Open this photo in gallery:
Halifax Mayor Andy Fillmore attends a council meeting at City Hall in Halifax in December, 2024.Darren Calabrese/The Canadian Press
Halifax RCMP are investigating expenses filed by Mayor Andy Filmore’s office after an audit showed four transactions worth a total of $111,000 did not comply with municipal policies.
The municipality’s auditor general, Andrew Atherton, told council’s finance committee Monday that he started the audit after concerns were raised by senior municipal managers earlier this year.
He said police were called in because he “felt this was a little past my comfort zone.”
“It’s a professional judgment from me of where things move potentially past non-compliance into an area where I’m not qualified to say whether something is illegal or not.”
In response, Fillmore told the committee he had co-operated fully with auditor general’s probe, and he stressed that he and his staff have received more training on the procurement processes.
“I think we are moving forward in a good way now,” he said.
The committee heard that the largest expense was filed last year after the mayor’s office hired a human resources consultant to help with hiring staff, which was supposed to cost $50,000. But the final bill was $90,000.
Atherton found the contract for that work was negotiated directly with the consultant rather than seeking competitive bids through the municipality’s regular procurement process.
“Staff indicated they felt the mayor’s office had a clear preference from the start for a single vendor,” Atherton told the committee. As well, the auditor said he was told Halifax’s chief administrative officer had signed off on the deal, citing confidentiality as the reason.
Atherton rejected that explanation, saying the work did not involve any confidential information.
“None of it was anything more than what I might call typical HR work,” he said. “It is clear to my office that this contract should have followed the competitive procurement approach to ensure the best value was obtained for the money spent.”
Atherton, however, confirmed the final invoice for the job, like the invoices for the other three expenses, had been properly approved and the bill was reasonable.
Still, the auditor general said the mayor’s office again failed to follow the proper procurement process last year when they spent $14,000 to hire a speech writer without inviting other bids.
“The mayor’s staff reached out directly to a vendor and asked them to help,” Atherton said. “No contract or statement of work was used to define expectations …. There are specific procurement approaches designed for just this sort of situation.”
The final two contracts – worth more than $7,000 in total – were for external legal services that weren’t approved by the regional government’s solicitor, as required by the municipality’s procurement rules.
Fillmore told the committee he had personally repaid the legal expenses and he assured council that his staff had received training on how to properly handle future procurement.
In this case, the municipal solicitor approved the initial $1,400 expense as a one-time exception, and the mayor’s office was subsequently reminded about the rules.
The mayor’s staff, however, appeared to ignore those rules in November of last year when another outside law firm was hired to provide legal advice.
The finance committee was told the mayor’s chief of staff approved a payment of more than $6,000 by selecting “other goods and services” when processing the payment through the municipality’s procurement portal.
“These were clearly not compliant,” Atherton said, referring to both legal expenses. “They shouldn’t have been paid.”
Deputy Mayor Patty Cuttell said she was troubled by Atherton’s findings.
“This is much more than just a lessons-learned kind of moment,” she told the committee. “This feels much more serious … There were clear violations of procurement policies even after information was shared.”
But the mayor insisted the method of the second payment was an oversight.
He said a drop-down menu on the portal did not include an option for legal services, which is why another option was selected. But he also said the lack of a proper option should have served as a warning that the option chosen was inappropriate.
Meanwhile, Halifax RCMP confirmed Monday that their investigation started May 22 after receiving a referral from the Halifax Regional Police.
Atherton said he had initially contacted the municipal police force but later learned it was concerned about a possible conflict of interest.
An RCMP spokesperson confirmed the Mounties’ commercial crime section was investigating reports of financial irregularities between June 2025 and February 2026, as spelled out in the auditor general’s report.