June 10, 2025
The headlines are sensational: “Former CAO paid more than $750,000 since leaving City Hall.” But in the world of municipal administration, the story behind the numbers is more complex—steeped in political history, standard contractual practices, and the often-overlooked cost of leadership transitions.
Setting the Record Straight
In June 2025, the Brampton Guardian issued a correction to a widely circulated article on David Barrick’s departure from the City of Brampton:
“Correction — June 5, 2025: This article was edited from a previous version that mistakenly said former CAO David Barrick left the city’s employ in February 2021 and has been paid more than $1 million since then. In fact, he left in February 2022 and has been paid more than $750,000.”
The correction is significant—not just for factual accuracy, but for understanding the broader context.
A Politically Charged Departure
Barrick’s exit occurred during the final year of a tumultuous Council term, marked by shifting alliances, election-year tensions, and escalating political infighting. The term also preceded the implementation of Ontario’s “Strong Mayor” powers. During this period, several senior staff departures—including Barrick’s—drew criticism. Yet few acknowledged that the severance arrangements followed standard municipal norms and mirrored past precedent in Brampton.
Severance Is Not a Scandal—It’s an Industry Norm
Brampton is no stranger to multi-year CAO severance payments. Harry Schlange, CAO from 2016 to 2018, received roughly $300,000 annually for three years post-departure, as recorded in Ontario’s Public Sector Salary Disclosure (“Sunshine List”). Similarly, Paul Morrison, who served briefly as interim CAO after Barrick, was compensated at a CAO-equivalent rate—earning over $345,000 in 2023.
Such payouts are common when contracts are ended without cause. They are a legal and often necessary cost of political transition in public administration. For example, Caledon CAO Nathan Hyde’s contract provides for four years’ severance if terminated without cause—a clause not unusual in executive public sector roles.
Elsewhere in Peel, Shari Lichterman was fired without cause one day after Mississauga’s new mayor took office—entitling her to up to 24 months’ severance. She began her new role as Greater Sudbury’s CAO on March 19, 2025. This followed Paul Mitcham retiring from the City of Mississauga in February 2023, but continuing to receive $320,000 in salary in 2024.
Whether Lichterman continues to receive severance payments from Mississauga while employed in Sudbury remains unclear.
An Apology and a Deeper Story
In 2023, the City of Brampton issued a public apology to Barrick. The statement acknowledged unfounded investigations, privacy breaches, and the politicized nature of attacks against him—many stemming from an attempted smear campaign during a divisive period in Council. An independent investigation by Deloitte in 2021 found no wrongdoing on Barrick’s part. Still, some Council members pursued costly inquiries and continued criticism—ultimately spending over $1 million in taxpayer funds on investigations that yielded no misconduct.
Despite being ranked among Brampton’s most effective CAOs by local media (Bramptonist, 2022), Barrick was removed in what many saw as a politically motivated decision. The apology emphasized Barrick’s leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic and reaffirmed his contributions to city governance.
The Real Reason It Cost So Much
What media coverage to date has not said out loud: this wasn’t just severance—it was damage control. Councillors defamed their own CAO in public, on camera, and in the press, exposing the City to legal risk. Understandably, Barrick presented valid arguments for a defamation claim. The City apologized. And taxpayers paid the price for councillors who either didn’t understand Canada’s defamation laws—or didn’t care.
This wasn’t a standard exit. It was a costly lesson in what happens when politics crosses the line into personal smear. The payout wasn’t just for walking away—it was for the damage done on the way out.
Looking Ahead: Lessons and Accountability
As Brampton pivots to future priorities—such as transit electrification, housing expansion, and economic growth—calls to depoliticize senior staffing decisions are growing louder. While taxpayer accountability remains essential, so too does public understanding of how municipal governance works. Severance, especially in cases of without-cause termination, is standard—and often necessary to attract and retain qualified leaders.
In Brampton’s case, confidential sources confirm that Councillor Pat Fortini moved both of the motions to terminate both Schlange and Barrick, fully aware of the financial implications. If residents are concerned about how their money is spent, the path to accountability lies with those making the decisions.
Final Thought
Municipal leadership changes are sometimes messy—but they need not be misrepresented. Severance is not a scandal. It’s a price of political transition. The real question isn’t why these payments happen, but how governance structures can ensure they happen for the right reasons— not political infighting but rather with the public interest at heart.
