Hazel McCallion keeps puppet-councillor Ron Starr in the dark –by “telling it like it is.”

February 28th, 2011  

Today’s Blog is a continuation of our last two Blog entries, “Mississauga Council presentation on Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest: the McLean & Kerr Report –Setting the Record Straight” and “How much did the legal opinion ‘Peter McCallion, for material purposes, was not actually the son of the Mayor’ cost the City of Mississauga?”

Both Blog entries are for the historical record and for inclusion in the February 23, 2011 Mississauga Council meeting minutes as well as those of Brampton, Caledon and Peel.

Something else happened at last Wednesday’s Council meeting and I found it immensely entertaining. Councillor Ron Starr asked an excellent question about single source contracting. It was a simple, accountability question: how does the City know it’s getting value for its money when they’ve approved a contract from a single bidder source? Regular readers know that the answer to that question is that the City doesn’t!

Watch this fascinating video of Hazel McCallion avoiding Ron Starr’s question and deflecting to Paul Mitcham, who in typical fashion, responded in detail to Councillor Starr’s question without actually answering the question, let alone telling the truth. As always, the video transcript.

Hazel McCallion keeps puppet-councillor Ron Starr in the dark –by “telling it like it is.” (4:27 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 26, 2011)

There’s a revealing exchange between Hazel McCallion and Ron Starr and Paul Mitcham at Wednesday’s Council meeting. I’m going to play it now.

Councillor Ron Starr,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Okay, Committee Reports. Planning and Development Committee Report? Councillor Starr?

Councillor Ron Starr,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Well, I, I’m sorry Madam. I didn’t know we were off the ‘R’ Series here.

On the single source ‘R 5’ –the PCL Constructors Contract. On these, and especially when they’re larger, how do we monitor, how do we establish, what’s the baseline for costs and determination of the construction value, etc etc. What I’m looking at is how do we determine that this is good value for the dollars we’re spending, since it’s a single source?

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 26, 2011)

McCallion should know the answer.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Who’s going to answer? It’s a good question.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 26, 2011)

McCallion should know the answer.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Who’s going to answer?

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 26, 2011)

McCallion should know the answer.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

It’s a good question.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 26, 2011)

McCallion should know the answer.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

How do we compare?

[REVERSE CLOCKWIPE]

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

There was —there was a policy established. Every vendor, and especially on major contracts, that when we had bad experiences —and we have had some bad experiences—

Al Steinbach, Senior Internal Auditor (Mississauga Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

Yes.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

There was a policy established years ago that the vendor would be categorized. And in fact some would be cut off for future contracts.

Al Steinbach, Senior Internal Auditor (Mississauga Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

That’s not—

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

Did you find no trace of it?

Al Steinbach, Senior Internal Auditor (Mississauga Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

No, it’s not in there.

Councillor Pat Mullin (Chair, Mississauga Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

No, the answer’s no. So I guess [inaudible]

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

Well it was set up, I can tell you.

Councillor Carmen Corbasson (Mississauga Audit Committee, May 11, 2009):

I remember the discussion.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

Do you?

Councillor Carmen Corbasson (Mississauga Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

I remember the discussions.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

Some of you who’ve been around long will remember? It was set up. So obviously it got lost in the shuffle somewhere. Cuz we ran, we ran into some bad examples. And that’s when we set the policy. That’s years ago. That’s not —ten years ago, would I be right? At least. So where did that —what happened to it?

Hazel McCallion, "And that’s when we set up the policy. That’s years ago. That’s not —ten years ago, would I be right? At least. So where did that —what happened to it?"

[CLOCKWIPE]

Councillor Ron Starr,  (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

—how do we determine that this is good value for the dollars we’re spending, since it’s a single source?

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 26, 2011)

They don’t!

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

—So now we’re going to set up one up. Fine.

Someone:

Yeah.

Mayor Hazel McCallion,  (Audit Committee meeting, May 11, 2009)

If we set one up, it better be followed. That is the key. No use setting it up if it’s not going to be followed. You know, I don’t know why there’s such a disregard for policy.

Councillor Ron Starr, (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

—how do we determine that this is good value for the dollars we’re spending, since it’s a single source?

[DIP TO WHITE]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting, February 27, 2011)

Which brings us to a relevant point in Tom Urbaniak’s book, HER WORSHIP, Hazel McCallion and the Development of Mississauga. Page 143.

Despite McCallion’s tight control, it did happen occasionally that unwanted statements or descriptions slipped into the budget documents. In such instances, Her Worship did not hesitate to chastise the staff. One staff-prepared budget overview contained a statement implying that deferred maintenance was resulting in deterioration of facilities used by the public–

[DIP TO WHITE]

–This brought a sharp rebuke from the mayor: the statement ‘should either be retracted or adjusted. This is a very significant statement to me that a roof is going to fall in on some of our buildings. Somebody’s going to pick this up and say “yes, you’re doing a great job on taxes but you’ve got significant deferrals. I think you should take out that statement, redo and tell it like it is.’”

Community services commissioner Paul Mitcham tried at first to explain, but then conceded that ‘it’s probably not a good statement.’ He promised it would be taken out.

[DIP TO WHITE]
[Music:“Don’t Crash the Ambulance” by Mark Knopfler]

Paul Mitcham, Commissioner of Community Services, (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Um, through to ah Councillor Starr.

Uh, my understanding is that the agreement in this case is ah comparable to the agreements we have in place already for the ISF-funded projects. Um. And given that this is really a continuation of the ISF-group of projects, ah and given the deadlines that we face, ah we, ah, have come forward with a request as you have in front of you to sole-source to PCL.

So it’s a construction management contract, ah, consistent with the ah agreements that we already have in place.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting and pretending to be fishing —reeling in a Big One, February 26, 2011)

Op! He’s comin’ in! He’s comin’ in! He’s gonna land him on the boat! And he’s GOT IT!

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS. LOGO]

Just some of the Corporate policies that City of Mississauga Corporate Security have violated (confirmed through Freedom of Information)

"Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday Party that's not a party head table. Tickets $350.00 each. February 12, 2011

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

How much did the legal opinion “Peter McCallion, for material purposes, was not actually the son of the Mayor” cost the City of Mississauga?

February 26th, 2011  

Today’s Blog is a continuation of our last Blog, “Mississauga Council presentation on Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest: the McLean & Kerr Report –Setting the Record Straight”. Both Blog entries are for the historical record and for inclusion in the February 23, 2011 Mississauga Council meeting minutes as well as those of Brampton, Caledon and Peel.

On Wednesday, I addressed City of Mississauga Council to raise concerns about the City’s two outside legal opinions relating to Hazel McCallion’s conflict of interest.

I presented a video deputation on an omission in the McLean & Kerr legal opinion.

Then during Public Question Period I asked how much the City paid for the second legal opinion —provided by Stanley Makuch (Cassels Brock Lawyers) who concluded that Hazel McCallion could not have been in conflict of interest because “Peter McCallion for material purposes, was not actually the son of the Mayor”. Yes. Really…

Today’s video is a fun-watch. It’s me asking that question and the response I received.

This video was created in triple split-screen. Top right video shows Councillors Katie Mahoney and Pat Saito (both staunchly opposed to the Judicial Inquiry) and their reaction to  “Peter McCallion for material purposes, was not actually the son of the Mayor”.

Last, Special Thanks to Rogers Cable 10 Mississauga for their segment (top left).

As always, the video transcript.

Peter McCallion for material purposes was not actually the son of Mayor. This Legal Opinion cost?… (2:51 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]
[Note: Inquiry transcripts or McLean & Kerr sometimes used for accuracy purposes]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

I’ve also Public Question Period, some questions on it. Do you think I can ask it now?

Frank Dale, Acting Mayor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Yeah. Sure. Go ahead.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Thank you.

I’ll just see here. I just want to go to this thing here to kind of help you out. It is testimony on August 10, 2010 and I’m asking this for historical purposes and for my own research.

It’s the City Solicitor, here as “A” and “Q” is the cross-examination by Inquiry Counsel, William McDowell. And Mr. McDowell says:

 13                 Q:   Right.  And then you'll see, going
 14  down that page, that he—

and “he” is Stanley Makuch of Cassels Brock, who is the second outside legal opinion. So McDowell says:

  —And then you'll see, going
 14  down that page, that he comes to the conclusion that Peter
 15  McCallion, for material purposes, was not actually the son
 16  of the Mayor.

That’s the City’s second outside legal opinion. And Ms. Bench says:

 17                 A:   Yeah. 

McDowell:

 18                 Q:   Go to the next page, page 7.  He came
 19  to the view, I gather, that unless there was a financially
 20  dependent relationship that Peter McCallion could not be
 21  considered to be the son of the Mayor?

Bench, “That’s right” or:

 22                 A:   That's correct. 

And McDowell:

 23                 Q:   All right.  Apart from this letter,
 24  did he ever offer any authority for that view?

And Ms. Bench.

 25                 A:   He never offered an explanation at

2740

  1  all.  And it's contrary to the case he cited and it's
  2  contrary to the definition of child in the lac -- in the
  3  Act— 

And so my question has to do with the second outside legal opinion and I’m not sure whether I’m allowed to have this answer. But how much did the City pay for the second outside legal opinion? I know I’m allowed to ask. I’m just now sure if I can get the answer to that. Or— Ms Bench?

Frank Dale, Acting Mayor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Do we have those figures available?

Mary Ellen Bench, City Solicitor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

I don’ t have that information with me here.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Yeah, I didn’t think so. Okay, that’s my—

Frank Dale, Acting Mayor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

But it would be public information, correct?

Mary Ellen Bench, City Solicitor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

It’s information that can be provided, yes.

Frank Dale, Acting Mayor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

Then I’d ask that, or give direction that it be provide it.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

OK. Thank you, thank you so much. And thanks for letting me present this.

[DIP TO BLACK]
[Music:“Don’t Crash the Ambulance” by Mark Knopfler]

VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS. LOGO]

Frank Dale, Acting Mayor (Mississauga Council meeting, February 23, 2011)

There’s been a motion for receipt. All in favour? Opposed if any? Carried. Thank you.

If someone would call the Mayor back.

Additional Resources

87 MIS001009003 Conflict of Interest – Ltr November 11, 2009 – from Mary Ellen Bench To Stanley Makuch (Cassels Brock Lawyers) Letter 11-Nov-09 6-Jul-10 Liz McIntrye for Mayor

This is a scan of Mississauga Judicial Inquiry Exhibit Number 87, Conflict of Interest – Ltr November 11, 2009 – from Mary Ellen Bench To Stanley Makuch (Cassels Brock Lawyers)”. We respectfully request being advised of any errors between our scan and the original (above) from the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry website.


Corporate Services Department
Legal Services
City of Mississauga
300 City Centre Drive
MISSISSAUGA ON L5B 3C1
[City of MISSISSAUGA Logo] Leading today for tomorrow
Tel: 905-615-3200
FAX: 905-896-5106
www.mississauga.ca
WRITER’S DIRECT LINE (905) 615-3200 ext 5393
EMAIL: Maryellen.bench@mississauga.ca

November 11, 2009

Mr. Stanley Makuch
Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP
2100 Scotia Plaza, 40 King Street West
Toronto, Ontario
MSH 3C2

Dear Mr. Makuch:

Re: Conflict of Interest

Receipt after 5:00 p.m. on Friday, November 6, 2009 of your letter dated November 6, 2009 is
confirmed.

I was extremely taken aback by the content of your letter. You were retained by me on
September 18th to provide an opinion to me, not to Council. You accepted this retainer, and
there is no basis for you to now assert that Council is your client. By letter agreement dated April
19, 2007, The Corporation of the City of Mississauga retained Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP
to provide legal services as required by the City. That retainer letter is very clcar that in carrying
out assignments on behalf of the City you take instructions from me or persons who I designate.
In particular, I draw your attention to paragraph 4 of the retainer and the sentence: “The City
Solicitor is the principal contact of the City for all practice areas.”

This is entirely consistent with and conforms to the commentary under Rule 2.02(1.1) as follows:

“Further, given that an organization depends upon persons to give instructions, the
lawyer should ensure that the person giving instructions for the organization is
acting within that person’s actual or ostensible authority.”

The retainer with your firm clearly states that I am the person with authority to represent the
City, and you are bound by my instructions. The RFPQ to which you responded clearly
identified that you are being retained to provide supplemental legal services. There is nothing in
the retainer that requires me to explain to you how I use your work product. In fact, in the 20
years that I have practiced as an in-house municipal lawyer I have never seen a retainer letter that
would require me to provide you with an explanation regarding how I use your work product.

When I spoke to you about assisting me on this matter, Mike Minkowski was present and we
spoke to you from my office on speaker phone. We were very clear in our instructions
concerning the timelines for this project. I advised you that I would like to receive it Thursday,
September 24, 2009 and that under no circumstances could it be any later than noon Friday,

Form 1012 (Rev 06/01)

MIS.001.009.003


2

September 25, 2009 as it had to be delivered to Members of Council with their agenda packages
that afternoon. You agreed to this time commitment. Notwithstanding the fact that you assured
me that you could have the opinion ready in that time, at one point you even joked that you
thought I might be asking you to do it over the weekend, you failed to deliver your opinion on
time, Not only did you fail to meet the clear timelines, you did not even have a courtesy to call
me and warn me that you were running into difficulties. Having reviewed the product you
produced, I found it very difficult to understand why you could not complete this matter within
the time frame specified.

You have stated that I disagree with your opinion. However, that is not the issue. I made it very
clear to you from the outset that this was to be your opinion. I also advised you that this was a
contentious matter and the reasons for your opinion must be clearly set out including relevant
legal authority to support any expressed opinion, The product that you provided to me, late,
failed to do this and included conjecture without supporting legal authority.

Finally, please be advised that I am declining your request that I explain to you how I used your
opinion for reasons set out above. If you cannot live by the terms of our retainer agreement,
please advise me forthwith and I will remove Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP from the list of
firms retained by The Corporation of the City of Mississauga.

Yours truly,

[signature]

Mary Ellen Bench , BA, LLB, CS
City Solicitor

cc Bernice Kam
Janine Kovach
Mark Young

MIS.001.009.004


and the McLean-Kerr Legal Opinion, September 24, 2009 (PDF)

HAZEL MCCALLION'S LIE AT THE MISSISSAUGA INQUIRY. City Staff are "very professional and they follow the policies very, very, very diligently. "

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Mississauga Council presentation on Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest: the McLean & Kerr Report –Setting the Record Straight

February 22nd, 2011  

Today’s Blog is just for the historical record and will be included in the February 23, 2011 Mississauga Council meeting minutes.

MISSISSAUGA CONFLICT OF INTEREST JUDICIAL INQUIRY: HAROLD SHIPP (AGAINST) DONALD BARBER (FOR)

Yesterday, I gave a deputation before City of Mississauga Council and presented a shortened version of the following video.

Because of time constraints, I was not able to include the last 35 second clip of the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry involving Elizabeth McIntyre (counsel for Mayor Hazel McCallion) and Ed Sajecki, Mississauga’s Commissioner of Building and Planning to Council yesterday.

The exchange had Ms McIntryre ask Sajecki whether his staff gave any preferential treatment to Peter McCallion’s World Class Developments or whether they, in any way, felt interfered with or influenced around his hotel project.

As always, here is the original-length video —followed the transcript.

Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest: the McLean & Kerr Report –Setting the Record Straight (11:07 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]
[Note: Inquiry transcripts or McLean & Kerr sometimes used for accuracy purposes]

Freya Kristjanson, counsel for the Mayor Hazel McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

Okay. If you could turn to the next page then. And again, this is the McLean Kerr summary of what happened on April 30th. At the commencement of the meeting, Acting Mayor Saito stated — called it to order, saying, “My understanding is that Mayor McCallion had declared last week a conflict of interest on this item. So as Acting Mayor, I’ll call the meeting to order and deal with this.”

She then asked for disclosure. She said,”Seeing none, we will accept the Mayor’s previously disclosed conflict of interest if she comes before the meeting is over.”

Do you recall that interchange, the Acting Mayor reaffirming the — Mayor McCallion’s conflict?

Janice Baker, City Manager (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

Again, I have no specific recollection of it, but if the — the record would be accurate, I’m sure.

Freya Kristjanson, counsel for the Mayor Hazel McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

And if McLean & Kerr, your legal firm, summarized the DVD as such, you’re prepared to accept that’s what happened?

Janice Baker, City Manager (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

Absolutely.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting February 21, 2011)

And it isn’t an accurate reflection of what happened on April the 30th and that’s what I want to report on today.

What I have here in front of me is the McLean & Kerr report. If you take a look and you start going now to page 33, you see that McLean & Kerr, write here:

“We have reviewed the Minutes of the meetings and the DVD Recordings of those meetings and in particular those portions of those meetings relation to WCD’S involvement in the Property.”

So again, there’s the statement that they have reviewed the minutes and also the DVD.

So you get right away into the April 23rd meeting of Council and they say the following about the minutes of that meeting.

Mayor McCallion disclosed here conflict of interest. Barry Lyons Consultants addressed Council. Councillor Dale made comments relating to the development application. And a resolution to defer to a Special Council Meeting on April the 30th was voted on.

And I have here the April 23, 2008 minutes. There it is. “World Class Developments” and it does show here that there’s a declaration.

The item there, Item I, and it talks about Barry Lyons and it does mention that Councillor Dale had welcomed the development of the application. And then on top of it, a resolution to defer.

So for the April 23rd, 2008 Council, McLean & Kerr’s summary of the Minutes are accurate.

And you check the DVD recording —then they start putting down a transcript of the Mayor had actually said. And then three and a half hours into the meeting, the Mayor had stated the following —the Mayor then left the meeting.

And the DVD shows that Barry Lyons was there and then indeed Councillor Dale had made comments about the “destination” and so on. And then also that the results [sic] is that the motions were carried and so on.

So I went and checked this and McLean & Kerr really did do an accurate reflection of both the minutes and reporting on the DVD. The problem starts with April 30th.

April 30th as you can see here is a Special Meeting of Council. McLean & Kerr had only this to say about the minutes of the meeting.

“The Minutes of the Meeting reflect that there was no disclosure of direct or indirect pecuniary interest.”

However when you go to the minutes of the meeting, the April 30th minutes mention Barry Lyons and also that Councillor Dale had made comments. And that’s a significant amount of information right here.

The minutes say, and McLean & Kerr completely leave this out, that:

Councillor Dale moved the request for deferral and asked if the applicant has been granted an extension from the land owners as it was an important point in getting these documents together. He expressed concern that a lot of staff time by various departments has been spent on the subject application to date so that they could meet a development charges deadline. The Ward Councillor stated that he welcomes the hotel into the City Core, however, now that this deadline was no longer an issue, he hoped that they will proceed with their application in a normal manner and suggested that the Commissioner so advise the applicant, with the expectation that the documents will be available for the May 21st. council meeting.

Again, here’s what McLean & Kerr says the minutes said:

“The Minutes of the Meeting reflect that there was no disclosure of direct or indirect pecuniary interest.”

No mention of any kind of comments by Councillor Dale.

So. Perhaps the DVD recording might make mention of it. And McLean & Kerr says the DVD recording reflects that at the commencement, Pat Saito —Councillor Saito said the following. And that is just a summary of what we’d heard at the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, I’m going to call to order the meeting of council. We have a special (council) meeting this morning. My understanding is that—

Freya Kristjanson, counsel for the Mayor Hazel McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

“My understanding is that Mayor McCallion had declared last week a conflict of interest on this item. So as Acting Mayor, I’ll call the meeting to order and deal with this.”

She then asked for disclosure. She said:

“Seeing none, we will accept the Mayor’s previously disclosed conflict of interest if she comes before the meeting is over.”

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting February 21, 2011)

And then the only other thing that McLean & Kerr mention about the DVD is:

“(2) a motion to refer the matter to the May 21, 2008 council meeting was carried.”

That’s it. But that’s not all that happened at that meeting.

What’s interesting is that when you go on to the next meeting —May 7th, they again go to accurately reporting what the minutes said.

And you go to May 21st and again, there’s the minutes of the meeting —are quite accurate, very thorough, what was said. And down here that the Commissioner of Planning advised the applicant. So again you’re back to accurate reflection of the minutes —and the DVD.

[PUSH RIGHT]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting February 21, 2011)

What I want to do now for the record is to show what my video camera recorded, April 30th 2008 that did not make it into the McLean/Kerr report.

[REVERSE CLOCKWIPE]

Councillor Pat Saito (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

Disclosures of direct or indirect pecuniary interest on the item on today’s Council meeting? Seeing none, we have, yes, will accept the Mayor’s previously disclosed conflict of interest if she comes before the meeting is over.

We have one item on the agenda. This was from last week’s Council meeting —the, Barry Lyons Consultants asked that we put this off until the issue of removal of the holding symbol for World Class Developments Limited —that it be put to a Special Council meeting today to give them time to, I guess, get their ducks in a row, Councillor Dale?

Um, it is an information item that I have on the agenda this morning and —they are basically saying that they are unable to fulfill the approval requirements in time for today’s meeting. So they’re asking us to once again defer the item until the May 21st Council meeting.

Councillor Dale, do you wish to speak to this?

Councillor Frank Dale (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

I do and I will –I’ll move it, the deferral.

I just have first a question to Staff. Do you know if they’ve granted an extension with OMERS with respect to the Purchase of Sale?

Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

I don’t know the details of their arrangements with OMERS—

Councillor Frank Dale (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

Because I think that’s–

Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

I think that they have indicated that [inaudible] as a possibility but whether it’s happening, I don’t know the specifics.

Councillor Frank Dale (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

Because I think it’s important to know because, whether or not there will be another Council meeting, or whether they will  be here on May 21st or not.

And I just –and the only thing I just want to say is I know our Staff, particularly the Planning Department Staff as well as our Legal Department Staff worked extremely hard to try to accomplish what needed to be done in order to remove that “H” symbol and get all the documents in order.

And I think a message should go to them though, cuz they worked a lot of hours –on weekends and the evenings. That if they ‘re gonna come back, you know, basically, I think the reason they were doing it and it makes sense is cuz they wanted to come in under the wire with the development charges.

Well now that they’ve come into effect, I think business as usual. We got a lot of other business in the City Centre –a lot of other business throughout the whole city itself.

And, like, you know, we don’t mind helping people but I think you went over beyond –all of the Staff did to try to get this come before us in time for them to, I guess pay less development charges than would be come May 1st.

So I just think a message should go out to them that we have no problem if they come back because we certainly would welcome the opportunity to have hotel, hopefully a 5-Class Star in the City Centre.

But I think a message should go to them. But I—

Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

[inaudible] I’ll pass that message on. I do want to also add that [inaudible] and Community Services have also been involved in it. Legal for sure. Burning the midnight oil over the weekend. But several departments in addition too. Thanks.

Councillor Pat Saito (Special Council Meeting regarding removal of the “H” Holding Symbol, World Class Developments, April 30, 2008)

Okay. Thank you. Councillor Dale, are you then moving receipt and I guess Madam Clerk, we need to refer it to —oh, you’re writing a motion for it. Thank you, so that will be referred then. The Motion will be referring it to the 21st?

And that’s basically what’s in the Motion? Okay.

Uh, Councillor Dale has moved that Motion then of receipt and referral to the May 21st Council meeting. Receipt of the correspondence that’s in our Agenda. Any questions?

All in favour? Opposed? That carries. Thank you.

[DIP TO BLACK]
[Music:
“Don’t Crash the Ambulance” by Mark Knopfler]

Elizabeth McIntyre, counsel for the Mayor Hazel McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

Now you have indicated that the WCD did not get any preferential treatment from city staff around this project. Is that right?

Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building (Special Council Meeting, April 30, 2008)

That’s right.

Elizabeth McIntyre, counsel for the Mayor Hazel McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

And I understand that you asked your staff directly whether or not they felt that there was any — any interference or influence that they felt, correct?

Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building (Special Council Meeting, April 30, 2008)

I did ask that question, yes.

Elizabeth McIntyre, counsel for the Mayor Hazel McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, September 15, 2010)

And what response did you get, sir?

Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building (Special Council Meeting, April 30, 2008)

They said they did not feel in any way, you know, influenced.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS. LOGO]

Additional Resources

The McLean-Kerr Legal Opinion, September 24, 2009 (PDF)

HAZEL MCCALLION'S LIE AT THE MISSISSAUGA INQUIRY. City Staff are "very professional and they follow the policies very, very, very diligently. "

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Dalton McGuinty, Jim Flaherty and Stephen Harper (via video) at Hazel McCallion’s $350.00-a-ticket 90th Birthday Bash

February 17th, 2011  

Today’s blog is dedicated to Stephen Wahl.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH reports from Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party.

This is the third Blog in Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party”. For those interested, check out our first blog, “Video: Hazel McCallion’s swanky $350.00 per ticket 90th Birthday Bash sees Sheridan Campus named after her” and also the blog, “Couldn’t afford the $350.00 ticket for Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash? Here’s what you missed!”

Hazel McCallion enters her 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party.

Today, for the record, here’s our third Hazel McCallion 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” video —complete with transcript.

Note, I took video footage of the Mayor’s gala and edited it to the Mark Knopfler song, “Don’t Crash the Ambulance” and created something of a music video.

As for the video transcript, what follows is a mix of Mark Knopfler’s lyrics merged with MYTHissauga speeches and my own commentary during Hazel McCallion’s February 12th $350.00 a ticket 90th Birthday Bash.

Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. MISSISSAUGAWATCH pays $350 for a ticket –and WOW! (4:18 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]
Lyrics, “Don’t Crash the Ambulance” by Mark Knopfler

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting from parking lot prior to Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

It is Saturday, February 12th, 2011 and I’m parked here in a very primo spot at the Mississauga Convention Centre. It is 5:34 pm and the reception for Hazel McCallion’s 90th birthday begins in roughly half an hour.

Now just to be clear, tickets for this particular event are $350.00 each. And yes, I’ve actually spent $350.00 to be in there tonight. And I just want go onto the record as to why.

Don’t often open up this floor
Since I handed in my gun
What all these keys are for
Now my tour of duty’s done
You got to know the switches
Now you got your turn
Watch and learn, junior
Watch and learn

Jim Murray, Jim Murray, senior vice-president J. J. Barnicke's Mississauga Office, organizer of Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party.

Jim Murray, senior vice-president J. J. Barnicke’s Mississauga Office (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

—can bring to our city centre. The construction, opening and on-going use of the Mississauga Sheridan Campus will bring the type of enthusiasm, energy

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

He fails to mention that Hazel McCallion really wanted a hotel and convention centre there.

Now you will get your
Trouble spots
Here’s one from
Down voodoo way
Bragged he had me
By the you-know-whats
Very funny, you don’t say

Sometimes you got to
Put a shoulder to the door
Not so fast, junior
Listen to your pa
Here, son
I’m handing over to you
Don’t crash the ambulance
Whatever you do

What we have here’s
A dung hole place
Thought it was fly shit
On the map

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty at Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party.

Fancy dress
Medals chest
It’s all in here
For all the gigs
Gas mask
Bullet-proof vest
All the usual rigs

Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Finance Minister (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

—sends you his greetings and he has done so by video. So here is the Prime Minister of Canada, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper.

There’ll be things they missed
They didn’t mention
You’ve even
Got a whistle in there
For attracting attention

Prime Minister Stephen Harper gives video greetings at Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party.

Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Tonight, ladies and gentlemen, you’re gathered not just for a birthday party.

Dalton McGuinty, Liberal, Premier (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Here’s why I’m not voting Liberal next time.

Dalton McGuinty, Liberal, Premier (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

I just want to say a few words on this very auspicious occasion.

Dalton McGuinty speaks at Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party.

We don’t forget
Who put us here, jack
That’s page one

—and I figure if I say nice things to Hazel McCallion on her 90th birthday, she’ll say nice things about me on my 90th birthday.

We talk soft
But carry a big stick
And pack the biggest gun
We don’t like accidents
Major or minor
You don’t want yourself
An incident

Don’t ever invade China
Here, son
I’m handing over to you
Don’t crash the ambulance
Here, son
I’m handing over to you
Don’t crash the ambulance
Whatever you do

Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday $350.00-a-ticket Party. Mayor McCallion blows out candles.

[CROSS DISSOLVE. LOGO]
[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

The image I used in the first  Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” blog is worth repeating….

MISSISSAUGA CITY HALL (AMO, OMERS, MYTHissauga Inc) ---morally beyond redemption

…the system is CORRUPT and this is why there is youth violence this is why there are guns on the street and drugs in the hands of children the youth are fighting with the system because it is CORRUPT there is no way to fix it because the people higher up are sitting nice in their big leather chairs, driving their nice cars, living their perfect life when some people in this world have to work hard to get by and even by doing so they get nothing, and after they realize how hard they have to work to get by they break down and no longer want to live life being part of the system because they realize that living life by the rules of the system gets you no where because it is CORRUPT!

–email from youth (age 19)

as is this image of our second Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” blog…

ONTARIO MUNICIPALITIES: A MAJOR (unexplored) ROOT OF YOUTH VIOLENCE
Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.
–George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 3

And I only wish to add.

"Well I appreciate your interest in what I have to say and the rest of Council, I do have to say that what goes on in Peel stays in Peel." —Caledon Councillor Doug Beffort (Caledon Council December 12, 2007 Bill 130 Closed Meeting presentation)"

“Well I appreciate your interest in what I have to say and the rest of Council, I do have to say that what goes on in Peel stays in Peel.”

—Caledon Councillor, Doug Beffort (Caledon Council December 12, 2007 Bill 130 Closed Meeting presentation)

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Couldn’t afford the $350.00 ticket for Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash? Here’s what you missed!

February 15th, 2011  

"Hazel McCallion's 90th Birthday Party that's not a party head table. Tickets $350.00 each.  February 12, 2011

Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.
–George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 3

In yesterday’s blog, “Video: Hazel McCallion’s swanky $350.00 per ticket 90th Birthday Bash sees Sheridan Campus named after her” I shared the first in a series of Hazel-McCallion’s-90th-Birthday-Party-that’s-“not-a-party” videos.

Today, for the record, here’s our second Hazel McCallion 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” video —complete with transcript.

Couldn’t afford the $350.00 ticket for Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash? Here’s what you missed! (8:46 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting from parking lot prior to Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

It is Saturday, February 12th, 2011 and I’m parked here in a very primo spot at the Mississauga Convention Centre. It is 5:34 pm and the reception for Hazel McCallion’s 90th birthday begins in roughly half an hour.

Now just to be clear, tickets for this particular event are $350.00 each. And yes, I’ve actually spent $350.00 to be in there tonight. And I just want to go onto the record as to why.

There’s been a lot of discussion about Mayors’ Galas both in Brampton and here in MYTHissauga. And from what I can gather and having read about the Brampton Mayor’s Gala and Hazel McCallion’s golf tournament galas and the November Galas and now this particular Gala —and what we know from the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, I gotta go! I’ve got to go!

Because there’ll be something like, I believe, 1300 people showing up at this [sic actually 1000 were expected]. And the 90th being a big thing, I figure that if Corruption were a physical thing with Mass and Volume, it’s likely difficult to find more Corruption under any one roof in Canada today than right in that building.

And I have to see it.

I have to see all of those people who are part of the Cult of Hazel.

[CUT]

Announcer (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Ladies and Gentlemen, we are about to get underway. Please take your seats. Ladies and Gentlemen…

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Okay, this is Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash or party that is “not a party” over here. And the good news is this is the Media area and I was told that videotaping and Media coverage can be from this area.

And so I’m taking the opportunity right now to do some videotaping. Uh, it’s quite the celebration here. Oh, let’s take a look at that.

I’d love to stay with the Media, unfortunately I have a TABLE 68 somewhere in here. So I gotta to be there which means I have to be there and I can’t videotape anymore. But, oh, and I should point out, I had one glass of wine, took maybe three sips, went to the washroom and by the time I got back it was gone. So anyway, here it is.

[Gala video-screen displays “90TH BIRTHDAY MAYOR MCCALLION” heralded by Metro Goldwyn Mayer theme]

Now remember what Ron Starr said. It’s a party that’s “not a party”.

Announcer (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Ladies and Gentlemen, please stand and welcome our Guest of Honour, Mayor Hazel McCallion and this evening’s head table guests.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

And the Media is right here. And I can’t think of a better place to be than right —or they’re pointing to, over here. Media’s here.

[Hazel McCallion and guests enter escorted by Peel Police Pipe Band]

Oh, going right by the Media here.

Sheridan Rep (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

You can go up if you like.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Oh, is this where it is? No, no, I’m good.

Oh, I see, she’s going right there.

[Hazel McCallion walks up the steps followed by Jim Flaherty, William G. Davis et al]

There’s the Media. Oh, and I can see over here.

[PUSH RIGHT]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (reporting from parking lot prior to Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Um, I guess the other thing would be, Hazel’s Seven Councillors will be there. So expect Tovey, Fonseca, The Two Sisters Saito-and-Mahoney. Dalton McGuinty has got to be showing up. So all of the MPs and MPPs here in MYTHissauga will be here.

I expect Jim Murray to be here. Lots to say about Jim Murray, but I’ll save that for another time.

Oh yeah! You know who else I expect to be here?! David O’Brien! I also expect Michael Nobrega to be here!

Like alllllll of them. The entire Enersource Board. Ron Starr, forgot to mention him too.

Like in other words, THE BIGGEST STINKERS IN ONTARIO ARE GOING TO BE RIGHT HERE! That’s why it’s so fascinating.

[CUT]

Sheridan College President Dr. Jeff Zabudsky (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the Hazel McCallion Campus!

[949 out of 950 guests. Applause, cheers]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH  (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Oh my Gawd!

Oh my Gawd!

[PUSH RIGHT. Camera aimed so MISSISSAUGAWATCH and Hazel McCallion are in same field of vision]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH  (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

What is there to say?

I still don’t quite get how this Mississauga Campus could be named Hazel McCallion Campus. It’s —George Orwell was so right in who controls the past controls the present, who controls the present controls the future [sic].

But above all, who controls the Money, who controls the Media, who controls the Communication and the Propaganda, triumphs.

And this is a Triumph here for uh —you know I’m still gob-smacked, I’m still gob-smacked, how –just how, how you can get this.

And, uh —I’m reminded of what a 19-year old wrote me in email. The System is too corrupt —there is no way to fix it. There it is back there, testimony to the fact that he’s right.

And you gotta wonder, you gotta wonder how many other politicians that we’ve learned about from Sir John A. Macdonald forward was really the truth or whether it was just revisionist history, like what we see here.

[PUSH RIGHT. Camera pans room and dance floor]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH  (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

I gotta say that the $350-bucks I just spent, I could have spent on a camera. However, this was worth it.

I mean who would have f***in‘ thought that one of the announcements was that they were going to call this the Hazel McCallion Sheridan Campus?

[CROSS DISSOLVE. LOGO]
[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

The image I used in yesterday’s blog is worth repeating….

MISSISSAUGA CITY HALL (AMO, OMERS, MYTHissauga Inc) ---morally beyond redemption

…the system is CORRUPT and this is why there is youth violence this is why there are guns on the street and drugs in the hands of children the youth are fighting with the system because it is CORRUPT there is no way to fix it because the people higher up are sitting nice in their big leather chairs, driving their nice cars, living their perfect life when some people in this world have to work hard to get by and even by doing so they get nothing, and after they realize how hard they have to work to get by they break down and no longer want to live life being part of the system because they realize that living life by the rules of the system gets you no where because it is CORRUPT!

–email from youth (age 19)

And only wish to add…

ONTARIO MUNICIPALITIES: A MAJOR (unexplored) ROOT OF YOUTH VIOLENCE
Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.
–George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 3

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Video: Hazel McCallion’s swanky $350.00 per ticket 90th Birthday Bash sees Sheridan Campus named after her

February 14th, 2011  

There’s been quite the controversy about Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party”. First there was a leaked email and then the public howl about Mississauga Councillors receiving $700 per couple tickets courtesy of the taxpayer.

Then there was Councillor Ron Starr insisting that McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party was “not a party” but a fund-raiser for Sheridan College.

All that Mayor’s gala-fuss happened in January —which was fine with me because I’d already bought my $350.00 to McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” on December 15th!

I know. $350.00 is a lot to shell out for one evening. But I was certain I’d find what I was looking for there. As regular readers know I’ve been researching the roots of youth violence since March 2007 by documenting the Peel Youth Violence Prevention Network and Safe City Mississauga. I was right —I found it. Zero doubt. The Roots of Youth Violence under one convenient glitzy, swanky roof!

And Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” was even more than what I expected it to be! If Corruption were a physical force with Mass/Weight, there was enough Corruption at the Derry Road Mississauga Convention Centre to create a substantial black hole.

Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party” drove MYTHissauga to new depths. So much so that I really don’t have to research anymore.

And I have much of the Party on video! I really had no intention of photographing/videotaping but was told that there was a place at the back of the room for media. Well! Imagine my DELIGHT! I spent most of the evening at the back of the room with the media and ran two cameras dry!

Enough! I produced the first in a series of Hazel-McCallion’s-90th-Birthday-Party-that’s-“not-a-party” videos.

So here’s the video complete with transcript.

Hazel McCallion’s swanky $350.00 per ticket 90th Birthday Bash sees Sheridan Campus named after her! (3:04 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]

Elizabeth McIntyre, Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

Okay. So with respect to the Hotel Conference Centre next to the — next to the Living Arts Centre, aside from the WCD project, which we’re just about to get into, were there any other projects, developers who came forward with a proposal to complete this development?

Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

No, it was the only one that — the only one that had purchased the land, or was purchasing the land, or purchased the land, to proceed with my vision, and this council’s vision, and the staff’s vision of the — of finally attaining a hotel next to the Living Arts Centre —

[DIP TO WHITE]
Music: Don’t Crash the Ambulance (Mark Knopfler)

Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

—my vision, and this council’s vision, and the staff’s vision of the — of finally attaining a hotel next to the Living Arts Centre —

Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

—my vision, and this council’s vision, and the staff’s vision of the — of finally attaining a hotel next to the Living Arts Centre —

Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

—my vision, and this council’s vision, and the staff’s vision of the — of finally attaining a hotel next to the Living Arts Centre —

Sheridan College President Dr. Jeff Zabudsky (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the Hazel McCallion Campus!

[949 out of 950 guests. Applause, cheers]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH  (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Oh my Gawd!

Oh my Gawd!

Oh my—

Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

—my vision, and this council’s vision, and the staff’s vision of the — of finally attaining a hotel next to the Living Arts Centre —

Brian Gover, McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

And to be clear about this, at the time — and now we’re speaking of times; we’re speaking of August 24th, September 11th, and September 15th. Did you believe you were a principal of WCD on any of those occasions?

Peter McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

No, I did not.

Brian Gover, McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

How would you have described yourself at the time, in terms of your relationship with World Class Developments?

Peter McCallion (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2011)

At the time, I was basically acting as real estate agent and the promoter of the development, visionary.

Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry testimony, September 20, 2010)

—my vision, and this council’s vision, and the staff’s vision of the — of finally attaining a hotel next to the Living Arts Centre —

[DIP TO WHITE]

Mayor Hazel McCallion (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Well, it’s been a great evening, I can assure you.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH  (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Unbelievable.

Mayor Hazel McCallion (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

You know, I had a vision—

MISSISSAUGAWATCH  (while videotaping Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

Here it comes.

Mayor Hazel McCallion (Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday $350.00 a ticket Party, February 12, 2011)

—an objective to get Sheridan College back to Mississauga.

[DIP TO BLACK. LOGO]
[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

Last, I wasn’t just videotaping on Saturday evening. I kept busy Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party”.

I’ve cut-and-pasted all Tweets here for the record —with typos cleaned up and the F-word toned down with asterisks.

Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party “that is not a party”! Funny who’ll they let in for 350 BUCKS!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash “that isn’t a party” ! Was just offered wine (red) and drank some. Needs sugar!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting Live from Hazel McCallion’s Birthday Party that “isn’t a party”. As expected Fran Rider (big cheesette in Women’s Hockey) now here.
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th birthday party “that isn’t a party”. Declined offer of Lobster caviar hor’doerve (sp?)
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party. Lotta rich white types with the only Diversity being rich non-whites…
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party. ACCCCK! Just saw the Head-Dude of the Mississauga Board of Trade!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that “isn’t a party”. City Manager Janice Baker doth arrived…
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th birthday party that’s “not a party”. Dave O’Brien not yet here. Maybe didn’t remember to come…
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’ 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party”. *WOW*! I wish I had boobs like that!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party that’s “not a party”. EU-REEEEK-A!!!! Michael Nobrega just showed up!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash! OMERS CEO Michael Nobrega here and just recognized another ENERSOURCE Director!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Only had four sips of this glass of wine…. (where’s the Baby Duck?!)
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. There’s a media area! So I now feel I’m wid my bruddahs!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. McCallion getting standing ovation. I was the only one to remain seated!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Louroz Mercader just showed up! And THAT raises a question…
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party. Ted Woloshyn is EmCee. On bright side I like John Tory.
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party. Confirming Brampton Mayor Susan Fennell here. Also *PTUI* Mike Harris!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Katie Mahoney’s husband Steve Mahoney here in a skir….kilt!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash! Councillors you’d expect to be here are. Tovey, Fonseca, Starr -Hazel’s Own.
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s Birthday Bash. Harold $$$Shipp$$$ four tables away from me. Like being at the Inquiry –with WINE!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Want to yell’ “ANYONE HERE FROM MALTON???!!!”
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. If Corruption had Mass/weight, there’d be a HUUUGE black hole here in MYTHissauga!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Shrimp, filet mignon, asparagus and wine, wine, wine Too bad I don’t really drink!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash! Hmmmmm… I wonder what table Tony DeCicco is at!….
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Nobrega just gave me a long look. Likely not a person of interest to him tho.
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Believe this. Judging from conversations, NO ONE’s giving single thought to Poor!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Haven’t seen David “I can’t recall” O’Brien. Or Peter McCallion!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting from Hazel McCallion’s 90t Birthday Bash. F*** ME! They just named campus after the woman who flogged convention centre!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. What youth wrote in email confirmed. “System is corrupt. No way to fix it!”
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. Orwellian remaking of History this eve. Like Inquiry NEVER happened.
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Party. Best 350-bucks I ever spent! I’ve confirmed the Roots of Youth Violence!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Still Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th Birthday Bash. What I witnessed tonight CONFIRMS Hazel McCallion is Above the Law.
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s 90th bash. Sheridan rep just talked to me. Told her it’s absolute perversion to name campus after McC!
Mississauga Muse
MISSISSAUGAMUSE
Tweeting LIVE from Hazel McCallion’s birthday bash. Orwell was right. She Who Controls the past and present guarantees Herstory!

There’s only one image to end all this….

MISSISSAUGA CITY HALL (AMO, OMERS, MYTHissauga Inc) ---morally beyond redemption

…the system is CORRUPT and this is why there is youth violence this is why there are guns on the street and drugs in the hands of children the youth are fighting with the system because it is CORRUPT there is no way to fix it because the people higher up are sitting nice in their big leather chairs, driving their nice cars, living their perfect life when some people in this world have to work hard to get by and even by doing so they get nothing, and after they realize how hard they have to work to get by they break down and no longer want to live life being part of the system because they realize that living life by the rules of the system gets you no where because it is CORRUPT!

–email from youth (age 19)

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Mississauga Judicial Inquiry Commissioner Cunningham asks, “Without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you really think that these large entities would have paid any attention to WCD?”

February 9th, 2011  

Well, yesterday someone finally raised the salient point at the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry. The good news is that that “someone” was Commissioner J. Douglas Cunningham.

He simply asked “without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor” whether such large pension funds as OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) and AIMCo (Alberta Investment Management Corporation) would have paid any attention to a no-assets no-history “shell” company like World Class Developments.

So here’s the video followed by the transcript. Note, video also features OMERS CEO, Michael Nobrega receiving a congratulatory thank you hug from Mayor Hazel McCallion after his performance at the January 22, 2009 Enersource public meeting.

Mississauga Inquiry 7-Million dollar question “Without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the mayor” (2:30 min)

(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]

Commissioner J. Douglas Cunningham to Elizabeth McIntyre, Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, Tuesday, February 8, 2011)

Do you think that Mr. Nobrega, OMERS, Oxford would have paid any attention at all to WCD, this shell company, coming out nowhere with no apparent assets and unknown principals, that’s ALS, coming forward with a proposal to develop a hotel convention centre, condominium project, no history of having ever done any of this kind of work previously?

And this isn’t something that OMERS, Oxford, AIMCo had put out for tender. This was something that came out of the blue from this company. Now, Mr. Lax would characterize it as the Mayor having created this one (1) horse race. But putting that aside, without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you really think that these large entities would have paid any attention to WCD?

Elizabeth McIntyre, Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, Tuesday, February 8, 2011)

Well, I –um.

[DIP TO BLACK]
[Music: Mark Knopfler “Don’t Crash the Ambulance”]

Commissioner J. Douglas Cunningham to Elizabeth McIntyre, Hazel McCallion’s lawyer (Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, Tuesday, February 8, 2011)

Do you think that Mr. Nobrega, OMERS, Oxford would have paid any attention at all to WCD, this shell company, coming out nowhere with no apparent assets and unknown principals, that’s ALS, coming forward with a proposal to develop a hotel convention centre, condominium project, no history of having ever done any of this kind of work previously?

And this isn’t something that OMERS, Oxford, AIMCo had put out for tender. This was something that came out of the blue from this company. Now, Mr. Lax would characterize it as the Mayor having created this one (1) horse race. But putting that aside, without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you really think that these large entities would have paid any attention to WCD?

[CROSSFADE LOGO]

[TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

"OMERS CEO Michael Nobrega and Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion in congratulatory hug after Enersource public meeting January 22" 2009

What follows is a cut-and-paste from the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry website —and the Closing Submissions by Hazel McCallion’s lawyer, Ms. Elizabeth McIntyre. It’s instructive to examine how Ms. McIntyre successfully avoided answering Commissioner Cunningham’s direct Yes/No question, “Without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you really think that these large entities would have paid any attention to WCD?”

The Mayor’s lawyer counters with a Bullshit-Baffles-Brains approach and in avoiding the Commissioner’s simple Yes/No question even serves up two “the question is” that turn out not to be Cunningham’s question at all!

Unbelievably after four minutes avoiding Cunningham’s question, McIntyre then offers, “So that’s the best I can answer the question”. She then follows that up with “we’ve prepared a chart, which we can — which I plan to — to hand out that — that –” and we never did get her answer to “Without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you really think that these large entities would have paid any attention to WCD?”

Did the Commissioner notice McIntyre’s avoidance strategy?

We submit there’s Hope. Why? Anyone bright enough to ask the salient question, “Without the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you really think that these large entities would have paid any attention to WCD?” with also recognize McIntyre’s four minutes of acrobatics for exactly what it was. Her way of avoiding, “No.”

So here it is. The exchange between the Commissioner and Hazel’s lawyer.

  2                 COMMISSIONER DOUGLAS CUNNINGHAM:   Do you
  3  think that Mr. Nobrega, OMERS, Oxford would have paid any
  4  attention at all to WCD, this shell company, coming out
  5  nowhere with no apparent assets and unknown principals,
  6  that's ALS, coming forward with a proposal to develop a
  7  hotel convention centre, condominium project, no history
  8  of having ever done any of this kind of work previously?
  9                 And this isn't something that OMERS,
 10  Oxford, AIMCo had put out for tender.  This was something
 11  that came out of the blue from this company.  Now, Mr.
 12  Lax would characterize it as the Mayor having created
 13  this one (1) horse race.  But putting that aside, without
 14  the involvement of Peter McCallion and the Mayor, do you
 15  really think that these large entities would have paid
 16  any attention to WCD?
 17                 MS. ELIZABETH MCINTYRE:   Well, I -- I
 18  would suggest that on the evidence, the -- the hotel
 19  convention centre was something that the owners
 20  recognized was in their best interest.  It was -- it was
 21  a good use of -- of that land.  The hotel convention
 22  centre was -- was something that would be of value to
 23  them, particularly their interest in Square One.
 24                 In terms of it being a corporation that
 25  was set up for that project, I didn't see anything in the

6493

  1  evidence that suggested that -- that that was unusual; it
  2  -- that there be a corporation put together for a single
  3  purpose.  I assume that -- that the owners would put in
  4  place a -- and they did put in place a contractual
  5  arrangement which they saw as protecting their interest.
  6  And, you know, they saw it as something that was of value
  7  both to -- both to themselves and the City.
  8                 I mean, if the question is, what was the
  9  Mayor's role in jump-starting the project, there's -- and
 10  she has acknowledged this, that she encouraged them to
 11  look at it.  She would have encouraged them to look at
 12  any project that came forward that was proposing to -- to
 13  -- to build a hotel, but then once it's -- once they look
 14  at it it's up to, and I think this is the evidence fairly
 15  of the co-owners, it's up to them to do their -- their
 16  due diligence.
 17                 They did, of course, know Mr. Cook.  They
 18  knew that he had some history, and in fact, I think on
 19  the totality of the evidence that -- that -- that the
 20  project, as originally conceived, would have moved
 21  forward and we might have that hotel/convention centre
 22  there today had not the market crashed and the economy
 23  interceded.
 24                 So, you know, the question is, did they
 25  make a wise business deal based on all of the usual

6494

  1  business considerations, and I think the answer to that
  2  is yes.  You know, we don't have any evidence of other
  3  projects that came forward.  There was nothing else on
  4  offer for -- for that property at the time, we know that.
  5                 COMMISSIONER DOUGLAS CUNNINGHAM:   M-hm.
  6                 MS. ELIZABETH MCINTYRE:   So that's the
  7  best that I can answer the question.  In terms of
  8  speculating as to whether -- if the Mayor had not made
  9  the phone call she did, that one (1) phone call, is that
 10  what's responsible for everything that then proceeded.  I
 11  think that it's highly speculative to suggest that that
 12  was the only trigger.
 13                 COMMISSIONER DOUGLAS CUNNINGHAM:   Oh, no,
 14  she did much more, but I'm -- I'm sure you'll touch on
 15  that.
 16                 MS. ELIZABETH MCINTYRE:   Yes.  And in
 17  fact, we've prepared -- we've prepared a chart, which we
 18  can -- which I plan to -- to hand out that -- that --

E MALAMA KAKOU. To Care For All.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

"The TRIUMPH of MYTHissauga" "Justanopinion Aug 12, 2010 6:12 PM Face reality Our mayor could be caught, in the library, with the candlestick in her hand, over the dead body, and she would still win by a landslide! MISSISSAUGA NEWS READERS COMME

MISSISSAUGA NEWS READERS COMMENT:

“Justanopinion Aug 12, 2010 6:12 PM

Face reality Our mayor could be caught, in the library, with the candlestick in her hand, over the dead body, and she would still win by a landslide!

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Clifford Lax’s 43-page summary: Judicial Inquiry Closing Written Submission on behalf of The City of Mississauga

February 8th, 2011  

There has been considerable interest in the City of Mississauga’s closing written submission to the inquiry. City of Mississauga lawyer Clifford Lax’s submission can be viewed directly at the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry website.

City of Mississauga

The Submissions (1,203Kb / 43 pages)

We scanned this document so that people can easily access it through a Google search and also for easy cut-and-pasting and added the City’s Phase II Written Submissions of the City of Mississauga to our mirror site.

Also because of its importance we also present it here as a separate blog entry. We respectfully request being advised if there are errors. Thanks.

Closing Submissions: The City of Mississauga

                                       CITY OF MISSISSAUGA JUDICIAL INQUIRY 

                                           Phase II: Written Submissions
                                             of the City of Mississauga

                                                                            LAX O’SULLIVAN SCOTT LISUS LLP 7
                                                                            Counsel
                                                                            Suite 1920
                                                                            145 King Street West
                                                                            Toronto, Ontario
                                                                            M5H 1JS

                                                                            C. Clifford Lax
                                                                            Tracy L. Wynne
                                                                            James Renihan
                                                                            Tel: (416) 598-1744
                                                                            Fax: (416) 598-3730 

                                                                            Lawyers for the City of Mississauga

-2- Introduction 1. On October 28, 2009, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Mississauga (“Council") requested a judicial inquiry into questions that arose as a result of a failed land deal between World Class Developments Ltd. ("WCD") and certain companies affiliated with the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System ("OMERS"). 2. Council requested the Inquiry in order to determine whether any of the circumstances surrounding WCD’s land deal affected the good government of the City of Mississauga (the "City"). To ensure public confidence, Council deemed it necessary to have these circumstances investigated by a Judge of the Superior Court of Justice. 3. This Inquiry is guided by the Terms of Reference adopted by Council.1 While the Terms of Reference empower the Commissioner to ask any questions that he deems necessary, they specifically invite him to address certain questions. It is those questions that motivated Council to request this Inquiry. 4. The specific questions that Council raised in the Terms of Reference are as follows: a) What relationships, if any, existed between the elected and administrative representatives of Mississauga (the “City") and the principals and representatives of WCD? b) What relationships, if any, existed between the elected and administrative representatives of the City and the principals and representatives of OMERS and its affiliate companies that are relevant to the land deal with WCD? c) Did any member of Council, City employee or person with a contract with the City engage in any misconduct in relation to their duties to the City?
1 Exhibit 1 (Terms of Reference, Resolution 0271-2009, adopted November ll, 2009) (Tab 1)
- 3 - d) Did any of the elected or administrative representatives of the City have a conflict of interest that influenced their actions in relation to the matters under inquiry? 5. These submissions address the questions raised in the Terns of Reference, and in so doing, also address the list of issues distributed by Commission Counsel. This is accomplished by examining the role of certain primary players and the relationships between them. The submissions proceed as follows: a) The role of Peter McCallion b) The role of Tony DeCicco c) The role of Emilio Bisceglia d) The roles of Edward Sajecki and Marilyn Ball e) The role of Mayor Hazel McCallion 6. After addressing the role that each of these individuals had in the events under inquiry, these submissions make recommendations as to how to ensure that events like those under inquiry do not reoccur. Overview 7. As of 2002, Peter McCallion envisioned a project that would see the construction of a luxury hotel, convention centre and condominiums in Mississauga City Centre. He was aware that the City saw a four-or-five star hotel and convention centre as integral to its long-term vision for City Centre, and believed he could profit from that vision.
- 4 - 8. Over the next three years, Peter McCallion tried to find investors for the project. In 2005, Leo Couprie agreed to be an investor, and Peter McCallion incorporated WCD as the corporate vehicle he would use to carry the project out. 9. In the summer of 2005, Peter McCallion recruited Murray Cook to manage the WCD project. In the fall of 2005, Cook and Peter McCallion entered into negotiations with OMERS Realty Management Corporation and 156 Square One Ltd. (collectively, the "Sellers") to purchase Blocks 9 & 29 in Mississauga City Centre (the "Lands"). The Lands were managed by Oxford Properties Group ("Oxford") on the Sellers’ behalf. Both OMERS Realty Management Corporation and Oxford are subsidiaries of OMERS. 156 Square One Ltd. ("156") is a subsidiary of ARCA Investments Inc., the assets of which are managed by the Alberta Investment Management Corporation ("AIMCo"). 10. WCD and the Sellers entered into an agreement of purchase and sale (“APS") on January 31, 2007. The APS required WCD to build a four-star hotel with convention facilities. 11. In the summer of 2007, Peter McCallion replaced Cook with Tony DeCicco, because he feared that Cook was going to cut him out of the deal. Under DeCicco’s management, WCD eventually abandoned its plan to build a hotel and convention centre, and began to explore the possibility of either selling the Lands to another purchaser or building condominiums exclusively. The Sellers terminated the APS in January 2009, and legal proceedings between the Sellers and WCD commenced in July of that year. 12. Throughout the life of the project, the principals of WCD received significant assistance from Peter McCallion’s mother, Mayor Hazel McCallion, The Mayor helped Peter McCallion convince Cook to join the project, pressured the Sellers to sell the Lands to
- 5 - WCD, and negotiated amendments to the APS on WCD’s behalf. Ultimately, the Mayor told David O'Brien, an OMERS board member, that she was concerned that the litigation between WCD and the Sellers would jeopardize Sheridan College’s plan to build a campus on the Lands. O’Brien, on behalf of OMERS, subsequently met with Peter McCallion and DeCicco and negotiated a settlement of the litigation in which WCD received $4,000,000. 13. Throughout the WCD project, Peter McCallion and his partners took improper advantage of Peter McCallion’s relationship with the Mayor, and used it to further their own financial ends. Despite the obvious conflict between her interest in her son and her duties as an elected official to act impartially, the Mayor chose to work to advance the goals of WCD. I. The Role of Peter McCallion 14. Peter McCallion would have the Commissioner believe that he was nothing more than WCD’s real estate agent and the representative of one of its investors. ` 15. Despite his claims to the contrary, Peter McCallion was and knew himself to be a shareholder and active principal in WCD. He wrongfully took advantage of his relationship to the Mayor to further his business goals, and as a result impugned the reputation of the City for impartially dealing with residents. Peter McCallion had access to the Mayor that nobody else had, and willingly provided that access to others, such as DeCicco.
- 6 - i) Peter McCallion incorporates WCD 16. In 2002, well before WCD was incorporated, Peter McCallion travelled to China to meet with possible investors for a project to build a hotel, convention centre and condominiums in the City Centre.2 The Mayor accompanied him on this trip.3 It was during this trip that they first met Couprie.4 17. In 2005, Peter McCallion incorporated WCD and put together the initial WCD management “team”, which consisted of himself and Cook, supported by the lender, Couprie.5 18. Couprie was nothing more than an investor in WCD. He loaned WCD $750,000, and hoped to receive an additional $750,000 as return on his investment.6 That loan was _ personally guaranteed by Peter McCallion.7 While Couprie was the sole shareholder at the time of WCD’s incorporation, he held the shares merely as security for his investment.8 lt was never intended that Couprie would be an equity owner of WCD. 19. In the summer of 2005, Peter McCallion sought out Cook, an experienced developer, to manage the WCD project.9 To facilitate this, he arranged a meeting between himself,
2 Testimony of Peter McCallion, p. 1801 (Tab 2) 3 Testimony of Leo Couprie, pp. 3403-3404 (Tab 3) 4 Testimony of Peter McCallion, p. 1808 (Tab 4) 5 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1805-1806 (Tab 5) 6 Testimony of Leo Couprie, p. 3406 (Tab 6) 7 Exhibit 274, p, 2 (Loan Agreement, dated January 29, 2007) (Tab 7) 8 Testimony of Leo Couprie, p. 3407 (Tab 8 ) 9 Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4525—4526 (Tab 9)
- 7 - Cook and the Mayor.10 The Mayor had known Cook personally for many years.11 At that meeting, the Mayor encouraged Cook to join her son in the management of WCD, and Cook subsequently agreed to do so.12 Cook was to be compensated for his work with a 20% carried interest in the project.13 20. The Mayor met with Peter McCallion and Cook twice more in 2006.14 The purpose of both of these meetings was to allow Peter McCallion and Cook to bring the Mayor up to date on her son’s project.15 21. While Cook was the manager of the project, Peter McCallion was involved in the selection of the architectural team, and was a constant presence at meetings with the consultants16 He claims to have attended these meetings as Couprie’s representative17 However, Couprie had no active or substantial involvement in WCD’s business. Peter McCallion attended these meetings in order to protect his shareholder’s interest in WCD.
10 Exhibit 228, p. 13 (Mayor’s Agendas, dated May 18, 2005) (Tab 10) ll Testimony of Murray Cook, p. 4437 (Tab 11) 12 Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4521-4522; Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp, 2042-2044 (Tab 12) 13 Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4450-4451 (Tab 13) 14 Exhibit 228, p. 7 (Mayor’s Agendas, dated May 29, 2006); Exhibit 228, p. 9 (Mayor’s Agendas, dated September 22, 2006) (Tab 14) 15 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 2050-2052; Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4537-4539 (Tab 15), 4551-4553 (Tab 13) 16 Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4446-4447 (Tab 16) 17 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 2074-2076 (Tab 17)
-8- ii) WCD begins negotiating with the Sellers 22. WCD benefitted greatly from the Mayor’s assistance. Despite being an experienced real estate agent, Peter McCallion relied on his mother to initiate negotiations with the Sellers. In October 2005, she complained to OMERS that Oxford had not taken steps to sell the Lands to WCD, and convinced them to contact Cook.18 Moreover, the Mayor informed OMERS that she knew how to contact Cook, and would let him know that Oxford would be in touch shortly.19 23. Oxford was not familiar with Cook,20 and was unsure whether he was capable of completing the proposed project. This concern was warranted, given that WCD was a "shell corporation... with only a borrowed office" and Oxford had “not seen any financials or even been able to determine who in fact are the real principals.2l Further, Oxford did not believe the deal to be a "best use plan" for the Lands.22 24. The Mayor’s intervention convinced Oxford to negotiate with WCD despite its concerns. She assured the Sellers that Cook had the capability to complete the project,23 and continued to pressure Oxford to sell the Lands.24 This pressure caused tension between
18 Exhibit 258 (E-mail chain involving Fred Biro, Michael Latimer and Paul Haggis, dated October 4, 2005); Testimony of Mayor McCallion, p. 4875 (Tab 18) 19 Exhibit 591 (E-mail chain involving Fred Biro, Michael Latimer and Paul Haggis, dated October 4, 2005) (Tab 19) 20 Testimony of Michael Latimer, p. 2204 (Tab 20) 21 Exhibit 164 (E—mail discussion between Ronald Peddicord and Dean Hansen, dated October 18, 2006) (Tab 21) 22 Exhibit 153 (E-mail discussion between Ken Lusk and Ronald Peddicord, dated April 17, 2006) (Tab 22) 23 Testimony of Ken Lusk, p. 1667-1668 (Tab 23) 24 Exhibit 146 (E—mail from Ken Lusk to Michael Dal Bello, dated March 9, 2006) (Tab 24)
- 9 - the Sellers. AlMCo was initially against the deal, but was convinced to support it by Oxford. It was then Oxford’s turn to question the deal, to which 156 responded "if the Mayor calls we have no intention of taking a bullet for Oxford.”25 The Mayor continued to pressure the Sellers throughout 2006, and complained that she felt that the deal was taking too long.26 25. It is submitted that, but for the Mayor’s considerable and direct support for her son’s project, the Sellers would not have agreed to work with WCD. iii) Peter McCallion ’s ownership in WCD is formalized 26. In January 2007, Peter McCallion and Couprie entered into a Declaration of Trust, pursuant to which Couprie would hold 80% of the equity in WCD in trust for Peter McCallion.27 The Mayor signed the document as a witness, though she claims not to have read it. 27. There was no reason to justify the Declaration of Trust save to keep Peter McCallion’s ownership interest in WCD secret. Peter McCallion was not disqualified from holding shares, and the trust provided Couprie with no security for his loan. Based on the evidence, if the Sellers had known that Peter McCallion was an owner of WCD, they may
25 Exhibit 162 (E-mail discussion between Ken Lusk and Ronald Peddicord, dated October 20, 2006) (Tab 25) 26 Exhibit 162 (E—mail discussion between Ken Lusk and Ronald Peddicord, dated October 20, 2006) (Tab 25) 27 Exhibit 190 (Declaration of Trust) (Tab 26)
- 10 - not have entered into the APS,28 and would have been concerned with the Mayor’s involvement.29 28. The Declaration of Trust is inconsistent with Peter McCallion’s claim to be nothing more than a real estate agent. A real estate agent would have had no possible entitlement to 80% of the company, and Peter McCallion is unable to offer any plausible reason why this interest was transferred to him.30 The purpose of the document was to give Peter McCallion the beneficial interest of the majority of WCD, as was always intended. 29. In two payments made in March 2007 and May 2007, despite his claims to be no more than WCD’s real estate agent, Peter McCallion advanced $103,500 to WCD.31 By this time, he knew that the Sellers would not pay him a commission on the sale of the Lands. He now alleges that he advanced the money to protect the possibility that he would receive real estate commissions on the eventual sale of condominium units.32 In fact, WCD owed money to its consultants, and Peter McCallion needed to protect his interest in WCD. Almost all of the $103,500 went to pay consultants working for WCD.33 30. WCD planned to submit a site plan application to the City on July 31, 2007, and was required to pay a fee of approximately $50,000. WCD did not have the money to do so, and as a result, on July 27, 2007, Peter McCallion arranged for a loan of $50,000 from
28 Testimony of Leo De Bever, pp. 4282-4283 (Tab 27) 29 Testimony of George Craig Coleman, pp. 2834-2835 (Tab 28) 30 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 2021-2022 (Tab 29) 31 Testimony of Peter McCallion, p. 1891; Exhibit 195 (Financial Document showing WCD bank account activity) (Tab 30) 32 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1806-1807 (Tab 5) 33 Exhibit 195 (Financial Document showing WCD bank account activity) (Tab 30)
- 11 - TACC Group Inc. ("TACC"). He provided TACC with a promissory note in this amount, which he signed as an authorized signing officer of WCD.34 Peter McCallion now claims that he had no authority to sign this note, as he was merely a real estate agent.35 He is unable to explain why a real estate agent would have arranged for this loan. iv) Peter McCallion replaces Cook with DeCicco 31. In the Summer of 2007, Peter McCallion decided to bring in DeCicco to replace Cook.36 At the time, WCD was facing serious financial problems. While Cook claimed that he could find investors for the company, Peter McCallion was concerned that Cook and his . new investors would squeeze him out of WCD. His solution was to replace Cook, and bring in DeCicco as an investor.37 The decision to replace Cook was Peter McCallion’s alone. Couprie, not being involved with the business, had no opinion on the matter.38 32. When DeCicco assumed management of the project, Peter McCallion transferred 80% of his beneficial interest in WCD (64%) to DeCicco. This left Peter McCallion with a 16% interest. Couprie continued to hold Peter McCallion’s interest in trust and now held DeCicco’s interest in trust as well.
34 Exhibit 196 (Promissory Note dated July 27, 2007) (Tab 31) 35 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1846-1847 (Tab 32) 36 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1830-1832; Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4465—4466 (Tab 33) 37 Testimony of Peter McCallion, p. 1832 (Tab 33) 38 Testimony of Leo Couprie, p. 3446 (Tab 34)
- 12 - 33. Peter McCallion and DeCicco demanded that Cook give up his 20% interest in WCD and agree to terminate a Put and Call Agreement which gave Cook the right to force the other shareholders to purchase his interest in WCD, under certain conditions.39 Cook refused. 34. Peter McCallion and DeCicco turned to the Mayor for assistance in pressuring Cook to accept their demands.40 It was hoped that the Mayor could convince Cook to leave WCD as successfully as she had convinced him to join. 35. The Mayor arranged a meeting between herself, Peter McCallion and Couprie, in order to obtain Couprie’s opinion on the dispute. Couprie made clear to the Mayor that he did not know DeCicco or Cook, and that the decision was Peter McCallion’s to make.4l v) Litigation commences against Cook 36. Despite their efforts, Peter McCallion and DeCicco were unable to force Cook to accept their demands. As a result, in March 2008, they resorted to litigation, and claimed $100,000,000 from Cook.42 While Couprie was the nominal plaintiff he never reviewed the claim or instructed Emilio Bisceglia, who was both the lawyer nominally representing him and an investor in WCD.43 It was DeCicco who instructed Bisceglia.
39 Exhibit 194, pp. 2-5 (Put and Call Agreement, dated August 30, 2006); Testimony of Tony DeCicco, pp. 3580- 3581 (Tab 35) 40 Exhibit 236 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 5, 2007) (Tab 36) 41 Exhibit 228, p. 4 (Mayor’s Agenda, dated November 20, 2007); Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 2085-2086 (Tab 37); Testimony of Leo Couprie, pp. 3446-3447 (Tab 34) 42 Exhibit 198 (Statement of Claim of Leo Couprie, dated March 25, 2008) (Tab 38) 43 Testimony of Leo Couprie, pp. 3434-3436 (Tab 39)
- 13 - 37. The Couprie claim never mentions Peter McCallion. Instead, it conspicuously avoids referring to him, to the point of claiming that it was Couprie who commenced negotiations to purchase the Lands, although Couprie had no involvement in negotiations whatsoever. 38. Along with his defence, Cook launched a counterclaim against both Couprie and WCD.44 In his pleadings, Cook made repeated reference to “another participant” in WCD, but did not provide a name for that participant. That participant was none other than Peter McCallion, and Cook carefully refrained from connecting him to WCD in his pleadings, though he mentioned both DeCicco and Bisceglia.45 39. The obvious inference from the content of these pleadings is that all parties were aware that Peter McCallion’s interest in WCD was to be kept secret. Even Cook, who was being sued for $100,000,000, was careful not to reveal this fact. 40. DeCicco continued to keep the Mayor apprised regarding the dispute with Cook into mid- 2008, specifically updating her with regard to communications WCD received from Cook’s lawyer.46 41. The litigation settled in September 2008, and a mutual release was executed. Peter McCallion, despite not being named in any of the pleadings, signed the release as one of the "World Class Parties".47 He claims that he did not read the release before signing it,
44 Exhibit 199 (Statement of Defence and Counterclaim of Murray Cook, dated July 9, 2008) (Tab 40) 45 Testimony of Murray Cook, pp. 4512-4513 (Tab 41) 46 Exhibit 238 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated December 21, 2007 ); Exhibit 239 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated May 22, 2008) (Tab 42) 47 Exhibit 210 (Full and Final Mutual Release dated September 23, 2008) (Tab 43)
- 14 - and is unable to explain why, as a real estate agent, he would be required to sign a release relating to a dispute between shareholders.48 However, Bisceglia claims that he told Peter McCallion that he was required to sign the release because he was a part owner of WCD.49 vi) DeCicco takes over management 0f WCD 42. The fact that DeCicco took over the management of WCD did not cause Peter McCallion to stop actively participating in the project. 43. A particularly telling example of Peter McCallion’s participation occurred in May 2008. The Mayor asked Michael Kitt of Oxford to meet with Peter McCallion regarding the project.50 The meeting took place on May 13, 2008, and was attended by Kitt, Peter McCallion and the Mayor herself, although Peter McCallion arrived late. During the meeting, the Mayor sought amendments to the APS.5l When Peter McCallion arrived, he pushed Kitt for further concessions. 44. Kitt testified that he was uncomfortable negotiating the transaction with the Mayor rather than with the purchasers.52
48 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 2029—2030 (Tab 44) 49 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, p. 5538 (Tab 45) 50 Exhibit 271 (E-mail discussion between Michael Kitt and Michael Nobrega, dated April 30, 2008) (Tab 46) 51 Testimony of Michael Kitt, pp. 4013-4021; Exhibit 246 (E-mail discussion between John Filipetti and Michael Kitt, dated May 13, 2008); Exhibit 421 (E-mail discussion between Michael Kitt and Michael Nobrega, dated May 20, 2008) (Tab 47) 52 Testimony of Michael Kitt, pp. 4012-4013 (Tab 47)
- 15 - vii) The Sellers terminate the deal with WCD 45. In January 2009, the Sellers terminated the APS with WCD.53 WCD refused to accept the termination, and maintained that the APS was in force. On July 9, 2009, the Sellers sought a declaration from the Superior Court of Justice that the APS terminated in January 2009. 46. In the course ofthe litigation, Peter McCallion filed an affidavit, dated August 24, 2009, prepared by Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP and commissioned by Bisceglia in which he swore that he was "one of the principals of World Class Developments."54 47. At some point after the affidavit was sworn, City Solicitor Mary Ellen Bench provided a copy of it to the Mayor.55 The Mayor then demanded that Peter McCalli0n explain why he had sworn an affidavit in which he stated that he was a principal of WCD, and urged him to “correct" the document.56 48. On September 11, 2009, after his phone call with his mother, Peter McCallion asked Bisceglia’s office to prepare a second affidavit for him, in which he purported to "delete" his claim to be a principal of WCD from his first affidavit.57 Although Bisceglia’s office drafted this affidavit, Bisceglia refused to commission it, as he believed it to be untrue.58
53 Exhibit 117 (Letter from Abraham Costin to Minden Gross LLP, dated January 9, 2009 (Tab 48) 54 Exhibit 212 (Affidavit of Peter McCallion dated August 24, 2009), at para. 1 (Tab 49) 55 Testimony of Mayor McCallion, pp. 5020-5022 (Tab 50) 56 Testimony of Mayor McCallion, pp. 5020-5024 (Tab 50); Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1862-1863 (Tab 51) 57 Exhibit 206 (Affidavit of Peter McCallion, dated September 1 1, 2009) (Tab 52) 58 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, p. 5527 (Tab 53)
- 16 - Peter McCallion proceeded to have it commissioned at the offices of Danson Schwarz Recht LLP. Jayson Schwarz, one of the partners of that firm, has acted as the Mayor’s lawyer for many years.59 49. Evidently, Peter McCallion subsequently determined that his second affidavit was not sufficient. On September 15, 2009, he swore a third affidavit, in which he specified that his original affidavit’s reference to being a principal of WCD "should be deleted as it is not true. I am not a principal of WCD."60 Although the Mayor denies speaking to Peter ` McCallion about his second affidavit, Peter McCallion believes that he swore the third affidavit because his mother told him that the second affidavit "needed to be more clarified."61 This affidavit was also commissioned at Danson Schwarz Recht LLP. 50. Peter McCallion alleges that his claim to be a principal of WCD in his first affidavit was an oversight. This is despite the fact that he reviewed multiple drafts of the affidavit, and made "quite a few” revisions to it.62 viii) The settlement of the WCD litigation 51. On July 7, 2009, during a golf tournament dinner, the Mayor told O’Brien that she was concerned that the dispute between WCD and the Sellers could imperil the City’s plans to purchase the Lands and lease them to Sheridan College for the construction of a
59 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1963-1964 (Tab 54) 60 Exhibit 207 (Affidavit of Peter McCallion, dated September 15, 2009) (Tab 55) 61 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1868·1 869 (Tab S6) 62 Testimony of Peter McCallion, p. 1861 (Tab 51)
- 17 - Mississauga campus.63 She asked O’Brien to familiarize himself with the issues. O’Brien sits on the OMERS Administration Corporation’s Board of Directors. 52. Peter McCallion was also present at that dinner. That very evening, O’Brien approached Peter McCallion and informed him that he wanted to settle the differences between WCD and the Sellers.64 McCallion arranged a meeting between O’Brien, DeCicco and himself a few days later.65 53. During that July meeting, O’Brien told DeCicco and Peter McCallion that he was on OMERS’ board, and wanted to settle the dispute. O’Brien claims that DeCicco offered to settle the dispute for $10,000,000, although DeCicco denies that he provided O’Brien with a number.66 O’Brien later briefed the Mayor on this meeting.67 54. In late August 2009, the Mayor called O’Brien and again expressed concern over the litigation between WCD and the Sellers.68 O’Brien subsequently met with the Mayor on or about September 3, 2009, and they discussed Peter McCallion’s affidavit in which he had sworn that he was a principal of WCD.69 They continued this discussion the morning
63 Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 2921-2924; Testimony of Mayor McCallion, pp. 4993-4994 (Tab 57) 64 Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 1870-1871 (Tab 56) 65 Testimony of Peter McCallion, p. 1871 (Tab S6) 66 Testimony of David O’Brien, p. 2929; Testimony of Tony DeCicco, pp. 3668-3672 (Tab 58) 67 Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 2979-2980 (Tab 59) 68 Exhibit 404 (E-mail from David O’Brien to Michael Nobrega, dated August 27, 2009); Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 2982-2984 (Tab 60) 69 Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 2989-2990 (Tab 61)
- 18 - of September 5, 2009, during which time they agreed the Sheridan College project could be jeopardized if the WCD litigation continued.70 55. Shortly thereafter, on or about September 9, 2009, O’Brien obtained authority from Michael Nobrega, OMERS’ Chief Executive Ofiicer, to meet with WCD on behalf of OMERS and discuss the possibility of settling the litigation.71 56. O’Brien met with Peter McCallion and DeCicco on or about September 10, 2009 to discuss settlement.72 Either during that meeting or through telephone conversation that evening, a settlement in principle was reached in which the Sellers would pay WCD the sum of $4,000,000, which included the return of deposits previously paid by WCD,73 O’Brien called the Mayor on September 14 to give her an "update on what I have".74 Although the Mayor denies it, O’Brien’s evidence is that he called to inform her of the settlement.75 57. The communications between the Mayor and O’Brien raise a strong inference that O’Brien was trying to settle the WCD litigation at the Mayor’s request. That settlement allowed the Sheridan College transaction to proceed without risk, ended the litigation in which Peter McCallion had filed an affidavit in which he had revealed himself as a
70 Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 2999-3002 (Tab 62) 71 Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 3013-3014; Testimony of Michael Nobrega, pp, 3168-3170 (Tab 63) 72 Testimony of David O’Brien, p. 3014 (Tab 63); Testimony of Tony DeCicco, pp. 3687-3689 (Tab 64) 73 Testimony of David O’Brien, pp. 3020-3021 (Tab 65); Testimony of Tony DeCicco, p. 3689 (Tab 64) 74 Exhibit 330 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated September 14, 2009) (Tab 66) 75 Testimony of David 0’Brien, pp. 3023-3024 (Tab 67)
- 19 - principal of WCD, and delivered a healthy profit to WCD. These results were all beneficial to the Mayor. ix) Suggested Conclusions Regarding Peter McCallion’s Conduct 58. An examination of Peter McCallion’s role in the WCD project yields answers to the questions raised by the Terms of Reference. Peter McCallion was one of the principals and representatives of WCD. However, the Mayor was related to the principals of WCD not only by blood, but also through her dedicated advancement of their business interests. 59. Peter McCallion was a major shareholder in WCD and hoped to realize a large profit on that equity interest through the deal with the Sellers. He wrongfully used his relationship with the Mayor to further that goal. 60. While Peter McCallion tried to hide his ownership interest from the Sellers, his partners in WCD were well aware that he was a shareholder. Bisceglia knew of Peter McCallion’s ownership interest from the beginning of his involvement.76 DeCicco claims that Peter McCallion told him that his shares were being held by Couprie.77 61. From the outset, Peter McCallion actively solicited the Mayor’s assistance with the project. He used the Mayor to convince Cook to join the project, to pressure the Sellers into selling the Lands to WCD, to force Cook out of WCD to make room for DeCicco, and to convince the Sellers to amend the APS. He realized that the Sellers would only work with him if the Mayor pressured them to do so, and hid his ownership of WCD _ from the Sellers, lest it prevent the Mayor from advancing WCD’s interests.
76 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, pp. 5495-5496 (Tab 68) 77 Testimony of Tony DeCicco, pp. 3561-3562 (Tab 69)
-20- 62. Peter McCallion knew or ought to have known that it was improper for the Mayor to advance the interests of a company of which he was a shareholder. By seeking the support of the Mayor, he took advantage of her office. II. The Role of Tony DeCicco 63. It was not until DeCicco assumed management of the project that he realized the full extent of the challenge that WCD faced in building a four-star hotel on the Lands. He eventually determined that it would not be possible to build a hotel of this quality on the Lands.78 At that point, DeCicco abandoned the plan to build a hotel and convention centre, and instead focused on simply obtaining the most profit he could, either by selling the Lands once they had been purchased from the Sellers or building condominiums exclusively. 64. DeCicco acquired 80% of Peter McCallion’s interest in WCD, but was careful to keep Peter McCallion actively involved in the company. This was because of the unique entrée that Peter McCallion offered to the office of the Mayor. DeCicco took advantage of this special connection wherever possible. i) DeCicco’s initial contact with the Mayor 65. DeCicco became involved with WCD in the Summer of 2007. However, his relationship with the Mayor goes back much farther.
78 Testimony of Tony DeCicco, p. 3969 (Tab 70)
- 21 - 66. DeCicco first met the Mayor in the early 1980s.79 For years, his contact with her was sporadic, and limited to functions that they both attended.80 It was only through his relationship with Peter McCallion that DeCicco gained easier and regular access to the Mayor.81 67. DeCicco began to arrange meetings with the Mayor through Peter McCallion at least as early as February 2003.82 The three met on many more occasions over the following two years.83 These meetings allowed DeCicco to build a relationship with the Mayor, and demonstrated to him the benefits of maintaining ties to Peter McCallion. DeCicco began to exploit that relationship as soon as he replaced Cook at WCD. 68. Surprisingly, it was the Mayor that informed the Sellers that Cook had been replaced by DeCicco, rather than DeCicco or Peter McCallion, and this did not occur until DeCicco had been involved with WCD for more than half a year.84 The Sellers had never heard of DeCicco. However, just as she had vouched for Cook, the Mayor assured the Sellers that DeCicco had "significant financial resources."85
79 Testimony of Tony DeCicco, pp. 3523-3524 (Tab 71) 80 Testimony of Tony DeCicco, p. 3526 (Tab 72) 81 Testimony of Tony DeCicco, p. 3529 (Tab 73) 82 Exhibit 234, p. 1 (Mayor’s agendas, dated February 12, 2003) (Tab 74) 83 September 9, 2003 (Exhibit 234, p. 3); November 12, 2003 (Exhibit 234, p. 4); January 29, 2004 (Exhibit 234, p. 5); April 24, 2004 (Exhibit 228, p. 19); July 13, 2004 (Exhibit 234, p. 7); September 14, 2004 (Exhibit 234, p. 8); October 30, 2004 (without Peter McCallion) (Exhibit 234, p. 10); January 17, 2005 (Exhibit 234, p. 12) (Tab 75) 84 Testimony of Michael Kitt, pp. 4002-4003 (Tab 76) 85 Exhibit 429 (E—mail discussion between John Filipetti and Ronald Peddicord, dated March 31, 2008) (Tab 77)
- 22 - ii) DeCicco asks the Mayor to obtain concessions from the Sellers 69. From the beginning of his involvement,·DeCicco regularly spoke to the Mayor about the project. He informed her of discussions and progress with the architects86 and updated her on WCD’s attempts to secure a hotelier for the project.87 He also provided her with information regarding the payment of WCD’s bills and thanked her for her help.88 Had she not been personally involved with the project, DeCicco would have had no reason to provide the Mayor with these sorts of detail. A private company’s ability to pay its bills is not and should not be a municipal concern. 70. As part of its deal with the Sellers, WCD was required provide the Sellers with proof that it had entered into a hotel management agreement by July 28, 2008. By early July, DeCicco knew that WCD would not be able to meet this deadline, so he solicited the Mayor’s assistance to obtain an extension.89 71. In response to this request, the Mayor convinced the Sellers to give WCD an extra six months to find a hotelier.90 The fact that the Mayor made this request, rather than WCD,
86 Exhibit 237 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 5, 2007), Exhibit 515 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 29, 2007) (Tab 78) 87 Exhibit 204 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated June 5, 2008); Exhibit 240 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated June 6, 2008); Testimony of Peter McCallion, pp. 2095-2099 (Tab 79) 88 Exhibit 235 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 5, 2007) (Tab 80) 89 Testimony of Mayor McCallion, pp. 4925-4926 (Tab 81) 90 Exhibit 285 (E·mail chain involving Michael Latimer, Michael Kitt and John Filipetti, dated July 9, 2008); Testimony of Michael Nobrega, pp. 3104-3105 (Tab 82)
- 23 - caused Kitt to believe that WCD was using the Mayor "as an effective communication tool" to "advance negotiation positions."91 This was precisely DeCicco’s aim. 72. That was not the only time that DeCicco used the Mayor to obtain extensions to deadlines in the deal. In November 2008, WCD was required to pay a deposit to the Sellers. DeCicco again asked the Mayor to obtain an extension for the payment of the deposit.92 The Mayor, on behalf of WCD, obtained a further one-week extension from the Sellers.93 73. When that extension had nearly expired, DeCicco once again sought the Mayor’s assistance in obtaining another extension for WCD.94 The Mayor obtained a further one week extension.95 74. However, WCD was again unable to pay the deposit, and yet again turned to the Mayor,96 who managed to convince the Sellers to extend the deposit deadline until January 9, 2009.97 When WCD failed to make that deposit, the Sellers terminated the APS.
91 Testimony of Michael Kitt, pp. 4023-4024 (Tab 83) 92 Exhibit 529 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 17, 2008); Exhibit 530 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 19, 2008); Exhibit 531 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 19, 2008); Exhibit 532 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 20, 2008); Exhibit 533 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 21, 2008) (Tab 84) 93 Exhibit 423 (E-mail discussion between Michael Kitt and Michael Nobrega, dated November 21, 2008); Exhibit 464 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 21, 2008) (Tab 85) 94 Exhibit 534 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 27, 2008); Exhibit 535 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated November 28, 2008); Exhibit 536 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated December 2, 2008); (Tab 86) 95 Exhibit 470 (E—mail discussion between Michael Kitt and John Filipetti, dated December 1, 2008); Exhibit 438 (E-mail chain involving Michael Kitt, Michael Nobrega and John Filipetti, dated December 2, 2008); Exhibit 627 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated December 3, 2008) (Tab 87) 96 Exhibit 537 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated December ll, 2008, Peter McCallion calling on behalf of DeCicco); Exhibit 538 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated December 12, 2008) (Tab 88)
- 24 - iii) DeCicco seeks assistance from the Mayor with City issues 75. DeCicco not only sought the Mayor’s assistance with respect to the Sellers, but also with respect to the City itself. In order for WCD to build anything on the Lands, City Council had to vote to remove the holding designation that had been placed on the Lands. This vote was initially scheduled to occur on April 23, 2008, but was deferred to April 30, 2008 at WCD’s request. 76. Between April 22, 2008 and April 29, 2008, DeCicco left five separate telephone messages for the Mayor.98 One of these messages was "very long and detailed", and disclosed that he had "met with City Officials" and wanted to speak to the Mayor.99 77. The April 30, 2008 date was also deferred, again at WCD’s request. WCD never succeeded in having the holding designation lifted. iv) DeCicco decides not to build a hotel 78. By September 2008 at the latest, DeCicco had decided against attempting to build a hotel on the Lands. WCD began to explore the possibility of selling and transferring the
97 Exhibit 425 (E·mail chain involving Michael Kitt, Michael Nobrega and Michael Latimer, dated December 17, 2008) (Tab 89) 98 Exhibit 519 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated April 22, 2008), Exhibit 520 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated April 23, 2008), Exhibit 521 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated April 25, 2008), Exhibit 522 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated April 28, 2008); Exhibit 523 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated April 29, 2008) (Tab 90) 99 Exhibit 521 (Mayor’s Phone Message, dated April 25, 2008) (Tab 90)
-25- obligation to construct a hotel to the purchaser.100 Ernst & Young was retained to locate a purchaser. 79. DeCicco maintains that Ernst & Young was only retained so that WCD could find out what was "going on in the marketplace."l01 That contention is brought into serious doubt by the evidence that DeCicco and Bisceglia provided Ernst & Young with offers and counter—offers to transmit to potential purchasers. 80. WCD was unable to find a purchaser willing to purchase the property and accept the hotel conditions, causing DeCicco to attempt to convince the Sellers to waive the hotel requirement. He sought the Mayor’s assistance in this regard, and though she denies supporting him in this, the evidence indicates that the Sellers believed that she wanted them to sell WCD the Lands without the hotel condition.102 This would have allowed WCD to build nothing but condominiums. However, the Sellers refused to grant the concession. 8l. After DeCicco failed to convince the Sellers to remove the hotel condition from its deal with WCD, he resorted to subterfuge. WCD was required to enter into a hotel management agreement in order to close the deal with the Sellers. The Sellers required WCD to produce such an agreement to them. WCD purported to enter into an apparent hotel management agreement with Steve Gupta’s company, Eastons.
100 Exhibit 561 (E-mail chain involving Emilio Bisceglia, Tony DeCicco and Ray Drost, dated September ll, 2008) (Tab 91) 101 Testimony of Tony DeCicco, pp. 3809-3810 (Tab 92) 102 Exhibit 438 (E—mail chain involving John Filipetti, Michael Kitt and Michael Nobrega, dated December 2, 2008) (Tab 87)
- 26 - 82. However, the agreement that was produced to the Sellers deliberately failed to reveal the existence of a side agreement, which permitted WCD to unilaterally terminate the hotel management agreement on one week’s notice.103 The side agreement effectively negated all of WCD’s obligations in the purported hotel management agreement. Its existence was known to DeCicco, who signed it, and Bisceglia, who drafted it,104 but not to the Sellers. v) Suggested Conclusions Regarding Tony DeCicco’s Conduct 83. The Terms of Reference inquire into the relationships between City officials and representatives of both WCD and OMERS and its affiliate companies. The assistance that the Mayor provided to DeCicco vividly demonstrates the nature of the Mayor’s relationship to both WCD and OMERS/Oxford/156. Throughout the WCD project, DeCicco routinely solicited the Mayor for assistance, and she responded by pressuring the Sellers to comply. 84. DeCicco was interested in the WCD project because it came with the unique ability to have the Mayor act as his spokesman. Peter McCallion’s main role was as a conduit to the Mayor, but over time, DeCicco no longer needed that conduit, as he had ready and direct access to the Mayor himself 85. When DeCicco needed Peter McCallion’s connections to the Mayor, he was a trusted ally. However, when WCD received the settlement monies from OMERS, and the deal was at an end, DeCicco conveniently forgot about Peter McCallion. Peter McCallion
103 Exhibit 401 (Letter re: Management Agreement from WCD to Steve Gupta, dated December 15, 2008) (Tab 93) 104 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, p. 5508 (Tab 94)
- 27 - received nothing from the settlement, despite his 16% interest in WCD. He did not even receive a return of the $103,500 he advanced to WCD, or the $50,000 TACC loan that he guaranteed. 86. From the outset, DeCicco used the Mayor to introduce him to the Sellers, to negotiate extensions to deadlines, to seek assistance with City approvals and to remove Cook from WCD. He knew that the Sellers would not cooperate with him unless the Mayor pressured them to do so. 87. DeCicco had access to the Mayor beyond that available to an ordinary resident. He used her influence to advance his private financial interests. He allowed her to believe that he was committed to building a hotel on the Lands, even when he himself had concluded that it was not feasible. III. The Role of Emilio Bisceglia 88. Bisceglia claims that he was no more than WCD’s lawyer.105 However, the evidence demonstrates that Bisceglia’s role went well beyond that of legal counsel. He was also an investor and was deeply involved in many of WCD’s important business decisions. 89. Bisceglia, through a family company, invested a total of $61,000 in WCD from November 2007 to January 2008.106 He came into the project with DeCicco, with whom he had a prior professional and commercial relationship.107
105 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, pp. 5529-5530 (Tab 95) 106 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, pp.5494—5495 (Tab 68) 107 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, pp. 54946495 (Tab 68)
- 28 - 90. Along with DeCicco, Bisceglia attended the first meeting that WCD had with Gupta, and was involved in negotiating the agreements between WCD and Easton’s.108 He also drafted the side letter that effectively relieved WCD of any obligations to Easton’s.109 91. Bisceglia also attended meetings with architects and other contractors on behalf of WCD. One example is a meeting at Page and Steele’s office on November 21, 2007.110 The minutes from that meeting indicate that Bisceglia took an active role in instructing the architects and accepting responsibility for such non-legal tasks as co-ordinating the payment of fees to the City. 92. In addition, Bisceglia was included on e-mails sent by WCD’s consultants informing the members of WCD of updates regarding the project.111 93. Even communications with Ernst & Young regarding potential purchasers of the Lands were handled by Bisceglia.112 These discussions were of vital importance to DeCicco, who did not want to build a hotel, and were well outside the civil litigation focus of Bisceglia’s legal practice.113
108 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, pp. 5503-5507 (Tab 96) 109 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, p. 5508 (Tab 96) 110 Exhibit 256 (E-mail from Scott Walker to Tony DeCicco, Emilio Bisceglia and others, dated November 22, 2007) (Tab 97) 111 See, e.g., Exhibit 400 (E-mail from Scott Walker to Tony DeCicco, Emilio Bisceglia and Peter McCallion, dated . May 1, 2008) (Tab 98) 112 Exhibit 561 (E-mail chain involving Emilio Bisceglia, Tony DeCicco and Ray Drost, dated September ll, 2008) (Tab 91) 113 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, pp. 5492-5493 (Tab 99)
- 29 - 94. Although the extent of Bisceglia’s interest in WCD was never formalized,114 it is clear that he was more than just WCD’s lawyer. He was DeCicco’s partner, an investor in the company, and was intimately involved in many of WCD’s important business decisions. 95. Bisceglia did not have any contact with the Mayor or with any other City officials. However, his involvement with the project and close association with DeCicco strongly suggest that he was aware of the manner in which Peter McCallion and DeCicco were using the Mayor to advance their own interests. IV. Edward Sajecki and Marilyn Ball 96. In January 2008, the City informed WCD that it was required to pay $440,670.84 in site plan application fees. Given the quantum of the required fees, the City agreed to receive this sum in two equal instalments.115 97. WCD was told that its site plan application would not be circulated among City staff for comment until the first instalment had been received. Although neither instalment was ever received, Sajecki and Ball decided to circulate the application for comment anyway.116 98. The evidence of Sajecki and Ball makes clear that there was nothing improper about this decision.
114 Testimony of Emilio Bisceglia, p. 5536 (Tab 100) 115 Exhibit 503 (Letter from Marilyn Ball to Barry Lyon dated February 28, 2008) (Tab 101) 116 Testimony of Edward Sajecki, pp. 2767-2770; Testimony of Marilyn Ball, pp. 4219-4221 (Tab 102)
-30- 99. The application was circulated prior to receipt of the first instalment because: (i) the City had received assurances from credible consultants that the first instalment would arrive shortly; (ii) the City needed comments on the application in order to start preparing the accompanying agreements; and (iii) the City would be faced with tight timelines if it did not begin working on the application immediately.117 100. There is no evidence that this decision was made for improper reasons or as the result of improper influence. V. The Role of Mayor Hazel McCallion 101. Elected officials must act impartially with regard to the interests of their constituents. In order to justify public trust, elected officials must not exercise their powers in a way that unfairly benefits or appears to benefit particular individuals. 102. The facts recounted above with regard to Peter McCallion and DeCicco document the extensive involvement that the Mayor had in the affairs of WCD and its principals. They also provide an answer to the question whether any City official engaged in misconduct, or had a conflict of interest, as raised by the Terms of Reference. In the case of the Mayor, the answer to that question is yes. 103. While Peter McCallion and DeCicco improperly took advantage of Peter McCallion’s relationship to the Mayor, and exploited her office for their own ends, the Mayor was unfortunately a willing participant. It has been a longstanding goal of both Council and senior staff at the City to have a luxury hotel and convention centre built in the City
117 Testimony of Edward Sajecki, pp. 2767-2769 (Tab 102)
- 31 - Centre.118 However, even though the project that WCD presented to the Sellers was in line with the City’s vision, this does not legitimize the efforts that the Mayor made to advance her son’s project. 104. The Mayor encouraged Cook to join her son in WCD. She pressured Oxford to enter into an agreement of purchase and sale with a shell corporation with no track record operated by principal it had no experience with. The Sellers proceeded with the transaction despite their own doubts, indicating they did it primarily to placate the Mayor. Once the APS had been signed, the Mayor repeatedly sought amendments and concessions from the Sellers. She did all of this knowing that Peter McCallion stood to gain financially from her actions. 105. Even if she had believed that her son was merely WCD’s real estate agent, her support for the company would nonetheless have been inappropriate. Whether as real estate agent or principal, her son’s involvement with WCD and his ability to benefit financially from her actions placed her in a conflict of interest, and she should have been aware of that fact. 106. The Mayor did not violate the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.119 That statute is narrow and applies only to actions taken with respect to votes in meetings of council. Although she failed to comply with its provisions at the May 21, 2008 council meeting, as she did not declare a conflict of interest when the matter of WCD’s application to remove the holding designation came up, her breach appears to have been the result of
118 Testimony of Edward Sajecki, pp. 13864387 (Tab 103) 119 R.S.O. 1990, c. M.5O (the "MClA") (Tab 104)
- 32 - honest mistake. Accordingly, she would not be liable for sanction under the MCIA pursuant to the saving provision found at s. 10(2). 107. However, the fact that the Mayor did not substantively breach the MCIA does not lead to the conclusion that she did not act inappropriately, or in violation of a conflict of interest. The common law principles concerning conflict of interest co-exist with the MCIA, and provide guidance to determine whether the actions of a member of a municipal council are appropriate.120 108. The overarching purpose of rules governing conflicts of interest is to foster public confidence in elected officials.121 The promotion of the financial interests of an official’s child through the influence of the official’s office undermines that confidence.122 For the Mayor to be seen promoting a deal in which her son has a direct financial interest may lead the public to question whether she is acting for the good of the City, or solely the good of her family. Such conflicts must be scrupulously avoided, whether or not they are specifically prohibited by rules contained in statutes or codes of conduct. 109. Accordingly, the important question is not whether the Mayor’s actions violated any applicable statute or rule. Rather, it is whether she acted in a manner which she knew or ought to have known would likely undermine the confidence and trust that the residents of Mississauga are entitled to have in their elected officials. The maintenance of the public trust is essential to good governance, and the Mayor must not engage in conduct that could reasonably erode that trust.
120 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5589-5590; Testimony of Dean Lorne Sossin, pp. 5592-5593 (Tab 105) 121 Testimony of Dean Lorne Sossin, pp. 5583-5584 (Tab 106) 122 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5591-5592 (Tab 107)
- 33 - 110. The Mayor’s active role in supporting and promoting the business interests of her son and WCD threatened to undermine public confidence in both her office and the elected and administrative representatives of the City. Whatever her reasons for supporting WCD, they were unbecoming of an elected official. VI. Recommendations lll. Given the misconduct that has been identified as a result of the Inquiry, it is essential that steps are taken to prevent municipal officials from engaging in such conduct in the future. Five issues are examined here: the MCIA, the new Mississauga Council Code of . Conduct, policies to ensure accountability and transparency in municipal activities, lobbyist registries and comfort letters issued by municipalities to third parties. i) The MCIA 112. This Inquiry has demonstrated three significant defects in the MCIA: its restricted scope, its limited remedies and the fact that enforcement is left to ordinary citizens.123 In its current form, the MCIA addresses only pecuniary conflicts of interest, and applies only to matters that are the subject of discussion or a vote at a meeting of council or a local board.124 If a court determines that a member of` council has breached the MCIA, the court must disqualify that member and declare her seat vacant.125 The court has no discretion to order a different remedy.
123 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5663-5664, 5686 (Tab 108) 124 MCIA, s. 5 (Tab 104) 125 MCIA, s. 10(1) (Tab 104)
- 34 - 113. The MCIA should apply to non—pecuniary conflicts of interest, as well as pecuniary conflicts. Public confidence is affected when a member of council acts on a conflict of interest, whether the interest is pecuniary in nature or otherwise. This amendment can be accomplished by simply deleting the references to "pecuniary" in the MCIA, thereby causing it to refer to "conflicts of interest" generally.126 114. Similarly, the scope of the MCIA should not be restricted to discussions and votes that occur in meetings. The application of the MCIA should apply generally to actions taken by members of council when acting or appearing to act in their official position.127 Aside from her technical breach on the MCIA May 21 , 2008, none of the support that the Mayor provided to WCD occurred in a meeting of council. However, this does not mean that her involvement with WCD did not threaten to diminish the public’s trust in the office of the Mayor. There is no principled reason to limit the applicability of the MCIA to council meetings, and the MCIA should be broadened accordingly. 115. If the scope of the MCIA was broadened in this way, it would capture the sort of conduct that the Mayor engaged in. The Mayor placed herself in a conflict of interest, but this conflict occurred outside of council meetings. If conduct like this should reoccur in the future, an amended MCIA would allow that conduct to be addressed by a court that has the power to disqualify a member of council. 116. However, while it is important that the MCIA continue to empower the court to disqualify a member of council, this should not be the only available remedy. The court
126 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5687-5688 (Tab 109) 127 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, p. 5692 (Tab 110)
- 35 - should have the discretion to determine the appropriate remedy in the circumstances of a breach of the MCIA. Situations may arise in which the MCIA has been breached, but in ` circumstances that do not warrant disqualification.128 117. In its current form, actions under the MCIA must be initiated by an elector. Given the cost and complexities involved in legal proceedings, such actions are unlikely to happen. It is a rare citizen who has the resources to retain and instruct counsel to bring an action in which that citizen has no personal financial interest. 118. In order for the MCIA to be effective, an official must be empowered to commence actions under the MCIA. This power could be given to municipal integrity commissioners, who could bring an action at the request of an elector, subject to an investigation to ensure that that an action was justified. Alternatively, the power to commence proceedings under the MCIA could be vested in a provincial official, such as the provincial integrity commissioner. The provincial integrity commissioner may choose to initiate proceedings upon receipt of a recommendation from a municipal integrity commissioner or at the request of an elector of the municipality in issue. 119. Municipalities and the Province will have to discuss where the power to commence proceedings under the MCIA is best vested. At the present instance, what is needed is a recommendation from the Commissioner that such discussions take place. If enforcement of the provisions of the MCIA is left to electors, as it is currently, it is unlikely that it will be enforced at all.
128 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5692-5694 (Tab 110)
- 36 - ii) The Mssissauga Council Code of Conduct 120. Subsequent to the commencement of the Inquiry, the City took proactive steps to craft rules that would prevent the sort of misconduct that occurred in this case. This led to the adoption of the Council Code of Conduct in September 2010 (the "Code").129 121. The Code is the product of` a detailed review of codes of conduct adopted by other municipalities and extensive consultations with experts and City residents. It largely follows the format adopted by other Ontario municipalities such as Toronto and Vaughan, but is even more comprehensive in its scope. 122. Unlike the codes of conduct adopted by other municipalities, the Code contains substantive provisions that deal with conflict of interest and apparent conflict of interest.130 This is in addition to the provisions that prohibit the improper use of influence.131 These rules now make abundantly clear to all future Members of Council that the Mayor’s actions in this case were improper, thereby helping to ensure that misconduct of this sort does not occur again. 123. The Code is sufficiently general to deal with future concerns, and will be subject to future interpretation by the integrity commissioners retained by the City. The Code specifically provides that it is to be given a broad and liberal interpretation.l32
129 Exhibit 708 (Tab 111) 130 Code, Rules 1(b), (d)-(g) (Tab 111) 131 Code, Rule 7 (Tab 111) 132 Code, Framework and Interpretation, s. 1 (Tab 111)
- 37 - 124. The Code was not in place during the events under inquiry. However, if it had been, it would have clearly prohibited the actions that the Mayor performed on WCD’s behalf. Rule 7 provides that "No member shall use the influence of his or her office for any purpose other than for the exercise of his/her official duties." The commentary to this rule clarifies that this includes "attempts to secure preferential treatment beyond activities in which Members normally engage on behalf of their constituents." This is precisely what the Mayor did for WCD. 125. While the Code was widely praised by the experts called in the Inquiry, it is apparent that some improvements could be made to it. Several of those improvements related to Rule l(b), which is a general rule concerning conflicts of interest. 126. Some concern has been raised that Rules 1(d)-(g) could be interpreted as exhaustive examples of prohibited conflicts of interest.133 Rules 1(d)-(g) are not intended to be read in this manner, but it would be worthwhile to specify this in the body of Rule 1. 127. Rule 1(b) itself can be strengthened by rewording it from "Members of Council should be committed to performing their functions with integrity..." to “Members of Council shall be committed...".134 128. Finally, Rule 1(b) currently addresses preferential treatment given to "Family Members" only.135 Although terms such as "friends" or "business partners" may present interpretive difficulties for future integrity commissioners, the connection between the Mayor and
133 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5646-5648; 5697-5698 (Tab 112) 134 Testimony of Prof David Mullan and Prof Greg Levine, pp. 5648-5649 (Tab 112) 135 Testimony of Prof David Mullan and Dean Lorne Sossin, pp. 5699-5701 (Tab 113)
- 38 - DeCicco in this Inquiry demonstrates the importance of applying conflict of interest rules to more than just family relations. In order to broaden the Rule and avoid definitional difficulties, it could be worded so as to apply to relations that a reasonable person would believe prevent a member from being impartial.136 129. Outside of the realm of Rule l(b), the relationship between the Code and the MCIA, especially if the scope of the MCIA is broadened, can be helpfully clarified. The Code is necessarily subservient to the MCIA, but it is important that the Code can operate whenever possible. An amendment to the Code to specify that its procedures apply unless an action under the MCIA has actually been commenced would be an improvement.137 iii) Accountability and Transparency 130. While it is up to Council to craft policy, City employees are tasked with implementing it. The implementation of policy, particularly for senior staff members, can raise many of the same ethical concerns that are encountered by elected officials. It is vital that the City have policies in place that ensure that its staff are accountable to residents and its procedures are transparent to all. 131. The Inquiry confirmed that there was nothing improper about the Planning Department’s decision to circulate WCD’s site plan application for comment despite WCD’s failure to pay the required fees. However, this incident demonstrates the important decisions that are made by senior staff on a regular basis. In this case, the familial relationship between
136 Testimony of Dean Lorne Sossin, pp. 5700-5701 (Tab 113) 137 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5695-5696 (Tab 114)
- 39 - the Mayor and Peter McCallion was well known to staff. Such a situation may cause staff discomfort in performing their duties, or leave them unsure about how to proceed. 132. For a municipality which holds accountability and transparency as its core values, optics can be as damaging as reality when the City deals with an individual who has a close relationship to a member of Council or senior employee. The City should adopt policies and procedures so that that the existence of such relationships are made transparent to the public, and staff have guidelines to follow to ensure that these relationships do not give residents reason to question whether the City is acting fairly and impartially. 133. At the current time, a number of different City policies address employee conduct. Of particular relevance is the policy concerning conflicts of interest.138 The Policy is quite comprehensive, but differs from the more general approach taken by the Code. For example, it is not clear whether the Policy deals with apparent conflicts of interest, as the Code does. Additionally, simply by virtue of the fact that different language is used in the Code and the Policy, senior staff could reasonably believe that different standards apply to them than elected officials, even if this is not intended. 134. It would be beneficial if the City undertook to draft a set of policies applicable to senior staff in particular that mirrored, wherever appropriate, the obligations placed upon members of Council in the Code. For example, it would be beneficial if a stand—alone rule concerning the improper use of influence applied to senior staff, like that found at Rule 7 of the Code. While the Policy refers to the use of influence, it is only in the context of conflicts of interest. Because it is possible for an individual to improperly use
138 Mississauga Corporate Policy No. 01-03-02, dated July 5, 2006 (the "Policy") (Tab 115)
- 40 - their influence in a situation where they do not have a conflict of interest, a policy that specifically deals with the improper use of influence would benefit the good governance of the city.139 iv) Lobbyist Registry 135. Toronto is the only municipality that has adopted a lobbyist registry. It is required to do so by statute. 136. It is too early to determine whether the benefits of the Toronto lobbyist registry justify its cost.140 However, given the limited scope of that registry, and its voluntary nature, there is good reason to believe that its benefits will not justify its existence.141 137. A lobbyist registry would have done nothing to prevent the misconduct under inquiry. No lobbyist registry would have addressed the Mayor’s communications with the Sellers, or her intervention into the internal affairs of WCD. It would be rash to begin the costly process of developing and implementing a lobbyist registry in response to the matters under inquiry. v) Comfort Letters 138. During the expert testimony, it was suggested that the City could begin to provide third parties with "comfort letters", which would contain information regarding applicable
139 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, Dean Lorne Sossin and Prof Gregory Levine, pp. 5709-5716 (Tab 116) 140 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp, 5638-5639 (Tab 117) 141 Testimony of Prof David Mullan, pp. 5639-5640 (Tab 117)
- 41 - ethical rules and procedures, relevant declared conflicts of interest or previous findings of misconduct by the integrity commissioner.142 139. A letter of this sort would have done nothing to address the misconduct that occurred in this case. While the Mayor was advancing the interests of WCD, the Sellers did not have any formal relation to the City regarding that deal. There would have been no reason for them to obtain a comfort letter. Indeed, until April 2008, when the Mayor first declared a conflict in Council, the letter would not have revealed any conflict of interest at all.143 140. While comfort letters might be used by third parties to establish that they carried out due diligence before proceeding with a transaction, this would do nothing to prevent misconduct from occurring. 141. As it is not clear exactly when third parties would seek a comfort letter from the City and there is no reason to believe that such letters would prevent misconduct, the cost of establishing a comfort letter program cannot be justified. VII. Conclusion 142. This Inquiry has performed an important public service for the residents of the City. Through the Terms of Reference, Council requested the Commissioner to investigate the circumstances surrounding the WCD project in order to determine whether any of the elected or administrative representatives of the City engaged in any misconduct in connection with WCD.
142 Testimony of Dean Lorne Sossin, pp. 5718-5720, 5724 (Tab 118) 143 Testimony of Dean Lorne Sossin, pp. 5723-5724 (Tab 118)
- 41 - 143. As a result of the documents produced and the evidence heard during the Inquiry, City residents have been provided with access to sufficient information to allow this question to be answered. 144. Peter McCallion used his relationship to the Mayor to advance his own financial interests, and actively solicited her support for his own private business dealings. DeCicco took advantage of Peter McCallion’s relationship to the Mayor for his own purposes, and wrongly involved the Mayor in affairs that she had no business in. 145. For her part, the Mayor willingly provided Peter McCallion and DeCicco with all of the assistance they requested. She ought to have recognized that her actions were inappropriate for an elected official tasked with maintaining the confidence of the public. 146. That public confidence can only be maintained if the public is properly informed. The fact-finding aspect of this Inquiry has been of immense value, and the Commissioner’s Report will ensure that all residents are able to learn from the evidence that has been heard. 147. While the City is anxious to hear the recommendations that the Commissioner has, it decided not to wait for those recommendations before taking steps to address the misconduct revealed by this Inquiry. The events under inquiry revealed that the statutory and code—based ethical rules applicable to Members of Council during the time under inquiry were insufficient. Mississauga’s new Code changes that. Amendments to that Code, as well as the MCIA, would further help to foster public confidence in Members of Council.
- 43 - 148. The assistance that the Mayor provided to WCD was inappropriate and threatened to diminish the trust that the residents of Mississauga are entitled to place in their Members of Council. The City called this Inquiry to ensure that that trust is maintained and strengthened. It welcomes any recommendations that the Commissioner can provide that would ensure that City Council can continue to deserve and enjoy the trust and respect of its constituents. January 24, 2011 [signature] LAX O’SULLIVAN SCO ET LISUS LLP Counsel Suite 1920 145 King Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 1J8 C. Clifford Lax Tracy L. Wynne James Renihan Tel: (416) 598-1744 Fax: (416) 598-3730 Lawyers for the City of Mississauga

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Are your frail elderly facing (hip-replacement, colon cancer) surgery at Credit Valley (or Trillium) Hospital? Some tips.

February 6th, 2011  

It’s been January 22nd, 2011 since my last blog. What can I say? I’ve been busy.

Rather than continue where I last left off detailing the malfeasance and corruption at the City of Mississauga, there’s something much more important —some suggestions on what to do if your elderly loved-one turns so ill he can’t even make it to the doctor’s office.

To be clear this isn’t medical advice, just a heads-up on things we’d have liked to know two weeks ago.

As I write this my 87 year old father is still in Credit Valley Hospital, recovering nicely from successful colon cancer surgery.  Right now it’s my sister’s turn to stay with him and I’m due to ParentWatch and sleep there tonight. He’s supposed to go home tomorrow afternoon. Credit Valley saved his life again.

I could write at least two dozen blogs on our experiences over the last two weeks but instead, I’ll post a Readers Digest version and flesh out details when time permits.

To begin.

Don’t assume that paleness and fatigue are just a natural part of aging –or sleeping the day away is just escape from boredom.

My 87 year old father had been lethargic for several weeks, pale and sleeping far too much. We put it down to just getting older, winter, boredom… Through January he’d complained about dizziness and reported two minor falls but mostly he dozed his days away.

On Tuesday, January 25th my father had fallen once again and took to bed. At first we’d assumed he had picked up some bug. He himself attributed his malaise to something he ate. Problem was, he also blamed his previous crisis on bad food and this time he didn’t bounce back.

We called Teleheath Ontario and described the symptoms. We were told to get our father to a doctor “within four hours”. Not easy when your elder insists he’s too sick to move!

Don’t view an ambulance as just for emergencies.

To get our father to a doctor “within four hours” our only choice was to call 911. We explained it wasn’t an emergency but we needed to get to a hospital. The paramedics were understanding but weren’t entirely sure that an ambulance ride was the way to go. So here’s another piece of advice. You don’t regret an unnecessary ambulance ride! It’s certainly the best 45 bucks we’ve spent believe me, and it might be for you too.

You won’t regret an “unnecessary” ambulance ride! It’s the best 45-bucks you might ever spend.

The ambulance aimed for the closest hospital but en route word came that Trillium already had its share of ambulances. Credit Valley had none in their bay. So Credit Valley it was.

Now you’ll hear stories about ghastly waits in Emergency but we were registered quickly. The paramedics did most of the work and the truth is, they made it easy for us. We were then assigned a gurney inside Emergency and there’s this relief when you hand over your loved one to experts.

My sister and I spent two nights and almost three days in Emergency looking after our father. Only curtains separated patients from each other and there was just room between partitions for medical equipment, one chair (that my sister slept on) and a space on the floor where I spent the nights.

STAY. Stay with your elder the entire time.

So here’s the #2 most important piece of advice I can give anyone whose elder is sick enough to be in the hospital. STAY. Stay with them the entire time.

Imagine how confusing and stressful Emergency is for the elderly. Everyone shows up in Emergency, from the oldest-old to infants. One inconsolable little baby wailed himself to exhaustion. If you spend any time in Emergency you only really get to sleep when you’re too exhausted to stay awake. And that’s what happens to a strong regular person. Now imagine the plight of the elderly (especially non-English speakers or those with mild dementia or worse).

Infants and kids have their parents fretting over them. Too few elderly had family “parenting” them. Those of advanced age can be in just as much need as infants/toddlers –and can even more vulnerable.

If your elder is pale, sleeps a lot, complains of weakness/dizziness, suspect anemia.

By late Tuesday, Credit Valley Hospital had identified the cause of my father’s fatigue and paleness —anemia. Doctors suspected internal bleeding and suggested stomach ulcers or colon cancer. They said he’d need a colonoscopy.

My sister and I freaked. In my father’s 87 years he’d not once had a colonoscopy! How could we, as care-givers, have overlooked this! So, if you’ve read this far, when was the last time your elder had a colonoscopy?

My father was so anemic he needed a blood transfusion –two units!

When was the last time your elder had a colonscopy?

On Wednesday, Credit Valley said that my father would have to prep for the colonoscopy at home because there just wasn’t the sufficient staff to work through the GoLYTELY® bowel cleansing procedure. My sister and I managed to keep our father inside Credit Valley’s expert care by insisting that we could supervise/navigate our father through the GoLYTELY® “experience”.

GoLYTELY® was Thursday and anyone who’s undergone a colonoscopy knows the toughest part is the actual preparation/cleansing and not the peek-and-probe-up-the-butt afterwards.  GoLYTELYThursday was by far our toughest day, both for my sister and me –and especially for my father.

Mercifully, by late Thursday, we were transferred out of Emergency and into a semi-private room.

After two nights (and almost three days) in Emergency we're transferred to a semi-private room to await colon cancer surgery on 87 year old patient

Early Friday morning was the colonoscopy and colon cancer confirmed. The good news is the tumour was operable and my father, otherwise healthy, was “low risk” for surgery.

More good news, by late Friday he was wheeled into surgery for his colon operation.

So here’s the #1 most important message, be extremely wary of general anesthesia with the elderly! We requested epidural.

Given our experiences with general anesthetic and hip replacement surgery on a frail elder, we did not want a repeat of what a general anesthetic can do.

Now we’re giving this heads-up. We suggest you Google “effects general anesthesia elderly” and also “epidural anesthesia elderly” so you can ask informed questions about anesthetics. Remember. When your elderly loved one is facing surgery be sure to speak to the anesthesiologist about delivering no more than just enough to get the job done.

We spend an unnecessary extra hour of angst because we waited at the wrong place!

We can’t say this enough. STAY. Stay with your elder the entire time.

When that’s not possible perhaps you’re blessed with a responsible teen who can be pulled from school to be the frail elder’s advocate and companion. In our experience we found that post-surgery delivery of oxygen (first a full mask and later oxygen prongs) is vital to keeping a frail elder’s brains properly oxygenated. Oxygen delivery and also regular cuing your elder to take deep breaths is key in flushing any anesthetic out his system as quickly as possible. The elderly don’t always remember on their own and there were times when our father tried to pull off his oxygen mask!

Also trips to the bathroom are precarious for the elderly at night  -especially after surgery. Even when they’re on a catheter, they’re likely to pull tubes out of arms, and even if frail, they’re still capable of struggling out of bed should they wake to unfamiliar surroundings. (Ask us how we know…)

You might consider requesting a catheter (we now wish we had for a hip replacement procedure two years ago… )

Nightwatch. Post colon cancer surgery. Sister sleeps on floor at Credit Valley ward

There’s a lot of other stuff I can write about regarding our elderly loved ones and surgery (hip, colon cancer) but I’m satisfied that I’ve recorded what we found to be the most important information.

To repeat.

If your elder is pale, sleeps far too much, complains of weakness/dizziness, suspect anemia.

Google “anemia elderly causes” to inform yourself.

When was the last time your elder had a colonoscopy? (There will come a time when you must help them prep/cleanse for this procedure)

Call Teleheath Ontario. It’s a superb resource.

The only ambulance ride you will regret is the one you didn’t request.

Google “effects general anesthesia elderly” and also “epidural anesthesia elderly”. This will help you ask informed questions of surgeons and anesthesiologists.

Prior to surgery on your elder loved one, speak to the anesthesiologist about delivering no more than just enough anesthetic to get the job done. (We went with epidural).

STAY. If you can’t yourself, consider pulling your responsible teen out of school to be your elder’s advocate and hospital companion.

Even if you have to borrow money, book a private room. There is no better hospital investment for frail elders as far as recovery goes.

Private room (Credit Valley Hospital). We sleep on the floor. (light-sleeper sleeps on bathroom-side of 87 year old patient's bed)

Did I mention, STAY?

From the ward we are transferred to a private room (Credit Valley Hospital). Our home until we leave.

First solid food since 87-year old patient entered hospital on January 25, 2011

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL AMBULANCES "Busy Night" February 6, 2011

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article