Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 15) Compliance with the Code of Conduct

January 30th, 2012  

 

MISSISSAUGA GOOD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE   January 23 2012
This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12′s Respectful Workplace Policy. Pages 22 through 24 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 10) Conduct Respecting Staff and the HUGE hidey-hole loophole. Pages 25 through 26 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 11) Employment of Council Relatives/Family Members. Page 27 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 12) Failure to Adhere to Council Policies and Procedures. Page 28 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 13) Reprisals and Obstruction. Page 29 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 14) Acting on Advice of Integrity Commissioner. Page 30 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.


The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 31 –final page begins)

 Rule No. 18

Compliance with the Code of Conduct:

1. Upon receipt of recommendations from the Integrity Commissioner, Council may, in
circumstances where the Integrity Commissioner has determined there has been a violation
of the Code of Conduct, impose either of two penalties:

i) a reprimand; or
ii) suspension of the remuneration paid to the Member in respect of his/her services as a Member of Council or a local board, as the case may be, for a period of up to 90 days

[Interesting reference to “a local board”. It’s not really defined. However, regarding “board” it looks like the Code’s Rule No. 9 Conduct of Council at Committee Meetings and When Representing the City states:

3. Members shall make every effort to participate diligently in the activities of the committees, agencies, boards, commissions and advisory committees to which they are appointed by the City or by virtue of being an elected official.

The 2001 Municipal Act defines “local board” as:

“local board” means a municipal service board, transportation commission, public library board, board of health, police services board, planning board, or any other board, commission, committee, body or local authority established or exercising any power under any Act with respect to the affairs or purposes of one or more municipalities, excluding a school board and a conservation authority; (“conseil local”)

The 2001 Municipal Act authorizes municipalities to establish their own codes of conduct as seen here:

Code of conduct

223.2(1)  Without limiting sections 9, 10 and 11, those sections authorize the municipality to establish codes of conduct for members of the council of the municipality and of local boards of the municipality. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 98.

So, the City’s Council Code of Conduct’s reference to “local board” and the 2001 Municipal Act’s definition of “local board” would suggest that conduct of elected officials sitting on the Peel Police Services Board would fall within the mandate of the Integrity Commissioner.

Nope, sorry —citizens can’t get there from here. The 2001 Municipal Act ensured that elected officials sitting on police services boards are exempt from investigations by municipal integrity commissioners!

For the record, the 2001 Municipal Act, Part V.1, (ironically named) the “ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY” section, authorizes integrity commissioners to investigate “local boards”, then changes the meaning of “local boards” as defined in Part 1 of the Act!

“local board” means a local board other than,

(a) a society as defined in subsection 3 (1) of the Child and Family Services Act,

(b) a board of health as defined in subsection 1 (1) of the Health Protection and Promotion Act,

(c) a committee of management established under the Long-Term Care Homes Act, 2007,

(d) a police services board established under the Police Services Act,

(e) a board as defined in section 1 of the Public Libraries Act,

(f) a corporation established in accordance with section 203,

(g) such other local boards as may be prescribed; (“conseil local”)

And any elected officials sitting on any of these “local boards” are exempt! And notice that malevolent “(g) such other local boards as may be prescribed; (“conseil local”)”?  If I’m reading that correctly, elected officials can exempt any other local board they don’t want the integrity commissioner peeping into. Most obvious example would be elected officials sitting on the Enersource Board! Back to Page 31 of the Code.]

2. The Integrity Commissioner may also recommend that Council take the following actions:

i) removal from membership of a committee;
ii) removal as chair of a committee;
iii) repayment or reimbursement of monies received;
iv) return of property or reimbursement of its value;
v) a written and/or verbal request for an apology to Council, the complainant, or both.

[Items i) and ii) should prove interesting… Back to Page 31 of the Code.]

Commentary

Members are accountable to the public through the election process. Between elections they
may become disqualified and lose their seat if convicted of an offence under the Criminal
Code of Canada or for failing to declare a conflict of personal interest under the Municipal
Conflict of Interest Act, or for certain violations of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

[This paragraph is a wordy-wordy way of saying, “Members are only accountable on during the few hours every four years when the voting booth is open” … Back to Page 30 of the Code.]

In addition, the Municipal Act, 2001 authorizes Council to impose either of the two penalties
on a Member following a report by the Integrity Commissioner that, in his/her opinion, there
has been a violation of the Code of Conduct.

[A “reasonably informed person” would suspect that the Municipal Act, 2001 was written to favour municipalities, not the citizens they serve. A “reasonably informed person” would also suspect that the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) lobbied into overdrive massaging the Act to their advantage —meaning, create the illusion of accountability for the naive reader.  “Naive” is not meant to be derogatory —few people could be as naive as I once was.

Here’s something else. The 2001 Municipal Act grants integrity commissioners the power to transfer their powers and duties to “any person”. From the Act:

(3)  The [Integrity] Commissioner may delegate in writing to any person, other than a member of council, any of the Commissioner’s powers and duties under this Part. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 98.

Imagine how that section can be misused!

And the Municipal Act’s truly contemptuous of the public with this statement:

(5)  The [Integrity] Commissioner is not required to be a municipal employee. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 98.

Fact is, once hired by Mayor and Councillors, the Integrity Commissioner becomes a municipal employee!

The public are such SUCKERS!

31

END OF PAGE 31, THE LAST PAGE OF THE CODE.

I’ve finished going line by line through all 31 pages of the City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct.

Now comes the hard part…

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Hazel McCallion: Mississauga Judicial Inquiry Report "Updating Ethical Infrastructure"

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 14) Acting on Advice of Integrity Commissioner.

January 29th, 2012  

 

MISSISSAUGA GOOD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE   January 23 2012
This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12′s Respectful Workplace Policy. Pages 22 through 24 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 10) Conduct Respecting Staff and the HUGE hidey-hole loophole. Pages 25 through 26 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 11) Employment of Council Relatives/Family Members. Page 27 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 12) Failure to Adhere to Council Policies and Procedures. Page 28 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 13) Reprisals and Obstruction.  Page 29 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.


The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 30 begins)

Rule No. 17

Acting on Advice of Integrity Commissioner:

1. Any written advice given by the Integrity Commissioner to a Member binds the Integrity
Commissioner in any subsequent consideration of the conduct of the Member in the same
matter, as long as all the relevant facts known to the Member were disclosed to the
Integrity Commissioner

[First of all, regarding, “any written advice given by the Integrity Commissioner”. Do you really believe that Mayor Hazel McCallion will accept behavioural admonishment from what amounts to little more a City employee with a five-year stint?

Remember. When confronted with Justice Douglas Cunningham’s October 3, 2011 “Updating Ethical Infrastructure” report, specifically his ruling:

“The Mayor’s actions amounted to both a real and apparent conflict of interest. On any view of the evidence, Peter McCallion stood to gain substantially on the successful completion of the hotel and condominium project. He had, on his own evidence, a potential upside of more than $10 million. And as an investor he stood to gain much more than that. By her own admission, the Mayor knew at the very least that he was the real estate agent for the purchaser. I have found that the Mayor knew that a successful WCD project would have earned her son more money than he would otherwise have earned over the course of many years —probably in his lifetime. I have found that the Mayor must have known that her son had a financial role much greater than acting simply as the purchaser’s agent.”

Hazel McCallion responded with, “That’s his opinion.”

Think about it. If one of the most respected judges in the land can’t make Hurricane Hazel heel, why on earth would anyone believe that some lower-tier-legal-hired-help on a McCallion-controlled-Council’s payroll can?

Last. I’ve read Rule No. 17 over several times now, and I still don’t get it but love the “as long as all the relevant facts known to the Member were disclosed to the Integrity Commissioner” part. Especially given the acrobatics that the City of Mississauga (and especially the Friends of Hazel) contort themselves into to avoid the leaking of facts.]

30

END OF PAGE 30 OF THE CODE.

Yes. That’s it.

Short one today.

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

What follows is a two-part video of Justice Douglas Cunningham as he reported on his findings in the Judicial Inquiry report, “Updating Ethical Infrastructure” on October 3, 2011.
What he actually said differs at times with the Commissioner’s Statement on the Public Release of the Report. As a result, I’ve prepared this video transcript of Justice Cunningham’s address and will share it with Mississauga Council to be included for the public record in the October 26, 2011 Council meeting minutes.

Justice Cunningham: Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report “Updating Ethical Infrastructure” Part 1 (15:32 min)

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

Justice Cunningham: Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report “Updating Ethical Infrastructure” Part 2 (8:59 min)

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


Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 13) Reprisals and Obstruction.

January 28th, 2012  

 

MISSISSAUGA GOOD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE   January 23 2012
This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12′s Respectful Workplace Policy. Pages 22 through 24 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 10) Conduct Respecting Staff and the HUGE hidey-hole loophole. Pages 25 through 26 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 11) Employment of Council Relatives/Family Members. Page 27 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 12) Failure to Adhere to Council Policies and Procedures.  Page 28 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.


The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 29 begins)

Rule No. 16

Reprisals and Obstruction:

1. It is a violation of the Code of Conduct to obstruct the Integrity Commissioner in the
carrying out of his/her responsibilities.

2. No Member shall threaten or undertake any active reprisal against a person initiating an
inquiry or complaint under the Code of Conduct, or against a person who provides
information to the Integrity Commissioner in any investigation.

3. It is also a violation of the Code of Conduct to destroy documents or erase electronic
communications or refuse to respond to the Integrity Commissioner where a formal
complaint has been lodged under the Code of Conduct.

[For the record: As far as I know, I’ve read all City of Mississauga corporate policies relating to elected officials/employee conduct and don’t ever recall seeing the statement, “It is also a violation of the Code of Conduct to destroy documents or erase electronic communications” in any of them. Not even in both the City’s two public complaints policies. And that serious omission needs to be addressed. Back to Page 29 of the Code.]

Commentary

Members of Council should respect the integrity of the Code of Conduct and investigations
conducted under it.)

 [As we’ve noted, combing through these 29 pages, Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct protects Mayor/Councillors from an investigation conducted by the Integrity Commissioner .

In Rule 12 Item 2 of the Code, we saw how Mayor/Councillors are protected from an investigation by the Integrity Commissioner:

“2. Upon receipt of a complaint that relates to the City’s Respectful Workplace policy and involves a Member, the Integrity Commissioner shall forward the information subject to the complaint to Human Resources who will refer it for an independent investigation.”

The Respectful Workplace policy is the City’s most fundamental policy in that it addresses all behavioural expectations (elected officials, employees, volunteers, public) while on City property.

It is under the City’s Respectful Workplace policy that a member of the public would most likely launch a complaint to the Integrity Commissioner. And it’s under this policy that the public can’t get an investigation conducted by the Integrity Commissioner!

The Code then goes on to state:

“Upon receipt of a complaint that relates to the City’s Respectful Workplace policy and involves a Member, the Integrity Commissioner shall forward the information subject to the complaint to Human Resources who will refer it for an independent investigation.”

A “reasonably informed person” will discover that in Mississauga municipal governance, there’s always a huge loophole in a policy that shields Elected Officials and/or Staff from authentic accountability.

“Members of Council should respect the integrity of the Code of Conduct“? How, I ask you?

The Code states:

“As leaders in the community, Members are held to a higher standard of all behaviour and conduct and accordingly their behaviour should be exemplary.”

In fact the Code contains three (3) references to a “higher standard of behaviour and conduct”. As such citizens can be forgiven if they inferred that “Members are held to a higher standard of all behaviour and conduct” is the ethical foundation of the Code. Nope.

Example. Regarding “higher standard of behaviour and conduct” and “diligently”, the Code states:

“Members shall make every effort to participate diligently in the activities of the committees, agencies, boards, commissions and advisory committees to which they are appointed by the City or by virtue of being an elected official.”

And then defines “diligently” as regular attendance:

“to participate diligently means that a Member shall not be absent from Council or committee meetings…for more than three consecutive scheduled meetings or on a regular basis.”

Keep holding “diligently” to that “higher standard of behaviour and conduct”, MYTHissauga!

The Code states that the Mayor and Councillors:

“shall adhere to such by-laws, policies and procedures adopted by Council that are applicable to them”.

And then serves up:

“in exceptional circumstances, a Member may request Council grant an exemption from any policy”.

Add another dozen other loopholes and this Code sure hasn’t got my respect! It’s good for Mayor and Councillors though… Nothin’ in there that will hold them to a higher standard of conduct or behaviour!]


29

END OF PAGE 29 OF THE CODE.

 

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

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

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 12) Failure to Adhere to Council Policies and Procedures

January 27th, 2012  

 

MISSISSAUGA GOOD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE   January 23 2012
This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12′s Respectful Workplace Policy. Pages 22 through 24 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 10) Conduct Respecting Staff and the HUGE hidey-hole loophole. Pages 25 through 26 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 11) Employment of Council Relatives/Family Members.  Page 27 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations. Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises. Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

Given the City’s chronic lack of compliance to Corporate policies, procedures, by-laws and guidelines, Rule No. 15’s Failure to Adhere to Council Policies and Procedures isn’t just the Cornerstone of this Council Code of Conduct but forms the bedrock-foundation for all City of Mississauga Corporate policies, procedures, by-laws and guidelines and even provincial legislation.

The Code’s Rule No. 15 is THE BIG ONE, folks! The One Rule that Binds All other City Rules.

And, as it turns out, the Code‘s Rule No. 15 is also the Code’s Biggest Joke!

We begin.

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 28 begins)

Rule No. 15

Failure to Adhere to Council Policies and Procedures:

1. Members shall adhere to such by-laws, policies and procedures adopted by Council that
are applicable to them.

Commentary

Members of Council are required to observe the policies and procedures established by City
Council at all times, and are directed to pay special attention to, and comply strictly with, the
Council Procedure By-law and the Elected Officials’ Expenses policy. In exceptional
circumstances, a Member may request Council grant an exemption from any policy.)

[Regular readers will recall how often I’ve warned citizens that every City of Mississauga Corporate policy, by-law or guideline has at least one exemption clause. And the Code’s Rule No. 15 blows the biggest accountability loophole that certainly I’ve ever witnessed.

So. The Mayor and Councillors “shall adhere to such by-laws, policies and procedures adopted by Council that are applicable to them”. To render the entire Code essentially worthless, the City’s Staff/Good Governance Committee then slipped in the protective clause, “in exceptional circumstances, a Member may request Council grant an exemption from any policy”.

And what might qualify as an “exceptional” circumstance? When Mayor and Councillors don’t want to comply.

And what does “any policy” mean?

“(A)ny policy”means any policy including the ones that Rule No. 15 directed Mayor/Councillors to “pay special attention to, and comply strictly with”. And also includes this one —The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct!]

 

28

END OF PAGE 28 OF THE CODE.

FREEDOM of INFORMATION MISSISSAUGA (TO DATE MISSISSAUGAWATCH HAS SPENT CLOSE TO $3,000 ON FOI REQUESTS FILED WITH CITY OF MISSISSAUGA AS WELL AS SELECTED ONTARIO MUNICIPALITIES)

And related topic… Check out the humorous Mississauga News editorial “We can be the leaders” on last Monday’s Good Governance Committee meeting.

The Mississauga News writes:

Our civic leaders will forever remain divided in their strong opinions on whether the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry and its $7 million price tag were justified.

To this day, the majority of city residents feel Mayor Hazel McCallion had Mississauga’s best interests at heart when she got involved in a deal to bring a luxury hotel to the City Centre. They trust McCallion implicitly and didn’t bat a proverbial eyelash when it became known publicly that her developer son stood to make millions if the deal was ever done.

That same crowd bitterly resents the $7 million cost of the Judicial Inquiry that examined conflict-of-interest allegations against the mayor.

Crying and complaining won’t do a bit of good, though, because the money has already been spent.

Collectively, we have to move on and make the most out of the situation by quickly implementing the recommendations handed down by Inquiry Commissioner Douglas Cunningham.

You think the Judicial Inquiry handed us lemons? Let’s make lemonade.

Mississauga now has an opportunity to emerge as a true leader and model for municipalities across North America when it comes to civic ethics and morality and how they are employed to guide governance.

We can hold our collective heads up and tell the world that the $7 million was well spent because we blazed a righteous path for other municipal councils to follow…

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. Because every municipality in Canada needs a Council Code of Conduct that states, “Members shall make every effort to participate diligently..” and then defines “diligently” as not missing three consecutive meetings aka: regular attendance!”

And every municipality in Canada needs a Council Code of Conduct that Mayor and Councillors “shall adhere to such by-laws, policies and procedures adopted by Council that are applicable to them” and then carves the wormhole “in exceptional circumstances, a Member may request Council grant an exemption from any policy”.

What a Pompatous of Pretend!

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

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

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 11) Employment of Council Relatives/Family Members.

January 26th, 2012  

 

MISSISSAUGA GOOD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE   January 23 2012
This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12′s Respectful Workplace Policy. Pages 22 through 24 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 10) Conduct Respecting Staff and the HUGE hidey-hole loophole. Pages 25 through 26 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations. Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises. Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 27 begins)

Rule No. 14

Employment of Council Relatives/Family Members

1. No Member shall attempt to influence the outcome, or to influence any City employee to
hire or promote a Family Member.

[File a complaint under Item 1 and good luck with that! And if you suspect something rotten happening with hiring, you certainly can’t build a case using Freedom of Information. Hiring practices and employee relations are beyond the reach of the province’s Municipal Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. Back to Page 27 of the Code.]

2. No Members shall make any decision or participate in the process to hire, transfer,
promote, demote, discipline or terminate any Family Member.

[Notice how Item 2 left out,”No Members shall make any decision or participate in the process of salary negotiations.”

And same criticism can be leveled in Item 1. If you suspect something rotten happening with hiring, you certainly can’t build a case using Freedom of Information. Employment issues and employee relations are beyond the reach of Freedom of Information. Back to Page 27 of the Code.]

3. No Member shall supervise a Family Member, or be placed in a position of influence over
a Family Member.

4. No Member shall attempt to use a family relationship for his or her personal benefit or
gain.

[Like Items 3 and 4 are enforceable… Back to Page 27 of the Code.]

5. Every Member shall adhere to the City’s Candidate Selection Process policy.

[Before reading this I had no idea the City had a Candidate Selection Process policy. I discover any new Corporate policy like this and I’m reminded of the City’s chronic disregard for compliance and its corporate culture of looking the other way.  Back to Page 27 of the Code.]

Commentary

If a Family Member of a Councillor is an applicant for employment with the City or is a
candidate for promotion or transfer, the Family Member will proceed through the usual
selection process pursuant to the City’s hiring policies, with no special consideration.

[So what do you think your chances are if you’re competing for the same City position as (say) Ron Starr’s daughter or for the same Peel Police job as (say) Hazel McCallion’s son?]

27

END OF PAGE 27 OF THE CODE.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

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

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 10) Conduct Respecting Staff and the HUGE hidey-hole loophole.

January 19th, 2012  

MISSISSAUGA GOOD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE   January 23 2012
This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12′s Respectful Workplace Policy. Pages 23 through 24 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations. Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises. Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011  (Page 25 begins)

Rule No. 13

Conduct Respecting Staff:

1. No Member shall compel staff to engage in partisan political activities or be subjected to threats or discrimination for refusing to engage in such activities.

[Interesting wording, “No Member shall compel staff to engage in partisan political activities” Item 1 seems to suggest that staff are free to engage in partisan political activities provided it’s of their free will and choosing. Back to Page 25 of the Code.]

2. No Member shall use, or attempt to use, their authority for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, coercing, commanding or influencing any staff member with the intent of interfering in staff’s duties, including the duty to disclose improper activity.

[“duty to disclose improper activity”? Another City expectation that I’ve videotaped staff failing to comply with. Oh well… Back to Page 25 of the Code.]

3. Members shall be respectful of the role of staff to advise based on political neutrality and objectivity and without undue influence from any individual Member or faction of the Council.

[How do politically partisan staff  (who are confirmed to exist at the City) “advise based on political neutrality”? Back to Page 25 of the Code.]

4. No Member shall maliciously or falsely impugn or injure the professional or ethical reputation or the prospects or practice of staff, and all Members shall show respect for the professional capacities of the staff of the City.

[Interesting how there’s no provision in the Council Code of Conduct that states, “No Member shall maliciously or falsely impugn or injure the professional or ethical reputation of members of the public…” Back to Page 25 of the Code.]

Commentary

Under the direction of the City Manager, staff serve the Council as a whole, and the combined interests of all Members as evidenced through the decisions of Council. Only Council as a whole has the authority to approve budget, policy, committee processes and other matters. Accordingly, Members shall direct requests outside of Council-approved budget, process or policy, to the Budget Committee or directly to Council.

In practical terms, there are distinct and specialized roles carried out by Council as a whole and by Councillors when performing their other roles. The key requirements of these roles include dealing with constituents and the general public, participating as standing committee members and as chairs of standing committees, and participating as Council representatives on agencies, boards, commissions and other bodies. Similarly, there are distinct and specialized roles expected of City staff in both the carrying out of their responsibilities and in dealing with the Council. Staff are expected to provide information to Members that they are entitled to. City staff are accountable to the City Manager who is accountable to City Council. Sometimes the line between staff duties and activities that are political in nature is not clear. Members of Council must respect the difference between the two in making requests of staff.

[First, regarding the statement, “Staff are expected to provide information to Members that they are entitled to” —I’m reminded immediately of several Corporate reports that were fudged, with information completely withheld.

As for the statement, “City staff are accountable to the City Manager who is accountable to City Council”, here’s what Mayor Hazel McCallion wrote in a December 20, 2006 email:

“It is true that City staff are not directly accountable to the citizens, since City staff are not elected. However, City Council is accountable to Mississauga residents for the actions of City staff.”  

I believed what the Mayor wrote me right up until I read the Code and its “City staff are accountable to the City Manager who is accountable to City Council”. Certainly, the Mayor chose to make me believe that City Council was accountable for the actions of City staff.

It’s only five years afterwards do I now realize, thanks to the Code, that the Mayor/Councillors are not free to hold staff accountable. The City Manager does that. (Or doesn’t.)

This window-dressing accountability trail was a major revelation inside the Code. It explains why City staff so often fail to comply to Corporate polices, procedures, guidelines, by-laws and even provincial legislation. Elected officials can’t investigate Staff directly! Back to Page 25 of the Code.]

Members of Council should expect a high quality of advice from staff based on political neutrality and objectivity irrespective of party politics, the loyalty of persons in power, or their personal opinions.

[Seriously. Does anyone believe that?! Time and time again, it’s been proven that the only consistently “high quality of advice from staff” comes from Mary Ellen Bench, the City Solicitor and that’s it! Back to Page 25 of the Code.]

The City’s Respectful Workplace policy applies to Members of Council. Staff and Members of Council are all entitled to be treated with respect and dignity in the workplace

[“Staff and Members of Council are all entitled to be treated with respect” —no matter how often they lie, deny and/or stonewall to those they profess to serve. Back to Page 25 of the Code.] 

25

END OF PAGE 25 OF THE CODE. PAGE 26 BEGINS

 

5. It is inappropriate for a Member to attempt to influence staff to circumvent normal processes in a matter, or overlook deficiencies in a file or application. It is also inappropriate for Members to involve themselves in matters of administration or departmental management which fall within the jurisdiction of the City Manager. Any such attempts should be reported to the Integrity Commissioner.

[Item 5’s second sentence, “It is also inappropriate for Members to involve themselves in matters of administration or departmental management which fall within the jurisdiction of the City Manager.” explains why neither the Mayor or any of her Councillors bothered to read a single document that I offered them through Freedom of Information. There was never any point because the Mayor and Councillors do not monitor/discipline staff! 

When you add the next sentence, “Any such attempts should be reported to the Integrity Commissioner.” then Rule No. 13’s Item 5 imposes an impenetrable barrier between City staff and Elected Officials so inclined to hold them accountable.

In Rule 12 Item 2 of the Code, we saw how Mayor/Councillors are protected from an investigation by the Integrity Commissioner:

2. Upon receipt of a complaint that relates to the City’s Respectful Workplace policy and involves a Member, the Integrity Commissioner shall forward the information subject to the complaint to Human Resources who will refer it for an independent investigation.

Meaning City Staff in Human Resources will conduct an”independent investigation” of the Mayor/Councillors and, according to the Code, “will provide guidance to an independent investigator” and of course, select that “independent investigator”. Thus City of Mississauga Elected Officials neatly avoid the Integrity Commissioner conducting an investigation.

While Rule 12 points out that, “Upon receipt of the findings of the independent investigator, the Integrity Commissioner shall make a determination on the application of this Code of Conduct and the merits of the investigation”, seriously, how is that possible without conducting an investigation of the “independent investigator”? (City of Mississauga hires retired staff as “consultants”. Or as Mayor McCallion observed at the January 23, 2012 Good Governance committee meeting, “defeated politicians” morph into “consultants” .)

It’s all perfectly circular: the Code’s Rule 12 ensures that the City’s Human Resources staff protect Mayor and Councillors from an investigation by the Integrity Commissioner and Rule 13 protects all City staff from any Mayor or Councillor who might want to hold an employee accountable. 

I wonder how many other Ontario municipal Council codes of conduct are this slick with illusion and window dressing….

Like the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct has huge hidey-holes in just the right places to create the illusion that the HMS MYTHissauga should spring fewer leaks “going forward”.

Nope.]

26

END OF PAGE 26 OF THE CODE.

HAZEL MCCALLION QUOTE ON STAFF NON-COMPLIANCE TO POLICIES (AUDIT COMMITTEE 090511) "There seems to be a complete disregard for policy." “There seems to be a complete disregard for policy”
—Hazel McCallion, May 11, 2009 Audit Committee

 

Signed, MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

MISSISSAUGAWATCH joins Wikipedia, Reddit, Big Brother Watch, Reporters Without Borders in BLACK OUT protest of SOPA and PIPA

January 18th, 2012  

MISSISSAUGAWATCH joins Wikipedia, Reddit, Big Brother Watch, Reporters Without Borders and numerous other sites in protest BLACK OUT.

from Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schandmaul

Imagine a World
Without Free Knowledge

For over a decade, we have spent millions of hours building the largest encyclopedia in human history. Right now, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open Internet. For 24 hours, to raise awareness, we are blacking out Wikipedia. Learn more.

Make your voice heard

We also join Big Brother Watch @bbw1984 11m

Big Brother Watch has voluntarily taken its website offline. Defend freedom and privacy online, stop #SOPA: bit.ly/wnwciV

SOPA Blackout

In conjunction with websites across the world, today Big Brother Watch has voluntarily shut-down its website.

We join Wikipedia, Reddit and numerous others in protest of SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act and PIPA, the Protect Intellectual Property Act, currently being considered in the United States.

Yes, it may appear a futile gesture. But we believe this is too important an issue to carry on as normal. Like many UK websites, several of our online services are run via the United States. As a result, our website falls under US law. It is grossly naive to think that legislation currently being considered in the US, which in the opinion of many constitutes a fundamental attack on freedom online, would not impact on businesses and individuals in the UK.

This is not just an issue for the US. This kind of regulation of the internet, involving state-sanctioned censorship and surveillance of all our online activity, is already being called for in the UK. This is the first salvo in the battle to protect freedom of speech and privacy online on both sides of the Atlantic.

These proposals would carry a huge economic cost, mark the death of privacy online and threaten free speech as we know it. Big Brother Watch will be at the forefront of the campaign against any similar proposals in the UK.

For these reasons, in the defence of free speech and privacy online, we have taken ourselves offline.

Normal service will resume at 5pm UK time.

 

MISSISSAUGAWATCH will also participate in this “futile gesture”.

 

Signed,
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

Click here to return to www.mississaugawatch.ca

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 9) CITIZEN ALERT! Avoid Kafkaesque Rule 12’s Respectful Workplace Policy.

January 16th, 2012  

This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations. Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications. Pages 21 through 22 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

 

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 23 begins)

Rule No. 11

Respect for the City and its By-laws and Policies:

1. Members shall encourage public respect for the City and its by-laws.

[Odd. Mississauga Council has admitted that the City doesn’t enforce its own Litter By-Law or Sign By-Law. And I’ve documented over five years worth of Mississauga Council looking the other way regarding City Staff’s chronic, callous disregard for Corporate policies, procedures, guidelines and, yes, even by-laws. All that happening while Hazel McCallion testified during the Inquiry hearings that (Staff are) very professional and they follow the policies very, very, very diligently.” I sure don’t respect that! Back to Page 23 of the Code.]

Commentary

A Councillor must not encourage disobedience of a City by-law in responding to a member of
the public, as this undermines confidence in the City and in the Rule of Law.

2. Members shall conduct themselves with appropriate decorum at all times.

[So. Does the Mississauga Council Code of Conduct define “decorum” anywhere in its 31 pages?… Nope. So here’s Oxford dictionary’s. Back to Page 23 of the Code.]

Commentary

As leaders in the community, Members are held to a higher standard of behaviour and conduct,
and accordingly their behaviour should be exemplary.)

[Oh my! Who wrote this? Seriously. Does anyone at the City really believe this?!  Back to Page 23 of the Code.]

 

23

END OF PAGE 23 OF THE CODE. PAGE 24 BEGINS

 

[CITIZEN ALERT! Rule No. 12 is a huge trap!  BEWARE the City of Mississauga’s Respectful Workplace Policy. You are advised to avoid filing a complaint with the Integrity Commissioner under Rule No. 12 and the City’s Respectful Workplace Policy! Use Rule No. 11 Item 2, “Members shall conduct themselves with appropriate decorum at all times” instead. Otherwise the Integrity Commissioner immediately hands over your complaint to City Staff at Human Resources and that’s one BIG BLACK UNACCOUNTABLE HOLE! Read on. ]

Rule No. 12

Respectful Workplace Policy:

1. Members are governed by the City’s Respectful Workplace policy. All Members have a
duty to treat members of the public, one another and staff appropriately and without abuse,
bullying or intimidation and to ensure that their work environment is free from
discrimination and harassment.

[Can’t argue with that, right?]

2. Upon receipt of a complaint that relates to the City’s Respectful Workplace policy and
involves a Member, the Integrity Commissioner shall forward the information subject to
the complaint to Human Resources who will refer it for an independent investigation.

[Now here’s the Trap… It’s likely that most citizen complaints filed against Elected Officials would fall under the City’s Respectful Workplace Policy. What Item 2 accomplishes is protecting Mayor/Councillors from an investigation conducted by the Integrity Commissioner.

I’ve been reporting for years that Elected Officials shield City Staff from accountability (they look the other way for them, deny for them, lie for them, stonewall for them). The Code requiring the Integrity Commissioner to take your complaint against a Council member’s “abuse, bullying or intimidation” and forward it to Human Resources to be handled by City Staff, is Staff’s way of protecting the same Elected Officials who protect them from accountability. Mayor/Councillors cover for City Staff in day-to-day operations and City Staff cover for Mayor/Councillors under the Code’s Rule No. 12, Item 2. It’s that simple.

I know the entire 2006-2010 Council is to blame for approving the Code with Rule No. 12 Item 2 in it. But my question is who is responsible for slipping that diversion, “Upon receipt of a complaint that relates to the City’s Respectful Workplace Policy and involves a Member, the Integrity Commissioner shall forward the information subject to the complaint to Human Resources who will refer it for an independent investigation” to avoid an investigation by the Integrity Commissioner in the first place?

And I recall back in March, 2011, the National Post reported that Councillor Sue McFadden filed a complaint against Hazel McCallion with the Integrity Commissioner.

(cut-and-paste)

By National Post March 10, 2011

Mississauga Councillor Sue McFadden has called on the city’s integrity commissioner to investigate Mayor Hazel McCallion’s “disdainful, exclusionary, rude and petulant” behaviour toward her at public events.

Her request, which sparked derision from the Mayor’s allies, is the latest sign of the deep divisions plaguing city council.

“The Mayor has been, and continues to be, publicly disrespectful, insulting and abusive toward me… to the point where I’m beginning to feel hampered in my ability to serve the residents of Ward 10,” Ms. McFadden stated in a letter filed Wednesday with integrity commissioner George Rust-D’Eye.

By March 13th, the National Post reported, McFadden withdraws request to probe McCallion’s alleged ‘bullying’. And why did McFadden pull her complaint? The National Post states, “But after consulting with integrity commissioner George Rust-D’Eye, Ms. McFadden determined the costs of such a probe would be excessive.” 

How very odd that the $625-an-hour Rust-D’Eye would say “the costs of such a probe would be excessive” given that the Code states that he “shall forward” McFadden’s complaint to Human Resources who will refer it for an “independent investigation” .   

Do not believe the statement, “Human Resources…will refer it for an independent investigation.” The City of Mississauga’s concept of  “independent investigation” simply means City Staff from a different department will do the investigating. For example, the City will call in Jamie Hillis and his Keystone Craps at City Security to conduct an “independent investigation”. Another example would be Corporate Services “independently investigating” Community Services.

Can you imagine? Citizens assume their complaint will be handled by the Integrity Commissioner for authentic resolution —instead George Rust-D’Eye hands off to City Staff and Human Resources who will (in the words of the Code) “refer it for an independent investigation.” And “an independent investigation” conducted by a Staff proven through Freedom of Information to have a chronic, callous disregard for policies, procedures, guidelines, by-laws and even provincial legislation  —and who’re only too happy to lie about their diligent compliance to same.

In addition, Freedom of Information has confirmed that Human Resources do not follow procedures when handling complaints from the public, believe it or not.

Please. Do not fall for the Code’s Rule No. 12, Respectful Workplace Policy “refer it for an independent investigation” fraud. Back to Page 24 of the Code.]

Commentary

It is the policy of the City of Mississauga that all persons be treated fairly in the workplace in
an environment free of discrimination or personal and sexual harassment.

The City of Mississauga’ Respectful Workplace policy ensures a safe and respectful workplace
environment and provides for the appropriate management of any occurrences of harassment
and discrimination as those terms are defined in the policy.

[Freedom of Information confirms that “provides for the appropriate management” means appropriate to the City and not what a reasonable person would regard as appropriate. Back to Page 24 of the Code.]

The City of Mississauga’s Respectful Workplace policy applies equally to members of staff
and Members of Council. It will provide guidance to an independent investigator when a
complaint is received involving a Member.

[CITIZEN ALERT! The City of Mississauga’s Respectful Workplace policy defines “independent investigator” as:

“Investigator” means the person(s) responsible for examining the circumstances of a complaint. Departmental and Corporate Human Resources Managers or Consultants are considered “Investigators”.

And “or Consultants” is deliberately-deceptive reinforcing what I’ve been saying for years: It’s not what the City of Mississauga tells you that you need to know —it’s what they don’t. Fact is, “or Consultants” should read, “or Consultants selected by Departmental and Corporate Human Resources Managers”!

Repeat. The Council Code handing off all Respectful Workplace policy complaints to Human Resources was intentional. Deliberately-contrived to shield Elected Officials from an investigation by the Integrity Commissioner —a payback —just as elected officials shield City Staff from accountability.

And yes, I stand by that allegation. And yes. At the City of Mississauga, ass-covering really is that bad (although the City calls “ass-covering“, “risk management”). Back to Page 24 of the Code.]

3. Upon receipt of the findings of the independent investigator, the Integrity Commissioner
shall make a determination on the application of this Code of Conduct and the merits of the
investigation respecting the conduct of the Member subject to the complaint. The findings
of the Integrity Commissioner shall be reported to City Council as per the normal
procedure respecting such matters.

[Notice how Item 3 refers to “independent investigator” and leaves readers inferring that “independent investigator” means what a reasonable person defines as “independent investigator”. Like I said, it’s what the City doesn’t tell you…

So be smart and protect yourself!

You now know that “independent investigator” in this Code means STAFF:  “Departmental and Corporate Human Resources Managers or Consultants selected by Departmental and Corporate Human Resources Managers.”

For the record, many of the “Consultants” the City hires are just their own retired Staff now hiring themselves out as “Consultants” (and double-dipping!)

As for the Code’s claim that “Upon receipt of the findings of the independent investigator, the Integrity Commissioner shall make a determination on…the merits of the investigation”, now how do you suppose he’d do that in a municipal mutual-ass-covering-corporate-climate of Lie, Deny, Stonewall? Back to Page 24 of the Code.]

4. The Ontario Human Rights Code applies in addition to the City’s Respectful Workplace
policy.

[If you have a human rights complaint file your complaint directly there, with the Province —especially since the McCallion-controlled “Stop the Judicial Inquiry-Friends of Hazel” Councillor-Puppet-Show will be picking/hiring their own “integrity commissioner” to “investigate” them in the upcoming months.

24

END OF PAGE 24 OF THE CODE.

HAZEL MCCALLION QUOTE ON STAFF NON-COMPLIANCE TO POLICIES (AUDIT COMMITTEE 090511) "There seems to be a complete disregard for policy."
“There seems to be a complete disregard for policy” 

—Hazel McCallion, May 11, 2009 Audit Committee

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 8) Conduct at Meetings/When Representing the City and Media Communications

January 14th, 2012  

This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations.   Pages 19 through 20 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

 

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 21 begins)

Rule No. 9

Conduct of Council at Committee Meetings and When Representing the City:

1. Members shall conduct themselves at Council and committee meetings with decorum in
accordance with the provisions of the Council Procedure By-law.

[To read the City of Mississauga’s  COUNCIL PROCEDURE BY-LAW 421-03 at the City’s website, please click here. Back to Page 21 of the Code.]

Commentary

A Member recognizes the importance of cooperation and strives to create an atmosphere
during Council and committee meetings that is conducive to solving the issues before Council,
listening to various points of view and using respectful language and behaviour in relation to
all of those in attendance.

2. Members shall endeavour to conduct and convey Council business and all their duties in an
open and transparent manner other than for those decisions which by virtue of legislation
are authorized to be dealt with in a confidential manner in closed session, and in so doing,
allow the public to view the process and rationale which was used to reach decisions and
the reasons for taking certain actions.

[There’s that reference to “open and transparent manner” again.  I’m forever reminded of the most outrageous comment ever to refer to “open”:  Councillor Pat Saito, Chair (Mississauga Council meeting, December 13, 2006). In her Christmas address that year, Saito warbled,  “And thank you always to Cable 10 for their ongoing volunteer support in making sure that we have a very open and accountable Council. We heard throughout the campaign that this Council was not open, was not accountable, and all those people running were going to make it open and accountable. And I don’t know of any Council that’s as open and accountable as we are.” 

Imagine Saito believing that ROGERS Cable 10 manager and McCallion puppet, Jake Dheer made sure that Mississauga had “a very open and accountable Council“. Pat Saito knows that Mississauga Council is no more accountable than any other municipal council in Ontario. Accountable just once at the voting booth every four years! And that’s it! Back to Page 21 of the Code.]

Commentary

Various statutes, the Council Procedure By-law and decisions by courts and quasi-judicial
tribunals including the Information and Privacy Commission, establish when City Council can
discuss issues in closed session. Transparency requires that Council apply these rules
narrowly so as to best ensure that decisions are held in public session as often as possible.
Unless prohibited by law, Members should clearly identify to the public how a decision was
reached and the rationale for so doing.

[As I keep saying, it’s what Mississauga doesn’t tell you that you need to know. While it’s true that “[v]arious statutes…establish when City Council can discuss issues in closed session”, the Code fails to inform citizens about Bill 130 Amendments to the Municipal Act. Back in December, 2006, true to form, Mississauga Council blocked citizens’ access to closed meeting investigations conducted by the Ontario Ombudsman. Rather, Councillor Pat “I don’t know of any Council that’s as open and accountable as we are” Saito and her Council-colleagues avoided authentic oversight and hired Local Authority Services, a subsidiary corporation of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario to “investigate” closed meeting complaints.

The City of Mississauga hiring its own investigator worked its magic. To this day, no citizen has ever complained about inappropriate in-camera sessions. Back to Page 21 of the Code.]

3. Members shall make every effort to participate diligently in the activities of the
committees, agencies, boards, commissions and advisory committees to which they are
appointed by the City or by virtue of being an elected official.

[PUT A STAR BESIDE THIS ONE! Notice the statement, “Members shall make every effort to participate diligently”? What reasonable person would not agree to “make every effort to participate diligently”? Next question. Think about this: how would a reasonable person define “diligently”? Well, it’s not what you think… Back to Page 21 of the Code.]

Commentary

Individual Members are appointed to committees, agencies, boards and commissions based on
their various backgrounds and their ability to contribute to matters before them, bringing their
expertise and experience.

4. Given that Council and committee meetings are scheduled far in advance to accommodate
the many activities of elected office of a Member, to participate diligently means that a
Member shall not be absent from Council or committee meetings, or from those of
agencies, boards and commissions to which they are appointed by virtue of their status as a
Member, without reasonable justification (for example, illness of the Member, family
circumstance, Regional business) for more than three consecutive scheduled meetings or
on a regular basis.

[That’s right. Item 3 stated, “Members shall make every effort to participate diligently in the activities of the committees” and then we find out that the Council Code defines diligently as nothing more than “a Member shall not be absent from Council or committee meetings etc etc etc  for more than three consecutive scheduled meetings or on a regular basis.”

And here’s the despicable part. The statement that Council Members “are held to a higher standard of behaviour and conduct” appears three times in this Code. And what is the Code’s “higher standard” definition for “participate diligently”? “shall not be absent.. for more than three consecutive scheduled meetings or on a regular basis.”

That’s what I mean by useless paper policies. Just like we discovered about the worthless Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. Citizens are told that “Members shall make every effort to participate diligently” and then are left to assume that’s the same “diligent” in the dictionary — “diligent: characterized by steady, earnest, and energetic effort : painstaking <a diligent worker>”  Nope!

All “diligent” means in this Code is, Members are expected to warm up a black leather chair “on a regular basis”! Back to Page 21 of the Code.]

21

END OF PAGE 21 OF THE CODE. PAGE 22 BEGINS

 

Rule No. 10

Media Communications:

1. Members of Council will accurately communicate the decisions of Mississauga City
Council, even if they disagree with the majority decision of Council, and by so doing
affirm the respect for and integrity in the decision-making processes of Council.

[There’s something absolutely perverse in creating the expectation that “Members of Council will accurately communicate” in a municipality that is as dependent as Mississauga is on misinforming and manipulating the public! Item 1’s “will accurately communicate” is just so fraudulent! Back to Page 22 of the Code.]

2. Members of Council will keep confidential information confidential, until such time as the
matter can properly be made public.

Recognize Item 2 as the Corporate gag order.  “[U]ntil such time as the matter can properly be made public” really means “until such time as the matter has been spun, kneaded and cooked to perfection by our Communications Department. Back to Page 22 of the Code.]

Commentary

A Member may state that he/she did not support a decision, or voted against the decision. A
Member should refrain from making disparaging comments about other Members of Council
or about Council’s processes and decisions.

[“should refrain from making disparaging comments about other Members of Council or about Council’s processes and decisions”… after all, it’s not in the interests of the City for the public to learn the Truth! Back to Page 22 of the Code.]

When communicating with the media, a Member should at all times refrain from speculating
or reflecting upon the motives of other Members in respect of their actions as a Member of
Council.

[Good Grief! Hazel McCallion has broken the “When communicating with the media, a Member should at all times refrain from speculating or reflecting upon the motives of other Members” rule about a dozen times since the Code went into effect in December 2010—with Councillors Mahoney and Saito tied as a distant second. Back to Page 22 of the Code.]

While openness in government is critical, governments also must respect confidentiality when
a matter must remain, at least for a period of time, confidential. Breaches of confidentiality by
Members erodes public confidence.

[“Breaches of confidentiality by Members erodes public confidence.” And lying that there aren’t breaches in confidentially erodes public confidence even more.]

22

END OF PAGE 22 OF THE CODE.

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 7) Improper Use of Influence and Business Relations.

January 14th, 2012  

Back to the Mississauga Council Code of Conduct. This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns. Pages 16 through 18 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

 

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 19 begins)

Rule No. 7

Improper Use of Influence:

1. No member shall use the influence of his or her office for any purpose other than for the
exercise of his/her official duties.

Commentary

Examples of prohibited conduct are the use of one’s status as a Member of Council to
improperly influence the decision of another person to the private advantage of oneself, or
one’s Family Member, or friends. This would include attempts to secure preferential treatment
beyond activities in which Members normally engage on behalf of their constituents as part of
their official duties. Also prohibited is the holding out of the prospect or promise of a future
advantage through a Member’s supposed influence within Council in return for present actions
or inaction.

[A specific example of “prohibited conduct are the use of one’s status as a Member of Council to improperly influence the decision of another person to the private advantage of oneself, or one’s Family Member, or friends” would be Hazel McCallion pulling David (former city manager, OMERS Board of Director and trustee of the McCallion family trust) O’Brien aside at a golf tournament. Then (according to O’Brien’s testimony), McCallion “essentially said, you know, there are issues, and you should know about those issues.” And O’Brien, McCallion’s Mr. Fixit, hopped to it.  Back to Page 19 of the Code.]

2. Pursuant to corporate policy, the City Manager and Chief Administrative Officer directs
City Commissioners, who in turn direct City staff. City Council and not individual
Members of Council appropriately give direction to the City administration.

[Anyone out there really believe that if Hazel McCallion directed a City Commissioner to “Jump!”, they’d respond with “Sorry Madam Mayor, but a reminder that Rule 7 of the Code states that only the City Manager can direct me.” Seriously. Anyone out there think that would ever happen? Back to Page 19 of the Code.]

 

19

END OF PAGE 19 OF THE CODE. PAGE 20 BEGINS

 

Rule No. 8

Business Relations:

1. No Member shall allow the prospect of his/her future employment by a person or entity to
affect the performance of his/her duties to the City, detrimentally or otherwise.

[I’ve read this a half-dozen times and I still don’t get “or otherwise”?! “or otherwise”? WTF?! … Back to Page 20 of the Code.]

2. No Member shall borrow money from any person who regularly does business with the
City unless such person is an institution or company whose shares are publically traded
and who is regularly in the business of lending money, such as a credit union.

3. No Member shall act as a paid agent before Council or a committee of Council or any
agency, board or committee of the City.

4. No Member shall refer a third party to a person, partnership or corporation in exchange for
payment or other personal benefit.

 

20

END OF PAGE 20 OF THE CODE.

 

Have to say that all I do for the Code‘s Rule No. 8 Business Relations is think about what Justice Cunningham wrote and Ronnie Hawkins said:

“A review of the interaction between the Mayor and various players in relation to the WCD deal suggests that those
who are fortunate enough to enjoy friendships with the Mayor have derived benefits from those relationships.”

Justice J. Douglas Cunningham
Mississauga Judicial Inquiry Report Executive Summary

 and

“Folks, I’d like to tell you that it’s an honour to be here meetin’ all you old timers again. Most of you were going to jail before she took over. Now you’re all rich. Whatta girl!”

Ronnie Hawkins quote about Hazel McCallion,

 

And some silly Council Code of Conduct is going to change this?

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 6) Use of City Staff, Property, Services etc –and Election Campaigns

January 13th, 2012  

Back to the Mississauga Council Code of Conduct. This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?!  Pages 14 through 15 of the Code.

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

 

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 16 begins)


Rule No. 5

Use of City Staff, Property, Services and Other Resources:

1. No Member shall use for personal purposes any City staff services, property, equipment,
services, supplies, websites, webboards, or other City-owned materials, other than for
purposes connected with the discharge of City duties.

2. No Member shall obtain personal financial gain from the use or sale of City-developed
intellectual property (for example, inventions, creative writings and drawings), computer
programs, technical innovations or any other item capable of being patented. Members
acknowledge and do not dispute that all such property remains exclusively that of the City
of Mississauga.

3. No Member shall use information gained in the execution of his or her duties that is not
available to the general public, for any purposes other than his or her official duties.

[Item 3’s “shall use information gained” is easily contravened (especially in the Planning Department) and impossible to monitor unless you latch a video surveillance camera to each potential employee-perp. As I’ve stated repeatedly, there isn’t a Corporate policy, by-law, guideline that I’ve examined that City Staff have not violated. Back to Page 16 of the Code.]

Commentary

Members, by virtue of their position, have access to a wide variety of property, equipment,
services and supplies to assist them in the conduct of their City duties as public officials.
While most of this property is provided within the confines of their office, much of it is
transportable or may be provided for home use, given the nature of the demands placed on
Members in carrying out their duties and in recognition of the fact that the City does not
provide constituency offices to Members of Council. Members are held to a higher standard
of behaviour and conduct and therefore should not use such property for any purpose other
than for carrying out their official duties. For clarity, this Rule is intended to prohibit the use
of City resources for purposes such as running a home business. It is not intended to prohibit
occasional personal use, but it should be subject to practical limitations.

[ “Members are held to a higher standard of behaviour and conduct”, oh please! Back to Page 16 of the Code.]

Careful attention should be given to the provisions of the City’s Elected Officials’ Expenses
policy which identifies approvable allowable expenses. During election campaigns, the
provisions of rules 6 and 7 will apply.

4. No Member shall use the services of City staff, or make requests for document or
information from City staff, unless such information is required for the purpose of carrying
out their duties as public officials.

16

END OF PAGE 16 OF THE CODE. PAGE 17 BEGINS

 

Rule No. 6

Election Campaigns:

1. Members are required to follow the provisions of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and
Members are accountable under the provisions of that statute.

Commentary

Staff should not interpret or provide advice to Members regarding the requirements placed on
candidates for municipal office.

2. No Member shall use the facilities, equipment, supplies, services or other resources of the
City (including Councillor newsletters and individual websites linked through the City’s
website) for any election campaign or campaign-related activities.

a) Despite the foregoing, Members may choose to use their cell phone or other such
equipment and may do so by advising the Integrity Commissioner in writing in
advance and by reimbursing the City for all related expenses associated with such use.

b) Despite the foregoing, Members are allowed to place materials on the City’s election
website, http://www2.mississauga.ca/vote2010/, that is available and authorized for use
by all candidates for municipal and school board office.

3. In a municipal election year, commencing on June 30th until the date of the election,
Members may not publish Councillor newsletters or distribute them in municipal facilities.
All newsletters distributed through the mail must be post-marked by no later than June 30th
in an election year.

4. In a municipal election year, commencing on Nomination Day until the date of the
election, no Member or other candidate for elected office, may book directly or indirectly,
any facility for any purpose that might be perceived as an election campaign purpose if that
facility is being used as a polling station.

Commentary

The restriction on booking facilities ensures election-related functions, or those that could
appear to be election-related, will not occur at any time there is an advance or regular poll at
the facility. The need to set up in advance means that election night parties cannot be held in
the same facilities that polling stations are located in. Members should not authorize any event
that could be perceived as the City providing them with an advantage over other candidates.

[Hazel McCallion’s October 25, 2010 victory party was held at Vic Johnson Arena the same day it was a polling station. I know because I voted there. Back to Page 16 of the Code.]

It is the personal responsibility of Members to ensure that any use of facilities or the services
of municipal staff are carried out in accordance with applicable legislation. Staff are not
responsible for monitoring and advising Members or any other candidates, in this regard.

17

END OF PAGE 17 OF THE CODE. PAGE 18 BEGINS

 

5. Members shall be respectful of the role of the City Clerk in managing the municipal
election process and meeting all statutory requirements in respect thereof. The Clerk must
ensure all candidates are treated equally and no candidate for elected office should
interfere with how the Clerk carries out these duties.

Commentary

The Municipal Elections Act, 1996 clearly states that it is the responsibility of the City Clerk to
conduct the election and take all necessary actions to ensure municipal elections meet all
statutory requirements.

6. No Members shall use the services of persons for campaign related activities during hours
in which those persons receive any compensation from the City.

18

END OF PAGE 18 OF THE CODE.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

“Rick Mercer’s rants damaging anti-graffiti cause: Mississauga councillor” (National Post). “Councillor Katie Mahoney damaging brain cells.” (MISSISSAUGAWATCH)

January 12th, 2012  

Here I was planning on working through the Mississauga Council Code of Conduct and vowing that nothing would distract me from that goal. And what happens?

Yet another stupidity abominated out of Mississauga Council!

(Cut-and-paste, from the National Post)

Rick Mercer’s rants damaging anti-graffiti cause: Mississauga councillor

THE RICK MERCER REPORT/CBC

THE RICK MERCER REPORT/CBC

  Jan 12, 2012 – 12:32 AM ET

Mississauga is grappling with a rise in graffiti on city property, and one councillor blames an unlikely culprit: CBC comedian Rick Mercer.

Councillor Katie Mahoney says Mr. Mercer’s famous rants along Toronto’s graffiti alley, an area specially designated for that use, has damaged the anti-graffiti cause.

“Rick Mercer needs to know that he’s not doing anybody any good with his rants down the graffiti-tagged alley,” Ms. Mahoney fumed during a city council meeting Wednesday, suggesting the Mercer rants may have unintentionally encouraged the spread of graffiti throughout Canada.

“…suggesting the Mercer rants may have unintentionally encouraged the spread of graffiti throughout Canada.” Ahhh yes… Councillor Katie Mahoney —truly a master at avoiding the Science of Governance. And why not? Bullshit Baffles Brains.

The rest of Megan O’Toole’s article on Mississauga Council’s debate on graffiti is just a painful eyeful. Click here to read to read it if you must.

The Mississauga News also reported on Council’s graffiti debate with the article, “Residents want security cameras: Councillor”.

(Cut-and-paste)

During a lengthy discussion today at General Committee about a staff report on vandalism and graffiti in municipal parks, Iannicca said residents and merchants have told him they’d welcome surveillance cameras.

He doesn’t necessarily agree, though, noting the Dundas/Hurontario Sts. area in Cooksville has one of the lowest occurrence rates of graffiti in Mississauga likely due to the number of people frequenting the area.

“I don’t think you can go 10 seconds … without (seeing someone) and people don’t normally commit crimes in the public realm,” said Iannicca. “Maybe there’s a lesson in all that.”

Psst. The fact is, the Dundas/Hurontario Sts. area in Cooksville actually has one of the highest occurrence rates of graffiti in Mississauga! That’s why I made it one of my study sites.

Back to the Mississauga News. (Cut-and-paste)

“The issue of surveillance cameras in the public realm is something I’ve always thought of as rather odious,” said Iannicca. “There’s just something about the state, that’s us, having cameras in the public realm.

Actually,there’s nothing wrong with security cameras —they’re an irreplaceable tool for law enforcement. What’s odious is having unaccountable quasi-fascist lying c**ts like City of Mississauga Corporate Security operating those security cameras and then fabricating Corporate Reports to Council. And that’s not allegation, that’s fact.

Back to the Mississauga News:

“And, yet, you have to hear what your constituents are telling you and many are saying, ‘Nando, wouldn’t Hwy. 5 and 10 be the logical place to put them?'” he continued. “I’m not telling you I agree or disagree with it, but it’s certainly a discussion worth having.”

Psst! There’s been a Pelco PTZ video surveillance camera right at the intersection of 5 and 10 since at least October 2008.

Actually, I’d love to see the City of Mississauga install a dozen Pelco PTZs at 5 and 10. Two dozen! Knock themselves out! Five dozen! It’d be FUN to document how the cams won’t deter graffiti!

Have to laugh at yet more calls for more video surveillance cameras!

Reminder of an August 25, 2009 article, Mississauga News, “Vandals damage golf course”. The article begins:

Peel Regional Police are on the hunt for the vandals who broke into Mississauga’s BraeBen Golf Course last night and trashed the place.

Officers from the 11 Division Criminal Investigation Bureau received a call from golf course staff just after 6:30 a.m. today reporting the crime.

Notice the City of Mississauga reported the vandalism at “6:30 a.m”? Psst! Vandals and taggers do their work at NIGHT!

Next. I followed up on the BraeBen Golf Course vandalism. I videotaped no fewer than three outside Pelco PTZs (Pan Tilt Zoom) on the BraeBen Golf Course and managed to confirm that there were five cams inside the clubhouse!

Far as I know the City never did catch the BraeBen Golf Course vandals who, to quote the Mississauga News, “trashed the place”.

Just for the record, here’s video of the BraeBen Golf Course surveillance cameras back in 2009 violating the Guidelines for the Use of Video Surveillance Cameras in Public Places that City of Mississauga Corporate Security Manager, Jamie Hillis lied about complying with.

Hazel McCallion letter reveals MAJOR Root of Youth Violence –Our lying municipalities (9:29 min)

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

As for how installing more video surveillance cameras will deter vandalism and graffiti?…

Here’s video I posted to YouTube back in May 16, 2010 showing six different video surveillance cameras FAILING to deter graffiti. Including by the way, the sophisticated video surveillance camera installed high atop a utility pole at the corner of Cooksville’s 5 and 10.

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE FAIL! (GRAFFITI defeats 6 VIDEO SURVEILLANCE cams in Mississauga, Ontario)  (1:37 min)

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

And video uploaded April 23, 2010 to condemn Mississauga Councillor Pat Saito’s proclamation about the “absolutely phenomenal” progress of her Peel Youth Violence Prevention Network.

GRAFFITI MISSISSAUGA: WARNING! HIGHLY OFFENSIVE MATERIAL (but not as offensive as the politicians) (3:55 min)

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

And who can forget the June 30, 2009 Mississauga News article, “Youth Plan ready for implementation” that reported:

The mayor also pointed out that only an estimated two per cent of young people frequently get into trouble.

“We should concentrate on the 98 per cent that are good youth,” she said.

Keep stockin’ up on those video surveillance cameras for the 2 per cent you don’t give a shit about, Hazel!

GRAFFITI MISSISSAUGA and the (delusional) PEEL YOUTH VIOLENCE PREVENTION

 

Last. This hour and a half video is the best documentary I’ve ever seen on graffiti. “Bomb It” is at times tough to watch.

The Hate is Shocking. Feral. But I’m convinced that it is a glimpse into the Future.

Bomb It The Movie FULL (1.30 hours)

(Click here to go directly to “BOMB IT” on YouTube)

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

UPDATE: January 13, 2012. The Mississauga Graffiti Debate in the news

MetroNews Canada   Councillor can’t tag this on Mercer

Rick Mercer is seen in a screen grab delivering one of his famous TV
rants filmed in a graffiti-tagged laneway.
TORSTAR NEWS SERVICE
Published: January 13, 2012 5:55 a.m.
Last modified: January 12, 2012 10:19 p.m.

Rick Mercer is firing back at a Mississauga city councillor who says the comedian’s famous rants along Toronto’s Graffiti Alley have hampered the suburb’s anti-graffiti efforts.

“My rants are shot in an artist-friendly laneway. These are fabulous, vibrant, constantly-changing works of art,” Mercer wrote in an email to the Star. “I would wager many of those artists will be remembered long after the good councillor, who’s (sic) name escapes me.”

At a Mississauga city council meeting Wednesday, Councillor Katie Mahoney suggested the graffiti backdrop of Mercer’s “Rant,” a popular segment on his long-running CBC Television program, Rick Mercer Report, glorifies vandalism.

“Rick Mercer needs to know that he’s not doing anybody any good with his rants down the graffiti-tagged alley,” she said. “That’s not helping the cause across the country.”

In an interview with the Star on Thursday, Mahoney said she stands by her original remarks, but emphasized that they were “certainly no knock against Rick Mercer at all.”

“My concern is that this showing of Graffiti Alley … doesn’t help in our efforts to combat illegal graffiti,” she said.

 

Graffiti Alley

  • Mahoney added that she wasn’t aware until after she made her comments that Graffiti Alley, located near Queen St. W. and Spadina Ave., is exempt from any graffiti bylaw and sanctioned as an area of “municipal significance” by Toronto city hall.
  • For his part, Mercer said he doesn’t condone vandalism or tagging.
 Note. Mercer saying, “My rants are shot in an artist-friendly laneway” means the art is not graffiti, but rather graffiti-style permission walls.

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy now online as a companion piece to the City’s Council Code of Conduct.

January 11th, 2012  

Yesterday’s blog, Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?! dealt with Rule No 4 of the City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct.

Rule No 4, Item 2 of the Code made reference to a Corporate Policy that I’d never heard of before —the City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy.

The City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy appears nowhere online, so we figured that we needed to make it accessible to the public before going on to Rule No 5.

We offer the Policy here in its entirety —making it searchable and “cut-and-pastable”.  Please click here for the City of Mississauga’s Elected Officials’ Records policy pdf file kindly provided by the City Clerk’s office.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Corporate
Policy and
Procedure
[Logo of Corporation of City Of Mississauga] Policy No. 03-02-09
Page 1 of 3
Effective Date  2008 02 13
Supersedes

 TAB:  CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION
 SECTION:  RECORDS MANAGEMENT
 SUBJECT:  ELECTED OFFICIALS’ RECORDS

POLICY STATEMENT Records held by City of Mississauga elected officials will be identified and dealt with in accordance with this policy.
PURPOSE The City of Mississauga differentiates between official civic records held by elected officials and constituency records. The purpose of this policy is to define “official” and “constituency” records and to outline the procedures for dealing with these records.
SCOPE This policy applies to all records held by City of Mississauga elected officials.
DEFINITIONS “Constituency Record” means a Record which relates to a member of Council acting in the capacity of an elected representative of a constituent and relates to the member’s mandate and function as an elected representative only.”Non-Record Material” means material that is not included in the scope of Official Records and that has no documentary value to the City (e.g. convenience copies, reference material, publications).”Official Record” means an original Record which is either created or received by a department, division or officer of the City, related to a business function of the City.”Record” means any record of information regardless of format (i.e. paper, microfilm, electronic mail, documents or systems).

Corporate
Policy and
Procedure
[Logo of Corporation of City Of Mississauga] Policy No. 03-02-09
Page 2 of 3
Effective Date 2008 02 13
Supersedes

OFFICIAL RECORDS Official Records generally relate to a business function of the City, and include:
•    any Record received or created by an elected official for inclusion in committee meeting agendas;
•    any Record received or created by an elected official acting in the capacity as a Committee Chair, including correspondence;
•    any Record received or created by an elected official acting in the capacity of a representative of the City;
•    the Mayor’s records that relate to mayoral duties, since the Mayor, as Head of Council is considered an “officer” of the City;
•    any Record regarding office space allocation, supplies, equipment, and services;
•    any Record related to expenses paid by the City, including reimbursements to the elected official;
•    any Record related to the elected official’s staff, if kept by the particular elected official;
•    operating procedures-and manuals; and
•    any Constituency Records that have been transmitted to City staff for action by the business unit or for information purposes.

Official Records will be deemed to be within the City’s custody or control.

 CONSTITUENCY RECORDS  Constituency Records relate to issues the elected official is dealing with involving one or more members of the public and may include:
•    personal papers;
•    mailing lists;
•    the elected official’s own records on any Committee or Board;
•    subject files;
•    Non-Record Material.

Corporate
Policy and
Procedure
[Logo of Corporation of City Of Mississauga] Policy No. 03-02-09
Page 3 of 3
Effective Date 2008 02 13
Supersedes

Constituency Records are generally deemed not to be within the City’s custody or control and may be dealt with by each elected official as he or she chooses. However, any Constituency Record that is transmitted to City staff for action by a business unit, or for information purposes, is deemed to be within the City’s custody or control and will be treated as an Official Record.
REFERENCE: GC-0059-2008 – 2008 02 13
LAST REVIEW DATE: May, 2011
CONTACT: For more information, contact the Office of the City Clerk, Corporate Services Department.

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 5) WTF?! “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act”?!

January 10th, 2012  

This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government”  Pages 11 through 13 of the Code.

Again, for the record, my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.


The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct.

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 14 begins)


Rule No. 4

Confidential Information:

Confidential Information includes information in the possession of, or received in confidence
by, the City of Mississauga that the City is either prohibited from disclosing, or is required to
refuse to disclose, under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
(“MFIPPA”)
, or any other legislation.

[Reminder of what Mayor Hazel McCallion told the Traditional Media in an April 14, 2010 scrum:

“Well, I don’t think there’s —today, I don’t think there’s nothing confidential. There’s absolutely nothing confidential. Freedom of Information —you can get anything you want.”

Here it is, almost two years later and I still don’t know if McCallion’s, “There’s absolutely nothing confidential. Freedom of Information —you can get anything you want.” was a lie or just another example of how little she knows about provincial legislation and her own City’s Corporate policies. Back to Page 14 of the Code.]

MFIPPA restricts or prohibits disclosure of information received in confidence from third
parties of a corporate, commercial, scientific or technical nature, information that is personal,
and information that is subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Municipal Act, 2001 allows information that concerns personnel, labour relations,
litigation, property acquisitions and security of the property of the City or a local board, and
matters authorized in other legislation including MFIPPA, to remain confidential. For the
purposes of the Code of Conduct, “confidential information” includes this type of information.

1. As elected officials, Members of Council will receive highly sensitive and confidential
information concerning residents who need their assistance. This is consistent with the
nature of the Members’ duties. In accordance with the City’s Elected Officials’ Records
policy, Councillor constituency records are at all times under the control of the Member
and are not subject to any municipal disclosure requirements.

2. The following are examples of the types of information that a Member of Council must
keep confidential:

• items under litigation, negotiation, or personnel matters;
• information that infringes on the rights of others (e.g. sources of complaints where the
identity of a complainant is given in confidence);
• price schedules in contract tender or request for proposal submissions if so specified;
• information deemed to be “personal information” under the Municipal Conflict of
Interest Act; and

[The City of Mississauga’s Code of Conduct has gone through dozens of readings since a draft code first appeared in June, 2010. Yet there’s clearly a mistake. The bullet, “• information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act” should read, “• information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Privacy Act”.

Fact is, there are only two instances of the word “personal” in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with both referring to “personal financial gain”. And the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act doesn’t contain the word “information” at all.

That said, should a citizen wish to file a privacy complaint with the Integrity Commissioner, don’t be deterred believing that the City’s erroneous statement, “information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act” prevents you. The province defines “personal information” through its Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and all Ontario municipalities must comply. Back to Page 14 of the Code.]

• statistical data required by law not to be released (e.g. certain census or assessment
data)

3. Where it is clear that a communication was not made in a confidential manner (i.e. copied
to others, or made in the presence of others) or the manner of communication undermines
the validity of labelling it “Confidential”, such communication will not be given any
higher level of confidentiality than any other communication. The words “Privilege”,
“Confidential” or “Private” will not be understood to preclude the appropriate sharing of
the communication for the limited purpose of reviewing, responding or looking into the
subject-matter of the communication.

[CITIZEN ALERT! From bitter experience I’ve learned that every Corporate Report that I’ve examined or taken for a “test drive” has at least one massive loophole from which City Staff or Elected Officials can hide or seek exemption. Now’s the time to marvel at Item 3’s 85 meticulously-selected words that really mean, “Screw the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, WE DECIDE WHAT’S CONFIDENTIAL OR NOT! Back to Page 14 of the Code.]

14

END OF PAGE 14 OF THE CODE. PAGE 15 BEGINS

 

4. Under the Council Procedure By-law, a matter that has been discussed at an in-camera
(closed) meeting remains confidential, until such time as a condition renders the matter
public.

a. No Member shall disclose the content of any such matter, or the substance of
deliberations, of the in-camera meeting until the Council or Committee discusses the
information at a meeting that is open to the public or releases the information to the
public.

b. No Member shall disclose or release by any means to any member of the public, any
confidential information acquired by virtue of their office, in either oral or written
form, except where required by law or authorized by Council to do so.

c. No Member shall use confidential information for personal or private gain, or for the
gain of relatives or any person or corporation. For example, no Member should
directly or indirectly benefit, or aid others to benefit, from knowledge respecting
bidding on the sale of City property or assets.

d. Members of Council should not access or attempt to gain access to confidential
information in the custody of the City unless it is necessary for the performance of their
duties and is not prohibited by Council policy.

 

15

END OF PAGE 15 OF THE CODE.

 

 

Well, given that Rule No. 4 Confidential Information, contained the City of Mississauga’s 85-word caveat:

“3. Where it is clear that a communication was not made in a confidential manner (i.e. copied to others, or made in the presence of others) or the manner of communication undermines the validity of labelling it “Confidential”, such communication will not be given any higher level of confidentiality than any other communication. The words “Privilege”, “Confidential” or “Private” will not be understood to preclude the appropriate sharing of the communication for the limited purpose of reviewing, responding or looking into the subject-matter of the communication.”

citizens will find the Code’s Rule No. 4‘s, “such communication will not be given any higher level of confidentiality than any other communication” to be classic MYTHissaugaspeak: wordsmithed to lead the public into thinking one thing when the reality is quite the opposite.

And checking the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s report, “UPDATING THE ETHICAL INFRASTRUCTURE” section on the Council Code of Conduct, there’s no mention of the Code’s Rule No. 4 Confidential Information. Clearly confidentiality wasn’t part of the Inquiry’s mandate. Oh well…

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

UPDATE: January 11, 2012. The following email was sent to the Mayor, the City Solicitor and cc’d to the City Clerk for inclusion in the next Council agenda.

From: MISSISSAUGA WATCH <mississauga_watch@yahoo.com>
To: MAYOR <mayor@mississauga.ca>
Cc: Mary Ellen Bench; Crystal Gree>; “mississauga_watch@yahoo.com” <mississauga_watch@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:40 PM
Subject: Error in the Mississauga Council Code of Conduct Page 14

[Hi Ms. Greer. I ask that you include this email in the January 18, 2012 Council agenda/minutes. Thanks].Hi Madam Mayor,Please refer to the Council Code of Conduct’s Rule No. 4.Regarding Confidential Information it states:

The Municipal Act, 2001 allows information that concerns personnel, labour relations,
litigation, property acquisitions and security of the property of the City or a local board, and
matters authorized in other legislation including MFIPPA, to remain confidential. For the
purposes of the Code of Conduct, “confidential information” includes this type of information.
• items under litigation, negotiation, or personnel matters;
• information that infringes on the rights of others (e.g. sources of complaints where the
identity of a complainant is given in confidence);
• price schedules in contract tender or request for proposal submissions if so specified;
• information deemed to be “personal information” under the Municipal Conflict of
Interest Act; and

Bullet 4 refers to “personal information” as defined by the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act does not contain the word, “information” and “personal” appears just twice in the Act, with both references being to “personal financial gain” and not personal/confidential information.

Bullet 4 should read,”information deemed to be ‘personal information’ under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; and”

Last, please note that I plan to attend and videotape the January 23, 2012 Governance Committee meeting in Room A at 1:00 pm and all subsequent meetings for a historical record.

Thanks,

Ursula
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 4) “providing persons…with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government”

January 9th, 2012  

This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word. Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”… Pages 7 through 10 of the Code.

Just a reminder that my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.


The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct.

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011 (Page 11 begins)


Rule No. 3

Councillor Expenses:

There are a range of expenses that support a Member’s role in community development and
engagement activities within their ward. For federal and provincial elected officials, these
expenses are often paid for by Riding Association funds. Municipal elected officials do not
have this benefit. Subject to the Elected Officials’ Expenses policy, this section of the Council
Code of Conduct deals with community expense-events, will indicate allowable expenses for
reimbursement and provide guidelines for Members of Council respecting community
expenses related to a Member’s role in community development, and reflecting which
expenses are eligible for reimbursement from a Member’s office expense budget.

1. Raffle tickets, table prize tickets and other gaming tickets are not eligible for
reimbursement.

2. Sponsorship of teams or individuals, such as the provision of uniforms or equipment, are
not eligible for reimbursement.

3. Expenses incurred by Members working during normal meal periods serve a legitimate
public duty purpose, provided that the expenses incurred are reasonable and appropriate in
the circumstances. Reasonable and appropriate expenses are those that are incurred for an
official duty or function; are modest and represent the prudent use of public funds; and do
not involve the purchase of alcoholic beverages.

4. Official duties or functions include those activities that are reasonably related to a
Member’s office, and must take into consideration the different interests, the diverse
profiles of their wards, their different roles on committees, agencies, boards and
commissions. Municipal elected officials will be expected or required to extend hospitality
to external parties as part of their official duties and functions, and it is legitimate for
expenses to be incurred for this purpose. It is legitimate for Members to incur hospitality
expenses for meetings that include:

a. engaging representatives of other levels of government, international delegations or
visitors, the broader public sector, business contacts and other third parties in
discussions on official matters;

b. providing persons from national, international and charitable organizations with an
understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its
municipal government;

[With me having so much video, Freedom of Information and “workings” from the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, I can only interpret Item b two ways. Either Item b is a lie and the City really doesn’t provide “persons from national, international and charitable organizations with an understanding and appreciation of the City of Mississauga or the workings of its municipal government” —or (horrid thought) the City of Mississauga does inform “persons from national, international and charitable organizations” about the City’s unethical corporate landscape of Fudge, Fabricate, Lie, Deny, Stonewall and that the “persons from national, international and charitable organizations” are okay with that!  Back to Page 11 of the Code.]

c. honouring persons from the City of Mississauga in recognition of exceptional public
service and staff appreciation events;

[Re: “honouring persons from the City of Mississauga in recognition of exceptional public service ” Here’s a fun way to spend a weekend. Scribble down the names of all the City of Mississauga’s “Citizens of the Year” hanging up in the gallery outside Council Chambers of City Hall’s second floor. (Say from 1980 to current) Google them, then examine all “Team Hazel” councillors’ election financial statements for 2006 and 2010.

Only then will you gain some insight into the deliberately deceptive silliness of the Code‘s references to “volunteers”, “volunteer services” and “campaign contributions”. Back to Page 11 of the Code.]

d. recognition events for various agencies, boards and commissions of the City;

[In yesterday’s blog, I alerted readers to the true meaning of “community events” —that the majority are simply political campaign events in non-election years. In Item d, the Code introduces the concept of “recognition events”.  The City of Mississauga’s “recognition events” are just like “community events” meaning “political campaign events in non-election years” except more lavish.

The best example of a City “recognition event” is the Mayor’s $350.00 90th Birthday Bash back in February 2011. Another would be the City of Mississauga’s Tribute Dinner to McCallion-Starr-Mahoney-Crombie-Team-Hazel supporter, Victor Oh.  Back to Page 11 of the Code.]

11

END OF PAGE 11 OF THE CODE. PAGE 12 BEGINS

e. ratepayers associations, minor league sports associations and other community groups.

5. Hospitality expenses may be incurred while extending hospitality in the course of
travelling on a duty or function or as a Member of Council, provided the expenses are
reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.

6. As community leaders, Members may lend their support to and encourage community
donations to registered charitable, not-for-profit and other community-based groups
monies raised through fundraising efforts shall go directly to the groups or volunteers or
chapters acting as local organizers of the group and Members of Council should not handle
any funds on behalf of such organizations.

Members of Council routinely perform important work in supporting charitable causes and
in so doing, there is a need for transparency respecting the Member’s involvement. The
following guidelines shall apply:

a. Members of Council should not directly or indirectly manage or control any monies
received relating to community or charitable organizations fundraising;

[Notice how Item 6 deals only with money to community donations to registered charitable, not-for-profit and other community-based groups, and not moneys/contributions that could potentially slip unnoticed into the Mayor/councillors’s war chests through (say) as the Code puts it so well, “services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time”? Back to Page 12 of the Code.]

b. Members of Council or persons acting on behalf of a Member shall not solicit or accept
support in any form from an individual, group or corporation, with any pending
significant planning, conversion or demolition variance application or procurement
proposal before City Council, which the Member knew or ought to have known about.

[Oh MY! “ought to have known about”! HAHAHAHAhahahah! Sorry, can’t help it. “ought to have known about”? You mean like how Hazel McCallion “ought to have known about” common law?… Back to Page 12 of the Code.]

c. With reference to member-organized community events, Members of Council must
report to the Integrity Commissioner, the names of all donors and the value of their
donation that supplement the event.

[Reminder from yesterday’s blog and the Code‘s Rule 2 d. “services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time”.  The Power of Team Hazel’s Incumbency comes not so much from money donated, but her “Friends of Hazel” and their incalculable “services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time”.  Back to Page 12 of the Code.]

d. Where a Member of Council sponsors and/or lends support to a community or
charitable event, this Code recognizes that all donations are subject to the Elected
Officials’ Expenses policy.

[Oooo, We can all feel so much better nowwwww. Back to Page 12 of the Code.]

e. No donation cheques should be made payable to a Member of Council or to the City of
Mississauga. Members of Council may only accept donation cheques made payable to
a Business Improvement Association, charity or community group and only for the
purpose of passing the cheques on to such group.

[CITIZEN ALERT! Making “cheques made payable to a Business Improvement Association, charity or community group” ensures they’re tucked safely from scrutiny of any kind. Exempt from Freedom of Information. Example, any cheques written to the annual Mayor’s Gala spring immediately to mind. Back to Page 12 of the Code.]

f. Members of Council should not handle any cash on behalf of any charitable
organization, not-for-profit or community group, and should always remain at arm’s
length from the financial aspects of these community and external events. If a Member
of Council agrees to fundraise on behalf of a charity or community group, the Member
should ensure that payment is received by a means that does not involve cash,
including bank draft, money order, credit card or cheque made payable to the
applicable group or organization.

[See previous comments regarding the non-unit of measure “at arm’s length”. The only thing that Item f accomplishes is to remind Mayor/councillors to have someone else handle the money. Perfect example. Councillor Ron Starr’s annual, Starr’s on the Credit annual fundraiser. Now Starr doesn’t touch the money but his daughter’s company, Elegance on the Move does! So now you know what the City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct means by “arm’s length”! Back to Page 12 of the Code.]

7. Nothing included herein affects the entitlement of a Member of Council to:

12

END OF PAGE 12 OF THE CODE. PAGE 13 BEGINS

 

i) use the Member’s office expense budget to run or support community events subject to
the terms of the Elected Officials’ Expenses policy section relating to Community
Expense events;

[By now when you see “community events” you should automatically think “campaign events in non-election years”. Back to Page 13 of the Code.]

ii) urge constituents, businesses or other groups to support community events and advance
the needs of a charitable organization put on by others in the Member’s ward or
elsewhere in the City;

[Repeat. By now, when you see “community events” you should automatically think “campaign events in non-election years”. Back to Page 13 of the Code.]

iii) play an advisory ex officio, honorary or membership role in any charitable or nonprofit
organization that holds community events in the Members’ ward; and

[Again, translate “community events” into “campaign events in non-election years”. Back to Page 13 of the Code.]

iv) collaborate with the City of Mississauga and its agencies, boards or commissions to
hold community events.

[HAHAHAHAAhahaha. Who’d have thought reading the City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct would be such entertainment! “(C)ollaborate with the City of Mississauga and its agencies, boards or commissions to hold community events.” That’s MYTHissaugaspeak for “conspire with the ‘Friends of Hazel to hold campaign events in non-election years, all in the best interests of the City (of course). Back to Page 13 of the Code.]


Commentary

By virtue of the office, Members of Council will be called upon to assist various charities,
service clubs and other non-profits as well as community associations, by accepting an
honourary role in the organization, lending their name or support to it or assisting in
fundraising. Transparency and accountability are best achieved in today’s era by encouraging
contributors to make donations to such organizations on-line through a website or where that is
not possible through a cheque made payable directly to the organization. Cash should never
be accepted.

[Regarding, the Code’s assertion that “Transparency and accountability are best achieved in today’s era by encouraging contributors to make donations to such organizations on-line through a website.” So how was making donations on-line directly to Michele Starr’s Elegance on the Move website going to best achieve transparency and accountability? Back to Page 13 of the Code.]

13

END OF PAGE 13 OF THE CODE.

Next blog deals with the Code’s Rule No. 4, Confidential Information.

As “homework” for the Code’s Rule No. 4, Confidential Information and evaluating the Code’s reference to “ought to have known about”, here’s video of an April 14, 2010 scrum where Mayor Hazel McCallion tells the Traditional Media Snoozers, “Well, I don’t think there’s —today, I don’t think there’s nothing confidential. There’s absolutely nothing confidential. Freedom of Information —you can get anything you want.

I created that title back in April 2010 and for the most part, I still think that Traditional Media SUCKS!

Video: HAZEL MCCALLION / CAROLYN PARRISH “BAD TO THE BONE” CATFIGHT! (plus Traditional Media SUCKS!) (5:45 min)

Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 3) Beware “community events”, “volunteer services”, “arm’s length”…

January 8th, 2012  

This blog is a continuation of the following blog entries:

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word.  Pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies” Page 6 of the Code.

Just a reminder that my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct.

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011  (Page 7 begins)


Rule No. 2


Gifts and Benefits:

1. No Member shall accept a fee, advance, cash, gift, gift certificate or personal benefit that is
connected directly or indirectly with the performance of his/her duties of office unless
permitted by the exceptions listed below. No Member shall accept the use of property or
facilities, such as a vehicle, office or vacation property at less than reasonable market value
or at no cost.

For these purposes, a fee or advance paid to or a gift or benefit provided with the
Member’s knowledge to a Family Member or to a Member’s staff that is connected
directly or indirectly to the performance of the Member’s duties, is deemed to be a gift to
that Member.

The following are recognized as exceptions:

a. compensation authorized by law;

b. such gifts or benefits that normally accompany the responsibilities of office and are
received as an incident of protocol or social obligation;

c. a political contribution otherwise reported by law, in the case of Members running for
office;

[CITIZEN ALERT! Item c, “a political contribution otherwise reported by law, in the case of Members running for office” is also a political contribution to the Power of Incumbency.  And contributions can take can take varied and subtle forms.

Having researched the “Friends of Hazel” it’s surprising how many political “contributors” to McCallion-approved-councillors‘ campaigns are public relations spinmeisters. And graphics designers and printers! Not surprising is that the most fanatic of these “Team Hazel” graphic designers/printers-supporters also design and print City-event glossy brochures and reports!

And let’s not forget the most prevalent political contributions  to Team Hazel that few even notice: the soldier-ant highly-orchestrated support that the Mayor and Her Councillors enjoy from the Mississauga Board of Trade and the Mississauga Chinese Business Association.

Another significant source of McCallion’s support that goes unnoticed are the number of high profile “Friends of Hazel” who are real estate agents!  Team Re/Max and Team  LePage very much double as Team Hazel. Back to Page 7 of the Code.]

d. services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time;

[CITIZEN ALERT! Item d, “services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time” is the biggest loophole in the Mississauga Council Code of Conduct. How often has Mayor Hazel McCallion lavished praise on “community volunteers”? How often has she thanked them for their thousands of “volunteer hours” dedicating themselves to “Mississauga”?

But it’s only when these same “community volunteers” morph into (let’s call them) political volunteers, and provide “services without compensation” to Hazel McCallion and Her Councillors that their true value becomes apparent. The Mayor’s Power of Incumbency begins and rests on “d. services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time”. Back to Page 7 of the Code.]

e. a suitable memento of a function honouring the Member;

f. food, lodging, transportation and entertainment provided by Provincial, Regional and
local governments or political subdivisions of them, by the Federal government or by a
foreign government within a foreign country or by a conference, seminar or event
organizer where the Member is either speaking or attending in an official capacity at an
official event;

g. food and beverages consumed at banquets, receptions or similar events, if:

i. attendance serves a legitimate business purpose;

ii. the person extending the invitation or a representative of the organization is in
attendance; and

iii. the value is reasonable and the invitations infrequent;

h. communication to the offices of a Member, including subscriptions to newspapers, and
periodicals; and

i. sponsorships and donations for community events organized or run by a Member or by
a third party on behalf of a Member and subject to the limitations set out in the Code of
Conduct respecting Council Member-organized community events, where all costs are
incurred and where all such events occur on or before Nomination Day.

[CITIZEN ALERT! Item i’s “sponsorships and donations for community events organized or run by a Member or by a third party on behalf of a Member ” is another loophole.

In yesterday’s blog, I wrote, “Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

When you see “community events” in this Code, the City really means “campaign events” in non-election years.

Next. Re-read the Citizen Alerts for Items c and d. Item c’s “a political contribution otherwise reported by law, in the case of Members running for office” and the biggest loophole, Item d’s “services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time” all figure prominently in the Power of Incumbency.

For example, the Mayor’s Gala describes itself as “Mississauga’s premier social event of the year.” The Mayor’s Gala relies on “sponsorships and donations”, and is “organized or run by a third party on behalf of the Mayor”.   The annual Mayor’s Gala falls under the Code’s definition of “community event” yet you’d be hard-pressed to find more political scuttling, lobbying and campaigning under any one roof in Ontario than November Gala night.

As for the Code’s silly “subject to the limitations set out in the Code of Conduct respecting Council Member-organized community events, where all costs are incurred and where all such events occur on or before Nomination Day”,  “services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time” are incalculable —easily fudged. And don’t take my word for it.

Here’s what the Community Foundation of Mississauga has to say about the difficulty of attaching monetary value to volunteer services.

2 i  Donated Services

The Board of Directors and other volunteers contribute services to the Foundation
in carrying out its operating activities. Because of the difficulty in determining the
fair value of these contributed services, they are not recognized in the financial
statements.

The Community Foundation of Mississauga‘s admission that it has “difficulty in determining the fair value of these contributed services” means there’s plenty of room to low-ball volunteer services (ie: “Friends of Hazel” Rally, Mayor’s Gala, Golf Tournaments, Safe City Mississauga events…).

Bottomline, the “Friends of Hazel” volunteer services lavished on the Mayor and Her Councillors are incalculable.

What monetary value, for example, would you put on “volunteer”, Ted Woloshyn, McCallion’s personal columnist at the Toronto Sun? Or “volunteer”, Jake Dheer, McCallion’s very own TV station manager? Back to Page 7 of the Code.]

7


END OF PAGE 7 OF THE CODE.   PAGE 8 BEGINS

 

Commentary

Members should be transparent in their dealings with the public, and neither a Member of
Council or the City should handle funds on behalf of any organizations. Members should
remain at arm’s length from the financial aspects of these events and initiatives.

[NOTE. Do you know what “at arm’s length” means? Because I don’t!

And a reminder. I’ve frequently said that Freedom of Information confirms the degree to which City Staff fail to comply with Corporate policies, procedures, by-laws, guidelines and even provincial legislation. I’m also on record as saying that some of the City’s elected officials have “infinite capacity to pervert”. Surely there’s nothing easier to pervert than “at arm’s length”!

Can there be a more deceptive non-unit of measure than the length of an “arm”?! Especially in the Ontario municipal realm of unaccountable spitzbuben?  Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

a) Members may use their office expense budget to run or support local charities and
community events subject to the terms of the Elected Officials’ Expenses policy;

b) Members may urge constituents, businesses and other groups to support community events
put on by others in the Member’s ward or elsewhere in the City;

[CITIZEN ALERT! Re-read b) only this time, replace “community events” with “campaign events in non-election years”. Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

c) Members may work with community groups to assist them in finding sponsors and
participants to support community events put on by the community group in the Member’s
ward or elsewhere in the City.

[CITIZEN ALERT! Need I say this? Re-read b) only this time, replace “community events” with “campaign events in non-election years”. Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

d) Members may play an advisory or membership role in any organization that holds
community events in the Member’s ward; and

[CITIZEN ALERT! By now when you see “community events” you should automatically be converting to “campaign events in non-election years”. Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

e) Members may collaborate with the City and its agencies to hold community events and
may participate in the City’s Festival Funding Review Committee and other events
approved by City Council.

[CITIZEN ALERT! “Community events” = “campaign events in non-election years”. Note: The City’s Festival Funding Review Committee determines what groups are worthy of funding (and by how much) based on their political clout and/or campaign contributions. Best example, compare what the City’s Festival Funding Review Committee granted the Malton Community Festival versus any festival squawking for grant money south of the QEW. Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

2. In the case of exceptions claimed under categories 1. b, e, f, g, h and i,

a) where the value of the gift or benefit exceeds $500, or if the total value received from
any one source during the course of a calendar year exceeds $500, the Members shall
within 30 days of receipt of the gift or reaching the annual limit, list the gift or benefit
on a Councillor Information Statement in a form prescribed by the Integrity
Commissioner, and file it with the Integrity Commissioner.

[NOTE. 2 a’s, “where the value of the gift or benefit exceeds $500” translates to Members accept gifts or benefits not exceeding $499.99 so they won’t have to file with the Integrity Commissioner. Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

b) Subsection a) does not apply to the receipt of up to two tickets to a dinner or
fundraising, as long as the Member is attending only one such event with the same
individual or corporation within any calendar year.

c) For clarification, Members are authorized to receive gifts, mementos and benefits
which are common to receive in the normal course of fulfilling their duties. Members
are not obliged to list on a Councillor Information Statement or anywhere else, a record
of their receipt, unless the total value of such gifts or benefits received from any one
source in a calendar year exceeds $500.

[NOTE. 2 c’s, Regarding, “Members are not obliged to list on a Councillor Information Statement or anywhere else, a record of their receipt, unless the total value of such gifts or benefits received from any one source in a calendar year exceeds $500.”   Told ya! Back to Page 8 of the Code.]

3. On receiving a Councillor Information Statement, the Integrity Commissioner shall
examine it to determine whether the receipt of the gift or benefit might, in the opinion of
the Integrity Commissioner, create a conflict between a private interest and the public duty
of the Member. In the event that the Integrity Commissioner makes that preliminary
determination, he/she shall call upon the Member to justify receipt of the gift or benefit.

8


END OF PAGE 8 OF THE CODE. PAGE 9 BEGINS

 

4. Should the Integrity Commissioner determine the receipt was inappropriate, the Integrity
Commissioner may direct the Member to return the gift, reimburse the donor for the value
of any gift or benefit already consumed, or the Integrity Commissioner may order the
Member to forfeit the gift or remit the value of any gift or benefit already consumed to the
City, or a City agency, board or commission. Any such direction ordered by the Integrity
Commissioner shall be a matter of public record.

5. Beginning April 30, 2011 and quarterly thereafter, each Member shall file a Councillor
Information Statement with Integrity Commissioner and all such statements shall be a
matter of public record.

[NOTE. With Page 9’s Item’s 4 and 5, I’m sure you can feel there’s integrity happening, right?  Back to Page 9 of the Code.]

Commentary

Gifts and benefits are often received by elected officials in the course of their duties and
attendance at public functions is expected and is considered part of their role. Business-related
entertainment and gift-giving can be a token of respect and admiration for the elected official,
but can also be seen as an instrument of influence and manipulation. The object of this rule is
to provide transparency around the receipt of incidental gifts and benefits and to establish a
threshold where the total value could be perceived as potentially influencing a decision.

[NOTE.  Regarding, “gift-giving can be a token of respect and admiration for the elected official, but can also be seen as an instrument of influence and manipulation.” Was there ever a Mississauga “gift-giver” who’d admit his gift was specifically contrived to be an instrument of influence and manipulation?  Back to Page 9 of the Code.]

The practical problems that nominal gifts and benefits create require a Code of Conduct that
provides clarity and transparency. Personal integrity and sound business practices require that
relationships with developers, vendors, contractors or others doing business with the City be
such that no Member of Council is perceived as showing favouritism or bias toward the giver.
There will never be a perfect solution.

[CITIZEN ALERT.  Reminder that I’d warned readers that no word makes it into any of the City’s Corporate documents/communication without the carefullest of deliberation. Reminder too that it’s not what the City tells you that citizens need to know, it’s what they don’t!

The Code’s statement, “Personal integrity and sound business practices require that relationships with developers, vendors, contractors or others doing business with the City be such that no Member of Council is perceived as showing favouritism or bias toward the giver” is true. Personal integrity and sound business practices does require “that no Member of Council is perceived as showing favouritism or bias toward the giver.”

The problem is what the City and this Code don’t tell you: This City was built on unfettered nepotism, cronyism and favouritism! I’m not even sure they could operate aboveboard and truthfully.

Back to Page 9 of the Code.]

Each Member of Council is individually accountable to the public and is encouraged to keep a
list of all gifts and benefits received from individuals, firms or associations, with estimated
values, in their offices for review by the Integrity Commissioner in the event of a complaint.

Those gifts or benefits that exceed $500 or the annual limit of $500 for one source, need to be
kept on a form prescribed by the Integrity Commissioner and filed with the Integrity
Commissioner on a quarterly basis to ensure transparency.

Examples of gifts that are required to be listed on the Councillor Information Statement may
include:

i) property (i.e. a book, flowers, gift basket, painting or sculpture, furniture, wine);

ii) membership in a club or other organization (i.e. a golf club) at a reduced rate or at no
cost;

iii) an invitation to and/or tickets to attend an event (i.e. a sports event, concert, play) at a
reduced rate or no cost;

iv) or an invitation to attend a gala or fundraising event at a reduced rate or at no cost.

Use of real estate or significant assets or facilities (i.e. a vehicle, office, vacation property) at a
reduced rate or at no cost is not an acceptable gift or benefit. Having said that, it has to be

9

END OF PAGE 9 OF THE CODE. PAGE 10 BEGINS

 

recognized that Members of Council will have friends and will develop friendships with
individuals who may from time to time have business relationships that will involve the City in
some way. The purpose of the Code is not to prohibit Members from accepting all invitations
to socialize at a vacation property of personal friends.

[Fair]

Proper caution and diligence must however be exercised when a social function occurs within
close proximity to the individual having an issue before City Council or staff for approval. It
is always prudent to consult with the Integrity Commissioner before accepting or attending at
any such engagements.

[Fair]

Any doubts about the propriety of a gift should be resolved in favour of not accepting it or not
keeping it. It may be helpful to consult with the Integrity Commissioner when a Member
chooses to decline a gift as well as when a recipient may opt to keep a gift.

[Fair]

An invitation to attend a function where the invitation is directly or indirectly with the
Member’s duties of office is not considered to be a gift but is the fulfillment of an official
function or duty. An invitation to attend a function with a developer or supplier, however,
could be seen as allowing the giver an opportunity to influence the elected official. Such
invitations should only be accepted if the invitation is within the scope of permissible gifts and
benefits, meaning that Members should not consistently accept invitations from the same
individual or corporation and should avoid any appearance of favouritism.

[Hmmm. The Mississauga Chinese Business Association comes to mind here…. Back to Page 9 of the Code.]

For clarification, an invitation to an event celebrating the successful completion of a
development or project or the opening of a new business within the Member’s ward on the
other hand could serve a legitimate business purpose and be seen as part of the responsibilities
of office provided the person extending the invitation or that person’s representative is in
attendance.

[Fair]

An invitation to attend a charity golf tournament or fund-raising gala, provided the Member of
Council is not consistently attending such events as a guest of the same individual or
corporation, is also part of the responsibilities of holding public office. Likewise, accepting
invitations to professional sports events, concerts or dinners may serve a legitimate business
purpose. Where a Member is uncertain in regards to whether an invitation is or is not
appropriate, it may be prudent to consult with the Integrity Commissioner before attending any
such event.

[CITIZEN HEADS-UP! Regarding, “provided the Member of Council is not consistently attending such events as a guest of the same individual or corporation”:  http://amazing-women.ca   Back to Page 9 of the Code.]

Regular invitations to lunch or dinner with persons who are considered friends of Members of
Council is acceptable in situations where the Member pays their portion of the meal expense
and treats it as a personal expense, meaning a claim is not made under the Elected Officials’
Expenses policy. Proper caution and diligence not to discuss matters before the City for a
decision must be exercised at all times. Again, when in doubt it is prudent to consult with the
Integrity Commissioner.

[CITIZEN ALERT. Regarding, “Proper caution and diligence not to discuss matters before the City for a decision must be exercised at all times.” Like that’s enforceable.]

10

END OF PAGE 10 OF THE CODE.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

TOM URBANIAK MISSISSAUGA "media-barren environment" HAZEL MCCALLION, RON LENYK (former publisher Mississauga News) JAKE DHEER (station manager ROGERS CABLE 10 Mississauga) and "Friend of Hazel" TED WOLOSHYN (TORONTO SUN columnist
“To regain her power, expect McCallion to essentially build Team Hazel, for next year’s election. Team Hazel
would consist of four sitting councillors and seven candidates hand-selected by the Hurricane, who back the mayor.”

—Ted Woloshyn, Toronto Sun


ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2. Canada in the Making Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3. Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner (7:34 min)

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

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 2) “upholding both the letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies”

January 7th, 2012  

This blog is a continuation from yesterday’s entry, Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct. (Part 1) Line by line, word by word.

Just a reminder that my goal is to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word as preparation for future Council deputations. Part 1 examined pages 1 through 5 of the Code.

Once again, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

There was something important that I forgot point out yesterday. I was only reminded of it while going through this exercise. Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words —like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”.  Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

That’s enough of an intro. We completed Page 5 of the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct. It’s on to Page 6.

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct.

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011  (Page 6 begins)

i. Members of Council shall seek to serve the public interest by upholding both the
letter of the law and the spirit of the laws and policies established by the Federal
parliament, Ontario legislature, and by City Council.

[By now I’ve filed about $3,500 worth of Freedom of Information examining all manner of governance issues at the City of Mississauga. These documents confirm City Staff’s chronic non-compliance to Corporate policies, guidelines, by-laws as well as provincial legislation. Here’s just one example: video of Hazel McCallion bemoaning Staff’s “complete disregard for policy”.

And after the Mayor’s “It was just common law” performance at Sunday’s Mayor’s New Year’s Eve Levee, it’s obvious why the City of Mississauga’s corporate landscape is littered with “public servants” who believe that laws and policies do not apply to them.

Here’s what www.canadiana.ca says about the “just common law” that McCallion dismissed and demeaned.

Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

British Common Law

Definition

British common law, also called traditional law, is law that has evolved from decisions of English courts going back to the Norman Conquest in 1066. These earlier decisions set “precedent,” which are used in future cases of a similar nature. Precedent can be overruled by new laws, or statutes, passed by the appropriate government.

Today Common law is applied in most countries settled or ruled by the British. In Canada, law in all the provinces except Quebec is based on common law.

Note, “In Canada, law in all the provinces except Quebec is based on common law.” Except Mississauga too!

Back to Page 6 of the Code.]

Commentary

The provisions of this Code are intended to be applied in concert with existing legislation and
go beyond the minimum standards of behaviour set out in current federal and provincial
statutes.

To ensure the Code remains a living document that will remain current and continue to be a
beneficial guide, the Code shall be brought forward for review at the end of each term of
Council, with any changes to be implemented at the start of the following Council session.

j. In fulfilling their roles as elected officials, Members of Council shall respect the
role of staff in the administration of the business affairs of the City and in so
doing will comply with the City’s Respectful Workplace policy.

[Item j. is simply outrageous. “Members of Council shall respect the role of staff…” Repeat: Freedom of Information confirms the degree to which City of Mississauga Staff fail to comply to Corporate policies, guidelines, and by-laws ,as well as provincial legislation. And videotape of Audit and Council meetings confirm the degree to which elected officials not only look the other way, but cover up for Staff.

An even ghastlier joke is the Code’s reference to the City’s Respectful Workplace policy. Video evidence to follow.

Back to Page 6 of the Code.]

Commentary

Decision-making authority lies with Council, and not with an individual Member. Members of
Council recognize that it is the role of the officers and employees of the City to implement
Council’s decisions and to establish administrative practices and procedures to carry out
Council’s decisions. Council is the source of all legislative authority and will make decisions
on whether and to what extent to delegate this authority to others, including the Mayor,
committees and to staff. Only Council as a whole has the capacity to direct staff members.
Council as a whole must be able to access information in order to fulfill its decision-making
duties and oversight responsibilities however, individual Members of Council must also
recognize that the information they receive in their capacity as elected officials, is subject to
confidentiality and disclosure rules contained in federal and provincial legislation and City
policies.

[Item j’s “Council as a whole must be able to access information in order to fulfill its decision-making duties” echoes yesterday’s blog where I deal with the Code’s Rule No. 1 which states, “Members of Council recognize the public’s right to reasonable access to information in relation to how decisions are made.”

Item j’s caveat, “Members of Council must also recognize that the information they receive in their capacity as elected officials, is subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules contained in federal and provincial legislation and City policies.” echoes the Code’s Rule No. 1 which states, “The public’s right to access however must be balanced against the requirement to protect the legitimate interests of the City and the respect for approved policies of the City.”

Whether it’s the Code’s Rule No. 1 assertion regarding “the public’s right to reasonable access to information” or the Code‘s Item j’s “Council as a whole must be able to access information”, guaranteed, the City will protect itself against providing Information that a member of the public or a Member of Council really needs by hiding behind the many exemptions in the Province’s Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

 And here’s another fact. While Item j’s statement, “individual Members of Council must also recognize that the information they receive in their capacity as elected officials, is subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules contained in federal and provincial legislation and City policies” is true, if confidentiality rules are violated (for example, by elected officials’ emails), neither the public or a Member of Council can access the necessary information to prove that the elected official violated the confidentiality rules! That is, the Violator’s emails are themselves protected in the confidentiality provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act!

Fact is, you can suspect that a municipality’s elected officials are engaging in a brisk email trade in human trafficking. But you’d be denied access to their emails to prove it! That was fun, so let’s stop here.]

END OF PAGE 6 OF THE CODE.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH


ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

 1.    The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct April 2011

2.     Canada in the Making  Common Law and Civil Law

Canada has inherited two systems of law: civil law from the French and common law from the English. This page will describe and give the history of each system as it relates to Canada

Related essays on this site:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Sources of Law in Canada
The Written and Unwritten Constitution
Representative Government
Responsible Government
Canada’s Constitutional History
British Common Law

3.     Video of MISSISSAUGAWATCH’s first (meandering and unsuccessful) attempt to merge the Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct with the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry’s “Ethical Infrastructure” report.

As I watched it today, I winced at how unfocussed this video is —just all over the map. But it introduces the vital concept of “sanitized” reports. Sanitized reports/documents/communication is the Key to Mississauga’s success. It was the City of Mississauga’s sanitization efforts that prompted me to warn people today with:

Be it a Corporate Policy, Corporate Report, By-Law, Guideline, those drafting it meticulously weigh every single word. No word makes it on to a City document without Staff’s carefullest of scrutiny. Yes, “carefullest”.

The City of Mississauga’s wordsmiths are especially fond of vague words, like “transparent” and “accountable”. Fact is, words can be so vague as to become meaningless, become atrocities —like “transparent” and “accountable”.  Like “appropriate”. Like “subject to confidentiality and disclosure rules”. Like “Trust, Quality, Excellence”.

BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner  (7:34 min)

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

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article

Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word. (Part 1)

January 6th, 2012  

Back in early December, I read through the entire City of Mississauga Code of Conduct and offered warnings to citizens about this document’s inherent traps. My December 7, 2011 blog, “BEWARE of TRAPS in Mississauga Code of Conduct if filing complaint with integrity commissioner” introduced the most obvious problems.

I’ve had a month to ponder and it’s now time to go through The City of Mississauga Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word. To begin, I will cut-and-paste the City of Mississauga Code of Conduct directly into this blog entry and offer comment/criticism [bold italics square brackets] when the need arises.

Those interested in accessing the full version of City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct April 2011 please click here.

Last, I endure this certain-to-be-useless exercise with the full knowledge that:


Here we go.

The City of Mississauga Council Code of Conduct.

Council Code of Conduct April, 2011

Whereas the Municipal Act, 2001 authorizes municipalities to establish a Code of Conduct for
Members of Council or local boards of the municipality;

And whereas the establishment of a Code of Conduct for Members of Council is consistent
with the principles of transparent and accountable government;

[While it is true that “…the establishment of a Code of Conduct for Members of Council is consistent with the principles of transparent and accountable government…”, the City of Mississauga fails to mention that the only thing “transparent” about The City is the degree to which it avoids accountability. Evidence: City’s response to Bill 130, Staff emails, Freedom of Information. Back to Page 1 of the Code.]

And whereas the establishment of a Code of Conduct for Members of Council is also reflective
of the City’s core values of Trust, Quality and Excellence in public service;

[Warning to citizens: Asserting “the City’s core values of Trust, Quality and Excellence in public service” is fraudulent. The purpose of this claim is to deceive residents into believing that the City can be entrusted to conduct its business for the Common Good. Evidence: Video of Audit Committee meetings. Freedom of Information. Staff emails. Back to Page 1 of the Code.]

And whereas the elected officials of the City of Mississauga have and continue to recognize
their obligation to serve their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner recognizing
that as leaders of the community, they are held to a higher standard of behaviour and conduct;

[While it is true “that as leaders of the community, they are held to a higher standard of behaviour and conduct”, their claim of “recognizing that as leaders of the community, they are held to a higher standard of behaviour and conduct” is not. Evidence: Video of Audit Committee meetings. Freedom of Information. Staff emails. Mississauga Judicial Inquiry. Tom Urbaniak Her Worship: Hazel McCallion and the Development of Mississauga. Back to Page 1 of the Code.]

And whereas a Code of Conduct ensures that Members of Council share a common basis and
understanding for acceptable conduct extending beyond the legislative provisions governing
the conduct of Members of Council as set out in the Municipal Act, 2001; Municipal Conflict
of Interest Act; Municipal Elections Act, 1996; and the Municipal Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act.

Now therefore the Council of the City of Mississauga adopts certain rules in the form of a
Council Code of Conduct that further underscore the requirement that elected officials be
independent, impartial, and duly responsible in serving their constituents.

[While it is true that independence and impartiality are basic requirements for elected officials, City of Mississauga “McCallion-backed” elected officials are neither independent or impartial. As has been irrefutably demonstrated at the October 28, 2009 Council meeting, mega-developer Harold Shipp and his fellow “Friends of Hazel” threatened councillors to submit to their will or face defeat at the next election.

The entire Mississauga Code of Conduct/integrity commissioner “Governance Committee” is absurd —simply delivering more-of-the-same Illusion and Pretend.

The Mississauga News reports that “Ward 1 Councillor Jim Tovey was named committee chair, with Ward 9’s Pat Saito elected vice-chair. Other members are Chris Fonseca (Ward 3), Bonnie Crombie (Ward 5), George Carlson (Ward 11) and McCallion (ex-officio member).” All elected officials except George Carlson opposed the Judicial Inquiry.

Indeed a point can be made that this absurd Code of Conduct/integrity commissioner/Governance Committee charade is now an expensive waste of time and resources. With Hazel McCallion (Shipp/Friends of Hazel) in full control of Council, the 2001 Municipal Act, gives McCallion and Her Seven the authority to declare themselves beyond reproach, a shining example of Trust, Quality, Excellence and therefore not needing any Code and related expensive ethical infrastructure. Back to Page 1 of the Code.]

Application

This Code of Conduct applies to the Mayor and all Members of Council (“Members”)

[CITIZEN WARNING! City of Mississauga employees are exempt, meaning nothing has changed since I first stepped into Mississauga City Hall to become a Council Watcher. In a March 26, 2008 Council meeting, McCallion-backed Councillor Pat Mullin stated that an “ombudsman” or integrity commissioner would finally address the ongoing concerns raised by Donald Barber regarding City Staff.

The Code’s statement, “This Code of Conduct applies to the Mayor and all Members of Council (“Members”)” is in fact limiting. City employees still enjoy no accountability, subject exclusively to being investigated by other City Staff—Staff all too eager to cover up for them. (Evidence: video and Freedom of Information)

That nothing has changed since Councillor Mullin’s March 26, 2008 comments that citizens’ concerns regarding the lies and abuses of City employees would finally be addressed through an “ombudsman/commissioner” is itself a lie.

The deception and outright lies that I have already revealed (and we’re not even at the bottom of Page 1 in this Code) should assist the reader is seeing this Code for what it is: Orwellian MYTHissauga doublespeak, to create the illusion of a “transparent and accountable government” .  Back to Page 1 of the Code.]

Framework and Interpretation

1. The Code of Conduct is to be given broad, liberal interpretation in accordance with
applicable legislation and the definitions set out herein. As a living document the Code of
Conduct will be brought forward for review at the end of each term of Council, when
relevant legislation is amended, and at other times when appropriate to ensure that it
remains current and continues to be a useful guide to Members of Council.

 

END OF PAGE 1 OF THE CODE.

2. Commentary and examples used in this Code of Conduct are illustrative and not
exhaustive. From time to time additional commentary and examples may be added to this
document and supplementary materials may also be produced by the Integrity
Commissioner as deemed appropriate.

[IMPORTANT! Beware the City of Mississauga’s use of the word “appropriate”. It does not mean what a reasonable person would regard as appropriate. I’ve repeatedly said it’s not what the City of Mississauga says that you need to know, but rather, what they choose to leave out of their communications. That last statement should read, “supplementary materials may also be produced by the Integrity Commissioner as deemed appropriate for the interests of the City. Back to Page 2 of the Code.]

3. Where an elected official discloses all known facts to the Integrity Commissioner and as
long as those facts remain unchanged, the Member may rely on written advice provided by
the Integrity Commissioner. The Integrity Commissioner will be bound by the advice
given, as long as the facts remain unchanged, in the event that he or she is asked to
investigate a complaint.

4. Elected officials seeking clarification who are provided advice in a general way, cannot
rely on advice given by the Integrity Commissioner to the same extent as advice given in
respect of specific facts. Advice that is general in nature is subject to change when applied
to specific facts that may not have been known at the time the general advice was
provided.

[NOTE: Regarding “facts”.  City of Mississauga Staff are tutored (even instructed) to fabricate, fudge and selectively-report data. To “sanitize”. This propensity for governance-dishonesty—the City’s “Pimpin’ the Positive”has been documented by Tom Urbaniak. Watch this video as I read about fudging a Budget report, page 143 from his book Her Worship: Hazel McCallion and the Development of Mississauga.  Other evidence of fabrication-sanitation of records includes Freedom of Information and video of Audit, Budget and Council meetings as well. Back to Page 2 of the Code.]

5. Elected Officials seeking clarification of any part of this Code should consult with the
Integrity Commissioner.

6. The Municipal Act, 2001 is the primary piece of legislation governing municipalities
however there are other statutes that govern the conduct of elected municipal officials. It is
intended that the Code of Conduct operate together with and as a supplement to the
following legislation:

• Municipal Act, 2001;
• Municipal Conflict of Interest Act;
• Municipal Elections Act, 1996;
• Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act;
• Criminal Code of Canada.

[And we’ve learned just how worthless Ontario’s Municipal Conflict of Interest Act is thanks to the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry. In his October 3, 2011 report, Justice Cunningham started that under the Act, Hazel McCallion:

“—promoted the interests of WCD throughout the events at issue in this Inquiry. Indeed, I have found that the co-owners would not have entered negotiations with WCD absent her intervention. Once the Agreement of Purchase and Sale was signed, the Mayor sought significant commercial concessions. She went to great lengths to keep the deal alive as economic conditions deteriorated. And when the co-owners terminated the deal and litigation ensued, the Mayor again intervened to attempt to have the litigation settled.

I pause here to say that the Mayor held the view that provided she declared a conflict of interest in her legislative capacity and refrained from voting at Council or taking part in discussion, she was on safe ground. Currently-certainly, she was correct in her view that the MCIA did not apply to her actions in advocating privately for her son’s company. This may very well point to an inadequacy in the Act. Nevertheless, I have found that her actions were nevertheless improper-improper under the application of common law principles. These principles should be codified. The Act should be amended to make it clear that mayors and members of Council are subject to the conflict of interest provisions both in the legislative and executive functions of their office.”

Ontario’s Municipal Conflict of Interest Act is a worthless, deceptive piece of paper that this province has inflicted on our fellow Ontarians!  See related article, Time to reform local governance in Nova Scotia January 5, 2012 By Tom Urbaniak. Urbaniak writes, “Nova Scotia’s Municipal Conflict of Interest Act is also inadequate. It requires elected officials to avoid taking part in council or board meetings for their personal gain, but has gaping loopholes when it comes to conduct outside meetings. Nova Scotia’s conflict-of-interest legislation is modelled on Ontario’s. A recent judicial inquiry there showed the weakness of that statute.” Back to Page 2 of the Code.]

7. In carrying out his or her responsibilities regarding the Code of Conduct, the Integrity
Commissioner is not limited to looking at the pecuniary interest of the Member, and for
clarity the Integrity Commissioner is specifically authorized to investigate issues of
conflict in a broad and comprehensive manner.

[CITIZEN HEADS UPCRUCIAL STATEMENTS! “[T]he Integrity Commissioner is not limited to looking at the pecuniary interest of the Member” but also “specifically authorized to investigate issues of conflict in a broad and comprehensive manner.”  MISSISSAUGAWATCH will be testing Item 7’s “not limited to looking at the pecuniary interest of the Member” in the upcoming months. I’m not hopeful… Back to Page 2 of the Code.]

Definitions

a. In the Code of Conduct the terms “child”, “parent” and “spouse” have the same meanings
as in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act:

“child” means a child born within or outside marriage and includes an adopted child and a
person whom a parent has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her
family;

END OF PAGE 2 OF THE CODE.

“parent” means a parent who has demonstrated a settled intention to treat a child as a
member of his or her family whether or not that person is the natural parent of the child;

“spouse” means a person to whom the person is married or with whom the person is living
in a conjugal relationship outside of marriage;

b. “Family Member” means a spouse, common-law partner, or any other person with whom
the person is living as a spouse outside of marriage;

• child, includes step-child and grand-child;
• siblings.

c. “Member” means a member of the Mississauga City Council, including the Mayor.

d. “staff” includes the City Manager and Chief Administrative Officer, Commissioners,
Directors, Managers, Supervisors and all non-union and union staff whether full-time, parttime,
contract, seasonal or volunteers.

[NOTE: Important! The Code includes volunteers. The City of Mississauga is extremely careful to select volunteers who share the City’s goals and “vision”. Meaning three words. Friends. Of. Hazel. Video evidence confirms that a surprising number of the City’s volunteers can warble and defend the MYTHissauga Party Line better than City of Mississauga elected officials and even the Commissioners! Two easy examples, Brian “Brave Bold Future” Crombie, Jim “I love you, Hazel” Murray. Back to Page 3 of the Code.]

e. “Nomination Day” means the last day for filing or withdrawing a nomination as provided
for by the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

END OF PAGE 3 OF THE CODE.

Rule No. 1

Key Principles that Underlie the Code of Conduct:

a. Members of Council shall serve and be seen to serve their constituents in a
conscientious and diligent manner.

[“serve… in a conscientious and diligent manner“. Worthless, meaningless motherhood statement. Whoever wrote this doesn’t believe “serve… in a conscientious and diligent” manner for a second. Keep reading. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

Commentary

Members of Council recognize the public’s right to reasonable access to information in
relation to how decisions are made. The public’s right to access however must be balanced
against the requirement to protect the legitimate interests of the City and the respect for
approved policies of the City.

[The City’s caveat, “The public’s right to access however must be balanced” renders the Key Principle, “Members of Council shall serve and be seen to serve their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner” illusion —a sucker’s statement. As I keep saying, it’s not the information that they City of Mississauga shares, it’s what they choose to hide  —to withhold/protect, that you really need to know. And it’s that vital information —the material that they wouldn’t want reaching the media— that the City denies access to.

Why? Three reasons. One, the “legitimate interests of the City” comes down to it not being in the interests of the City for the public to know the malfeasance that’s really going on. And second, the City of Mississauga chooses to uphold the public trust by thwarting access to the very information that would confirm the degree to which the City can’t be trusted! Third and best reason of all, denying access is the most efficient, cost-effective way to run a city like a business. Lies don’t cost a single penny. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

b. Members of Council should be committed to performing their functions with
integrity and to avoiding the improper use of the influence of their office, and
conflicts of interest, both apparent and real. Members of Council shall not extend
in the discharge of their official duties, preferential treatment to Family Members,
organizations or groups in which they or their Family Members have a direct or
indirect pecuniary interest.

[IMPORTANT! “Members of Council should be committed to performing their functions with integrity“. This Code of Conduct has been in effect since December 2010. Seriously! Don’t you think if the City’s Integrity Commissioner was even remotely effective, we’d have seen Members of Council “performing their functions with integrity” by now? Details regarding the ‘improper use of the influence of their office” at a later date. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

Commentary

Members of Council have a common understanding that in carrying out their duties as a
Member of Council, they will not participate in activities that grant, or appear to grant, any
special consideration, treatment or advantage to a Family Member or an individual which is
not available to every other individual.

[“[T]hey will not participate in activities that grant, or appear to grant, any special consideration”. What fraud! All anyone need do is refer to Sunday’s Mayor’s New Year’s Levee and watch which councillors McCallion/Staff selected to bask in the Media that day. Mississauga City Hall is in Councillor Frank Dale’s ward —the Mayor had no choice but to include him. But Ward 2’s councillors Ron Starr and Bonnie Crombie and Ward 1’s Jim Tovey welcoming in the New Year inside the Great Hall? I interpret that as the Mayor already anointing Crombie as her successor with Starr as Crombie’s make-it-happen guy. As in this MISSISSAUGALife photo. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

Bonnie Crombie Wins Ward 5!  Community, News, People, Politics | October 21, 2011 by misslife | Comments (0)

Photo Credit: MISSISSAUGALife

[As for Councillor Jim Tovey? Considering the “Friends of Hazel” barely squeaked him into that Ward 1 chair, they know that he needs all the photo-ops he can get before 2014. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

Members of Council are governed by the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act and the provisions
of that statute take precedence over any authority given to the Integrity Commissioner to
receive or investigate complaints regarding alleged contraventions under the Municipal
Conflict of Interest Act.

[That’s right. The Code states, “Members of Council are governed by the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act and the provisions of that statute take precedence over any authority given to the Integrity Commissioner” even though we know this Act allows any elected official to lobby/promote deals bestowing tens of millions of dollars for relatives provided they declare a pecuniary interest at Council meetings. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

c. Members of Council are expected to perform their duties in office and arrange
their private affairs in a manner that promotes public confidence and will bear
close public scrutiny.

[Reminder how the City of Mississauga does its all to avoid any scrutiny, let alone “close”. And when the City’s nudge-nudge-wink-winks are threatened to be exposed, the “Friends of Hazel” spring into action to protect their interests and their Secret Society. Back to Page 4 of the Code.]

Commentary

Members of Council may seek conflict of interest advice, including a written opinion, from the
Integrity Commissioner however, where members choose to seek external legal advice on
conflict of interest issues, these fees will not be reimbursed by the City of Mississauga and
cannot be charged to any office account.

END OF PAGE 4 OF THE CODE.

 d. Members of Council shall avoid any interest in any contract made by him/her in
an official capacity and shall not contract with the City or any agency thereof for
the sale and purchase of supplies, material or equipment or for the rental thereof.

e. Members of Council, while holding public office, shall not engage in the

management of a business carried on by a corporation and shall not profit
directly or indirectly from a business carried on by a corporation that does or has
contracted with the City of Mississauga.

f. Despite subsection e., a Member of Council may hold office or directorship in an
agency, board, commission or corporation where the Member has been appointed
by City Council or by the Council of the Regional Municipality of Peel or by the
Federal or Provincial government.

g. Despite subsection e., a Member of Council may hold office or directorship in a

charitable, service or other not-for-profit corporation subject to the Member
disclosing all material facts to the Integrity Commissioner and obtaining a written
opinion from the Integrity Commissioner approving the activity, as carried out in
the specified manner, which concludes that the Member does not have a conflict
between his/her private interest and public duty. In circumstances where the
Integrity Commissioner has given the Member a qualified opinion, the Member of
Council may remedy the situation in the manner specified by the Integrity
Commissioner.

Commentary

Examples of exceptions include hospital boards, charitable boards, police services boards,
community foundations, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Federation of
Canadian Municipalities, service clubs such as the Rotary Club, Lions Club and other not-for-profit
organizations. Members should exercise caution if accepting such positions if the
organization could be seeking a benefit or preferential treatment from the City at any time.


h. Members of Council shall perform official duties and arrange their private affairs

in a manner that promotes public confidence and respect and will bear close
public scrutiny.

Commentary

Members of Council shall not participate in activities that grant, or appear to grant, any special
consideration, treatment or advantage to an individual which is not available to every other
individual member of the public. For example, Members shall remain at arm’s length when
City staff or Council is asked to consider a matter involving a Family Member or a prominent
supporter of the Member of Council.

[“Members shall remain at arm’s length when City staff or Council is asked to consider a matter involving…a prominent supporter of the Member of Council.” Can you spot the totally useless, unenforceable unit of measure? This is the end of Page 5 of the Code.]

 END OF PAGE 5 OF THE CODE.

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

 

NOTE: This blog entry was originally written live and carried the title, “Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word. Blogging LIVE! (Part 1)”

Blogging Live turned out to be a mistake because, after all, should a blog really carry the name” Blogging LIVE!” when you’re completed and you’re now on to Part 2? I also received comments that said Blogging LIVE adding material bit-by-bit was confusing.

I’ve also renamed this blog entry, “Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word. (Part 1)”

Published: January 6, 2012 10:50 AM
Updated: January 6, 2012 11:17 AM

MISSISSAUGAWATCH A.F.K. (Away From Keyboard)

Updated: January 6, 2012 11:52 AM
Updated: January 6, 2012 12:01 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012 12:42 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   1:09 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   1:17 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   1:30 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   1:43 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   1:51 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   2:04 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   2:12 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   2:23 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   2:28 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   2:35 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   2:59 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   3:19 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   3:43 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   3:54 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   4:03 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   4:14 PM
Updated: January 6, 2012   7:53 PM

MISSISSAUGAWATCH A.F.K. (Away From Keyboard)

Updated: January 6, 2012   8:17 PM  Part 1 completed. Part 2 tomorrow.

FINAL UPDATE: January 7, 2012 9:40 AM. Removed references to blogging live (it confused readers) and renamed this blog entry, “Examining The City of Mississauga’s Council Code of Conduct, line by line, word by word. (Part 1)”.  Working on Part 2.

Post Linx
Permalink | | Print This Article