Moore testified she believed this was partially the source of admitted animosity between she and Dubenofsky.

Ultimately, Moore was included in the vote, which took place on March 28. She voted against accepting the Dominus bid. A prior motion tabled by her and Gibson to defer the vote failed.

“I didn’t feel I had enough information to make an informed decision,” Moore told court.

As part of the competitive dialogue process, which sought to mitigate lobbying efforts by bidding companies, councillors were never shown the details of the final bids, voting instead on a staff recommendation.

Both councillors said they were led to believe — and directly told by senior staff — they would eventually get to see the final bids before making their decision, which never occurred.

“The majority of council wished to see the details of the proposal, or all of the proposals,” Moore told court, listing then councillors Paul Palleschi, John Hutton (both deceased), Bob Callahan, John Sprovieri and Gibson as falling in that camp.

While cross examining Moore and Gibson, the city’s legal team suggested due to rules of the competitive dialogue RFP process, senior staff members made it clear to all councillors from the beginning they would only get to see artist renderings of the final product, but no financial details. It offered various email exchanges and documents as evidence.

Gibson and Moore said they believed Fennell and Dubenofsky, who were close, were working behind the scenes to tilt the scales toward Dominus and away from Inzola.

“My concerns would have been that (Dubenofsky) was trying to drive the mayor’s agenda,” said Gibson while on the stand. “I believe the mayor was trying to see that Mr. Cutruzzola (Inzola) didn’t get it.”

Moore testified she believed Lewis and Patterson were withholding information from councillors not politically aligned with the mayor’s agenda, but sharing it with her and members of council who were.

Inzola is also claiming the Dominus proposal violated the RFP rules. A piece of property at 20 George St. was tabbed in the Dominus proposal as the SWQ phase 2 site for a library. The RFP rules required respondents to acquire necessary lands as part of their bids.

Inzola presented emails and council documents where senior staff and Fennell assured council members Dominus had secured the property with its own funds as required. However, it was revealed in 2014 that wasn’t the case, and the city ultimately paid $480,000 to retain rights to the land — not Dominus.

Both Moore and Gibson said they believed staff’s assurances in this regard at the time, and it would have seriously affected their views and actions towards the whole process had they known the truth.

“It would have destroyed my faith in the process,” Moore told court.

“I probably would have tabled a motion to restart the process,” said Gibson, who also voted against accepting the Dominus bid.

None of the allegations has been proven in court. The trial continues in Orangeville court and is expected to last another six weeks, with further possible dates being added for closing arguments in August or September.