Protection Management System in place Before using this drone to spy on private property? These infractions by the Municipality, especially in regards to failure to acquire the property owner's permission, means that the drone use was illegal and there could, and should involve heavy fines. These crimes involve the Ministry of Transportation, the Privacy Commissioner, The Ministry of Municipalities and Housing, As to the Mayor's hostile harassment of of her neighbors and using her authority to deny and delay building permits, to pass bi-laws designating the property as protected wet lands, it becomes obvious that the Mayor and CEO should be investigated and removed from office. This is not just an example of some bureaucratic red tape cock-up. This is illegal use of a drone for the purpose of gathering incriminating evidence. The Mayor and CEO have gone too far and must be removed.

Expand full comment
Stirling's avatar

Wow! This is how local jouranlism should be done. Great job.

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts