MISSISSAUGAWATCH
MississaugaWatch Mississauga Watch

Registered letter to Hazel McCallion sets record straight on her Security operation and its “CSIS” database

April 22nd, 2015  

On April 16, 2015, the following letter was sent by registered mail to former Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion in response to an email that she sent me back on April 16, 2007. In it, the Mayor insisted that regarding age and ethnicity, “there are no records to be found based on such categories.”

This now sets the record straight.

Canadian Security Magazine Jan/Feb 2007 "Shattering the Myth" City of Mississauga Corporate Security

Dear Madam Mayor, (You’ll always be “Madam Mayor” to me…)

I’m sending this by registered letter today, April 16, 2015, because it’s my way of acknowledging the 8th anniversary of an email that you wrote to me back on April 16, 2007.

Since February 2010 you’ve tried to set up a meeting with me to discuss issues I’ve had over the years, and that April 16, 2007 email certainly tops my list of concerns.
In an April 16, 2007 email, City Staff signing Hazel McCallion's name lie --twice.

After years of filing Freedom of Information I was finally ready to meet with you, and successfully set up a meeting for October 6, 2014.

Then, however, you (or your staff) postponed it on June 30, 2014, writing:

Unfortunately, due to changes in the Mayor’s schedule we are unable to confirm the October 6th date.  As per the Mayor’s e-mail to you earlier today, we will be in touch with you in the future as to when the Mayor is able to meet with you.

Well, no one ever did get in touch. I waited patiently until I finally had to write and remind you on November 5, 2014. On November 7th your Office wrote advising me there’d be no meeting:

Thank you for your e-mail dated November 5, 2014.  Unfortunately, due to the Mayor’s heavy schedule and numerous commitments prior to her retirement we are unable to accommodate your request for a meeting at this time.

So that’s why I’m writing you now. Specifically I wish to address what you wrote in your April 16, 2007 [07/030 file] email paragraph 4:
In an April 16, 2007 email, Hazel McCallion denies that City of Mississauga keeps records on Age and Ethnicity.

You have also taken issue with my earlier statement that the City treats all its residents fairly regardless of language or ethnicity. You alleged that because there is no detail on any security reports based on age and ethnicity, I had no basis to make this statement.  You also made other comments and references to instances that took place in the Brampton courts to substantiate your assertions.  Contrary to your allegations, it is because the City does not discriminate on the basis of age and ethnicity that there are no records to be found based on such categories.  I can also see no correlation between your speculative comments or such instances occurring outside of our City and your suggestion that the City is not treating its residents fairly, as I have indicated earlier.

The statement, “Contrary to your allegations, it is because the City does not discriminate on the basis of age and ethnicity that there are no records to be found based on such categories.” was not only false, I allege that denying that the City kept ethnicity/age records was deliberate deception.

Your emphatic denial that the City kept no ethnicity/age records eventually cost me enormous amounts of time and several hundred dollars for Freedom of Information filings. Because of your denial, when I requested first the hard copies, and later the computer files for the entire City of Mississauga Corporate Security “CSIS” database, I asked for all fields—but not ethnicity and age, since I believed what you wrote about not keeping that data!

The fact is, ethnicity and age were the two most important issues I was researching as a member of the Peel Youth Violence Prevention Network’s Education and Policy Working Group. Your April 16, 2007 email denied keeping those stats.

Please find enclosed a print-out of the entire City of Mississauga Corporate Security “CSIS” database (81 pages) that I finally secured through Freedom of Information. It’s a version that I’ve modified so that only the most important fields fit on each page. I’ve also added a column that calculates the age of each individual at time of incident.

Please note as you examine the database print-out that City Security did not use the term “Ethnicity” but rather “Complexion” in Column “R”, and yes, Security really did spell Caucasian “Caucasion”. Note too that they assigned “European” as a Complexion, as well as some other puzzling entries.

City of Mississauga Corporate Security bans issued by Security Manager, Jamie Hillis

Analyzing City Security’s Special Occurrence Reports (SORs) secured through Freedom of Information made me realize that there had to be some kind of database to print them out.

City of Mississauga Corporate Security "Special Occurrence Report" purposely leaves "Complexion" from the print-out.

It took multiple attempts over several years but I finally secured their entire “CSIS” Excel spreadsheet.

What I discovered when I finally had the complete database in my hands was not only shocking and appalling, it was also infuriating. City Security had clearly made sure that “Complexion” was left off their Special Occurrence Reports. Your Security operation not only kept ethnicity “Complexion” records since at least January 2006, they lied to you, to me, and to the public about keeping such stats.

Someone designed this database and made a deliberate decision to include ethnicity data. Someone knew that this was wrong and tried to disguise the fact by using the euphemism “Complexion”. City Security staff were well aware the field existed because they diligently filled it on in the majority of their reports. How did this escape notice?

Also, I was before Council several times with deputations giving elected officials the same alerts. The City Security officer present would have heard my allegations about the Security database, known they were true, and yet she remained silent. Why?

A casual skim through Security’s database forces the conclusion that no one (Security management, the Director of Facilities & Property Management, Corporate Services, or any elected official) ever took a serious look through City Security’s database—or if they did, they decided to become complicit in the cover-up.

Even Jeremiah Brenner Management Consulting who conducted the 2009 “Security E3 Review” and wrote about the database failed to alert the City Manager about the abuse of process festering there.

If you examine the database as I have—through the lens of the McMurtry/Curling “Roots of Youth Violence” Report, the Peel Youth Charter, and the Mississauga Youth Plan—you’ll truly understand just how deceptive the City was.

Next, Freedom of Information requests filed 2007 through 2014 has confirmed that your statement that “the City treats all its residents fairly regardless of language or ethnicity” is also false.

Here’s a quick example that shows citizens are not treated fairly.

For its own reasons, the City of Mississauga ensured that City Security was exempt from the Province’s public complaints system provided by Ontario’s Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Instead, in March 2008 you and Councillors allowed City Security to investigate themselves. No doubt they will deny it, but Freedom of Information confirms that they did investigate themselves—contrary to City’s Security Public Complaints policy.

As far as I can determine, the City of Mississauga has the only municipal security operation in Ontario that denies its citizens access to the independent public complaints process provided by the Province. Our complaints still go to the Security bosses to “investigate”. A citizen with a complaint against City Security therefore gets anything but fair treatment.

It gets worse.

Even on the City’s own property/facilities, Corporate Security’s database confirms that citizens are treated unfairly!

At times the City hires security guards from a private company like First Response for special events, and also for Transit.

So (for example) if you are banned or arrested at the City Centre Transit Terminal by a “contract” security guard and you have a complaint, you can file it with Ontario’s Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services for an independent investigation.

City of Mississauga Corporate Security "CSIS" database: Contract Security only plus "Complexion"

If you’re banned/arrested at the same terminal for the same reason, but by City of Mississauga Security, there’s no independent provincial route. The only avenue for your complaint is through the City—where the very people you are complaining about get to decide whether your complaint is valid. And then “investigate” it.

As I’ve already advised Council, former Transit Security boss, Joe Cairney, managed to have underling Dan Stevanov investigate him regarding a public complaint. The outcome was entirely predictable, and the man complaining wasted his own time.

Had that person been banned by the City’s contracted private security, his complaint would have gone to the Province and been investigated independently.
I repeat, as far as I’m aware, the City of Mississauga has the only “in-house” security operation exempt from Bill 159’s Provincial complaints system. How is this treating all residents fairly?

Now here we are, April 16, 2015, 8 years later and the public still doesn’t know City Security’s “Complexion” statistics. Despite a Security Public Complaints Policy (approved by Council in 2008) directing otherwise, Security is still free to investigate itself.

You have frequently reminded me, Council, and even the public just how much Staff time I’ve taken up regarding Security and Staff conduct in general. Time responding to my questions. Time responding to my emails.

Steve Mahoney has an excellent quote on his Twitter account and it certainly applies to my experience dealing with City of Mississauga staff: “The truth is easier to remember.”

I also submit that the truth also takes far, far less time.

The truth is that on April 16, 2007 your Security Staff lied about not keeping Ethnicity and Age statistics, lied about treating all citizens fairly regardless of age or ethnicity—and then signed your name to their lies.

HAZEL MCCALLION ACCUSE STAFF GUILTY OF Feb 2 2010

After my February 2, 2010 deputation, and after detailing some of the ways City Staff fail to comply with Corporate policies, procedures, and guidelines, you dismissed my allegations with:

It’s pretty serious when people can come before a public body and accuse Staff of doing something they are not guilty of.

Yes, Madam Mayor. But I submit that it’s far far far more serious when municipal staff whose mantra is “Trust, Quality, Excellence” repeatedly deny allegations that they know are true.

CC: City of Mississauga Council
City of Brampton Council
Town of Caledon Council
Peel Police Services Board
Integrity Commissioner, Robert J. Swayze
Ontario Ombudsman, Andre Marin

 

Click here for the full PDF:

ALL 5381 FORMAT CHKD 140205 MCCALLION 150415d FINAL

Mayor Hazel McCallion anointing Bonnie Crombie as Successor in the making for years –YEARS.

November 9th, 2014  

I have SO LOVED watching this Liberal 2014 take-over of Mississauga go down!

To Crombies’ enemies: Your doom was SELF-INFLICTED!

To the Hazel Worshipper “Friend of Hazel” who backed Mahoney and is now condemning McCallion and her “Legacy”, BEND OVER! There’s more where that came from!

Thought I’d follow up on yesterday’s Toronto Sun column “Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion remains a whirlwind to the end” by Sue-Ann Levy.

Levy writes:

“[McCallion] bristles somewhat when I ask her why she ended up endorsing Crombie for mayor over rival Steve Mahoney, especially when Mississauga residents were led to believe she’d stay neutral.

She insists she never said she’d remain neutral; rather that she’d analyze the platforms of those running for mayor and would endorse the platform she felt was good for Mississauga.

“I never endorsed Bonnie Crombie and she knows that … I endorsed Bonnie Crombie’s platform,” she said.

When I suggested that notwithstanding, her endorsement carried tremendous weight, she claims Crombie would have won without her endorsement.

“It would have been close but she was gaining the momentum,” says Hurricane Hazel. “My endorsement just gave her the big win and she knows it.

It was of course at that point I realized the wily Mississauga mayor knew very well what she was doing — that she saw Crombie as the one best to carry on her legacy.”

On that, both Hazel McCallion and I can agree on — Crombie is the one best to carry on her legacy.

Here’s video I shot the day before the Election Vote to explain exactly why I knew Bonnie Crombie would win the moment she registered —and why Hazel McCallion anointed her. From key organizers of “Friends of Hazel” Rally to Mississauga Summit to #TeamCrombie.

Bonnie Crombie’s War Room “Charting a brave, bold future” to Mayor –and BEYOND!

Signed,
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

Wherein Life imitates Cartoons…

Only creatures who are on their way
Ever poison their own well

 

 

Steve Mahoney: The SYMBIOTS of MYTHissauga –Mississauga 2014 Mayor Campaign Analysis

April 29th, 2014  

Every established politician has his share of what MISSISSAUGAWATCH refers to as “Symbiots”.

Don’t try Googling “symbiots”  –we just made it up. We define “symbiot” as one who engages in symbiosis.

In his testimony at the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, OMERS President, Michael Nobrega referred to those who engage in symbiosis, (for example, those who cling to Mayor Hazel McCallion) as “hangers-on”.

We’ve determined that some Symbiots hang onto Hazel McCallion so tenaciously that we’ve come to refer to them as “Cling-ons”.

So we raise the inevitable question: what makes a person or group actively support (hang-on) to a politician?

We believe that Justice J. Douglas Cunninghams, has the answer. He wrote:

“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.”

—J. Douglas Cunningham, Commissioner  Report Updating the Ethical Infrastructure, October 3, 2011

Symbiots have “derived benefits from those relationship”, be that with Mayor Hazel McCallion or any other politician.

This raises another question: What, if anything, can we learn about a politician by researching his Symbiots?

By example, what if you knew absolutely nothing about a politician and your only source of information comes from what you can learn about his “hangers-on”?

And that raises three other questions: So who are MYTHissauga’s Symbiots? And why?….

And.

WHO wins BIGGEST if Steve Mahoney does?…

And then there’s FORD NATION…

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

City of Mississauga Security scuttles Hazel McCallion’s reputation for “running a tight ship” [Freedom of Information]

February 15th, 2014  

Yesterday was February 14, 2014, Hazel McCallion’s 93rd birthday. As expected the Mississauga News is full-flow-gushing this annual event.

Today we’re going back in the day, February 14, 2007 when Rogers Cable 10 telecast a fascinating and so ironic Mississauga Council debate. The Mayor and Councillors were falling all over themselves because of an error made by City Staff in a by-law that potentially caused “hardship” to people. As we know, in Mississauga, “hardship” means Money Matters.

But we challenge you to view this video through a different lens. Imagine if back on February 14, 2007 Mississauga Council took our complaints about City of Mississauga Corporate Security as seriously as Money Matters. Imagine then, instead, that they were talking about “expeditiously” dealing with the lies and denies of their own Security operation. Seven years ago… What a difference that would have made!

So here’s our Mississauga Council Valentine’s Day 2007 dedicated to ALL those at the City who not only did Nothing, but actively engaged in fabrication and cover up. (Complete with video transcript.)

Dedicated to City of Mississauga Corporate Security bosses Ken Owen, Jamie Hillis, Cathie Evans and Joe Cairney.

City of Mississauga Security scuttles Hazel McCallion’s reputation for “running a tight ship”

VIDEO TRANSCRIPT

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

My advice to Staff, and I’m going to give some advice –that reports need to be more complete.  And I think we should be aware of discussions that take place on a very important change in the by-law.

It’s not just changing a simple policy, folks. It’s changing a by-law.

Yes. We made a mistake. And obviously we all admit we didn’t do our homework. On it. So I think we should learn from our experiences.

[Dip to White]

Paul Mitcham, Commissioner of Community Services, February 14, 2007

Madam Mayor? Madam Mayor, if I might as well request if there are any individual situations where there is hardship, that they be brought to my attention—

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

Very good.

Paul Mitcham, Commissioner of Community Services, February 14, 2007

—and I will address them.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

You will.

Paul Mitcham, Commissioner of Community Services, February 14, 2007

Ah, secondly, we w-I would appreciate really an opportunity to talk to Staff before we commit to a timeline. But then we will certainly expedite it at your request.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

Thank you.

[Dip to White]

Councillor Pat Mullin, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

There’s nothing underhanded about this.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

No.

Councillor Pat Mullin, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

This is simply—

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

I didn’t say that.

Councillor Pat Mullin, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

—something that in my view we did not look at carefully. And people are being hit.

It’s important as Councillor Carlson says, is to do the right thing as quickly as possible. So I ask—

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

And we will do the right thing.

Councillor Pat Mullin, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

—and I would ask, I would ask that there would not be a delay in this. That this would come forward as quickly as possible.

[Dip to White]

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council, February 14, 2007

We will deal with it expeditiously. And we will make sure that nobody is harmed by it. That, Paul Mitcham, the Commissioner, has assured us. And we will have it back as —uh.

It’s unfortunate it got by us. And we apologize for it. There is nothing underhanded about it. But I really believe that the Council has made the right decision by deferring it for more debate, more understanding.

I think it’s important that the eleven members around this Council understand the implications of any actions we take. And so that is extremely important.

Councillor Parrish….

[Dip to White}

City of Mississauga Corporate Security database scrolls. Sorted by Ethnicity. Asian. Black. Caucasion [sic]
Audio: Hazel McCallion’s February 14, 2007 advice to staff repeated.

“My advice to Staff, and I’m going to give some advice –that reports need to be more complete.”

“Yes. We made a mistake. And obviously we all admit we didn’t do our homework. On it.”

“We will deal with it expeditiously. And we will make sure that nobody is harmed by it.”

“I think it’s important that the eleven members around this Council understand the implications of any actions we take. And so that is extremely important.”

[Fade to Black. Dip to Black. MISSISSAUGAWATCH logo]

Too bad the Mississauga Mayor and Council weren’t this “expeditious” about dealing with their Security force. Freedom of Information confirms there was something “underhanded” about City of Mississauga Corporate Security’s Ken Owen, Jamie Hillis, Cathie Evans, Joe Cairney etc etc.

For easier reading, see larger sizes at: www.flickr.com/photos/43172810@N00/12547706404/sizes/h
 

Signed,

It is what it is. And telling it like it is.
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Rob Ford invades Mississauga (aka Liberal Ground Zero) at GTA Mayors Ice Storm Press Conference. Two Liberals flee!

January 19th, 2014  

Just a quick summary of the GTA Mayors and Regional Chairs Ice Storm Press Conference held at Mississauga’s Living Arts Centre on Friday, January 17, 2014.

It was ACTION PACKED!

First the serious stuff. The entire GTA Mayors Press Conference in fascinating split-screen. Cam 2 on Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion speaking at the podium and Cam 1 on Toronto Mayor Rob Ford as he listens (and stifles). (Cam 1 audio synchronized to Cam 2)

 Rob Ford and Hazel McCallion Split-Screen GTA Mayor’s Ice Storm Press Conference

Next.

I bet I was the only one who noticed City of Mississauga Corporate Security and former City of Toronto Corporate Security, Rob Ford’s driver, all under one roof —let alone get all excited about that.

Mayor Rob Ford's driver waves at MISSISSAUGAWATCH as City of Mississauga Corporate Security (aka The Misstapo) drives elevator

So I’m videotaping this for posterity and danged if Rob Ford’s security/driver doesn’t wave at me and did he even smile?! Imagine my confusion!

When I replayed the video, sure enough, it was a wave with all four fingers and thumbs and the smile was friendly instead of menacing.

Sure, maybe the Story really was the Ice Storm funding but video suggests the media would have showed up even if Rob Ford were just to park his Cadillac Escalade in the Living Arts Centre underground garage and refuse to pay for parking. Make no mistake the cameras were aimed at him, for him, and not Mayor Hazel McCallion. Certainly I’ve never witnessed a situation where McCallion wasn’t the Centre of the Universe. I did on Friday though.

And here’s the video of Rob Ford’s STAR power.

 Rob Ford’s *S*T*A*R* upstages Hazel McCallion –and Burns “One” Down

Something interesting about this video is that the female City of Mississauga Corporate Security guard, escorting Mayor Rob Ford out, was the Supervisor on duty on November 14, 2008 who thought it appropriate to ban a 10 year old girl from three facilities at once (Mississauga Civic Centre, Living Arts Centre and Central Library) for 30 days. Freedom of Information confirmed this little girl to be Asian, despite Security bosses lying that they don’t keep records of Age or Ethnicity. And just yesterday we received a tip that despite hundreds of arrests since January 2006, City of Mississauga Corporate Security has only now adopted its first every Arrest Policy. Effective December 1, 2013.  Except there’s no evidence that the Mayor or any Councillor ever had a peek at it… So this video is dedicated to City of Mississauga Corporate Security.

Another interesting thing about the video is that it was only after producing it and uploading it to YouTube that I replayed the segment that contained Mississauga’s Liberal Mayor-in-Waiting Bonnie Crombie. As videographers know, you’re sometimes too caught up in documenting action that you don’t always know what you have —or its significance.

For example in the video Rob Ford’s *S*T*A*R* upstages Hazel McCallion…” I didn’t notice Mississauga Councillor Chris Fonseca in it! It was only when I analyzed the clip that I noticed that both Liberal Councillors Bonnie Crombie and Chris Fonseca’s odd behaviour.

I’d stood ready for Mayor Rob Ford to leave the Living Arts Centre when Bonnie Crombie rushed past, hair flying and heels clicking. She stopped pointed quickly behind her and retreated into a side door. The photographer rushed and my camera followed and dang if it wasn’t the Rob Ford entourage.

And in the sight-line of my camera was former Mississauga News publisher Ron Lenyk and Liberal Mississauga Councillor Chris Fonseca. Video analysis shows Fonseca turning her head, turning back at Lenyk with eyes bugged and then a split-second later, fleeing lest media cameras record her in the background with Conservative Rob Ford!

The very politicians who do their all to appear in photos with Hazel McCallion couldn’t have moved much faster had GODZILLA-himself stomped down both Marilyn Monroe Towers, laid waste of Square One and was now bearing down on them!

Rob Ford terrorizes Mississauga Liberals Bonnie Crombie and Chris Fonseca who flee FORDZILLA's impending wake.
One last thing and this is to Mayor Rob Ford. You know when Hazel McCallion said

“And by the way, the next thing we’re going to deal with if I have my wish, is the gridlock in the GTA —working together to solve it.”

That’s MYTHISSAUGAspeak for “We-Liberals will do our all to solve You this municipal election!”

Signed,

(the liberal) MISSISSAUGAWATCH

OH! And.

Today, is is an anniversary of sorts. It was January 2007 when I filed my very first Freedom of Information request. And it was seven years ago today, that I got back my very first Freedom of Information response letter from the City of Mississauga!

CITY OF MISSISSAUGA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION 2007/01/19 (JANUARY 19, 2007)

Of course back then I didn’t know that City of Mississauga Enforcement was a different branch from City of Mississauga Corporate Security. Of course back then I also thought just a word to the Mayor-Who-Runs-A-Tight-Ship and all would be fixed…

ROB FORD SAVES HAZEL on fishing trip! Just six days after drunken Taste of Danforth romp! (What a coincidence!)

August 17th, 2013  

Rob Ford Saves Hazel McCallion On Fishing Trip… really?

By now Traditional and Social Media are abuzz about how Mayor Rob Ford “saved” Hazel McCallion during the opening day of the Great Ontario Salmon Derby. You really need to watch the video, “Hazel McCallion lands the big one as Rob Ford and Italo Labignan cheer her on” by Italo Labignan to see “saved” for yourself.

Odd that the actual videographer doesn’t name his video, “Rob Ford saves Hazel McCallion”.  More odd, his YouTube video description also makes no mention of saving. It simply reads, “Hazel McCallion, Rob Ford, Julian Fantino, Walter Oster and Italo Labignan enjoy the day on the water when Hazel lands a HUGE Salmon!” [commas added].

The description failed to mention Toronto Sun’s Joe Warmington in attendance [guy with camera YouTube thumbnail above]. As he was the year before. And likely before that….

Given Rob Ford’s recent public appearance, seen here in the YouTube video Toronto Mayor Rob Ford drunk walking along the danforth! by Adrain Sosa, anyone else think this Rob Ford/Hazel McCallion “fishing trip” was an orchestrated Pity Photo-Op? Especially given that at last year’s Great Ontario Salmon Derby opening day trip, Julian Fantino and Walter Oster had an all-penis crew of many of the usual suspects minus Rob Ford?

It’s clear from his column “Mayor Rob Ford makes catch of the day — Mayor Hazel McCallion” and his first three sentences why the Sun columnist is invited each year.

MISSISSAUGA – It was not just the catch of the day, but the save of the day too.

On Capt. Dolly Erbrecht’s Salmon Express II Thursday, that distinction went to none other than Mayor Rob Ford.

The trophy of the day went to Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion — with a little help from her honourable friend.

Warmington’s “save of the day” “from her honourable friend” reminds me of the white lie people lie just to prop up someone’s meager self-esteem —or flagging fortunes. Add photos of Rob Saves Hazel. Video too. A classic Pity Photo-Op!

Fact is, when you’ve seen how Mississauga political hopefuls latch themselves onto Hazel McCallion like the desperate leeches they are —their campaign literature littered with photos of them with the Mayor—  you can understand why Rob Ford needed a Pity Photo-Op with The Hazel.

It was a Pity Photo-Op all right. And it was Hazel McCallion who saved Rob Ford, not the other way around.

By far the most puzzling photograph in Warmington’s “Ford Saves Hazel” photo series is this one.

  Mayor Rob Ford reads a copy of the Toronto Sun on board the Salmon Express II Thursday, Aug. 15, 2013, as part of the Great Ontario Salmon Derby. (Joe Warmington/Toronto Sun)

Now we-all know what Rob Ford looks like when he’s taking a dump. It takes little in the way of PhotoShop to place McCallion’s “honourable friend” onto a gleaming white porcelain toilet…

I decided to PhotoShop Joe Warmington’s “honourable” Mayor Ford more subtley…

"FORD SAVES HAZEL!" Toronto Sun. "HAZEL SAVES FORD!" Mississaugawatch:  Rob Ford moves his lips to the Toronto Sun.

So. Friday, August 9th Rob Ford staggered bleary-eyed drunk in Taste of the Danforth. Thursday, August 15th, he was on a boat “saving” Hazel McCallion…

Anyone ever bother to ponder why it wasn’t former Top Cop Julian Fantino “saving” Hazel?….

They say people deserve the government we get. Seems we also deserve the MEDIA

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

Additional Resources

Toronto Sun’s Joe Warmington trip with Julian Fantino, Justin Ciano, City Councillor Mark Grimes (Etobicoke/Lakeshore) et al on Opening Day Great Ontario Salmon Derby 2012.

The Great Ontario Salmon Derby Opening Day 2012

And

A drunken Rob Ford doesn’t say “blow” but “cologne”. How could Traditional Media miss that?

Hazel McCallion asked for our New Year’s Resolutions: “1. I will not procras –I’ll finish this later.”

July 23rd, 2013  

Back on January 1, 2013 at the Mayor’s New Year’s Levee, Hazel McCallion invited Mississauga residents to share their New Year’s Resolutions with her.

The Mayor said:

“I know you all adopted resolutions. I’d like to see the list you all adopted. It would be fun. We would file them into the City Man –into the Mayor’s office and look –I’d be happy to look at them.”

And McCallion was right about us all having adopted resolutions. I sure did and what luck that the Mayor invited us to share them with her!

My first resolution back on January 1, 2013 inside that Council Chamber happened to be the same first New Year’s Resolution I’ve made since 1963!

1.  I will try not to procrastinate so much.

That it’s taken until July 2013 (perhaps even August…) to getting around to sharing my resolutions with the Mayor condemns “1.  I will try not to procrastinate so much” as EPIC FAIL.

My second resolution was to get back to an exercise regimen and especially back to strength training. Given that I am 63 years old I kept that goal modest:

2. I will complete a set of 8 reps with two 40 lb dumbbells by the end of February.

Only 8 reps.

Repeated family crises —primarily hospitalizations, got in the way but I exceeded that 8 reps goal on March 29th and shared my delight with the Ontario Ombudsman who happened to be tweeting about exercise that day!

@Ont_Ombudsman re “Next few tweets about exercise…” New Year’s Resolution was Chest press 8 reps w 40-lb dumbbells. 1st try today. 12 reps!

Andre Marin was happy for me and tweeted his congratulations.

But for me to share my New Year’s Resolution and results with Hazel McCallion I couldn’t just simply tell her. (After all, “Saying doesn’t make it so” is especially true about anything related to the City of Mississauga.)

My GoodLife gym has a policy against use of cameras so I had to wait until summer to document any heaving of two 40 lb dumbbells.  By then I’d revamped my goal to three sets of 15 reps with two 40 lb dumbbells.

So here’s the video we produced at Valley Isle Fitness, Lahaina, Maui on July 15, 2013. It documents the entire session (including three Fails).

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (63.8 yr old female) presses two 40 lb dumbbells for Hazel McCallion (3 sets x 15)

Which brings us to Resolution 3.

3. I will keep my promise to Mayor McCallion and meet with her as she invited me to do back on February 3, 2010.

Yes, it’s been that long since I promised that I’d accept Hazel McCallion’s invitation to meet with her. (Now you know the wisdom denouncing my First 2013 Resolution “I will try not to procrastinate so much” as EPIC FAIL.)

At that February 2, 2010 General Committee meeting McCallion had said:

“This morning you covered a volume of issues. So I’m going to make the offer again –that we will sit down with you, the total staff that you’ve involved, the Legal, the City Manager, the Community Services, the Security, etc. I’m prepared to do it again for you to get the issues out.

I hope you will accept it this time…”

I gave her a solemn promise that day right in front of Council.

So. Before the end of this summer, I will write the Mayor and request a meeting with her some time in September or October 2014.

Yes. 2014. I’ll need the time to work up a factum (Freedom of Information, video, audio) which I will share piecemeal starting this Fall to ensure City Staff won’t waste my October 2014 meeting time lying and denying.

For the record. I’m under no illusion. If there’s one thing I’ve learned since I began trying to change the way the City of Mississauga conducts its business is not only that ordinary people can’t, but you can actually make things worse —a whole lot worse.

So. There’s absolutely no need to be in any kind hurry for a meeting… since I’ve no expectation of any positive coming out of it.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Valley Isle Fitness Maui Lahaina. MISSISSAUGAWATCH 40 lb dumbbell presses. Last set 19th of 20 attempted.

“The McGuinty we never knew” telegraphs the McCallion we never knew

July 13th, 2013  

It’s been June 29th, 2013 since my last blog and fact is, it really doesn’t matter if I ever write another one. I’ve achieved one of the goals I set out for myself and it explained precisely why it really doesn’t matter if I ever write another blog —or any other thing again.

I found The Answer. Quite literally —found it.

Back in November 2008 the Liberals released the McMurtry/Curling Review of the Roots of Youth Violence Report.

I responded with three December 2008 blogs summarizing this $2.7 million study that failed to file a single Freedom of Information request as part of its “research”.

Highlights: Executive Summary of The report of the Review of the Roots of Youth Violence  

McMurtry/Curling, Volume 1 FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS -in Search of “accountable” and “accountability”  

McMurtry/Curling, Volume 1 FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS -word-surfing for “municipal”, “municipality” and “municipalities”

In so in December 2008 I set out to find The Roots of Youth Violence and what extraordinary good fortune for me that my research base was Mississauga! Fact is I don’t think I’d have stumbled on The Answer had I not filed Freedom of Information in this, Ontario’s —possibly even Canada’s, most influential city.

As you can see even back in December 2008, I’d suspected that the Roots of Youth Violence were somehow connected to a lack of accountability at the local level, in municipal government itself. Back then Freedom of Information had already confirmed the failure of City of Mississauga staff to comply to the City’s corporate policies, procedures and even provincial legislation.

Back then I still stupidly believed that if I could just let Mayor Hazel McCallion know what I knew this “honest” Mayor would ensure a couple of heads would roll and she’d return everything back to the “tight ship” she hailed to run at the City.

Trust me, I just couldn’t have gotten stupider than that.

Think of all that’s happened politically since November 2008 in Mississauga and in Ontario. The Mississauga Judicial Inquiry revealed that the “Honest” Mayor isn’t quite so honest.

Back in the day I wrote my local MPP Bob Delaney and even approached MP Bob Dechert for help —to investigate the lack of accountability at the municipal level.

That’s right. I turned to both the Province and Feds to stop the lying and investigate the City of Mississauga’s unaccountable ways.

Fast-forward to 2013 and we see the immoral political slimefest that is Stephen Harper’s Conservative government. And Dalton McGuinty and his despicable Ontario Liberals have surely set new lows in this province.

I once referred to the City of Mississauga as disorganized white-collar crime. Little did I know at the time, “disorganized white-collar crime” was the perfect descriptor for the Harper Government —and especially Premier Dad’s.

I submit even as Premier Dalton McGuinty announced a study into the Roots of Youth Violence back in 2007, that he knew the Root! McGuinty knew and he only had to look in the mirror.

This week I stumbled on a Globe and Mail article that I read back in October 2012, but I just didn’t get its true significance at the time. But add the January 26, 2013 Ontario Liberal Party leadership convention that saw Puppet Master Hazel McCallion sit-mighty in Kathleen Wynne’s box stringing her MPP Charles Sousa into Wynne’s ranks and you can paint Mississauga Liberal-Red.

Hazel McCallion and Kathleen Wynne January 26, 2013 Ontario Liberal Party leadership convention

Now add McGuinty’s Emailgate.

From Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian’s special report “Deleting Accountability: Records Management Practices of Political Staff.”

“It truly strains credulity to think that absolutely no records … responsive to the Speaker’s ruling were retained”…

“It is difficult to accept that the routine deletion of emails was not in fact an attempt by staff … to avoid transparency and accountability.”

That’s right. I looked to MPP Bob Delaney and the Liberal government that deletes emails “to avoid transparency and accountability” to try and hold the City of Mississauga accountable!

You just can’t get stupider than me.

Re-reading Adam Radwanski’s “The McGuinty we never knew” provided the answer that zipped over my head back in October 2012.

This part:

In between his first campaign and his second, Mr. McGuinty also significantly overhauled his office. That included bringing in some cutthroat political fixers, ruthless about heading off dissent, unapologetic about stroking interest groups that needed to be stroked, and generally willing to do whatever it takes to win – a group headed by a Windsor organizer named Dave Gene, who has been in the office ever since.

“You judge a leader by the people he chooses to be around him,” a long-time insider says. “And he chose some of the most ruthless operators to be there to help him implement his vision.”

In conversations, several senior Liberals suggested that in opposition and then in government, Mr. McGuinty chose to “outsource” politics. Others would do his bidding, while he stayed on the high ground, focused on broader policy areas– health care, education, the environment – that excited him.

The KEY! To Dalton McGuinty.

To Hazel McCallion and her City of Mississauga. Same.

For the record, there's considerable evidence that the "Friends of Hazel" (McCallion) and Bonnie Crombie "political fixers" are one-and-the-same.

Both relied on “cutthroat political fixers, ruthless about heading off dissent”, “some of the most ruthless operators to be there”, “while [McGuinty/McCallion] stayed on the high ground”.

I’ve been researching Hazel McCallion’s “Friends of Hazel” since October 28, 2009 and agree with that long-time insider and several senior Liberals that the “Friends of Hazel” are indeed  “cutthroat political fixers, ruthless about heading off dissent” and “some of the most ruthless operators” this country ever crapped out.

It should comes as no surprise too, that at least some of McGuinty’s “cutthroat political fixers, ruthless about heading off dissent” and “some of the most ruthless operators” are also Hurricane Hazel’s.

And I know this sounds perverse, but I’m happier than I’ve been in years. I’ve found the Roots of Youth Violence and they are the same roots that keep the Poor poor, provide substandard care in Ontario’s nursing homes and the source of all manner of society’s ills.

Our politicians and their “political fixers”.

“Politics is a nasty, unpleasant, mean-spirited business, which is presumably why so many of us here tonight are drawn to it. Many of us are nasty, unpleasant and mean-spirited people.”  —Warren Kinsella, The War Room, p. 72.

Political fixers…

DON CHERRY ROB TREWARTHA FRIENDS OF HAZEL RALLY

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH
Ursula Bennett, liberal

 

Additional Resources:

The McGuinty we never knew   by Adam Radwanski  The Globe and Mail     Published Saturday, Oct. 20 2012

The War Room by Warren Kinsella

Excellent – A must read!  by Robert Trewartha, a review of Warren Kinsella’s “The War Room”,  6 years ago

SAMARA DEMOCRACY REPORT #6  Lightweights?  Political Participation Beyond the Ballot Box

Rob Trewartha gave his boss Warren Kinsella's "The War Room" a 5-star rating on indigo.ca

Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest press conference –and “Hazineh vs McCallion” Summary of Decision pdf files

June 16th, 2013  

What follows is video of Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion’s June 14, 2013 Conflict of Interest press conference. And then Justice John Sproat’s “Hazineh vs McCallion” decision.

Hazel McCallion Conflict-of-interest case dismissed. Her City Hall press conference Jun 14 2013 (24:56 min)


ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Justice Sproat’s Decision


MISSISSAUGAWATCH court notes

 

Hazel McCallion Conflict of Interest Press Conference. The Press: Rick Drennan, San Grewal, Louise Rosella

Hazel McCallion Conflict of Interest Press Conference. The Press: Rick Drennan, San Grewal, Louise Rosella

Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest hearing. The Mayor’s Testimony Day 2. Notes from Brampton Superior Court, April 12, 2013

April 20th, 2013  

Hazel McCallion leaves courtroom after conflict of interest testimony (April 12, 2013)

What follows is a summary of notes taken during Mayor Hazel McCallion’s 2nd day of testimony during her conflict of interest hearing at Brampton court house on April 12, 2013 —Hazel McCallion testifying. If anyone finds any errors I’d appreciate being advised.

COURT NOTES DAY 5 April 12, 2013  2nd day of Hazel McCallion’s testimony

McCallion jokes with court staff.  Confident, up-beat, ain’t no big thing.

10:04  am  Judge Sproat enters.  Court in session. Hazel McCallion on the stand.

Thomas Richardson (Elias Hazineh’s lawyer) up.

Richardson refers to buff booklet and the Mayor’s January 24 and 25, 2013 cross-examination. Richardson asks McCallion whether since that time what she’s prepared since. Richardson asks what other documents did McCallion review in preparing to testimony today? Richardson asks if she reviewed her affidavit as well as those of Mayor’s Fennell and Morrison.

Richardson mentions that he was provided a booklet yesterday and in there is new evidence that was not provided on application record.

Richardson refers the Mayor to Tab 3 in the booklet. It’s a February 2, 2009 letter to Pat Bennie. Richardson asks McCallion what motivation did she have to provide this letter at this stage in the hearing?

Richardson asked why she inserted that letter now. Richardson claims to have read many articles in Municipal World. Neatly avoiding Richardson’s question.

Richardson notices her avoidance and rephrases his original question. He asks McCallion what import does this letter have to the proceedings today? Ask why did she present the letter as new evidence? [McCallion dances again.]

McCallion states that “Conflict of Interest Act may be interpreted in different ways”. And that she’d been on the AMO (Association of Municipalities of Ontario) Board for 30-some years and that she’s “very aware of the history of the Conflict of Interest Act.”

McCallion states that the letter was triggered by WeirFoulds… [Ed. missed it.]

McCallion says it highlights the fact of her concern regarding the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. [Ed. still avoiding question]

Richardson lets her talk but eventually calls McCallion out and says it’s Paragraph 2 that motivated her to write letter. Paragraph 2 states that a member can’t always know what their family is up to and asks how do you know what dealings your children are having?

Richardson reminds McCallion that earlier she’d testified that she did not know Peter’s dealings with World Class Developments (WCD).

Richardson suggests McCallion’s February 2, 2009 letter was triggered because she suspected that her son Peter didn’t reveal his relation with WCD. McCallion asks what do parents do when they have very poor relations with their children and do not communicate?

Richardson asks McCallion whether the letter was triggered by her realization that Peter didn’t inform her adequately as to his involvement in WCD.  McCallion: No. Denies.

Richardson asks whether McCallion was aware that Peter was involved in WCD/OMERS, knew he was acting for Leo Couprie.  When did you become aware that Leo Couprie became involved in WCD? McCallion says “Can’t recall”.

Richardson said McCallion testified she was not aware of details of any financial arrangements. McCallion said she assumed that Peter would be compensated as a real estate agent. Richardson then asked McCallion if Peter had been involved as a real estate agent in other $14M real estate transactions.

Richardson asks whether McCallion the degree to which she was aware that the process was a complex one? McCallion replied that she estimated that the hotel project would take 2-3 years for approval —maybe even more.

McCallion added that she knew the hotel would “obviously” come before Council.

Richardson asks McCallion if she were aware of the financing arrangements? McCallion: Not at any time was she aware of the financing.

Richardson got McCallion to admit WCD/hotel would come before Council once the financing was in place.

Richardson says site plans don’t come before Council. McCallion agrees.

Richardson asks McCallion whether she expected a project of this complexity to come before Council as a site plan? McCallion: It could…

Site had “H” –for Council to have control.

Richardson asks whether the removal of the H was conditional on the site plan approval? Richardson says the H symbol would only be removed after site plan had been granted.

Richardson asks what requirements that had to be met for the H designation to be removed? McCallion: “I’m not sure.”

Richardson asks establishes that McCallion knew the project required building permits? McCallion Yes. And that to get a permit they must pay development charges. McCallion Yes.

Now considering any transition provisions, WCD would have to pay either new charges or old –applicable at the time it got its building permit. And depending on date either new or old.

Richardson asks if McCallion would agree that for any project, paying less charges would help viability of the project. McCallion: First said “not necessarily”.

Richardson now tries that it would be the developer that would “reap the savings”.

Richardson adds that new development charge could “can the deal”. The benefit of the savings would go to the developer. McCallion: Yes.

Richardson then states that the benefit of a reduced development charge would not benefit the electorate. McCallion agrees.

The court is told that when a developer pays a reduced development charge, the loss of revenue would negatively impact the capital budget. Loss of revenue means there’s a loss of money for capital projects. McCallion keeps emphasizing “projection”.

Richardson points out that any revenue deficit must be made up on the tax levy to the electors at large. McCallion says it would not necessarily affect the tax rate —it can come out of the reserve.

Richardson asks McCallion if she disagrees with the opinions of LeBreque that reduced developmental fees revenue would affect taxes? McCallion dances and offers, “I guess if you take it out of the reserve fund, yes.”

McCallion says the only condition she knew about was that the hotel had to be built first. Repeats her comments that residential development comes quickly and non-residential takes a long time “or never”.

McCallion then says that she was concerned the residential would go ahead and the hotel “would never come”.

The court was told that the Sept 6, 2007 approved permits must be acquired from April 1st to May 1st. McCallion says that both Fennell and Morrison concerned and to extend the date.

McCallion also says that elected officials usually aren’t aware of the status of a project unless the developer tells them.

Richardson asks McCallion that it’s her evidence today is that the transition provision was brought up by Mayors Fennell and Morrison.

Richardson asks McCallion whether she had a resolution from Council to seek the amendment. Or Staff. Asks whether she had a recommendation from Regional Staff. McCallion says that the amendment was strictly from Fennell and Morrison. Richardson asks McCallion if she were aware of the fiscal implications to the Region re extension.

McCallion responds that “Transition is a usual policy” —like planning fees, transit, user fees… [Ed. same song as yesterday.]

The transition provision requires that a developer must have a site plan in by [Ed. —missed the date.]

Richardson asks McCallion if she would agree that the transition provision would not apply to citizens of Mississauga but only to apply for site plan approval by September 2007.

Richardson observes that the financial interest of the developer by September 13, 2007 would save the increase of 85% increase in fees.

Richardson now moves to September 13, extending transition period by 18 months. That there was no resolution. That McCallion didn’t discuss this with Councillors. Didn’t discuss with Mississauga Staff.

McCallion responds that this was a Peel matter not Mississauga.

McCallion adds, “We sometimes lose and sometimes win.” McCallion mentions “team approach”.

Richardson then revisits that McCallion didn’t discuss with Peel Staff either. [Ed. So much for team approach.]

Richardson asks McCallion that when she seconded Fennell’s 18-month extension, whether she considered fiscal implications. McCallion: “Don’t recall the discussion”. 

Richardson later pointed out that the Regional staff said $28M. It’s strictly an estimate.

Richardson: You have reputation of running a very tight fiscal ship, why approve transition? McCallion: “Very good question” [Ed. —here’s her prep.]

McCallion says that residential usually doesn’t pay its way and she’s worried she might lose industrial/commercial –a tough balancing act.

[Now she’s dancing about her role in the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and concerns regarding infrastructure, stimulus programs –and whether you’re going to lose your economic base. McCallion then states that losing a hotel was a “major, major loss” to Mississauga.

Richardson says that by September 13, 2007 the Development review had been going on for a year and a half and that Staff and Council had addressed the balancing act she was worried about. Richardson then asks McCallion what infformation she had on September 13, 2007 —what new information the Mayor got to prod her to extend the transition provision.

Richardson then asks McCallion had she known on September 13, 2007 that the provision she approved would save World Class Developments (WCD) $11M would she have declared a conflict of interest? McCallion responds with a swift, firm, “No” and that she feels very strongly that the development charge is like a tax and applies to everybody.

Richardson asks McCallion if her evidence was that she was not aware of WCD’s status? McCallion agrees, not aware. Then he mentions that McCallion expected Staff to keep her apprised of the progress of the WCD site plan application. McCallion replies no, that her instructions to Staff was that she did not wish to be aware of any part of when World Class Developments put anything in the hands of the City. Whether site plan or whatever.

Richardson then asks McCallion to turn to her January 25, 2013 cross-examination, page 248. Question 1172.

Richardson reads her testimony…

Q You were aware that WCD has filed a master site plan application.

Q Would it not have been prudent of you to have read the Sajecki letter to ask “If the Staff had drawn to my attention, there was no discussion”

On January 25, 2013 McCallion said, “Anything to do with WCD I want you to draw my attention”. Now, on the stand, McCallion takes that back! The Mayor clarifies that she did NOT wish to be informed. McCallion says that Marilyn Ball approached her and McCallion had said sorry, I don’t wish to be involved whatever it was (application, plan etc).

And she did this worried it might be seen as having influence on Staff.

Richardson continues to read from the Mayor’s January 2013 cross-examination. [If I can rely on this sentence… ] At some point, McCallion states that Ball told her that WCD was now active at the City.

January 2013, McCallion cross-examination shows that Council and Staff were conscious of a conflict with WCD. [Notes, say “Amazing! McCallion now retracts even more of her cross-exam re Ball and Staff all knowing. Cross-examination said even the public knew Peter was involved!”]

Hazel McCallion then states, “I have to apologize that is not the direction I gave to Staff.”

Richardson then asks whether McCallion made any inquiries as to the status of the hotel project? Richardson lobs out the names, Sajecki? Or Ball? McCallion offers, “Not that I recall” “And I made no inquiries.”

Richardson turns to exhibit booklet tab 2. Journal entries of the Mayor’s daily appointments. Fast out the gate McCallion says that her schedule is changed frequently —and now says she’s not sure if a meeting actually occurred. [I think, “Well played Moriarty!”]

Richardson then asks whether they could agree that the meetings MAY have occurred? Or occurred at another date? McCallion avoids a yes and no and goes with saying that meetings are deferred and some never happened.

Richardson now skims through the Mayor’s schedule as it relates to her son’s World Class Developments cast of characters. Richardson lists the following:

February 12, 2003: Peter McCallion and Tony DeCicco to meet with her.

November [missed date] 2003: Peter and Tony again at her home.

Richardson asks whether Peter and Tony were involved in business in 2003? McCallion now takes the opportunity to repeats her Olympic Flame problem story and finally gives Richardson a “Not sure.”

Richardson then asks McCallion why Tony DeCicco would go through her son to meet with her when it’s common for developers to contact The Mayor directly?

Richardson asks McCallion if Peter and Tony involved in Derrydale? McCallion responds, “I don’t know.”

Richardson then refers to another meeting in the Mayor’s schedule. May 1, 2004. A meeting with Peter, Digasperus [sp?] and David O’Brien (City Manager at the time) [Note also, husband of the City’s Director of Development and Design Marilyn Ball, trustee of McCallion family trust, OMERS/Enersource director etc etc].

Richardson lists off more meetings from the Mayor’s schedule.

June 3, 2004 meeting: Peter McCallion and Leo Couprie with President of Seneca College in development of Seneca.

July 13, 2004 lunch with Peter and Tony at Ruth/Chris steakhouse.

[Ed. missed the date.] Dinner with Peter and Tony.

Jan 29, 2004 lunch Peter and Tony. [Ed. out of order.]

March 14, 2004 Peter and her at dinner at father’s home.

April 14, 2004 Peter, Tony breakfast meeting “at Peter’s urgent request”.

Oct 30, 2004 breakfast with Tony and Peter.

Richardson then asks the Mayor why there were so many meetings with Tony DeCicco and her son in 2004? McCallion responds that there were lots of problems with the Region –something about a road, that she didn’t remember the details. And then mentions that Hwy #10/Derry was a major problem.

McCallion adds,  “I get calls on a lot of developers”…

Richardson gets her to admit she was “familiar” with Tony. The Mayor clarifies, “I had no special relationship with Tony DeCicco” and that she didn’t know his activity in rest of the GTA.

Richardson then turns his attention back to the Mayor’s journal entries.

September 22(?), 2004.

Jan 17, 2005, Peter, Tony dinner at Peter’s request.

May 18, 2005 Peter and Murray Cook. Meeting WCD.

Richardson asks if these meetings were around the time that Murray Cook would get involved in World Class Developments. McCallion says that she can’t recall, but assumes so. And that Peter knew that she knew Murray Cook because of his experience. [Ed: Murray Cook was a longtime friend of the Mayor’s husband, Sam McCallion.]

Richardson asks the Mayor if she encouraged Cook to get involved. McCallion responds, no. She states that she seemed to recall Peter told her in advance that Murray Cook was already involved.

[Ed. there was mention of a dinner with Peter, DiPocce etc. But notes too brief and I can’t recall in what reference.]

Richardson turns to page 15. Says there’s a note on in-camera issues regarding OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) that came up at the AMO (Association of Municipalities of Ontario) conference. Richardson asks if McCallion arranged for a meeting.

Dec 18, 2005, dinner meeting, Leo, wife etc. The Mayor says the dinner was social.

[Ed. Missed hearing what came next.]

May 29, 2006 at Delta Meadowvale hotel.

July 9, 2006 Peter barbecue at Peter’s home. McCallion says she can’t recall.

Sept 22, 2006 Peter and Murray at the Mayor’s house.

Lunch at Zorro’s. McCallion says she doesn’t recall.

[Ed. re Dec 2006 –missed what was said.]

Jan 25, 2007, Dinner with son, Peter, Leo Couprie , and Leo’s wife at Pier 4. This was the witness document session.

Richardson says that a review of the Mayor’s journal entries indicates “substantial number of meetings” with Tony, DeCicco, Leo Couprie and Murray Cook.. Meetings at the Mayor’s home, Saturdays and Sundays… McCallion agrees and then says, “if they all occurred” She adds that she can’t recall which ones did occur or even that they all did.”

Richardson says that these journal entries end with a meeting re January 25, 2007.

Nov 20, 2007 Peter and [Ed. missed name.]

Dec 14, 2007 Peter, Tony DeCicco and John DiPocce.

Richardson asks if this means that there were no meetings in between. McCallion responds that doesn’t mean there were meetings that weren’t entered in a journal. It was and still is, standard practice that if her family wants dinner they have to go through City Staff.

March 19, 2008 Mayor has a meeting with Tony DeCicoo, Steve Gupta and Ed Sajecki in Toronto. Richardson reminds the Mayor that she’d testified this meeting was the one occasion the she attended with people involved in WCD. McCallion replies that Ed Sajecki urged her to go.

Richardson asks as of that date, March 19, 2008, whether the WCD site plan was still in process. The Mayor says No.

Richardson then asks the Mayor why she would examine a hotel for a World Class Development site. Th “I guess i was so enthused in the project” and “Obviously Ed had convinced me…”

Richardson says that it seems The Mayor had a substantial number of meetings both socially and otherwise. Then asks if it’s her testimony that at no time did any of the World Class Developments people inform her as to the progress of WCD/hotel matters. McCallion responds that the hotel was the “mission of the City Council”.

[Ed. From there, Hazel McCallion went into her Hotel/Misssissauga pitch —that Mississauga is the 6th largest city, that its city core will never move to the extent that it should until they have a convention centre etc etc… ]

SPROAT BREAK TIL 11:50.

COURT RESUMES 11:52 AM

Richardson still up.

Richardson refers to a document on November 2007. Context, one month after the introduction of deadlines and World Class Developments was scrambling

Re December 2007 Richardson asks McCallion if she was able to get Murray Cook to sign the agreement terminating the call —and about the sooner we get it the better we are.  McCallion says she didn’t recall what the agreement was.

Richardson continues and asks the Mayor why she would be involved in getting Murray Cook to sign the agreement. Richardson also asked if the Mayor recalled the agreement being sent to her. McCallion responds, No. Never sent.

Richardson refers to exhibit 50. He says that the document referred to above is the Shareholder and Transfers Agreement.

Richardson presents a FAX transmittal sheet 905-813-XXXX —the Mayor’s Home Fax number. McCallion tells Richardson “The FAX doesn’t always work, I can assure you. I’ve had great problems with the FAX machine. I’ve advised my lawyers to fax to City Hall.”

Richardson refers to FAX status 14:29 Job Status is OK. McCallion insist that though the FAX status says “OK” she didn’t receive it.

Richardson refers to terminating the call and asks that Mayor what efforts she made when she received the phone message from Tony DeCicco about “the sooner we get it”. McCallion simply replies that she’s not sure.

Richardson then refers to page 29 and another message.  The November 5th message would come in shortly before the 9:03 one. That message said, “I spoke with Barry at length. We can resolve this….etc Thanks for your help. I thought we were being ransacked.”

Richardson asks the Mayor, “Who is Barry?” McCallion answers, Barry Lyons.

Richardson asks McCallion, if it would it be fair to say this message related to the WCD budget?

Elizabeth McIntyre objects to Hazel McCallion being asked what might be in the mind of Tony DeCicco.

Judge Sproat coaches Richardson to rephrase the question. Richardson then asks the Mayor to relate HER understanding of the DeCicco’s message. McCallion answers, “I don’t recall the message, I really don’t.” And then McCallion adds or whether I took any action on it. And declares “I’m known for not doing it.” [Ed. helping developers]

Richardson refers to small booklet tab 2 page 29. November 5, 2007 message at 8:52 am. “…when Peter comes back”. McCallion replies re who is Peter,  “I assume it was my son.”

Richardson asks, what were the bills? McCallion responds I don’t know.

Richardson asks the meaning of “thanks for your help?” How did McCallion help? The Mayor responds, “I can’t recall. I don’t know.”

Richardson says that two messages came in on November 5th from Tony DeCicco. DeCicco left a message that essentially said that he’d just spoke with Sol. If Murray knew of outstanding amount…I’ve asked Sol to forward everything, budget/bills.

Richardson asks the Mayor, Who is Sol? McCallion responds, “I don’t know”

Richardson then asks the Mayor if she knew what this message was about McCallion offers “I guess it was outstanding fees…”

Richardson asks why Tony DeCicco would share such information with her. McCallion cleverly offers, “I don’t know. I get a lot of funny calls.”

Richardson then turns to Application Record vol 4. Additional message not in the thin book. Telephone March 19, 2008. Tony “We just finished with Ed. Did a tour etc…Need answer soon…”

Richardson asks who is Ed? McCallion says Sajecki.

Richardson then asks what this message was about. [McCallion really tap-dances here Lots of words but not answering his question.]

Richardson asks McCallion what her understanding was of the phrase  “in order to move forward…” McCallion serves up, “Guess he was trying to get me to decide on the hotel.”

Richardson now introduces another message. April 25, 2008. Tony DeCicco left a long, detailed message. Advised that he has met with City officials. Richardson asks McCallion what she understood met with City officials to mean. McCallion responds, “Don’t know.”

Richardson asks if the Mayor followed up. McCallion says, “I don’t know.”

Richardson then asks if McCallion listened to the very long mobile phone message. McCallion counters that she seldom listens to mobile messages. She says, “I don’t check it. In fact I get criticized for it. I’m not a technical person.” [Ed. I believe that. I have hundreds of text and likely voice messages on my mobile phone…]

Now the Mayor appears to be trying to get judge to swallow that World Class Developments is just any developer.

The Mayor at this point offered up an observation Ed Sajecki made about Tony DeCicco’s reputation…

Richardson is now onto the thin book.

Richardson asks the Mayor if the emails of 2007 resulted in her holding a meeting with Peter and Leo Couprie? McCallion responds, “I don’t recall” [Ed. How many is that now?…]

Re: November 20, 2007. Richardson asks whether it was possible that the Mayor met as a result of the telephone messages DeCicco had left on November 5th? McCallion responds “I don’t remember.”

Richardson then asks, whether the Mayor had a meeting with Tony and Peter as a result of these messages? McCallion responds “Don’t remember. 2007 is a long time back”.

Richardson then refers to the cross-examination of Leo Couprie (December 2012).

Q 372. In the fall of 2007 did you have any discussion re Murray and DeCicco.

Richardson follows up asking, what the problem was. McCallion: A question of who would put the money up.

In further cross-examination Couprie was asked if Peter wanted Leo to consult his mother. Couprie responded that it was a disagreement between Murray and Tony and that he didn’t know either one very wel. Couprie said that he let McCallion know that. Peter arranged the meeting. Couprie said it was a two-minute meeting with McCallion and then he left.

McCallion still denies remembering this meeting.

Richardson now turns to witnessing of signatures. [Ed. 11:18 am. I really think McCallion is enjoying this!]

Richardson asks McCallion if she recalled attending a meeting with Leo and Peter at Pier 4? What was understanding was the purpose of the meeting? McCallion responds it was about going to China. They were asking advice re contacts in Hong Kong and getting investment for the city core hotel.

Now McCallion slips into a song and dance about “the wonderful benefits of the City of Mississauga…. etc etc”. Richardson lets her soar…

McCallion says that she also suggested Peter and Leo approach the principals of the Shangri-La.

Richardson asks if McCallion was aware beforehand that there’d be a witnessing of documents. McCallion: No.

Richardson asks the Mayor if she were informed of the purpose of the documents. McCallion: No.

Richardson asks about the number of copies signed. McCallion: Don’t recall.

Richardson asks if McCallion’s understanding was that Peter was a realtor, why would he need such a document? McCallion says that Peter and Leo explained some arrangements had to be prior to their Asian trip.

Richardson asks McCallion if she were interested in what Peter was signing? McCallion: No. [Ed. Yet The Mayor moans about how little information son-Peter shares with her…]

Richardson now refers to the affidavit.He tells McCallion that Peter probably had made her aware that the Agreement of Sale had been finalized.

McCallion replies  “I did not see the Agreement of Sale” but that she did become aware. McCallion observes that she did not learn about Agreement of Sale at that meeting. McCallion speculate that it could’ve been OMERS telling her. Could’ve been Peter….

Richardson then suggests that by January 2007 that at least then, the Mayor knew about the agreement had been finalized. Richardson’s point being she was aware, just not when.

Regarding the January 25/26 Pier 4 meeting, Richardson asks McCallion if they were celebrating the finalization of the meeting. Documents signed on the 29th around the same time as the Pier 4 meeting was. Then McCallion responds, “As I say, did it occur?”

Richardson refers to the slim volume provided yesterday Tab 2, page 23. Dinner January 25, 2007 at Pier 4. That was the dinner where McCallion witnessed docs.

Richardson asks for Mayor’s affidavit to be put in front of her. Page 51 par 167. “I also knew from Peter or Murray that it was a condition of the agreement was a hotel, or certain size, amenities etc.”

Richardson asks if Murray Cook also informed her that the hotel would be connected to the LAC by walkway. Richardson then asks if Cook informed her of any other terms of the agreement of sale?

Richardson asserts that in Spring 2008 the Mayor became involved in the negotiation of the Agreement of Sale. McCallion justifies this with they were having difficulty…

McIntyre objects saying that the time frame is beyond May 31, 2008.

Richardson then asks McCallion if she were involved in negotiations before May 31, 2008? McCallion: “I don’t recall.”

Richardson asks McCallion if she met with Mr. Fillipetti (Oxford) in March 2008. And whether it were possible that she were involved prior to May 31, 2008. He also asks if she knew about the nature of the proposed amendments McCallion replies “I did not know the details.”

Richardson then asks McCallion why she was called upon to be involved in the terms of the agreement. McCallion insists that she doesn’t recall meeting with Fillipetti. Exact quote, “I don’t recall. I’m sorry.”

Richardson asks if McCallion made contact with OMERS on or before May 31 2008. McCallion, yet another “I don’t recall.”

Richardson asks for break now.

RESUME AT 2 PM. PREDICTS FINISHING AT 4.

COURT RESUMES 2 PM

Richardson refers Aug 29, 2007 Mississauga News. Headline “City Centre gets second major hotel”. Richardson reads opening four paragraphs and the article clearly mentions World Class Developments.

McCallion says that she doesn’t recall seeing the article.  Richardson not quite believing, tells the Mayor that the article was  an announcement that her long-held dream of a hotel is to be fulfilled —and no one brought it to her attention?

McIntyre objects to any further questions on the clip. Judge Sproat tells Richardson to go ahead because it could be relevant.

Richardson asks several question, if any person brought this article to McCallion’s attention. Anyone advise her that WCD was commencing the project. Mayor replies no to both. Richardson then comments, “So no one informed you that your dream project was about to commence?”

Richardson then asks McCallion if she was informed around October 3, 2007 that Ed Sajecki appeared for an interview on Rogers TV announcing commencement of World Class Developments project. McCallion replies “I very seldom watch TV.”

Richardson now refers to the Ed Sajecki letter. McCallion acknowledges that Sajecki’s letter was removed from the file and had not returned.

Richardson, says that there were attachments. However as far as McCallion recollects the attachments were not attached to the letter. McCallion says that staff conducted very thorough search –and far as they know only two copies were made of the document (of the list of 84 site plan applications).

Richardson now refers to two maps. City of Mississauga Urban Growth Centre. And second page entitled Community Approvement…

[Ed unable to make sense of the next entry of my notes.]

The Sajecki letter describes the area affected as an Urban Growth Centre (UGC). Richardson asks whether the WCD lands located in that UGC? McCallion reads the paragraph and then answers, “I’d assume it would, yes.”

Richardson reminds McCallion she indicated Sajecki’s letter was not sent to Council. Richardson reminds Peel resolution wasn’t either.

Richardson is trying to understand…formulate his question  –but McCallion can’t follow Richardson [Ed. neither did I!]

Richardson suggests that within City’s UGC areas, special transition provisions would apply.

Richardson says that he’s trying to understand the effect of the motion she seconded. McCallion asks to see the resolution. [Ed. 2:17 pm. Hazel calm, confident]

Richardson refers to application record Vol 3, Tab 21. Page 1252.

Richardson explains that it was moved by Fennell, seconded by McCallion. That the resolution be amended to include medium-high density residential and mixed use project be extended to November 1, 2009. This xtension would apply to all three area-municipalities? McCallion admits, Yes.

Richardson asks McCallion and this resolution is to apply in these three municipalities only to areas identified by each municipality

Richardson asks whether that was the intent of Sajecki’s letter.

McIntyre objects. She says that the Mayor can’t speak for Sajecki.

Richardson rephrases and asks whether the effect of the Sajecki letter showed the Urban Growth Centre areas that could benefit from transition provisions.

Richardson suggests the second paragraph in Sajecki’s letter directs Staff. McCallion agrees this paragraph gives direction to Staff.

Richardson goes back to the first paragraph. With your resolution and the Sajecki letter, if those two resolutions had succeeded on the October 4, 2007 vote, the transition provisions would apply to WCD lands.

FINAL QUESTIONS.

Richardson explains that Fennell introdcued the resolution to address her Brampton-specific concerns. That she understood the resolution only applied to Brampton. Brampton is exempt.

Richardson reminds that with McCallion’s resolution the provision was extended to all three municipalities.

McCallion responds that any policy Peel tries to approve applies to all municipalities.

Richardson manages to get McCallion to admit that she passed a resolution that was not of concern to Mississauga.

McCallion offers that “We (Regional Councillors) don’t see bylaws” “Copies of the bylaw are not provided…” So the resolution of Council is then not reflective of will of Council.

Richardson then says that Mayor Susan Fennell said that the Region Clerk “regionalized” the Brampton resolution. Richardson asks McCallion if it is her experience that the Regional Clerk “regionalizizes” resolutions from area municipalities.

Richardson raises the issue if McCallion would expect a resolution passed by Mississauga Council to be regionalize at Peel Council…

QUESTIONS FINISHED.

McIntyre up. No questions.

 

NOTE: When I set to editing all my court notes to publish as separate blogs, I had absolutely no idea how detailed each day’s court notes were. Polishing my notes did not only became a daunting task but one that I did my all to avoid.

Jotting down notes during court testimony is interesting. But taking those point-form scribbles and fleshing them into sentences after the fact is indescribably tedious.

The next set of notes is the Hazineh court appearance. His are the toughest of all to transcribe. At one point during Hazineh’s testimony Judge Sproat interrupted, telling him to wait until McCallion’s lawyers were finished asking their question. Sproat explained that the court clerk was was having a difficult time recording what was being said —getting everything down. And that’s someone experienced!

Since Hazel McCallion and Elias Hazineh were the only two witnesses called to testify at this Superior Court conflict of interest case, it’s important that I also transcribe my Hazineh court notes.

But after that, I’m not prepared to commit what would amount to days-on-endless-end on something I could just buy as court transcripts!

Signed,
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

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

Hazel McCallion’s Conflict of Interest hearing. The Mayor’s Testimony Day 1. Notes from Brampton Superior Court, April 11, 2013

April 14th, 2013  

What follows is a summary of notes taken during Mayor Hazel McCallion’s conflict of interest hearing at Brampton court house on April 11, 2013 —Hazel McCallion testifying. If anyone finds any errors I’d appreciate being advised.

COURT NOTES DAY 4  Thursday, April 11, 2013  1st day of Hazel McCallion’s testimony

9:50 am  Mayor Hazel McCallion arrives and goes straight to the stand (upbeat, confident, laughing with court staff.)

9:55 Diane Kalenchuk, Fran Rider arrive (both involved in December 2, 2009 “Friends of Hazel” Rally opposing Judicial Inquiry) .

10:07 am  court session begins.

Elizabeth McIntyre (lawyer for the Mayor)

McIntyre calls McCallion to the stand. McCallion swears on Bible with a “So help me God.”

McIntyre refers to a document and includes an “accumulation of documents” extracted from other parts of the record (to be presented in chronological order).

McCallion swore an affidavit and states that she stands by evidence in that affidavit. [Ed. On Friday, Day 2 of her testimony, she will retract statements made in her sworn affidavit that she stood by today.]

McIntyre now refers to McCallion’s biography. McIntyre highlights that McCallion was first elected Mayor of Mississauga in 1978. Re-elected all the way to 2010. Involved in municipal politics for an extended period of time. Prior to that McCallion was involved in working for Canadian Kellogg. Worked for Kellogg for 19 years and left in 1967.

McIntyre relates that McCallion started off her political career on the Streetsville Planning Board. There she served as Chair, then became Deputy Reeve of Streetsville and then Mayor of Mississauga.

McIntyre then requests the Mayor to turn to paragraph 8 and reads that Mississauga was once a small collection of towns blah blah etc etc –and one of priorities of the Mayor was to “create a dynamic downtown city core”.

McIntyre then prompts McCallion to give Judge an idea of her  list of challenges.

McCallion states that when she first moved into City Hall, cows and horses were grazing across the  field when she went into her office. Square 1 started in a hayfield. McCallion said that she was successful in making “some progress” towards a city core. They built City Hall and Central Highway for example. Then they built the YMCA. McCallion said, “We tried to demonstrate that the City core had a future.”

McCallion states that office development has been a challenge. That she wanted 12 million sq ft of office space in the City core –and that has not been accomplished.

Then McCallion started on a favourite subject —about the number of Fortune 500 companies in Mississauga etc etc….

McCallion claimed that with these companies, Mississauga needed a convention centre. She stated that the main mission of Council and Staff was to get a convention centre tied in with Living Arts Centre.

But they had no success.

McCallion continued that the ideal location of hotel would be right next to Living Arts Centre along with a reasonably-sized convention centre. That, the Mayor claimed was the mission of Council and Staff —a 4 or 5-star hotel.

McIntyre asks McCallion what time frame. For how long has this hotel/convention centre been a goal.

McCallion says 10 or 15 years or longer. The Mayor explains that Mississauga’s Fortune 500 companies were drawn here by the airport. But they would have to stay in downtown Toronto hotels and then get carted to Mississauga.

McCallion claims she had received “a lot of complaints” about no hotel/convention centre.

McCallion then goes on to say that she’s been the Chair of Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)  and wanted to invite AMO conventions to Mississauga but can’t.

McIntyre asks, so goal of Council was to have convention centre next to LAC.  McCallion responds, yes, goal was to accommodate 1500 delegates to a conference.

McCallion revealed that “OMERS owns a lot of land around City Hall” (including Square 1).

McCallion says the City called for a proposal for a convention centre but got no response.  They went to Hong Kong, China on trade missions hoping to get hotel owners –ie Shangri la (a lot of regurgitation of Inquiry material…).

“Toronto beat us out on it” (re the Shangri la) McCallion says.

McIntyre asks McCallion if the official plan in question pre-dates 2005.

McIntyre refers to McCallion’s affidavit. McIntyre asks McCallion  to tell the court what she recalls she was advised by Peter during this time.

McCallion recounts that Peter knew the City was “anxious” to get a hotel and convention centre. So he approached his mother and said he had an investor to build a hotel/convention centre.

McCallion said that in all this time, Peter’s investor was the only one to express interest at any time.

McCallion said she knew the investor to be Leo Couprie.

McIntyre asks McCallion that In 2005 to what degree was she familiar with Leo Couprie. McCallion responds that she was invited to dinner at his home. But that she didn’t meet that many times with him.

McCallion knew Couprie’s background to be strictly importing.

McIntyre based on what you knew about Couprie did you have any reason for him not to invest?

McCallion said she had no idea how much money Leo Couprie had. She said that Couprie would put down the money (deposit) to buy the City core land.

McCallion  states that in 2005 she knew nothing of the details regarding how much money Couprie would put up in this venture.

McCallion understood Peter would be Leo Couprie’s legal representative as real estate agent.

McIntyre asked the Mayor it came as a surprise to her. McCallion said yes and that maybe it was the opportunity to get what City wanted.

McIntyre asks what came as a surprise. McCallion says the surprise was that Peter was able to convince someone to invest in the City core.

McIntyre then relates a short biography on Peter McCallion. She asks the Mayor when Peter was born. 1953. His occupational history. Residential real estate to industrial/commercial real estate.

McIntyre then asks McCallion, In 2005-2007,  what extent would you have known his real estate practices. McCallion  responds, “Very little.” “He did not share his successes with me.”

McIntyre asks what she understood re him being real estate agent.

McCallion says that she understood that Peter would make sure Leo Couprie didn’t lose money and because Couprie wasn’t experienced, that Peter would help him with real estate issues.

McCallion said she had no idea if Peter had equity in development projects. She adds that to her knowledge Peter did not have a history in investing development projects.

McIntryre says that Mayor McCallion has three children. Paul lives in Milton. Peter in Mississauga. [Ed. At this point the discussion became a bit hard to hear so McCallion admits to having a hearing aid –and needing it.]

McIntyre asks what McCallion’s relationship with Peter was in 2005-2007.

McCallion explains that her husband died in 1997. And that she would count on Peter to look after a lot of the household chores. McCallion said that her son Paul can’t, but because he’s a real estate agent, Peter has flexible hours. And that she has to depend on Peter a lot.

McCallion said that she had frequent contact with Peter. And also that Peter was her driver.

McIntyre asked McCallion about the “flow of information” between Peter and the Mayor. McCallion responds very little. That Peter keeps it to himself. That Paul is different –very open.

McIntyre then asks what McCallion knew about Peter’s financial situation. McCallion explains that she didn’t know Peter’s “financial standing”. McCallion says that “None of my children share their financial status with me.”

McCallion says that she never believed that Peter had the money to pull off The Project (the land, all the hoops to jump through) McCallion knew that would require “Major finances to do it.”

McCallion says that she understood that major investors would still be needed down the line.

McCallion explains that the hotel must be “Not less than a 4-star.” McIntyre asks McCallion for details. McCallion says that the City core would need the minimum of a 4-star hotel to “satisfy the needs of our economic base.” Convention delegates, McCallion says, expect at least 4-star accommodation and as a result they go to Toronto for those 4 or 5-star hotels.

McCallion says that she knew too The Project was “an extremely complicated process” and that Peter would not have the “technical expertise” to pull the process off.

At some point McCallion says she became aware that long-time family friend, Murray Cook would come in. McCallion says that she knew Murray Cook has “vast experience in the development industry —nationally and internationally”.

McCallion says she didn’t know who “they” were. But she guessed one of the investors would be Leo Couprie. And McCallion  knew that Peter would be involved  –in seeking the consultants necessary to grapple with such a major project.

Re World Class Development. McCallion  says that “from Day One” she understood that Leo owned all the shares in the corporation. But that she had no knowledge that Peter was a shareholder.

McIntyre asks McCallion if she thought Peter might be an officer of the company? Employee? McCallion responds no both times.

McCallion repeats that she understood that Peter “represented Leo”.

McCallion testifies that she advised Peter and Murray Cook that she would declare pecuniary interest at City Council should the issue come up. The court determines that it was 2005 that Peter first informed her of his involvement in this project.

McIntyre asks McCallion when did she advise Peter and Murray Cook that she’d have to declare a conflict?  The Mayor said she can’t recall.

McCallion  testifies that she knew that she’d have to declare a conflict at council, planning committee —“or any other committee”.

McCallion testifies that elected officials are not advised as council members when site plans come into the City. Like in any list.

McCallion testifies that developers might approach a councillor before he puts in a site plan application. And that some do. Some don’t.

McIntyre asks McCallion in a project of this nature what would come before council? McCallion says perhaps zoning amendments, official plan impacts. Then it comes to the planning committee. If WCD were to come before the planning committee, McCallion said she’d have declared a conflict of interest.

McIntyre then turns McCallion’s attention to zoning changes. McCallion said that matters related to zoning changes would come as a report with a lot of details about how those changes affect services/infrastructure.

McCallion repeated that anything related to World Class Developments that came before a committee or council she would declare a conflict.

McCallion said she’d seen a lot of development processes come through Mississauga. McCallion testified that she had OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) to lay down the condition that the hotel must come first, then the condos because she knew that developers prefer to build residential first. McCallion states that she felt the hotel must come first and be a condition in the sale of the land.

As a result of the hotel condition, McCallion says, the project failed. McCallion stated that they just couldn’t get 4-5 star hotel with the capacity to serve as a convention centre.

McCallion testifies that the details surrounding a hotel are uncertain because it depended on what the developer envisioned.

McCallion states that she definitely had a personal interest in hotel but that she never had a direct (personal) pecuniary interest. And that the hotel is key to convention centre.

McCallion  testifies that she had no problems attracting condos in city core. That residential development is not a problem. That the major problem is attracting office development.

McCallion  testifies that she had no involvement in residential developments –that she zero’d in on the hotel for involvement.

McIntyre asks if the Mayor would know the process/conditions, the hoops to jump through in the hotel process. McCallion then estimates that the project might take “quite a few years to accomplish. That the process of development has become very complicated.” Depends on size, what they want to do.

McCallion estimates “one to two years for very small project”. And for full approval of a convention centre “two to three years. At least two years.” –to get a building permit.

McCallion repeats what she testified at the Judicial Inquiry about Staff: “We are very diligent. Our Staff is diligent –making sure every ‘i ‘ is dotted”…

McIntyre asks in 2005 –what did you consider your obligations to be regarding interactions with Staff.

McCallion responds, “You should not in any way influence Staff.”

McCallion testifies “I had no involvement” (with site plan staff process). That Staff was aware that she had a conflict and therefore did not want to be involved in any discussion.

McIntyre asks how she was aware. McIntyre asks McCallion “but did you advise Staff prior?”

McCallion responds with “I did but can’t recall when.”

McIntyre asks whether it was usual for Staff to brief councillors on development. McCallion replies it was not unusual.

McCallion testifies that she didn’t attend the WCD briefing in April 2007. That since she was declaring conflict it would not be proper for her to attend the meeting (with Baker, Ball, Sajecki, Cook…)

McCallion then adds, “I’m not interested in the site plans because I believe it’s a responsibility of the Staff”.

McIntyre focuses on the 2005-2007 timeline asking McCallion  is she was ever approached by Marilyn Ball (Director of Development & Design and wife of former City Manager, David O’Brien/OMERS) to be briefed on the WCD project.

McCallion responds that Ball offered and that she had refused. McCallion said from “Day One” Staff knew that I did not want to be involved.

McCallion testifies her concern was that she would be seen to influence the Staff on the WCD application.

McIntyre asks to what extent the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCOI) did not apply to any OMERS meetings!

McIntyre then explores McCallion’s understanding of Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. McCallion responds that “Often when Acts come into being you rely on the Staff to brief you on it.”

McIntyre then asks whether the Staff provided briefing? McCallion responds that she can’t recall. McCallion states that somebody advised Council at the time (the Act came into effect) that when an item comes before a committee/Council, —you have to declare a conflict. McCallion then says she was told that even if you think you have a conflict you should declare.

McCallion said that as Director of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, issues relating to the MCOI Act came up for discussion from time to time. McCallion reports that George Rust’Dye gave presentations. That Rust D’Eye explained some of the cases. McCallion states that the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act was “A very great concern of the municipalities.”

McCallion states that the Large Urban Mayors now have concerns as well. That the MCOI Act now causing all kinds of complications.

McIntyre mentions that McCallion was charged under the MCOI Act back in 1982. McIntyre asks McCallion if since whether she reviewed the MCOI Act with her lawyer. And whether McCallion had reviewed the decisions of the court?

McIntyre asks McCallion to what extent she took the provision of that Act seriously? McCallion says when Peel Council deals with police budget she declares a conflict of interest regarding her son Paul who is employed by Peel Police.

McIntyre asks “as a councillor how seriously do you take that question?” (direct/indirect pecuniary interest at meetings)

McIntyre then goes back to 2007 and asks McCallion what her understanding of conflict of interest were back then? McCallion responds “If a matter involves, no matter what status, I have a conflict.” That her son Peter represented Leo Couprie. And that if matters relating to WCD came to Council, she  would declare a conflict.

McCallion states that Council was well aware that she had a conflict.

McIntyre now refers to a letter February 2, 2009 and asks who prepared the letter? McCallion says she did.

McIntyre asks McCallion why she prepared the letter, explaining that this February 2, 2009 letter is prior to any issues raised re motion/call for Inquiry.

[Ed. Essentially the letter asks for clarification of MCOI Act and asks what happens if an elected official doesn’t know what business or business contacts your kids have. This letter definitely pre-dates Judicial Inquiry.]

McCallion responds that she had read a government update that encouraged her to write a letter. And also the many discussions at AMO regarding MCOI Act and how it was “creating problems”. Including problems like hobbling a Council to a point where they can’t vote on an issue (ie: development in an area where most councillors live).

McCallion states that “AMO very aware of accumulation of issues surrounding MCOI Act.”

McCallion also said she had “many discussions” re MCOI Act with other municipalities.

[Ed. I’m certain that AMO has had many presentations/discussions relating to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act but McIntyre fuzzies up the timing of all this knowledge/debate McCallion was receiving. For example, interest/issues surrounding municipal conflict of interest intensified in Mississauga from September 2009 through the Rob Ford trials to current.]

COURT RESUMES 11:51

McIntyre now wants to explore Hazel McCallion’s involvement in WCD and its affairs.

Referring to document labelled “Couprie” in log book and the articles of incorporation re World Class Development Ltd. Dates from 2006 and refers to 2005.

McCallion says that she did not see them at the time.

McIntyre refers to page 351. McIntyre asks McCallion to what extent the document reflected her understanding. McCallion says she wasn’t really aware of Leo Couprie’s involvement.

McIntyre asks McCallion if she understood at any time that Leo Couprie was a principal and owned all of the shares in the World Class Developments.

McIntyre then refers to “Lusk” document. An Agreement of Purchase of Sale made on behalf of WCD and OMERS March 21, 2005. McCallion states that she did not see that document at the time.

McCallion testifies that she must have been advised at some time that World Class Developments had put in an offer. But she was aware they were trying to purchase the land.

McIntyre than suggests that at some point McCallion became involved in the negotiations. McCallion said no, not the negotiations but the “exchange”. That Murray Cook had said there was a lot of “exchange” between WCD and OMERS.

McIntyre defines “exchange” as “back and forth proposals”.

McIntyre then asks McCallion to what extent she saw the details of the changes?

McIntyre asks McCallion’s involvement in real estate transactions in general? McCallion says very little. That she may get a call… sharing what difficulties they might have. But that she doesn’t get involved in reviewing documents. That she had no involvement in real estate transaction aside from buying two houses.

McIntyre asks her involvement in WCD’s. McCallion says OMERS never made any effort to build a hotel “they own a lot of land in the city core”.

McIntyre redirects and repeats her involvement. McCallion states that she encouraged OMERS to sell the land to WCD to get the hotel to happen. But that she did not get involved in the details.

McIntyre leads McCallion to explain that she was representing the City, the Council of the City to get a hotel built.

McCallion then testifies that she knew that Ken Lusk represents OMERS and that OMERS owned 50% of Square One. AIMCO (Alberta Investment Management Corporation) the other 50%.

McIntyre gets McCallion to turn her attention to mail from Lusk to Michael Del Bello (OMERS/Oxford). Dated March 9, 2006. McIntyre asks McCallion if she saw that at the time? McCallion says no.

McIntyre reads portions to her. “Unidentified purchaser” Purchaser represented by Mayor’s son who is the purchaser… Pressure on Oxford. .. etc

McIntyre asks meeting with Paul Haggis (Oxford) re “express desire to sell the land”. McCallion  agrees with that statement.

McIntyre introduces a series of other emails referencing her involvement. Phone calls, etc.

McIntyre refers to Tab 8 –an email from Ken Lusk to Ron Pedicord (Oxford) October 20, 2006. “Mayor very upset that transaction taking so long to complete”. [Ed. The content of the email suggests that Hazel McCallion would get a considerable amount of detail about progress of project. Meaning, she wouldn’t need Staff informing her!]

McCallion testifies there was a “rumour” of another hotel coming at Highway 10 and Burnhamthorpe. [Ed. hmm…]

McCallion then goes into great detail, really selling convention/hotel to the court.

[Ed. WOW. No consideration that once meetings done, there’s nothing for convention delegates to do in Mississauga except go to Downtown Toronto!]

McIntyre asks McCallion what due diligence was done on World Class Developments around January 2007 –about the time the agreement was signed.

McCallion reports that Arthur(?) did most of the due diligence on WCD. And that Murray Cook said he was an owner. Spoke to McCallion about whether Murray could pull this off.

McCallion  states that she didn’t recall having the conversation but that she must have.

McIntyre states that Lusk reported that Cook had told him that he owned WCD. [Ed. at least partly]

McIntyre gets McCallion to turn back to the Leo Couprie book. Tab 5. It’s the Agreement of Purchase of Sale of The Property, January 31, 2007.

McIntyre asks McCallion whether she saw this document at the time. McCallion No.

McCallion says she was not aware of the details, but was informed by somebody from OMERS of the condition that the hotel had to be built first.

McCallion can’t recall around what date she knew the agreement had been signed. McCallion can’t recall who told her either. McCallion can recall that the Hotel Built First condition was included.

McIntyre now deals with events from January 2007 to the Regional Council meetings in September and October 2007. McIntyre asks if she recalls any other involvement with the vendors of the Property.

McCallion says yes, that she heard nothing for a long time, then at later point, they had certain deadlines to agree to in order finalize things to meet the conditions. As for the dates McCallion says that she can’t confirm whether it was before or after Sept/Oct 2007.

[Ed. My own dealings with City of Mississauga Staff have taught me that “Can’t recall” can have double meaning. It can mean the inability to remember but also “can’t recall because it’s not in my/City’s interest to share the information with you.”]

McIntyre now goes on to other documents in the Couprie material. Tab 3. McCallion confirms that she saw it at time for her to witness/sign and then also the Declaration of Trust (Tab 4). And McCallion confirms, yes, she witnessed the signatures.

McIntyre then asks McCallion what it means to witness a signature?

McCallion said she’s witnessed signatures for many thousands of documents/passports. That her role is merely to witness the signing/signature in their presence. Means nothing more than that.

As for the documents at Pier 4, McCallion says that Peter and Couprie were leaving for China hoping to get someone to invest in a hotel. They wanted to know what connections she had in China.

McCallion testified that she understood the purpose of the meeting at Pier 4 was to inform them as to what contacts she  had in China as to investment in Mississauga. McCallion also says that Peter and Couprie were the only ones at the Pier 4 dinner meeting.

McCallion said it was a relatively dark restaurant. And that she was asked just to witness their signatures to “cover their absence when they were away”.

McCallion testifies that Leo Couprie told her the purpose of the documents [Ed. then McCallion  appeared to back-pedal so I’m not too sure…]

McCallion states that the documents were to deal with the business with World Class Developments in case something happened during travel.

Referring to Tab 3, McCallion testifies, “I reviewed none of the content of the document. None.” Then she said that for certain lighting conditions and size of type she would have to use reading glasses to see much of anything.

Then McCallion adds that she doesn’t need glasses to sign documents but might to read them.

McCallion states that she can’t recall whether she used glasses to sign that day.

Document at Tab 4. McCallion says “I did not read them” (the words on that document).

McCallion states that she doesn’t recall any discussion of the documents. That she wasn’t given a copy either.

McIntyre asks McCallion to turn to Tab 6 in same book. Shareholder’s Agreement February 28, 2007 World Class Developments, Murray Cook and Leo Couprie.

McCallion states that from Day 1 she was advised that Leo Couprie owned all the shares of the company.

McCallion then testifies that she believed that Peter’s role with WCD was to ensure (try/hoping) that an agreement between WCD and OMERS would happen to purchase of land. Other than that Peter’s additional involvement was “none at all”.

McCallion announces that “I learned more during the Inquiry” re internal affairs of WCD.

McIntyre now turns McCallion attention to the Promissory note signed by Peter McCallion on behalf of World Class Developments for $50,000 from the TACC group.

McCallion testifies that she knows that TACC is a developer and a provider of services.

McIntyre asks McCallion if she saw the Promissory note at the time? McCallion: No. McIntyre asks McCallion if she were aware that TACC was lending money to WCD? McCallion: No.

In addition McCallion was not aware Peter was in position to sign a promissory note on behalf of WCD. McCallion then says, “I was not aware of his finances that would enable him to sign a promissory note.” [Ed. quote 100% accurate.]

McIntyre asks McCallion  that without seeing a document, to what extent she was aware of the financial details of WCD? Ie: Deposits (the ledger).

McCallion responds that she was not aware Peter was contributing or receiving money from World Class Developments. McCallion: “I was not aware.”

McIntyre takes McCallion  to Tab 9, an agreement between Landplex and Leo Couprie. Dated August 31, 2007. McCallion says she didn’t see agreement. But that she did know who Tony DiCicco was though.

McCallion testifies that at some point Peter mentioned that Tony DiCicco got involved because, she assumed, of his experience in development.

McCallion adds that she also knew DeCicco from developments in Mississauga including “joint ventures”. McCallion  testifies that she had discussions with him on occasion ie: access re his development at Derry Road –asked to help by Olympic Flame. McCallion says that she also had a social meeting with DeCicco because his Dad wanted to meet her –had to do with some celebration. McCallion also said that he won the auction for Dinner at Mayor’s house.

McCallion says that she has many conversations with developers.

McCallion testifies that Peter told her the reason DeCicco came in was because they needed somebody assisting WCD getting through the process.

[Ed. Yet at the Judicial Inquiry September 15, 2010 hearing, Murray Cook testified that Peter brought DcCicco in because Cook couldn’t give Peter real estate agent role going forward. Meaning Peter was out of all his money.]

From Murray Cook, initial principal of WCD September 15, 2010

Q = Naomi Loewith, Commission Counsel

A= Murray Cook

MURRAY COOK, SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 JUDICIAL INQUIRY TESTIMONY BEGINS

15                 Q:   Did you understand that he expected

16  to be the agent for the eventual condo sales?

17                 A:   No, that didn’t come up until much

18  later.

19                 Q:   Did you have concerns about it when

20  you did learn of it?

21                 A:   Yes, very much.

22                 Q:   Why is that?

23                 A:   You — later, when it appeared that

24  Mr. McCallion’s original investors were unable to — to

25  pony the — the dollars, I advised Mr. McCallion, when he


4445

suggested the — the sale of the individual condos that

it’s very hard to get an investor to invest if you

predetermined who was the selling agent. 

               In most cases, investors/developers have a

team that they’ve worked with over the years and are

comfortable with.  And that’s — that’s not a

conventional real estate cer — sales person.  It’s — I

won’t mention any particular firms, but there’s several

major firms out there that specialize in doing condo

10  sales.  They have low risk.  All they do is:  The

11  developer puts up the sale centre, puts up all the

12  advertising, does all the marketing, and in some cases

13  when you’re dealing with these firms they’ll even tell

14  you how many clipboards their staff need, and pencils.

15                 And that — that is a very different

16  entity.  And to make the project work with predetermining

17  that — an individual real estate sales person, that was

18  a non-starter.

MURRAY COOK, SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 JUDICIAL INQUIRY TESTIMONY ENDS

McIntyre then asks, in this period of time, January 2007 Agreement of Purchase of Sale to the October 2007 Peel Region vote, “To what extent would you discuss WCD with Peter?”

McCallion said that Peter discussed bringing DeCicco along. As for any discussion with the City, nothing. McCallion states, “he didn’t keep me well-advised at all.”

McCallion insists that the only time she got involved was when they ran into difficulties with the hotel.

McCallion then goes into a series of “can’t recall”s.  Can’t recall —might have discussed the purchase of the land with Murray Cook. Can’t recall anything with Leo Couprie.

McIntyre now wants to break until 2:15 pm.

Got back and set up at 2:19 pm (arrived a bit late)

McIntyre still up. Topic: building permits.

McCallion said that she certainly advised staff that she did not want to be advised/involved in any discussion/matters relating to World Class Developments. [Ed: That announcement/caution also means all Staff knew WCD had “Special” written all over it!]

McIntyre now moving to the development fees process.

McCallion said she was involved with levies even before legislative authority. That she changed levies in Mississauga and Region a number of times.

McIntyre asks if there’s been another development charge review since 2007? McCallion responds yes, 2012. McIntyre asks McCallion to explain understanding of the role of development charges.

McCallion says it applies to all growth. It’s for the major services, sewage/water lines, roads.

McIntyre then asks what is the role of Regional Council re the setting of Development Charges by-law. McCallion says Peel Staff research for a report and present findings to Council.  McCallion says elected officials depend on Staff to decide what the charges should be based on consultants’ reports and comparisons to the projection created in the first place.

McCallion testifies that the role of Peel Council has to hold public “stakeholders” meetings. McCallion points out the these meetings are between Staff and usually (almost 100% of the time) —developers.

McIntyre asks McCallion the role of Peel Council. McCallion says to field input from all [Ed. can’t follow it… lots of detail and not sure relevance except to… finally got to point]

McCallion states that Peel has always had a transitional period.

McIntyre asks what factors does Peel Council consider. McCallion says what the backlog is, the economic times (in regards to industrial/commercial since increased development fees could make Peel less competitive –a major concern.)

McIntyre now asks McCallion about the economy in 2007. McCallion says the was “starting to tank”. Also price of land. Competition increasing in Halton and Kitchener-Waterloo.

McIntyre then asks McCallion to what extent individual projects are reviewed during the consideration of the transitional period.

McCallion introduces the concern for jobs/unemployment.

McIntyre then asks McCallion to relate the relationship between Development charges and jobs? McCallion says that increased development charges can potentially have an effect in economic downtimes.

McCallion states decisions are based on the impact to the entire community.

McIntyre now goes through details of 2007 Developmental Charges by-law process.

McIntyre mow turns attention to the March 2006 Peel report by Dan Lebreque, Commissioner of Public Works Department for Region of Peel.

McIntyre then asks to what extent McCallion had clear recollection of these events.

McCallion says that they/Peel were behind in their collection of funds. And that Peel needed a certain increase, “not catch up but try to catch up.”

McIntyre returns to the LeBrecque’s March 2006 Peel report.

McIntyre asks McCallion to explain the relationship between development charges and the capital budget. McCallion said it’s projected —an estimate.

McIntyre asks whether McCallion anticipated an increase in development levies. McCallion replies that development fees have always gone up.

Relating to March 2006 McIntyre asks whether McCallion knew that World Class Developments would be affected by those charges. McCallion says it all depended on WHEN –but that she assumed they’d be faced with those charges.

McIntyre asks if McCallion declared a conflict of interest in 2006 when this Developmental Charges review came up at Peel. McCallion testified that since she didn’t know the status of WCD in the process she believed the fee applied to any fee/property tax or any user fee. It applies to everybody, McCallion says. Of general application.

[Ed. McCallion then makes an intriguing statement…] That in McCallion’s experience councillors have never declared a conflict in planning or development!

McCallion  then compares the Peel Development Charges by-law to a dog license fee –declaring that she has not declared a conflict when dog license fees come up even though she owns a dog.

Tab 14 McIntyre refers to a number of presentations made to Peel Council. McCallion explaints that some of these reports elected officials get on the day of the meeting —or the night before. McCallion adds that elected officials have complained to Staff about these last minute deliveries.

McIntyre asks with respect to non-residential development, in May 2007, what was Peel asking to be the cut off? McCallion couldn’t answer.

McIntyre then asks to what extent would Council would rely on Staff regarding the recommendations? McCallion says the desire of Staff would be to have no transition period at all.

McCallion points out that Peel Council doesn’t always accept the recommendations of Staff.

McIntyre refers to Tab 32 in McCallion’s book. Report from LeBrecque in 2007.

Re Letter of the arterial road mentioned yesterday. McCallion testifies that City of Mississauga Staff prepared the letter and Staff felt strongly this road shouldn’t be included. McCallion then states that after Staff prepared the letter it was then ready for her signature.

McCallion insists that the letter/issue was strictly raised by Staff. And that her signature was to show it came from Head of the municipality.

Tab 19 (in HM’s book) Minutes of Peel General Committee for September 6, 2007. Page 657 is an amendment requested by McCallion. Purpose of amendment was to allow for 90-day transition with respect to non-residential and apartments. (November to May 2008).

So the transition period was extended from 60 days to 90 days.

[Ed. The end of April 2008 happens to be when Mississauga Planning Staff were, according to Ed Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building for the City of Misissauga, “burning the midnight oil to help WCD remove the ‘H’ symbol and to avoid paying the higher development fees” —a saving of $11M..]

McIntyre asks McCallion, did you consider what effect this impact would have on WCD?

McIntyre then asks McCallion if anyone at WCD made submissions to Peel regarding fees impact?

McIntyre now moves to Tab 22 in McC’s doc. Peel Council September 13, 2007. Reports that meeting lasted 1 hr 6 min.

The court is told that there is no record of the September 13, 2007 Peel debate. McCallion said, “Yes, unfortunately”…

McIntyre asks McCallion if she can remember what is said at the meeting. McCallion: No. Then adds, “Development levies are general.”

McIntyre then introduces page 685 of McCallion’s document. September 6, 2013 General Committee includes that recommendations relating to residential and non-residential levies be adopted.

Re Staff reports before Council, McCallion says “I hope they do the research on the thing.”

McCallion  says that Brampton Mayor Fennell requested the minutes be “reconsidered”.

This was moved by Fennell, seconded McCallion, and it extended the transition period for medium-high density residential and office even further —to November 1, 2009.

McIntyre asks McCallion if she has recollection of this resolution. McCallion said that Fennell moved it because she had concerns in Brampton about medium-high density residential in her city.

McCallion testifies that she can’t recall the discussion with Fennell. McCallion is very vague about it. McCallion says that at that point the amendment didn’t affect Mississauga –only Brampton.  McCallion  also adds that she can’t remember how much this amendment was actually debated at Council.

McIntyre asks McCallion who drafted the actual wording? McCallion responds that “If anyone drafted it it would be Mayor Fennell.”

McCallion said she didn’t understand that the amendment was directed towards Mississauga.

[Ed. …wording uses “three area municipalities”.]

McCallion  states the she did not consider conflict of interest, “Why would I?” she says. “I had no knowledge of the progress of their application.”

McCallion admits that she knew the way the motion read that the Fennell amendment would affect WCD.

COURT RESUME 3:45 pm

McIntyre still up.

McIntyre now deals with a letter dated September 19, 2007 to Dan LeBreque from Ed Sajecki. This letter identifies areas of intensification. Maps attached.

It shows development projects inside the UGC (Urban Growth Centre). McIntyre asks McCallion whether she got the letter. McCallion says according to the record log, yes, the letter came to her. McCallion states though that she didn’t recall what she did with the letter.

McCallion states that she can’t say whether she reviewed the letter.

McIntyre asks whether McCallion had knowledge of whether World Class Developments was on the list/map. McCallion states that Ed Sajecki never reviewed the content of the letter with her/Council. So no.

McCallion says that it was strictly Staff to Staff letter.

The Development Charges By-Law that was ultimately passed and the exemption ultimately passed applied to Brampton only.

McIntyre refers to McCallion’s affadavit that the developmental charges were of general application.  McIntyre asks whether McCallion was aware of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act exemptions.

McCallion replies, “Oh, yes, because I have reviewed the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.”

McCallion says general application applies all over the municipality. McCallion says that George Rust-D’Eye explained it at the Association of Municipalties of Ontario. McCallion states that “Everybody pays for development levy.”

McCallion states that she knows Rust-D’Eye to be a “specialist in regard to the Conflict of Interest Act”.

McIntyre asks McCallion whether Peter or anyone at WCD discussed fees with her. McCallion: No.

McIntyre informs the court that in Fall 2007 there was an effort by WCD to scramble to get under the wire to avoid a fee increase. McCallion says that for her to be briefed or talk to Staff about it would have created the appearance of influence.

McIntyre asks McCallion if she got a legal opinion. No. McCallion says she was confident in her interpretation of Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

McIntyre asks McCallion what her understanding of Peter’s compensation was. McCallion repeats she believe her son to be the real estate agent and there’d be some compensation with Couprie. When and what basis, McCallion said, she had no idea.

McIntyre asks McCallion whether there were any point before the Inquiry that she knew that Peter was more than a real estate agent. McCallion says she didn’t know until Mary Ellen Bench told her that he was a principal. McCallion then says she phoned her son saying “You have clearly led me to believe that you’re a real estate agent for Leo.”

McCallion testifies that upon knowing that she advised Peter to see a lawyer and get it (the ownership) corrected.

McIntyre asks McCallion why she acted as she did. McCallion states that when she challenged Peter on it he still maintained he was not a principal. McCallion states,“I had been misled and nobody had told me any different.”

McIntyre now goes to the documents in The Buff Folder. As McIntyre is searching about McCallion comments that she’ll be going to a talk show tonight at 9 pm!

McIntyre reports that on May 18, 2005 there’s a records of Peter and Murray Cook meeting with Mayor re WCD. McCallion testifies that she doesn’t recall what was discussed.

McIntyre mentions another dinner. Again McCallion states that she doesn’t recall whether WCD was discussed. McCallion: “I have no idea.”

McIntyre introduces a May 29, 2006 meeting this time, Peter and Murray with Mayor. McCallion states that some of the meetings were at her house and repeats that she can’t recall what was discussed.

McIntyre mentions a December 19, 2006: Tony DiCicco and John DiPoce lunch meeting with McCallion. Again McCallion doesn’t recall what was discussed.

Then McIntyre repeats the Pier 4 dinner-meeting.

Then an April 10, 2007 meeting.

Then McIntyre points out there there’s no record of meetings between January 25, 2007 and November 5, 2007.

McIntyre then points out that the telephone messages start up. Mostly by DeCicco. McIntyre asks McCallion if there were any change in the frequency of her interactions with WCD after Tony DeCicco involved.

McCallion says there was a personality clash between Cook and DeCicco. And that DeCicco hoped she’d intervene. [Ed. See contrary testimony by Murray Cook above]

McIntyre references a put-and-call agreement.  October 26, 2007 from Emilio Bisceglia, lawyer for World Class Developments. It was an unsigned agreement –sent as a FAX. McCallion testifies that she doesn’t remember receiving it. McIntyre asks McCallion if she tried to get Murray Cook to sign it.

[Ed. It’s clear that DeCicco’s phone messages would give considerable details regarding WCD]

McIntyre asks McCallion how many calls she gets in a day? McCallion says that she didn’t get more calls from DeCicco than most developers.

McCallion then insists that she didn’t return all the calls from DeCicco.

When DeCicco’s phone message refers to a budget for WCD, McCallion insists at no time did she know the financial situation of WCD.

McIntyre refers to an entry March 19, Marriott Residence Inn, Toronto. McCallion to be with Sajecki, Gupta, etc to look at a hotel in downtown Toronto. McCallion states that she’d been told that the hotel was somewhat near the quality wanted in Mississauga downtown core. McCallion then says that it wasn’t near what was expected.

McCallion says that a group of Staff and Murray Cook went to the States to look at a hotel there as well.

McCallion then summarizes that the Marriot didn’t anywhere near meet the status of the hotel she/we wanted.

McIntyre then asks McCallion, If her position was not to be involved with Staff why did she go with Sajecki and Gupta? McCallion responds that it was her interest that the type of hotel would meet “our expectations”.

Then McCallion states,“No other meetings, this was the only time.”

BREAK TIL TOMORROW AT 10

Hazel McCallion leaves Brampton courthouse after conflict of interest testimony (April 12, 2013) –the PANORAMA

April 12th, 2013  

Today’s video, complete with transcript.

Hazel McCallion leaves courtroom after conflict of interest testimony (April 12, 2013)

 VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BEGINS

MISSISSAUGAWATCH outside Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

It is Friday, April the 12th, 2013 and Mayor McCallion has just finished with testifying.

That’s the car, ready to whisk her away.

Let’s see. Who is driving her?

Oh. And I should say that when I ran to get the camera, Harold Shipp had just arrived. So it’s like the “Friends of Hazel” all over again.

That’s Louie Rosella coming out. Mississauga News.

And it looks like the media here are poised to, perhaps ask some questions —I don’t know.

Oh, and I should also say that if you remember, in 2010 [municipal election], one of the things the Mayor asked was to give her councillors that she could work with. And the councillors that she could work with showed up in court today.

Katie Mahoney, Pat Saito —I think that was all though. Am I missing somebody? [Forgot about Pat Mullin]

Going to give this guy privacy [aims camera down just as Mayor McCallion leaves the courthouse…]

Mayor Hazel McCallion leaves Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013

[Video of the media and then the Mayor leaving in a Buick Enclave, that drives right past the camera]

And there’s the Mayor going.

Safe trip to Portugal. And I mean that.

And she’s gone.

And here we —oh, that’s right. Mullin, Pat Mullin is also here.

Councillor Pat Saito leaving Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

Hi Ursula. How are ya?

MISSISSAUGAWATCH outside Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

Fine. How are you?

Councillor Pat Saito leaving Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

I’m good thanks.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH outside Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

And here we have Katie Mahoney [followed by CTV cameraman and towards yet another.]

Katie "It's not hard to support our Mayor. Trust me." Mahoney leaves Hazel McCallion's conflict of interest trial (April 12, 2013)

Councillor Pat Mahoney leaving Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

Okay Pat! Help me out here!

MISSISSAUGAWATCH outside Brampton courthouse, April 12, 2013 Hazel McCallion conflict of interest trial

Actually, what’s interesting is that is [sic] three of the four women who were the councillors at the “Friends of Hazel” Rally. The only one missing is Maja Prentice who has since retired.

And I love what Katie Mahoney said on December 2, 2009. “It’s not hard to support our Mayor. Trust me.”

And there’s Harold Shipp.

Okay. Any bets “witch hunt” appears twice in his interview?

And just to be clear, he’s making comments though he wasn’t in the courtroom —as far as I know.

And there’s Parrish…

And… this person’s running over.

VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS
Music: Don’t Crash the Ambulance/Mark Knopfler

 And for those who wish to do their homework?…

Bonnie Crombie and her “same two hundred” Friends of Hazel –THE COMEDY

And here’s what I was doing in September 2007.

ROYSON JAMES, TORONTO STAR 2007 billboard "MISSISSAUGA, WHERE THE MOST OVERPAID MUNICIPAL POLITICIANS RESIDE"

ENERSOURCE Ontario Energy Board Ruling –email alert to Mississauga ratepayers from “Joe Citizen”

February 7th, 2013  

On January 16, 2013, I received an anonymous email from “Joe Citizen”.  Subject of email, “Enersource OEB Ruling”. He requested that I consider printing his comments and having him as a guest blogger.

So today inside Mississauga Council Chambers I made time to videotape his Enersource OEB Ruling letter and YouTube it. For the record.

As always, the video, complete with video transcript.

ENERSOURCE Ontario Energy Board Ruling –email alert to Mississauga ratepayers from “Joe Citizen” (12:08 min)

 [VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BEGINS]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH reading email sent by “Joe Citizen”, Mississauga Council Chambers, February 6, 2013

It is Wednesday, February 6, 2013. I’m here at Mississauga Council. Council has gone in-camera, and in-camera is opposite of what you really think it is. They are going out of camera range and in closed session.

And what I want to do now is take the time to read an email that was sent by “Joe Citizen”. And he asked me if I would publish his letter on my blog.

And I found that kind of strange because my blog is really obscure and there’s, to my knowledge, few readers.

However, I said I would do that. And what I want to do is read the two emails that he wrote me. And this is just for the record.

And he writes —the topic from “Joe Citizen” is “Enersource OEB Ruling” and I’m not even sure —I think OEB stands for Energy, Ontario Energy Board, but let me read it:

Hi there,

I am disenchanted with Enersource, the City of Mississauga, and city council. I love your website and find it very comforting to know there are others out there who question what the city does and tells us.

I am looking for a way to vent about the OEB ruling on Enersource’s rate application and their response to it (as found in the Mississauga News). I would like to remain anonymous though. I was wondering if you might consider printing my comments below. Maybe I could be a guest blogger!?

Anyways, I hope you’ll consider it.

And I’ll show it right there. Okay, so there’s the email.

And in all honesty, while I did videotape all of the Enersource meetings, most of the debates the City had on Enersource between 2006 to current —and have them on hard drive, and everything else, Enersource was not one of my areas of research.

I was more interested in ethical issues.

So I can’t really —I can’t know, the degree to which this letter is actually accurate. And as a result I’m going to read it and produce it verbatim as a guest blog.

Anyway, “Joe Citizen” writes:

I’d like to comment on the recent articles about the OEB’s decision on Enersource Hydro Mississauga’s rate increase application, and the response from Enersource, as reported in the Mississauga News. But before beginning, I’d like to set up the two sides so that the public can get a better perspective.

On one side, we have Enersource Hydro Mississauga. This is a corporation that is owned 90% by the City of Mississauga. The Board of Directors at Enersource includes the mayor, Hazel McCallion, and ward 6 councilor Ron Starr. Hazel McCallion of course was the subject  of a judicial inquiry into an aborted land deal that cost Mississauga taxpayers millions, money which went to a company headed by the mayor’s son. Had the deal gone through, it would have netted McCallion junior much more money. The mayor also played dumb on how a 10% owner of the utility, Borealis, got veto power on all decisions related to Enersource. Ron Starr, endorsed by the mayor in the last city election, is no stranger to controversy either. Starr was charged in 2000 with fraud for allegedly mismanaging funds at a children’s camp. The charges were dropped the following year. So right from the top, we have some shady characters.

The Ontario Energy Board (OEB) is an independent, self-financing Crown corporation. The OEB regulates the province’s electricity and natural gas sectors, in the public interest. With regards to the electricity sector, their job is to approve and set delivery rates for electricity distribution and transmission. They also set the price of electricity for certain consumers under the Regulated Price Plan and Time-of-Use plan.They are the industry watch dog, with the public’s interest at heart. It should be noted that the OEB isn’t just a handful of government drones making rulings. They appear to use a variety of outside groups to assist with comparisons and discussions. In the Enersource ruling, it appears the following groups/entities were involved: Energy Probe Research Foundation, Vulnerable Energy Consumers Coalition, Consumers Council of Canada, School Energy Coalition, and the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario.

Once I saw the article in the media and Enersource’s response, I headed for the Ontario Energy Board website and downloaded a copy of the actual decision. I would recommend one to do so to get a better understanding of the OEB’s decision. There were essentially three findings that they came down with. The first has been well documented by the media regarding the purchase of the new building and the resulting excessive space that Enersource now finds itself with. Enersource counters by saying that this building was the lowest cost option available. One has to assume that this case was presented to the OEB, and they rejected the argument. In fact, the OEB ruling seemed to indicate Enersource did not provide enough evidence to support a lot of their rate application, much less their building argument. In many cases, it seemed the OEB was doing Enersource a favor and making some comparisons on their behalf.

At face value, the response by Enersource to the public seems valid, but only with regards to the building. The rest of their response seems to be “we have the lowest rates, we know what we are doing, … trust us”. Getting back to the building, one has to believe that either this fact about the new building being the cheapest option was not presented to the OEB, or if it was, it was not sufficient. Perhaps the OEB is saying that even if the new building was the lowest option available, Enersource should have considered options for recouping some money for all of the excessive space they now find themselves with. If it was the lowest option, is it still fair to force that cost on ratepayers? Shouldn’t the utility look into options to mitigate that burden on ratepayers?

On a side note, perhaps Enersource should have considered moving into a better location after the train derailment in 1979. Having the head office for an essential service located right next to a railroad line was probably not a good idea. To remain there after a train actually derailed is an even worse idea.The second point made by the OEB was that Enersource was unable to provide examples of cost/benefit analyses that it had used when deciding whether to proceed with particular projects. They give two examples in the report, but there are sure to be others that weren’t in the report. Only minor items are usually put forth to watch dog entities. With conflict of interest allegations dogging members of the board, are we really to believe that there are no conflict of interest situations going on within Enersource? Why do projects with no apparent benefit go forward? Either for image, or, … somebody is making money in the project.

The third and most troubling finding to me from the OEB report was Enersource’s repeated resistance to the suggestion that it should look to other utilities to assess its own level of efficiency and to examine whether more efficient approaches are available. From the report: “the Board as an economic regulator acts as a proxy for competition, and therefore it is not surprising that comparative analysis would play a part in the Board’s analysis. Enersource maintained that it could demonstrate its level of efficiency by comparing its own performance over time, and the Board agrees that this is one approach to examining efficiency; however, it says nothing about whether the company is as efficient as it could be. For that type of analysis, some form of external comparison or external analysis is required. The company repeatedly stated that it did not compare itself to other distributors when assessing its operations for efficiency.”. The OEB found that Enersource is clearly lagging its peers on OM&A (operating and maintenance costs) measures. The OEB essentially said that Enersource should consider comparing itself with its peers in the industry using common metrics in order to find efficiencies internally before looking to burden ratepayers with cost increases. Enersource seems to refuse this thinking.

[MISSISSAUGAWATCH interrupted by City of Mississauga Corporate Security] Okay. Oh. You mean I gotta go.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH reading email sent by “Joe Citizen” at the “Rogues Gallery”(aka Citizens of the Year), February 6, 2013

No surprise. Security kicked me out. So I’m here in the Rogues Gallery. There are the people who made MYTHissauga, MYTHissauga. So I’m just going to continue reading this last paragraph. Hopefully I’ll be successful.

Okay. Here we go:

This is the key finding for me. One needs only look at the executive parking lot at Enersource to see where they might want to start looking for deficiencies. Is it really necessary for any executive of a public utility to drive a luxury vehicle? Wouldn’t an electric vehicle be a great signal to Mississauga residents? Was it really necessary for Enersource to re-brand itself with a new logo and colors? It’s not like residents have options with regards to electricity. We have to take it from Enersource, at the rates determined by the OEB. A shiny new logo (at whatever cost that might have been) won’t decrease our rates, but only increase them. And along those lines (that we really have no choice), do we really need to follow Enersource on Twitter and Facebook? Other than appearing hip, again, what cost savings do those initiatives provide?

I would strongly urge the ratepayers of Mississauga to do themselves a favor and read the OEB ruling, and like Enersource’s motto says, demand “more”.

And that’s the last of the thing here.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

 

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

“OMERS CEO Michael Nobrega and Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion in congratulatory hug after the televised Enersource public meeting January 22, 2009

Mississauga Councillor Katie Mahoney's 2010 Financial Statements reveal both Michael Nobrega and David O'Brien donated $750.00 (maximum allowed) to her 2010 re-election campaign.

Mississauga Councillor Katie Mahoney’s 2010 Financial Statements reveal both Michael Nobrega and David O’Brien donated $750.00 (maximum allowed) to her 2010 re-election campaign.

Mississauga Graffiti Report: “MEDIA LIES!”, “This is NOT Freedom” —and Gratitude to the Toronto Star

January 6th, 2013  

Last blog I shared video of Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion once again dumping on The Mississauga News calling it “the local wrapper for advertising”.

Here, for the record are her exact words.

“We have dealt with the Budget and the increase— don’t believe what you read in the newspapers! Please! Check it, before you believe it.

The increase in taxes was 2.6%. Not 7 to 8% as reported by the local wrapper for advertising. You know what that is? The local wrapper for advertising. I think they call it a newspaper.

So it just shows you how the press tries to mislead the public.”  —Hazel McCallion, January 1, 2013

Hazel McCallion won’t be getting any opposition from me for calling The Mississauga News “the local wrapper for advertising” but I would certainly dispute her generalizing her contempt for all press in the statement “So it just shows you how the press tries to mislead the public.”

Believe me! When it comes to misleading the public, the City of Mississauga really does Lead Today for Tomorrow!

McCallion’s contempt for the Press leads nicely into the topic of today’s blog —Graffiti in Mississauga. Now I can’t be sure but I think that the nature if Mississauga graffiti may be changing. Changing from tags and pieces where you can identify the writer/artist to more message-based graffiti where it’s completely anonymous.

Graffiti Mississauga "This is NOT Freedom" and "MEDIA LIES!"

So here’s video of Mississauga’s latest graffiti “This is NOT Freedom” and “MEDIA LIES!”.

As always, complete with video transcript.

Graffiti Mississauga: “MEDIA LIES!” and “This is NOT Freedom” (2:16 min)

(Click here to go directly to YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BEGINS]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH returning to document graffiti at Location 01-12/12/24,  December 24, 2012.

It is Sunday, [sic] December 24, 2012. And I’m parked here by an auto dealer so that I can document the graffiti right there.

I documented it last night but it was quite dark —it was around 5:05 pm. So I just want to make sure that I got a good look at it.

“This is NOT Freedom”.

And my still camera really can’t do that good a job from this far away. You see this video camera can do this.

So I’m going to drive down Erin Mills Parkway and see if I can’t get a photograph the other way.

Here’s something interesting. We got a man walking.

And —that should do.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH returning to document graffiti at Location 02-12/12/24,  December 24, 2012.

It is Sunday, [sic] December 24, 2012 and I’ve pulled over Erin Mills Parkway to document this.

And I have to say that yesterday when I was driving along Erin Mills Parkway and noticing graffiti that said, “This is NOT Freedom”, I don’t recall seeing this —along this wall.

Now I admit it was kind of getting dark. But I really really don’t think that was there yesterday. At 5:05 anyway when I was videotaping “This is NOT Freedom” up in that direction.

So.

“MEDIA LIES!”. Oh yeah. I agree with that. But Government lies so much more.

And then we can always be grateful for Media like the Toronto Star and their investigative reporting. Especially when they file Freedom of Information and get behind the Government Lies and their Government Public Face.

So. I can not disagree with that message.

Turning camera off.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

UPDATE: January 10, 2013. Yesterday while driving to the gym, we noticed that both “This is NOT Freedom” and “MEDIA LIES!” have been removed by authorities. Buffing occurred some time between Sunday, January 6th and yesterday.

Removal, is of course, the fate of graffiti. Removal is why we document it! This voice especially, had something important to say.

And the sign said, “The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls”
And whispered in the sounds of silence

Sounds Of Silence
Artist: Simon & Garfunkel
Album: Sounds Of Silence

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

GRAFFITI MISSISSAUGA "FREEDOM" documented May 27, 2012

“Politics is a nasty, unpleasant, mean-spirited business, which is presumably why some of us are drawn to it. (Many of us are nasty, unpleasant, and mean-spirited people.)” —Warren Kinsella, 2007

 

Where Were You When Twitter Went Down? And Hazel McCallion’s New Year’s allegation, “the press tries to mislead the public”

January 4th, 2013  

Mayor Hazel McCallion gave quite the speech at this year’s Mayor’s New Year’s Levee! McCallion sure crapped on The Mississauga News!

And McCallion didn’t stop there. She then let loose with the allegation that “the press tries to mislead the public.”

Have to laugh because back at the April 12, 2010 Mississauga Judicial Inquiry hearing, here’s what I testified to Inquiry Commissioner Douglas Cunningham about Mississauga “media”.

For the record, there are no media in MYTHissauga. And please spell that capital M. Y. T. H. and lower-case issauga.

We don’t have a television station in MYTHissauga. Citizens are merely inflicted with a way that the City has found to funnel its Trust, Quality, Excellence Party Line straight into our living rooms.

As for MYTHissauga’s only newspaper? Coverage of City Hall is a joke.

Well on New Year’s Day, Mayor Hazel McCallion called The Mississauga News, “the local wrapper for advertising”.

“Coverage of City Hall is a joke” or McCallion’s “local wrapper for advertising” —same message: When it comes to reliable political information, citizens are on their own in MYTHissauga.

So ends the intro and as always, here’s the video, complete with video transcript.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Tweeting LIVE! And Where Were You When Twitter Went Down (2:57 min)

 (Click here to go directly to YouTube)

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BEGINS]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH at City Hall elevator to cover the Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013.

It is Tuesday, January the 1st, 2013. There’s the information. So we’ll go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

I think this year, this levee, is a very special one. In which we’ve gone through a year of trials and tribulations.

Some unfortunate, pessimistic things have happened and people have become a little pessimistic.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH presses City Hall elevator button on way to Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

I know you-all adopted New Year’s Resolutions. I’d like to see the list you-all adopted. We would file them in the City M— into the Mayor’s Office. I’d be happy to look at them.

 MISSISSAUGAWATCH presses City Hall elevator button on way to Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

We have dealt with the Budget and the increase— don’t believe what you read in the newspapers! Please! Check it, before you believe it.

The increase in taxes was 2.6%. Not 7 to 8% as reported by the local wrapper for advertising. You know what that is? The local wrapper for advertising. I think they call it a newspaper.

So it just shows you how the press tries to mislead the public.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH presses City Hall elevator button on way to Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

And then unfortunately we had a bug called the Ash Bore that is ruining our ash trees. And we had to put $50-million in the budgets to spend over the next 10 years to try to save our ash trees. And when they die we plant more other trees.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH presses City Hall elevator button on way to Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

So there are challenges out there. And we want to keep our infrastructure in good shape! We don’t want cement falling from the bridges in Mississauga.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH presses City Hall elevator button on way to Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

Because, with the Staff and the Council working together —as a team, we can accomplish so much.

And then if we add to the team, the Citizens of Mississauga, nobody can beat us! Absolutely not. [Applause] We are The Best!

[Applause]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH presses City Hall elevator button on way to Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Go.

Mayor Hazel McCallion delivering Mayor’s New Year’s Levee speech  January 1, 2013

So. Let’s celebrate!  [Applause]

Let’s have a wonderful New Year!

[Applause]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH videotaping outside Council Chambers, Mayor’s New Year’s Levee January 1, 2013.

Okay. I’ve just gone out through this door —I’ll just show you here. This door right there —this door. This one right here.

And I see this! And it says, “NO PHOTOS PLEASE” and yet most people [person talking] most people went up the [person talking] most people went up the escalator [laughs] and they put the “NO PHOTOS” right there.

Weird.


Music: “Where Were You When Twitter Went Down” by Chumlee from Pawn Stars

GoldSilverPawn Shop.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

And wouldn’t you know it that just a week or so earlier, someone else in Mississauga isn’t happy with the media…

MISSISSAUGA GRAFFITI "MEDIA LIES!"  December 24, 2012

 “MEDIA LIES!” Mississauga graffiti photographed December 24, 2012, undisclosed location.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

 

Director of City of Mississauga Corporate Security concedes, “Citizens/kids need audio recorders.”

April 1st, 2012  

What follows is a video, complete with transcript. It includes an audio excerpt from a March 26, 2012 interview with Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities and Property Management (aka Director City of Mississauga Corporate Security).

Director of City of Mississauga Corporate Security concedes, “Citizens/kids need audio recorders.”

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

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]
Music: Baloney Again by Mark Knopfler

MISSISSAUGAWATCH in Tim Horton’s lineup with City of Mississauga Corporate Security “677” knob unit in the mirror

It is Wednesday, March the 28th, 2012 and guess what we’ve got right behind me.

I’m in a Tim Horton’s lineup here [laughs] and the knob unit, a knob unit, right there.

Just right behind me. Look at that. [laughs] And it’s not like he can disappear because he’s trapped behind another one.

This is too good. Right there. Knob unit. Oops. Better this way.

[sighs] Yeah, you just can —actually, this funny. This is great. I’m having a great time. Let me just see. Can I get a close-up there? ‘Cuz the guy’s trapped.

Let me see. Wrong angle. There it is.

[City of Mississauga Corporate Security guard now calls up my license place on his computer console]

You followed the wrong car, pal.

[text insert 01: Audit Committee, March 17, 2008]

Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion:

   So, I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that
   we are dealing with the public and we should give them every
   understanding possible.

Mississauga Corporate Security Manager Jamie Hillis:

   Yes. Absolutely.

[text insert 02]

“I’ll finish my lunch since I’ve been working for 8hr’s [sic] with out [sic] any
break, then when I’m done eating I’ll tow your car so you can feel satisfied
that your tax dollars are well spent, or maybe I’ll watch you while you use
the park and give you a ticket beacuse [sic] I can”

-City of Mississauga Corporate Security guard alias “HyJynx”
blueline.ca    Sat Oct 15, 2005

[text insert 03]

“And wouldn’t you know, the next weekend I ran into him again, same bat time
same bat channel. Only this time there were 3 of us vs. him.

Lets [sic] just say that the Administration of Justice was not the one dragged
through the cement …er rather mud… yeah the soft squishy stuff.”

–City of Mississauga Corporate Security guard alias “HyJynx”
blueline.ca    Mon Dec 26, 2005

MISSISSAUGAWATCH in Tim Horton’s lineup with City of Mississauga Corporate Security “677” knob unit in the mirror

Thank you very much.

Tim Horton’s attendant

Thank you. Have a good day.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH in Tim Horton’s lineup with City of Mississauga Corporate Security “677” knob unit in the mirror

Wait a second. This is hard to do as you can imagine. There he is. Let’s see, go right there.

At least he’s not honking to say get out of the way.

Yep, I really enjoy this. Let’s just get a close-up. There it is. The guy’s getting his coffee.

You’re on video surveillance, pal.

I wonder what knob unit it is.

They have “675”, “676”, “677”, “678”.

[DIP TO WHITE]

Video of City of Mississauga Corporate Security, Election Night, Mississauga City Hall, October 25, 2010.

Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion:

   So, I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that
   we are dealing with the public and we should give them every
   understanding possible.

Mississauga Corporate Security Manager Jamie Hillis:

   Yes. Absolutely.

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

Then it’s just your allegation up to this point that [name deleted] said that.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 26, 2012

Yes.

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

And I’m supposed to take you and your word but I’m not supposed to take my Staff at their word.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 26, 2012

Thank you very much. Thank you very much, because that’s been my saying all along is that, and that’s why I have this stuff because when it’s your word against City Staff —a citizen’s word, especially a kid’s word against City Staff, you lose a hundred percent of the time just because of that.

That’s why I’m saying you either have to have something on audio or better yet video because if you get into a situ—

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

I am not sure why this is such a revelation.

Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion:

   So, I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that
   we are dealing with the public and we should give them every
   understanding possible.

Mississauga Corporate Security Manager Jamie Hillis:

   Yes. Absolutely.


Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

So that I’m a third party. This person says this and that person says that. And I’m supposed to determine without any evidence one way or another what the right story is.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 26, 2012

Yeah. And I guess—

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

I am?!

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 26, 2012

No, no, no, no. What I’m saying is, I would say that the majority of complaints are like that, wouldn’t you say? Where the public don’t have an audio-recorder. They don’t have their cellphone ready.

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 28, 2012

And I would also tell you that the majority of complaints, the story that you get is not —able to be substantiated.

It is a person who is in a moment providing their recounting, usually after the fact, of what happened. And there is no evidence that what they say is absolutely true.

It’s their view of events.

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 28, 2012

Uh-hm.

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

Often filtered through some other lens.

So to suggest that I should take those stories at face value and act on them is bizarre. It’s just not—

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 26, 2012

Okay.

So, so basically then —yeah, no, I feel good about that.

Because it’s been something I’ve been saying is that if in a case where you have a problem with City Staff, you should be audio-recording your telephone conversation. You should be having a video-recorder going or something like that.

So that you, you, if you, you can not put yourself in a position of a He-Said/She-Said scenario. Okay? I think we can agree on that.

Ken Owen, Director, City of Mississauga Facilities/Property Management and Corporate Security, March 26, 2012

[silence]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH interview with Ken Owen, March 28, 2012

Okay. Great.

[Video. MISSISSAUGAWATCH (and finger) drives past Mississauga City Hall, March 18, 2012.]

Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion:

   So, I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that
   we are dealing with the public and we should give them every
   understanding possible.

Mississauga Corporate Security Manager Jamie Hillis:

   Yes. Absolutely.

 

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

This blog is dedicated to the 9/10 year old girl in this City of Mississauga Corporate Security Special Occurrence Report.

SHERI-LYNN RUFFO (SLR) SHIFT SUPERVISOR: CITY OF MISSISSAUGA CORPORATE SECURITY NOVEMBER 14, 2008 BAN OF 9/10 AND 15/16 YEAR OLD FEMALES (from Mississauga Civic Centre, Living Arts Centre and Central Library

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

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. "

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

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.

Year in Review: Police, Firefighters, more Police –and Hockey MISSISSAUGAWATCH Top Ten YouTube videos for 2011

December 29th, 2011  

A MISSISSAUGAWATCH quick year in review. Our Top Ten YouTube videos for 2011 based on your view counts. Police and Firefighters scored even bigger than hockey.

Here we go.

NUMBER ONE video for 2011. Uploaded May 14, 2011.

Peel Regional Police 2011 Dodge Charger (Police Day, May 14, 2011) (1:26 min)

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

NUMBER 2 Uploaded May 14, 2011.

Peel Regional Police Dodge Charger with special focus on INTERIOR (Police Day, May 14, 2011)  (3:38 min)

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

NUMBER 3    Uploaded June 7, 2011.

“Starr’s on the Credit” 2008 video of Mississauga elite partying removed from the Net. Why? (6:58 min)

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

NUMBER 4  Uploaded July 11, 2011.

Hana, Maui Hawaii Fire Department (highlighting two beautiful fire engines)  (2:27 min)

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

NUMBER 5  Uploaded April 14, 2011.

Hazel McCallion Mayor’s Gala Scandal: MYTHissauga “raised mmmillions of dollars”  (10:11 min)

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

NUMBER 6   Uploaded June 1, 2011.

St John Sea Dogs Defeat Mississauga Majors for Memorial Cup WIN! Special Thanks to ROGERS  (3:08 min)

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

NUMBER 7   Uploaded July 5, 2011.

Maui, Hawaii Firefighters and Police respond to Lahaina July 4th blaze that destroys house  (9:01 min)

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

NUMBER 8   Uploaded June 3, 2011.

Peel Police 11 Division Jail Cells 11 Division (May 28, 2011 High Definition)  (4:30 min)

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

NUMBER 9   Uploaded May 14, 2011.

Peel Regional Police Tactical Unit: Guns, GUNS, GUNS and RAPPEL. (Police Day, May 14, 2011)  (4:50 min)

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

NUMBER 10   Uploaded May 23, 2011.

St John Sea Dogs overtime goal against the Owen Sound Attack (May 23, 2011)  (7:28 min)

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

Those were the viewers’ Top Ten for 2011.

YouTube lists 174 MISSISSAUGAWATCH-produced videos for 2011. Tomorrow I’ll share what I regard as my Top Ten vids.

And always, always remember…

GRAFFITI MISSISSAUGA, "Dont Be so quick To judge; you only see what I choose to show."

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Mississauga Judicial Inquiry: Memo to Council from Councillor Nando Iannicca – November 2nd re: Judicial Inquiry Next Steps

November 2nd, 2011  

What follows is a “Memo to Council from Councillor Nando Iannicca – November 2nd re: Judicial Inquiry Next Steps” that Councillor Iannicca shared with Mississauga Council at today’s General Committee meeting. I reproduce it here in its entirety as written, with the good Councillor’s kind permission.

Memorandum [Corporate logo for City of Mississauga]

To: Members of Council City Manager
From: Nando Iannicca, Councillor Ward 7
Date: November 2, 2011
Re: Judicial Inquiry Next Steps

With this item now on our General Committee Agenda of November 2, 2011 I provide a list of questions and concerns expressed to me by residents during the course of the Judicial Inquiry, its subsequent findings and report, and the media reporting of same.

Like most other Councillors, many direct and forceful questions were asked of me by Ward 7 Constituents and others throughout this process and I advised all of them that I could not speak to the matter while Justice Cunningham and the Inquiry was seized of this issue. I fulfilled this obligation to his Honour and the process but I also promised all those who raised an inquiry that I would formally express their concerns and questions at the appropriate time so as not to appear to have avoided the issue, and to also give them the satisfaction of knowing that I formally addressed their concerns as their elected official.

In formally referring the matter to the City Manager and the appropriate municipal staff, I am well aware that some of the items that have been asked of me are answered in the “Report of the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry” or in today’s General Committee Agenda. Where this is the case I would ask staff to simply refer to the appropriate reference in these documents and proceed to then answer the balance of the queries. At the conclusion, what I hope to have achieved on behalf of my constituents is a written response to their direct inquiry either provided by the Inquiry Report, the Report prepared by City staff, and amendments to this Report before the final document goes to Council.

  1. Mayor’s Gala Fund

    Justice Cunningham dealt with this matter in his Report as have municipal staff. I am satisfied that all of the concerns that have been asked of me regarding the amount of money raised relative to the actual disbursements, the fact that we broke Revenue Canada’s laws, and particularly the fact that the municipality no longer plays a principal, official or any other direct role in this entity means that the City and I have addressed this concern.

  2. Need for a Judicial Inquiry

    Many residents asked why we even needed a Judicial Inquiry when some argued that the original legal opinion presented to Council said it was not required. I am glad to finally speak to this matter and to state in absolutely unequivocal terms that this most assuredly was not what was conveyed to Council in Camera on the matter. While it is absolutely true that the written Report presented to Council said that the Mayor may not have breached the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, in the extensive conversation that ensued prompted by questions from Councillors, the responses from the legal professionals in the room made it clear that a great many other concerns existed in the Mayor’s conduct. These were all borne out in evidence before the Inquiry and the ultimate findings. In fact, Justice Cunningham himself stated of the call for an Inquiry that, “there was no other practical way to explore what transpired.”

  3. Enersource/Borealis Veto

    This matter was also dealt with where it was confirmed the provision was “slipped in” after the fact and Council had no knowledge and gave no approval to the clause.

  4. The City must have a Hotel Convention Centre

    This part of the Inquiry prompted by far the greatest number of questions and concerns particularly from members of the business community, development community, and realtors. The list of questions they put to me are as follows:

    • when did the Council of The City of Mississauga determine that a Hotel/Convention Centre was vital and would be pursued?
    • when was the decision actually made?
    • can someone provide an Agenda of such meetings, the information presented, the Planning Report related to the subject, and the public process and public consultation that took place?
    • who determined that Mr. Peter McCallion would be chosen to lead the project?
    • what credentials and experience does he have in putting together a billion dollar Hotel and Convention deal in light of the fact that Justice Cunningham found, “Mr. McCallion’s experience was strictly as a real estate agent, and he has never put a development project together.” Many of those who put the question to me on this front were very upset that it appears no Requests for Proposal, Call for Submissions, or any other public process or competition was used to determine who could compete for this very lucrative business opportunity.
    • when the decision was made to go ahead with the project with Peter McCallion as the sole Principal and/or Agent, why does it appear as though those pre-eminent in the Hotel Convention business with names such as Wynn, Hilton, Hyatt, Trump and the like were never brought into the fold but that the biggest development proposal in the history of the City was instead entrusted to Peter McCallion and individuals he approached with names such as Cook, Couprie, DeCiccio, and the like, who Justice Cunningham referred to as friends of the McCallion family.
    • In the one instance where someone with standing in the Hotel business was approached, his candid comments are particularly disturbing. As Justice Cunningham wrote in his Report, “Steve Gupta, the CEO of Easton’s Group of Hotels…testified that a four star hotel…could not be achieved, given the less expensive hotels in the vicinity and the proximity of other four star hotels both near the airport and in downtown Toronto.” So when the only expert consulted said the proposal was dead on arrival who chose to keep the scheme alive?
  5. Sheridan College Flip

    A couple of individuals have made a very astute observation regarding the final outcome which has led them to question whether there was ever any intention on the part of the City to actually build a Hotel Convention Centre. They specifically point to the fact that when the Council of The City of Mississauga became aware that Sheridan College was looking to build a campus in our city the Council with great haste and $15 M of Taxpayers money immediately purchased the site in question that Peter McCallion referred to “as the best, last piece of land for a Hotel Convention Centre” and immediately conveyed it to Sheridan College at the nominal sum of $1 per year. As it was put to me, this fact clearly demonstrates that the City Council of The City of Mississauga had absolutely no intention whatsoever of pursuing a Hotel Convention Centre. They need an explanation as to why so many of the actions of the Mayor, Peter McCallion, and his various associates would demonstrate otherwise.

  6. Role of the Office of the Mayor

    When the deal ultimately fell through what role was the Mayor and her Office pursuing on behalf of Mississauga City Taxpayers when she continued to be involved in trying to obtain the highest possible settlement for the firm in which her son was a Principal. Many have followed up this question by noting the peculiar outcome, as they put it, in which Mr. McCallion was involved in a project in which he seemingly never bought or sold or listed a piece of land, and ultimately never built a Hotel Convention Centre and yet he and his associates received $4M of compensation. They also note that this $4M comes directly from the $15M which all Taxpayers paid for the land in question for Sheridan College from which the sellers of the land and then forwarded $4M to Mr. McCallion and his associates.

[Iannicca memo ends]

I have just one question arising from today’s General Committee meeting: Why has no one asked “How can you possibly trust a corrupt municipality like MYTHissauga to hire its own integrity commissioner?”

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

Signed,

The Mississauga Muse

OCCUPY TORONTO about “this disconnect between us privileged ones in government” and those they serve.

October 23rd, 2011  

At yesterday’s OCCUPY TORONTO march to city hall, I noticed a sign that said it all —George Orwell.

“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

OCCUPY TORONTO, PROTEST SIGN, GEORGE ORWELL, "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
Today I provide a video and transcript of truths told by Mississauga Councillor Nando Iannicca, truths about “this disconnect between us privileged ones in government” and those they serve.

And remember that silly, pretentious “Our Future Mississauga”? About dreaming BIG? Or the fraudulent Mississauga Summit? About MYTHissauga’s “brave, bold future”?

Watch/listen to Councillor Iannicca and the truth about Our Future Mississauga —Province and Country.

Maybe then you’ll “get” what OCCUPY TORONTO is about!

Is Occupy Toronto about “All animals look at each other differently when watering hole dries out” (7:01 min)

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

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BEGINS]

[Regarding loss of $731,485 in transit Infoplace –the result of the city not following its own rules for collecting payment for tickets]

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

Who’s responsible? Is it the, is it that Transit department responsible or the Finance Department? No communication, it seems.

And in a bankruptcy, without anything in writing that the project got changed, how can you —so, you know, it’s not as bad as the one in Toronto. But it’s bad.

Changes made without due authority. In the process.

So that’s all I want to say.

Councillor Nando Iannicca (Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

Councillor Iannicca.

Councillor Nando Iannicca (Audit Committee, May 11, 2009)

(inaudible) —Madam Mayor, to your point. The whole episode is shameful.

And the aspect that is concerning me more and more is, you know I don’t know how many of us in government have realized but there starts to be seen this disconnect between us privileged ones in government —that wasn’t the case fifty years ago, when you went in government you got paid less etc etc.

And yet, you know, the government’s out now —folks that make a hundred thousand dollars and my constituents looking for a job see that —Boy police constable’s make is a hundred thousand dollars with their overtime. And transit drivers, some of them make a hundred thousand dollars with their overtime.

And here I am, Joe Citizen, struggling to get ahead, and I’ve lost benefits, I’ve lost my job if I’m an auto worker, taking hits at various times coming in for extra work and not getting paid for it.

Struggling to pay your taxes. And then they see episodes like this. And what explanation do we have?

[DIP TO WHITE]

This speaks to the issue of the future. Our taxpayers will not put up with this any more.

And the people they’re going to look at isn’t you —they’re looking at us. And then we turn around and look at you.

And George Carlson, our good friend and colleague on Council has a very good point. And I was wishing he’d be wrong, but we’d better be cognizant that he’s right.

“All the animals look at each other differently when the watering hole dries out.”

We still have some water in our hole. A lot of my constituents don’t.

We owe them a better level of service than what they received over this debacle.

But Madam Mayor, we’ll speak some more to it in-camera. Thank you.

[CLOCKWIPE]

Councillor Nando Ianniccaa (Mississauga General Committee, October 19, 2011)

In Canada, we’re at the cross-roads, the watershed. And here’s the fear that I have, and I won’t give all my secrets away. But I’m going to give you on big one right now.

You know what the future is? I’m going to tell you what the future is. It’s pretty simple. Here’s what the history was.

What I came here four cents on your tax bill overall came to this city. We’re up to eight cents now going up to nine. And we’re Much. Worse. Off.

The four to eight to eight-and-a half hasn’t solved our problems. Our infrastructure deficit’s as dramatic as it’s ever been! Isn’t that right?

So you know, well, you’ve doubled the taxes pro-rata on my home for the last twenty-five years, Nando, and you’re telling me we’re far worse off. Get ready for it to double again.

So you know what the solution is.

And from that macro-level, I’m going to bring it down to the micro. A solution as old as time. Start throwing stuff off the boat.

We will be getting out of businesses. Period. Full Stop.

Do you know why? ‘Cuz it’s brilliant. You know why it’s brilliant? ‘Cuz all of my problems go away. What do you mean?

“Hazel you’ve got to go to Ottawa and talk to them about funding for seniors homes.”

I’m not in the business anymore. Don’t have to go talk to them.

“Well you know the arbitrators are—”

“I’m not in that business. I don’t give a damn about the arbitrator.

“Well the union’s are uppity about this.”

I don’t have a union workforce in that field. I don’t, I’m not in that field.

It’s priceless, isn’t it? It works real well.

I don’t know what society we’ll live in. But that is what is coming.

[If] you don’t believe it, core services like highways for governments? We sold off a highway. Airports are going in that direction. And there will be more and more and more of it.

Because in one fell swoop, boy do you eliminate so many of my problems!

On the other side of the coin, well no, let’s go keep fighting in Ottawa. What it’s gotten us? Let’s go keep fighting the Province. What it’s gotten us?

We’ve got, and I love the conversation between Councillor Starr and Councillor Mahoney. It’s the Great Divide: the people in the million dollar homes that don’t think that they’re being fairly treated and then the single mother with three kids that says, “But, am I supposed to pay it?!”

Our answer is, well neither one of you will pay it. We’re just out of the business.

And if you look at the world around us —Councillor Starr said something brilliant. I just loved it. If it’s in a phone book and somebody else does it, why do we do it?

And there’s going to be more questions like that as we go forward.

To bring it back down to this level —and this is the importance that I would put on this conversation, if a user group tells me, Nando, it’s getting kind of expensive. We don’t know about your soccer pitches, you know, especially the ones with the artificial turf, it’s getting a little tired.

I just won’t build one with artificial turf. Easy. No problem.

“Well, I’ll charge ya three bucks.” I’m charging you nothing now! You just don’t have the pitch, that’s all. Is that a problem for you? And that’s what we’re trying to forestall right now.

Because get ready for this. We will be jettisoning many, many, many services at the municipal realm.

Last thought I’ll leave with you and I hope a smart doctoral student does it one day —I’m not being flippant. I mean this seriously.

Is there any corporation in the world —give me IBM, give me any one of them, that is more complex than municipal-regional government. I mean that literally.

What are your core businesses? What do you do and what are you trying to achieve?

Remember. Things I do for fun on the side are entire enterprises. We run golf courses on the side for fun. Some people run businesses just for golf courses. And fitness facilities and restaurants and dental programs and— I do all of that just for fun! You haven’t taken your shower yet and —I do that just—entire entities do that all by themselves.

We do it just as an aside. Thank you, Ron. I think that’s my cue. So. As we go forward, these conversations have to be had. And they’re not at this level, “What would you like us to do?” it’s “What’s going overboard?”

Cuz we’re fed up —you all sensed it from me. I’m fed up with the Provincial and Federal government. What it’s gotten us? And my cue as you all know, just let me finish with this one is, we just came through a Provincial election and so many of the Provincial delegates running for public office in our city, who, you know, even if you want to pretend to care, you should pretend when you’re asking for public office?

“Are you going to come to the discussion we want to have about social—” The majority of them didn’t even want to show up! When it behooves them to pretend to care? Didn’t even pretend to care. So why, well, I understand—

MISSISSAUGAWATCH (Mississauga General Committee, October 19, 2011)

[claps, laughs] I love it.

Councillor Nando Ianniccaa (Mississauga General Committee, October 19, 2011)

But you see why I’m —so I don’t even want to send Hazel off anymore. I just want to say that we’re dropping that one off the curb. We’re not in that business anymore. Because I don’t want to force both people, these two, out of their homes.

Somebody’s got a better idea, let me know.

But that is the Future.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

There you have it.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Watch live streaming video from occupytoronto at livestream.com

Next. To appreciate what some people at OCCUPY TORONTO might be protesting, and what Councillor Iannicca referred to as the “privileged ones in government”, what follows is a complete SUNSHINE LIST of City of Mississauga employees making $100,000 or more for 2010 followed by the 2006 SUNSHINE LIST for comparative purposes.

RED indicates City Staff researched through Freedom of Information or video.

And don’t forget those “privileged ones in government” salaries also come with a life-long OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) pension and benefits.

City of Mississauga Salary Disclosure 2011 (Disclosure for 2010)
Surname Given Name Position Salary Paid Taxable Benefits
ADKINS RODNEY R. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
AHMED NADIR Project Leader $112,131.34 $280.44
ALEXANDER WENDY A. Director, Transportation & Infrastructure Planning $148,842.08 $372.21
ALLELY RICHARD J. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
AMRING SUSAN M. Manager, Economic Development $130,517.57 $313.86
ANDERSON SCOTT W. Senior Project Manager, Transportation $131,842.96 $704.26
APLIN GLENN V. Fire Captain $108,768.15 $258.96
BACON DENIS P. Manager, Parks $102,029.97 $244.32
BAKER JANICE City Manager and Chief Administrative Officer $245,864.06 $8,358.64
BALCHANDANI RAJAN Manager, Energy Management $108,739.51 $271.41
BALL MARILYN Director, Development & Design $147,881.38 $372.21
BANIC SONJA Manager, Public Affairs $112,300.64 $280.44
BAQILEH BASSEM Transit Operator $100,497.59 $299.79
BARRETT MURRAY A. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $258.96
BARRETT STEPHEN R. Manager, Transportation Asset Management $115,683.24 $287.01
BARTER TOM C. Captain, Fire Suppression $104,861.16 $244.40
BASTERFIELD MICHAEL D. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $260.52
BATE ANDREW Supervisor, Traffic Operations $111,357.70 $207.15
BEARD DAVID M. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $247.52
BEAUPARLANT MARK Manager, Corporate Financial Services $128,730.01 $313.23
BEHARRY ROCHARD Legal Counsel $128,732.04 $259.86
BENCH MARY ELLEN City Solicitor $178,468.52 $429.27
BERNARDI DINO Captain, Fire Suppression $110,884.42 $260.52
BIRD BRIAN G. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $270.92
BLATT DIANA F. Workforce Planning & Analysis Specialist $115,154.61 $216.48
BODNAR GREG Supervisor, Area, Transportation and Works $111,629.36 $244.32
BORGATTI RICHARD W. Fire Captain $107,612.63 $264.68
BOWSLAUGH ROBERT L. Manager, Facilities Maintenance $105,938.49 $264.90
BOYCE DEREK Manager, Business Planning $104,952.37 $262.38
BOYD MAX W. Capital Project Manager $112,131.34 $280.44
BRADLEY SEAN Fire Captain $102,590.21 $254.68
BREAULT BRENDA R. Commissioner, Corporate Services &Treasurer $186,385.74 $9,486.00
BREUER DAGMAR Capital Project Manager $114,001.46 $280.44
BREWDA KATIE Account Representative, Community Services $108,094.86 $62.40
BRODERICK DAVID Manager, Marina Operations $101,335.28 $244.32
BROWN BETTE Communications Officer, Fire $115,820.44 $250.64
BROWN JAMIE Manager, Sponsorship & Corporate Development $101,887.38 $244.32
BUCKLEY FRANK M. Manager, Parks $112,443.10 $244.32
BUCKSTEIN ELAINE Director, Enforcement $148,842.08 $372.21
BUGDEN KEVIN Assistant Deputy Chief $113,312.72 $238.60
BULGER JAMES E. Fire Captain $105,414.86 $274.56
BURKE PAUL G. Fire Captain $104,894.94 $254.80
BURNS ROBERT S. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
BURT SUSAN Director, Arts & Culture $153,561.43 $372.21
CALLIGARIS JOSEPH Fire Captain $102,281.92 $248.96
CALVERT CLIFF A. District Chief, Fire $111,235.02 $264.06
CALVERT JOHN D. Director, Policy Planning $148,842.08 $372.21
CAMILLERI TIMOTHY A. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $259.48
CARR BRUCE Director, Strategic Community Initiatives $154,685.08 $372.21
CESARIO SILVIO Manager, Maintenance & Operations $127,673.27 $313.86
CHALLINOR JASON Fire Captain $102,281.92 $291.60
CHAN STEPHEN Manager, Staffing & Development $116,533.22 $280.44
CHANCEY DOUGLAS T. Fire Captain $112,260.90 $286.52
CHIN DONOFRIO HELEN F. Data Architect $114,416.93 $280.44
CHONG DIANE Project Leader $110,827.70 $280.44
CHUNG TONY Transit Operator $102,542.67 $299.79
CIRELLO JIM Manager, Financial Services, Corporate Services $117,985.90 $293.72
CLARK JOHN A. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $271.44
CLARKE JOHN P. Supervisor, Traffic Signal & Street Lights $113,585.43 $279.21
CLEMENT ROGER Chief Fire Prevention Officer $110,511.44 $255.22
COFFEY KEVIN Fire Captain $102,423.62 $238.56
COLES SUZANNE Area Manager, Library Services $106,391.52 $266.02
CONNOLLY MARK R. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $268.84
CONNOR JOHN DAVID Fire District Chief $127,857.84 $288.90
CORBET CHRISTOPHER Fire Captain $104,930.43 $293.06
CORCORAN RAYMOND M. Fire District Chief $128,702.87 $280.58
CUNNINGHAM CRAIG Fire Captain $104,487.14 $256.66
CURRY DARRELL Manager, Frank McKechnie Facility $101,435.90 $244.32
CUSUMANO LEO J. Manager, Inspection Services $116,533.22 $280.44
CZYRKA PAUL J. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $245.96
DAEUBER WILLIAM E. Project Leader $112,131.34 $280.44
DAMASO PAUL Manager Celebration Square $103,376.64 $251.76
DAUM RANDY Fire Captain $104,861.16 $281.22
DAVENPORT MARK Project Leader $112,131.34 $280.44
DAVIS ERIC V. Captain, Fire Prevention $107,535.04 $250.64
DAVOLI LUIGI Fire Captain $102,281.92 $318.76
DEAN GEORGE Fire District Chief $119,975.38 $322.18
DECOSTE STEPHEN D. Fire Captain $111,414.54 $282.88
DEDMAN KEALY Manager, Development Engineering $109,858.01 $285.81
DEJAK TOM A. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $308.36
DELFINO GUSTAVO Manager, Service Development $112,004.53 $280.14
DELUCA DANIEL Plans Examiner, Fire $100,115.07 $228.60
DEMARTINI PETER G. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
DEMPSTER DAVID S. Fire Captain $105,063.80 $281.32
DENIKE TIMOTHY E. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
DEVEAU DOUGLAS C. Captain, Fire Suppression $113,860.49 $244.40
DI MILLO IVANA Director, Communications $152,544.76 $370.65
DIETRICH ANGELA Manager, City Wide Planning $112,207.58 $280.44
DOCKENDORFF CASEY Assistant City Solicitor $113,700.12 $284.03
DOUGLAS ALEX A. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $287.04
DRAPER STEVEN D. Manager, Information Technology, Corporate Services $122,431.66 $305.73
DUBKOWSKI JAMES R. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
DUFFY KEVIN J. Deputy Fire Chief $161,691.58 $871.57
DUNN ARLAND L. Fire Captain $108,608.85 $280.80
EBRAEMI FAWAD A. Project Manager $130,161.81 $316.05
EDWARDS ERICA Senior Buyer $110,586.86 $235.56
ELLIOTT ROBERT G. Manager, Projects $102,383.34 $255.48
ELLIOTT-SPENCER PATRICIA Director, Finance $164,230.75 $406.83
EMICK CRAIG Information Technology Auditor $107,532.79 $279.51
ENG SALLY P. Director, Internal Audit $151,763.58 $372.21
ENNAMORATO DANIEL Fire Captain $110,277.70 $244.40
EVANS JAMES Fire Captain $104,861.16 $249.40
FABRIS DIEGO City Arborist $102,453.86 $224.28
FARION CLIFTON Building Maintenance Coordinator $108,299.52 $253.16
FARRELL PATRICIA A. Planner $103,069.33 $224.28
FAYLE NORMAN Fire Captain $107,439.27 $260.00
FERRARA FELICE Supervisor, Area, Transportation and Works $117,829.56 $244.32
FINNIGAN TERENCE J. Fire Captain $110,032.04 $250.64
FLACK PAUL F. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $256.88
FLANIGAN MICHAEL B. Special Traffic Projects Leader $103,554.24 $258.66
FLEMING RANDY Training Officer, Fire $115,436.59 $230.76
FORD COLLIN Transit Operator $109,070.07 $149.79
FRANCIS LAWRENCE P. Fire Captain $105,443.35 $250.12
FROST MICKEY Manager, Transit Operations $137,043.35 $329.76
FUDGE JOSEPH Legal Counsel $139,389.85 $335.10
FULLERTON RUSS Transit Operator $115,374.37 $149.79
GAFFNEY SHAWN M. Fire District Chief $124,144.71 $308.26
GALAMINI DOMENIC Supervisor, Traffic Maintenance $116,931.26 $244.32
GALATI DOMENIC Maintenance Standards & Permits Supervisor $117,417.72 $238.71
GARNER RICHARD J. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
GILMOUR MICHAEL S. Fire Captain $108,190.59 $255.32
GOLD GRAHAM Fire Captain $103,621.31 $246.88
GRAZIANO MARIA P. Database Administrator $112,139.69 $234.00
GREEN DANIEL G. District Chief, Fire $129,853.90 $316.46
GREEN GARY S. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $246.90
GREER CRYSTAL Director, Legislative Services & Clerk $153,224.33 $372.21
GRIFFITH MARG Project Leader $109,968.42 $280.44
HAGAN ANNEMARIE Manager, Museums $100,142.00 $244.32
HAGERMAN ALAN J. Fire Captain $105,193.35 $266.76
HAND WAYNE L Manager, Meadowvale & Erin Mills Arenas $102,838.82 $244.32
HARVEY ANDREW W. Manager, Rapid Transit and Parking $129,027.51 $313.86
HAWKINS JOHN Senior Inspector $100,924.74 $190.05
HEAD MICHAEL R. Fire Platoon Chief $127,850.59 $299.42
HEADRICK DARREN Enterprise System (SAP) Portfolio Coordinator $112,131.34 $280.44
HERRIDGE DONNA E. Manager, Financial Planning $128,147.32 $313.86
HICKS BRUCE Fire Captain $107,439.27 $308.88
HILL JOHN A. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $258.96
HILLIS JAMES (aka Jamie) Manager, Security $112,131.34 $280.44
HILLS ALAN Fire Platoon Chief $124,599.12 $293.28
HINTON JAMES M. Acting Director, Enforcement $104,795.68 $262.31
HINTON JOHN F. Manager, Financial & Customer Service $104,669.77 $262.05
HIPGRAVE MARY A. Senior Internal Auditor $109,968.42 $280.44
HOLMES JAYNE Senior Project Manager $117,917.66 $294.24
HOMEVOH ERNEST Transit Operator $107,751.37 $199.79
HORVAT CAROL Executive Assistant, Mayor $101,658.64 $244.32
HULME HAL V. Supervisor, Survey & Inspection $108,817.66 $244.32
HUNTER PAUL D. Fire Platoon Chief $127,904.32 $299.42
IMPERIALE JOHN Manager, Information Technology, Community Services $121,826.55 $308.58
JACKSON ALLEN P. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
JACKSON JEFFREY Director, Revenue & Materiel Management $149,592.08 $372.21
JAMIESON RANDALL Project Manager, Community Services $110,105.19 $275.85
JAY MARTIN R. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $247.00
JEHU STEPHEN C. Fire Communications Operator $107,041.16 $218.62
JETHVA REKHA Manager, Planning and Integration $128,621.37 $313.86
JOHNSON FREDERIC C. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $283.92
KAMINO KEITH T. Senior Internal Auditor $101,043.30 $252.72
KAN LINCOLN Manager, Environmental Services $114,633.24 $287.01
KANAMALA SUNIL KUMAR Project Leader, Transit Facility Planning $100,378.33 $244.32
KEATING MIKE E. Manager, Transit Vehicle Maintenance $130,446.45 $313.86
KELLS HELEN M. Systems Specialist $106,594.18 $197.22
KELLY ANDREW Fire Captain $109,193.68 $299.52
KELLY LORI A. Manager, Strategic Community Initiatives $125,857.89 $308.91
KEMPF STEVEN G. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $265.20
KENEALY ROY Superintendent, Operational Support $103,782.41 $259.86
KENT GARY Director, Corporate Strategy and Innovation $154,685.08 $372.21
KERNAN PAUL Fire Captain $114,314.26 $248.56
KETTLE HAROLD J. Technical Specialist $104,664.75 $244.32
KEUPER DALTON INGRID Library Community Development Specialist $100,378.33 $244.32
KIRKPATRICK ROBERT B. Fire Captain $109,241.18 $278.62
KNIGHT MARLENE Manager, Materiel Management $125,587.45 $313.86
KOPAMEES ALAR Fire Captain $104,861.16 $267.80
KREMER RONALD Supervisor, Networking Service $101,910.17 $254.91
KRISMAN GRANT M. Fire Captain $103,760.25 $249.08
LAING DEBORAH Fire Communications Officer $111,365.67 $238.56
LAING GREGORY B. Deputy, Training & Prevention $164,745.48 $1,822.75
LAMANNA SABINA Manager, Human Resources, Community Services $109,378.64 $273.63
LAURENCE BRIAN J. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $256.88
LAW WENDY Legal Counsel $122,849.49 $345.32
LAWRENCE JACK Director, Information Technology $148,842.08 $372.21
LEE FRANK Manager, Information Technology, Planning and Building $119,058.87 $297.99
LEI GUANG Transit Operator $106,940.61 $149.79
LEVESQUE ROBERT Capital Project Manager $112,131.34 $280.44
LIBOIRON ROBERT L. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
LIN YUNGFU Project Leader $112,131.34 $729.84
LOHUIS JOHN Director, Recreation & Parks $154,685.08 $372.21
LONGMUIR GAVIN Manager, Urban Forestry $102,508.46 $244.32
MACDONALD DEBBIE Manager, Shared Services $112,317.51 $280.66
MACDONALD HEATHER Director, Business Services $154,685.08 $372.21
MACEACHERN DAVID Training Officer, Fire $115,313.27 $244.40
MACKENZIE CHRISTINA Manager, Creative Services $101,335.28 $244.32
MACKINNON KAREN G. Communications Coordinator, Fire $121,577.94 $268.92
MAGGIO ALBERT J. Fire Captain $107,543.60 $250.64
MAJCHER LAURIE E. Manager, Management Consulting $125,587.45 $313.86
MAJOR NANCY Manager, 311 Call Centre $116,402.42 $141.00
MAKURAT ROBERT Fire Captain $102,281.92 $241.16
MALO STEPHANE Fire Captain $102,356.33 $244.70
MANCUSO GIUSEPPINA Project Manager, Elections $104,880.52 $197.22
MANN JOHN Fire Captain $102,281.92 $253.64
MANSFIELD DOROTHY E. Manager, Community Services $115,432.75 $280.44
MARCUCCI DAVID Manager, Planning & Heritage $121,270.70 $303.27
MARINOFF GEOFF Director, Transit $176,515.42 $424.75
MARION DAVID Manager, Geomatics $137,043.68 $329.76
MARLAND RUTH Team Leader, Long Term Planning $109,358.32 $244.32
MARSHALL GREIG Fire Captain $104,894.93 $250.12
MARTIN LYNN Systems Support Specialist $122,772.78 $224.28
MASLIWEC MICHAEL N. Manager, Financial Services, Transportation and Works $125,587.45 $313.86
MATHESON SHAWN Fire Division Chief, Training $121,329.87 $303.27
MAYO MARY Manager, Enterprise Systems $125,777.07 $313.86
MCADAM PHILIP D. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $262.08
MCCALLION HAZEL M. Mayor $136,640.92 $1,648.90
MCCUTCHEON STEPHEN J. Fire Captain $107,578.37 $263.12
MCDOUGALL JOHN A. Fire Chief $167,913.56 $3,481.00
MCLEAN MARCELL L. Fire Communications Operator $111,307.30 $212.38
MCNALLY MARTIN I. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $255.84
MCPHAIL LARRY J. Platoon Chief $128,659.96 $299.42
MCPHAIL ROBERT Captain, Fire Suppression $108,768.15 $250.64
MEEHAN DOUGLAS E. Manager, Prosecutions $116,533.22 $280.44
MELVILLE ANDREW D. Fire Captain $105,063.80 $264.68
MENEZES ERIC Supervisor, Streetlighting $113,265.82 $214.38
MESIH CONNIE D. Manager, Property Assessment & Taxation $130,767.57 $313.86
MICHAUD DAVE H. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $255.84
MICHELUCCI ENIO Contract Administrator, Trees $104,051.55 $222.22
MINKOWSKI MICHAL Legal Counsel $139,389.85 $335.10
MITCHAM PAUL ARTHUR Commissioner, Community Services $186,385.74 $10,890.76
MONTGOMERY WILLIAM R. Fire Captain $108,768.15 $255.84
MOONEY JAMES Systems Technician, Fire $101,422.74 $236.90
MOORE ALLAN J. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $314.60
MORAES FERNANDO Project Manager, Architectural $103,259.76 $258.30
MORLEY JAMES D. Manager, Client Services $119,632.41 $299.19
MOULTON ALAN Fire Captain $108,768.15 $255.84
MUJAWAZ AHMAD Project Manager, Structural $109,149.63 $273.33
MURPHY ANNE M. Area Manager, Library Services $118,795.17 $288.49
MURPHY LAWRENCE Manager, Court Administration $112,131.34 $280.44
MUSIAL HENRY Fire Captain $119,051.96 $254.80
NADON RAYMOND A. Captain, Fire Suppression $104,861.16 $280.80
NASATO PAUL Supervisor, Area, Transportation and Works $104,214.27 $234.30
NG NORMAN Supervisor, Customer Service $112,131.34 $280.44
NISHIHAMA WAYNE G. Manager, Urban Design $112,131.34 $280.44
NOBLE RALPH A. Fire Captain – South – B $114,470.92 $250.64
NORWOOD STEPHEN T. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $259.48
NUCIFORA GINO Captain, Fire Prevention $119,104.29 $244.40
OFFLESS KEVIN Senior Inspector $101,379.30 $190.05
O’HALLORAN CAREY L. Manager, Infrastructure Management Systems $107,805.70 $280.44
ORMOND MARK A. Fire District Chief $124,105.78 $294.74
OSBORNE BRENDA Manager, Environmental Management $105,970.00 $221.97
OUTTRIM RYAN Firefighter $101,735.12 $248.36
OWEN KENNETH Director, Facility & Property Management $153,224.33 $372.21
PALA ZELJKO Transit Operator $113,333.05 $229.79
PALLADINE PAUL Supervisor, Area, Transportation and Works $109,946.75 $239.04
PARDY ROGER Fire Captain $104,861.16 $254.28
PARISI PAUL Fire Captain $102,351.44 $249.48
PARSONS PETER C. Senior Inspector $102,250.56 $190.05
PARTIPILO JOSEPH Senior Inspector $113,226.28 $181.62
PASSFIELD GORDON L. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $255.32
PATEL KESHWER Manager, Financial Services, community Services $115,050.09 $288.00
PATERSON EDWARD D. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $267.28
PATON CAROLYN Corporate Lead Business Planning & Performance Management $106,559.78 $244.32
PAVAN LESLEY M. Manager, Development, Planning and Building $106,839.59 $277.05
PEARCE RICHARD Enterprise Geographic Information System Project Leader $115,016.93 $280.44
PENTELIUK DAVID Area Manager, Library Services $103,240.24 $258.66
PERKINS ROBERT Building Services & Operations Supervisor $110,453.70 $213.12
PERRY CAROL Tax System Coordinator $109,968.42 $280.44
PETOVELLO LARRY F. Director, Economic Development $151,763.58 $10,838.64
PETRI MATHIAS Building Services & Operations Supervisor $112,616.29 $222.42
PETROSONIAK STEVE D. Fire Captain $107,682.70 $255.32
PHANEUF PATRICK J. Superintendent, Operations $116,533.22 $280.44
PHELPS GREGORY G. Plans Examination Officer, Fire $112,540.95 $258.74
PICCOLO JOHN Project Manager, Electrical $112,131.34 $280.44
PICO FERMIN Manager, Transit Business Systems $122,360.37 $294.24
PIETTE LAURA M. Director, Planning, Development & Business Services $151,257.43 $370.35
PIRES PAUL Transit Operator $103,319.65 $209.79
PITUSHKA JOSEPH Director, Engineering & Works $148,842.08 $372.21
POGUE JOHN D. Manager, Burnhamthorpe & Tomken Facilities $101,741.30 $244.32
POITRAS RAY L. Manager, Development $114,582.28 $280.44
POLETTO MARIO Captain, Fire Suppression $111,685.74 $288.60
POUNDER DONNA E. Manager, Training & Development $101,335.28 $244.32
POWELL MARTIN Commissioner, Transportation and Works $186,385.74 $12,186.32
RAJA MANJIT Senior Database Administrator $100,015.26 $244.32
RAMER ALLEN Captain, Fire Suppression $101,657.20 $233.88
RECK KIMBERLY A. District Manager, Community Services $110,763.91 $277.05
REIACH WILLIAM C. Fire Captain $105,525.54 $262.60
REID MAVIS Manager, Compensation & Benefits $111,935.79 $279.84
REYNOLDS MICHAEL W. Fire Captain $107,577.69 $250.64
RICHARD PAUL Fire Captain $109,904.79 $284.44
RIDDELL LOUISE ANN Manager, Labour Relations $126,522.41 $303.90
RIDLEY LAWRENCE Firefighter $116,630.10 $219.66
RIVERS DEBORAH A. Manager, Human Resources, Corporate Services $112,116.68 $279.84
ROBERTS NIGEL Manager, Departmental Systems $109,773.68 $274.29
ROBEZNIEKS AGRIS Director, Building Services & Chief Build Official $154,685.08 $372.21
ROEDER ED Superintendent, Transit Maintenance $111,921.24 $279.84
ROLLINS GARY S. District Chief, Fire $130,882.67 $294.10
ROSE DUILIO A. Manager, Animal Services $101,125.15 $244.32
ROWSELL JEFF Information Technology Specialist $103,230.32 $223.98
ROY DARRELL G. Fire Captain $105,636.34 $252.72
RUFFINI LORENZO Strategic Leader $124,749.89 $311.37
RUSNOV DIANA Manager, Development $114,582.28 $280.44
RYDZEWSKI JOHN B. Director, Hershey Group $148,842.08 $372.21
SAJECKI EDWARD Commissioner, Planning & Building $186,385.74 $9,711.40
SANDERSON RONALD Manager, Realty Services $106,625.45 $210.48
SASAKI ROBERT H. Manager, Transportation Planning $129,285.04 $313.86
SAVERY DOUGLAS Fire Captain $107,439.27 $270.92
SAVINI EZIO Manager, Capital Works $130,517.57 $313.86
SCARANGELLA MICHAEL A. Fire Captain $104,861.16 $347.36
SCOTT TIMOTHY Captain, Fire Suppression $114,907.39 $261.56
SCRACE DAVID G. Senior Inspector $115,427.36 $190.05
SHAO YIDAN Database Administrator $104,530.06 $235.20
SHARPE KEN J. Captain, Fire Suppression $104,861.16 $297.44
SHETH RAJ Manager, Facilities Planning & Development $138,855.76 $333.87
SHIN DAVID Project Leader $116,533.22 $280.44
SHIRLEY MICHAEL Transit Operator $100,356.79 $209.79
SINGH NAVIN Transit Operator $105,184.67 $299.79
SLACK SHAWN Director, Customer & Business Services $146,853.54 $366.96
SMITH GEOFF Team Leader, Park Assets $102,130.21 $244.32
SMITH GORDON R. Fire District Chief $120,808.37 $280.58
SMITH R. DENNIS Fire Captain $107,439.27 $253.24
SNOW ROBERT Fire Captain $104,861.16 $244.40
SONI VIPULCHANDR Transit Operator $105,849.77 $249.79
SOULLIERE WILLIAM P. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $257.92
SOUSA ALCIDES V. Maintenance Project Manager $116,533.22 $280.44
SOUSA DREW Manager Employee Health Services $101,335.47 $244.32
SPAGNOLO FRANK Manager, Plan Examination Service $115,432.75 $280.44
SPENCER KAREN Advisor, City Manager’s Office $100,285.02 $251.14
STARR JACOB Firefighter $101,035.28 $219.66
STEFANKA RANDY Maintenance Contract Coordinator $101,709.92 $224.28
STEINBACH ALBERT Senior Internal Auditor $112,131.34 $280.44
STEWART YVONNE Fire Communications Officer $102,026.24 $225.56
STICKEL ROBERT Application Portfolio Coordinator-Hansen $106,449.50 $277.05
STUART BRUCE D. Fire Captain $107,439.27 $250.64
SULLIVAN JOHN District Chief, Fire $130,755.38 $269.45
SULLIVAN MIKE Fire Captain $102,281.92 $284.22
SULZ-MCDOWELL INGRID Manager, Development Planning $117,808.22 $280.44
SYKES CHRISTOPHER Fire Captain $107,439.27 $279.14
SZCZEPANSKI STEFAN Manager, Park Development $122,553.08 $306.39
TAEGER CLYDE Application Developer $102,229.75 $224.28
TAPLEY TIMOTHY Fire Captain $104,861.16 $256.26
TAYLOR MARK A. Captain, Fire Suppression $104,861.16 $270.92
TAYLOR STUART Manager, Operational Planning $127,957.70 $313.86
TIBERIA MARIO Fire Captain $102,281.92 $238.56
TIEN SAMSON H. Systems Support Services Coordinator $112,131.34 $280.44
TIFFIN RANDY Communications Officer $128,329.05 $238.56
TIMUKAS PAUL M. Fire Captain $105,525.54 $261.04
TONER STEVEN District Chief, Fire $128,764.14 $283.70
TRAIN MARK A. Captain, Fire Suppression $109,998.28 $270.40
TRETROP

Mayor Hazel McCallion celebrating Thanksgiving October 7, 2006 with World Class Developments’ (son) Peter McCallion and Leo Couprie

October 9th, 2011  

Today’s blog regarding Mayor Hazel McCallion celebrating Thanksgiving October 7, 2006 with World Class Developments’ (son) Peter McCallion and Leo Couprie is for historical purposes.

I’ve gone to the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report, “Updating the Ethical Infrastructure” to provide context of the McCallion/Couprie October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving festivities.

  REPORT  (Full version)  (9,252Kb / 403 pages)

Page 68:

68 Updating the Ethical Infrastructure

Mr. McCallion testified that, by July 2006, it was clear that Mr. Couprie
would be investing in World Class Developments Incorporated and, as a result,
would replace the solicitors as the sole officer and director of the company. On
Mr. McCallion’s instruction, Mr. Couprie directed Caprara Brown by email on
August 3, 2006, stating that, until World Class Developments Incorporated
firmed up a deal with OMERS, the corporation was to remain in his name only,
because he was providing the deposit money. He also requested that the corporate
address be changed to the one he provided. By email the following day, Mr.
Brown confirmed receipt of Mr. Couprie’s instructions and assured him that
“all existing directors and shareholders (Caprara and myself ) will be scrubbed
and replaced with you.”40

On August 9, 2006, to address a printing error on letterhead and business
cards, the lawyers changed the name from “World Class Developments
Incorporated” to “World Class Developments Limited” and incorporated the
changes referred to above.41

Although it is odd that the printing error led to the reorganization of
the company, Messrs. McCallion and Couprie formally created World Class
Developments Limited (wcd) in November 2006. In a letter to Mr. Couprie
dated November 20, 2006, Mr. Brown confirmed that, based on Mr. Couprie’s
and Mr. McCallion’s instructions, the corporation had been reorganized
through the filing of articles of amendment.42 Mr. McCallion told his lawyers
that the company was Mr. Couprie’s company since Mr. Couprie was the
person with the money. He and Mr. Couprie instructed the lawyers to change
the directors, officers, and shareholders of wcd to reflect Mr. Couprie as the
principal of the corporation, a fact confirmed by letter.

That summarizes the Summer of 2006.

What follows, for chronology, are the photos of the McCallion/Couprie October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving celebrations. (Photo credit and special thanks to Peter McCallion)

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie

Mayor Hazel McCallion, October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving dinner with World Class Developments’
Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie.

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie
World Class Developments’ principal/owner Peter McCallion toasts family and friends.
Leo Couprie (black hair at left) and Hazel McCallion, October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving dinner.

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie
Hazel McCallion, October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving dinner with crab legs on the menu.

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie

World Class Developments’ principal/owners Peter McCallion (likely the one taking this picture) and
Leo Couprie (striped shirt) celebrate Thanksgiving 2006 with Mayor McCallion.

Peter McCallion’s Thanksgiving photos summarize World Class Developments’ activities on October 7, 2006.

For November we return to the Inquiry’s report Updating the Ethical Infrastructure. Page 74.

74 Updating the Ethical Infrastructure
Leo Couprie’s Role

Although it is odd that the printing error led to the reorganization of
the company, Messrs. McCallion and Couprie formally created World Class
Developments Limited (wcd) in November 2006. In a letter to Mr. Couprie
dated November 20, 2006, Mr. Brown confirmed that, based on Mr. Couprie’s
and Mr. McCallion’s instructions, the corporation had been reorganized
through the filing of articles of amendment.42 Mr. McCallion told his lawyers
that the company was Mr. Couprie’s company since Mr. Couprie was the
person with the money. He and Mr. Couprie instructed the lawyers to change
the directors, officers, and shareholders of WCD to reflect Mr. Couprie as the
principal of the corporation, a fact confirmed by letter.43

Mr. McCallion had incorporated WCD before Mr. Couprie became involved
in the company. Mr. McCallion approached him about investing in WCD in
the summer of 2006 on the basis that an investor group in Korea was prepared
to develop the project if Mr. McCallion could assure the investors they
would gain title to the property. He understood that Mr. McCallion was looking
to him only for deposit money for the property. As noted, Mr. McCallion
asked Mr. Couprie to “invest” $750,000, and offered a return of an additional
$750,000 on his original investment.77

Mr. Couprie was prepared to put up the money as long as it was secured
and fully refundable. After receiving verbal legal advice, he gave Mr. McCallion
$600,000 of his own money and borrowed an additional $150,000 from
friends, for the requested total of $750,000.78

The deal was attractive to Mr. Couprie in that it permitted him to double
his money, although he knew it would take some time to receive the $1.5 million
he was due. 79 The successful completion of the project depended on: (1)
closing the deal with OMERS; (2) the developer then building the condominiums
and engaging Peter McCallion as the listing agent; and, finally, (3) actually
selling the condominiums.80

Mr. Couprie explained that he came into the project as a lender, not as a
shareholder, and he requested that he be entitled to hold shares as collateral for
his money.81 As already noted, on August 3, 2006, Mr. Couprie instructed the
lawyers at Caprara Brown to change the corporate documents to reflect Mr.
Couprie as the principal and sole shareholder / director of WCD.82

 

Next, while the Inquiry explored dinners, galas, golf tournaments and phone calls dealing with World Class Developments, there is no mention anywhere in the report or witness transcripts of Mayor McCallion’s October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving Dinner with Peter McCallion and Leo Couprie.

Witness transcripts from Mississauga Judicial Inquiry website:

Leo Couprie, Principal of World Class Development (WCD) August 17, 2010

Mayor McCallion June 2, 2010  September 20, 21, 23, 2010

Peter McCallion, Principal and/or agent of WCD July 27, 28, 2010

Last, what follows is a video commentary of these four photographs of the McCallion/Couprie October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving celebrations complete with transcript.

Hazel McCallion, son Peter and Leo Couprie enjoy a “World Class” Thanksgiving Dinner (Oct 2006)

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

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT]
[Caspian & Grafhic – Matrix Shit]

MISSISSAUGAWATCH reporting October 8, 2011 while surfing the net.

It is Saturday, October the 8th, 2011 —Thanksgiving weekend, and this is what the Toronto Star looks like.

And I just want to go over to Peter McCallion’s Picasa website. And you can see here the URL. And he lists himself in real estate and also as living in Streetsville.

And one way that we know this is the Peter McCallion is that there’s his photographs. And within these photographs, he lists the trips that he took, but it’s this one here that you can see —his Random Pics.

There they are. Hallowe’en. There’s his mom. There’s Peter McCallion on the same boat trip. There’s Peter McCallion. So you know this is pretty well guaranteed to be Peter McCallion’s photographs.

Yeah, life’s good.

I want to show you Thanksgiving. Here. Here. Here. And here. 2006.

So we’re going to start with this image.

[Photograph 1]

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie

There they are. That’s Mayor McCallion —not sure who the others are.

And the important thing is to look at the amenities here, the candles. And we go around the table. Who else is at the “Photo information, October 7, 2006”. And here we go.

[Photograph 2]

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie

Now we’ve got son, Peter hoisting a glass. And then this group here have their backs to us.

The important person is this one right here. Black-haired guy. Who’s that?

[Photograph 3]

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie

There again. The person we’re interested in though is sitting over here, not in this photograph.

This again is October 7th, Thanksgiving at —I’m not sure whose house this is. Quite possibly Peter McCallion’s but we don’t know.

What are they having? Crabs’ legs. I don’t like crab legs but at  least it’s not shark fin soup. Hee hee.


[Photograph 4]

Hazel McCallion's Thanksgiving Dinner with World Class Developments' Peter McCallion (son) and Leo Couprie

And there it is.

Leo Couprie. Is at this particular Thanksgiving. October 7, 2006, Leo Couprie was one of the Thanksgiving dinner guests. With the Mayor.

Notice, there’s the crab legs. There’s the bread basket.

Going back to [Photograph 3], there’s the crab legs and the bread basket.

And [Photograph 2] crab legs. Bread basket. And that guy right there with the dark hair —that’s Leo Couprie!

So I wonder what they were talking about October 7, 2006 Thanksgiving weekend.

Going back. [Photograph 4] Now the one thing that I have yet to figure out is who this guy is [seated to Mr. Couprie’s left].

So Happy Thanksgiving to the people in Mississauga. [Photograph 2] Raising a glass to you from the Peter McCallion, Hazel McCallion and Leo Couprie Thanksgiving dinner, October 7th, 2006.

It’d be, what, five years ago.

Turning camera off.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

Signed,
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

“That’s his opinion.” —Hazel McCallion regarding Justice Douglas Cunningham’s findings

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

Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report won’t change Hazel McCallion’s “Her Town Her Rules”. As for the Inquiry’s recommendations authentically implemented?…

October 2nd, 2011  

Given all the hype in the papers right now about the release of the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report tomorrow, you would be forgiven if you believed that its contents actually mattered.

In the Mississauga News article, “Report could be a game changer”, don’t believe “game changer” for a second. Remember. We are dealing with a Commission that actually allowed Hazel McCallion to delay the release of this “After Labour Day” report until the Mayor had successfully installed yet another puppet-councillor into the Ward 5 Council chair.

There are those who argue that the Mayor didn’t just flee to Brazil to delay the report —the line that the Mayor’s lawyer is warbling.

In the Mississauga News article, “Inquiry report delayed”, reporter Louie Rosella informs us that:

McCallion’s trip is part of the Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance Trade Mission to Brazil, which has been in the works since last fall, said the mayor’s lawyer, Liz McIntyre.

“Last fall” is fall 2010. Yet neither McCallion or McIntyre respected Inquiry commissioner Douglas Cunningham and his commission counsel enough to inform them of this trip until mid-August.

Then there’s this pathetic statement in the Mississauga News, once again courtesy of the Mayor’s lawyer, who said that her client is looking forward to Monday’s report.

“We expect (the recommendations) will provide useful guidance to municipal officials across the province,” she said. “We hope that the Commissioner takes a fair and balanced approach, carefully considers the evidence that was presented, and makes findings based on the standards for elected officials that were reasonable and knowable at the time.”

“makes findings based on the standards for elected officials that were reasonable and knowable at the time.”

Shameless. Absolutely shameless.

It’s just not possible to scrape lower into the bottom of the barrel than Liz McIntyre’s “makes findings based on the standards for elected officials.”

Reminder. This isn’t just some “elected official”. This is the iconic Hazel “Best Mayor in the World” McCallion whose “Best City in Canada” loves to remind all other municipalities that Mississauga “leads Canada in management.”

Hazel McCallion and her MYTHissauga Inc routinely trumpet a Lot of Bests. Until of course events threaten to hold them accountable to Best. Then these cowardly hypocrites wilt-and-hide behind “makes findings based on the standards for elected officials that were reasonable and knowable at the time.”

As for the Mayor’s lawyer’s use of the weasel phrase “were reasonable and knowable at the time” (no offense to weasels) here’s another reminder. This is the Mayor who goes on forever about how “we are the Best” and “we must lead by example”, not to mention the City of Mississauga mantra of “Trust Quality Excellence”.

In their August 2011 commentary, “Hazel’s Revenge!”, Mississauga News reporters had this to say about Mayor Hazel McCallion:

Politics is a dirty game and when you’ve been in the business for 50 years you pick up a few tricks along the way.

Tomorrow will reveal whether McCallion’s latest “makes findings based on the standards for elected officials that were reasonable and knowable at the time” trick worked: Will Justice Cunningham judge McCallion’s conduct as just an “elected official” or as Canada’s most influential Mayor who’s had over three decades of practice pretending to get it right?

As for the Inquiry’s recommendations regarding municipal governance in this province? Read the Globe and Mail article, “McGuinty courts McCallion in battle for Ontario’s suburbs”. McGuinty knows only too well that the “fabulous” Hazel McCallion isn’t one for rules let alone optics. McGuinty also knows that not only is Mississauga “Her Town Her Rules” but it’s also Hazel McCallion’s Province.

Inquiry’s recommendations authentically implemented?…

Don’t you about you but I’m not that stupid.

Mississauga Councillor Katie Mahoney's 2010 Financial Statements reveal both Michael Nobrega and David O'Brien donated $750.00 (maximum allowed) to her 2010 re-election campaign.

Signed,
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Ward 5 By-Election results: In relatively-affluent “Britannia” Crombie prevailed but Malton clearly chose Simmer Kaur as their councillor!

September 23rd, 2011  

Today we took the City of Mississauga’s Official Election Results Detailed Poll by Poll Report (PDF) and converted it to our own spreadsheet. We then separated the polling stations into Malton and Non-Malton (which includes the Ward 5 area, Britannia).

And this is the picture.

Bonnie Crombie won the Ward 5 By-Election but it was only because the more populous (22,997 registered voters) and affluent south-west part of Ward 5 votes prevailed. Malton, with 19,707 registered voters clearly chose Simmer Kaur as their councillor! Malton cast 941 votes for Kaur compared to just 802 for Crombie.

  Polling Location              Registered Ballots  Voter   Voter   Peter  Peter   Bonnie   Bonnie  Simmer  Simmer  Carolyn  Carolyn
                                  Voters    Cast   Turnout Turnout  ADAMS  ADAMS  CROMBIE  CROMBIE   KAUR    KAUR   PARRISH  PARRISH
                                                      %     % 2010           %                %                %                %

0001 Champlain Trail PS            3908      810    20.7%   33.44%   104   12.84%    314    38.77%     49    6.05%     140    17.28%
0002 St. Gertrude SS               3330      677    20.3%   28.63%    76   11.23%    209    30.87%     62    9.16%     148    21.86%
0003 Fairwind Senior PS            3444      805    23.4%   30.57%    98   12.17%    214    26.58%     59    7.33%     211    26.21%
0004 St. Hilary CS                 2708      498    18.4%   26.90%    52   10.44%    129    25.90%     25    5.02%     123    24.70%
0005 San Lorenzo Ruiz School       3791      712    18.8%   27.84%   150   21.07%    169    23.74%     48    6.74%     113    15.87%
0006 Frank McKechnie C.C.          5816     1257    21.6%   32.48%   306   24.34%    279    22.20%     68    5.41%     229    18.22%

NON-MALTON Subtotals              22997     4759    20.7%            786   16.52%   1314    27.61%    311    6.53%     964    20.26%

0007 Ridgewood PS                  2306      626    27.1%   30.82%    34    5.43%     95    15.18%    109   17.41%     108    17.25%
0008 Morning Star MS               2263      441    19.5%   23.45%    32    7.26%     92    20.86%     99   22.45%      54    12.24%
0009 Marvin Heights PS             2158      597    27.7%   34.86%    35    5.86%    127    21.27%    181   30.32%      59     9.88%
0010 St. Raphael CS                2067      461    22.3%   30.19%    29    6.29%     59    12.80%    105   22.78%      45     9.76%
0011 Brandon Gate PS               1614      400    24.8%   33.54%    29    7.25%    102    25.50%     57   14.25%      66    16.50%
0012 Darcel Ave SS                 2439      605    24.8%   31.71%    52    8.60%    107    17.69%    124   20.50%     113    18.68%
0013 Malton C.C.                   2849      447    15.7%   19.35%    42    9.40%     79    17.67%     90   20.13%      72    16.11%
0014 Dunrankin Drive PS            3440      752    21.9%   27.52%    46    6.12%    120    15.96%    169   22.47%     141    18.75%
0015 Peel Regional Housing Rec Rm    51       38    74.5%   82.35%     2    5.26%      0     0.00%      0    0.00%      10    26.32%
0016 Malton Village LT Care         134       17    12.7%   13.33%     1    5.88%      0     0.00%      0    0.00%       1     5.88%
0017 Ridgewood Court                153       61    39.9%   41.07%     1    1.64%      6     9.84%      6    9.84%       8    13.11%
0018 Villa Forum LT Care            233       84    36.1%   34.04%    15   17.86%     15    17.86%      1    1.19%       9    10.71%

MALTON Subtotals                  19707     4529    23.0%            318    7.02%    802    17.71%    941   20.78%     686    15.15%

0019 St.Gertrude - Day 1              0      304                      36   11.84%     59    19.41%     13    4.28%     124    40.79%
0020 St.Gertrude - Day 2              0      352                      47   13.35%     78    22.16%     25    7.10%     139    39.49%
0021 Frank McKechnie - Day 1          0      250                      44   17.60%     56    22.40%     14    5.60%      68    27.20%
0022 Frank McKechnie - Day 2          0      352                      65   18.47%     75    21.31%     10    2.84%      97    27.56%

NON-MALTON Subtotals                        1258                     192   15.26%    268    21.30%     62    4.93%     428    34.02%

0023 Ridgewood PS - Day 1             0      282                      10    3.55%     33    11.70%     89   31.56%      59    20.92%
0024 Ridgewood PS - Day 2             0      240                      14    5.83%     25    10.42%     79   32.92%      46    19.17%
0025 Darcel Avenue - Day 1            0      237                      10    4.22%     29    12.24%    100   42.19%      19     8.02%
0026 Darcel Avenue - Day 2            0      205                      17    8.29%      8     3.90%     80   39.02%      36    17.56%

MALTON Subtotals                             964                      51    5.29%     95     9.85%    348   36.10%     160    16.60%

TOTAL                             42704    11510    27.0%   34.58%  1347   11.70%   2479    21.54%   1662   14.44%    2238    19.44%

 

It would seem that my September 19, 2011 predictions were also dead-on. In my report from Frank McKechnie polling station, I suggested that it would “likely will play an important role in tonight’s results.” Look at the spreadsheet —1,257 ballots cast. Huge.

And while Britannia lavished 1,314 and 964 votes on Bonnie Crombie and Carolyn Parrish respectively, Simmer Kaur managed just 311. Even Peter Adams played better in the relatively-affluent “Britannia” than Kaur: 786 votes.

Scan the results and you can see that Malton doesn’t have Simmer Kaur as their councillor because Britannia went with Crombie.

No surprise that voter turnout was lower than the October 25, 2010 city-wide election. All polling stations reported fewer votes. The rain didn’t help.

Reporting from Malton Community Centre on Monday, I’d stated that, “I predict the lowest voter turnout if it’s anything like it was in October 2010.” It was, with 15.7% compared to 19.35% in October 2010. [Yes, there was a polling station with a lower voter turnout of 12.7% but that’s the Malton Village Long Term Care facility.]

The only other thing that stands out and needs your attention is this: In the Advanced Polls, Carolyn Parrish received the most votes from the Britannia/non-Malton) area and once again Malton’s Advanced Polls bestowed Simmer Kaur with the most votes.

So what happened between the Advanced Polls and Voting Day?

Can you say “last day robocall”?…

Bonnie Crombie
Bonnie_Crombie

10% of all Ward 5 Voters dialed in for my Tele TownHall meeting last night. We’ll see tonight if it had any impact on their voting decision

19 Sep

But allow me to share Ms. Crombie’s most offensive Tweet:

Bonnie Crombie
Bonnie_Crombie

The first day of my new career fighting for the residents of Ward 5!

22 Sep

All Ward 5 residents (but especially Malton) need to know that prior to seeking a “new career” in politics, Crombie was a public affairs consultant. Allow me this example.

From the Toronto Star article, Ex-MP and new Mississauga councillor Bonnie Crombie reflects on election win:

Q: Your husband, Brian, a close friend of the mayor, was found by the Securities and Exchange Commission in the U.S. to have misled Biovail investors while he was an executive, and was fined by the Ontario Securities Commission here. A lot of people in Mississauga know about that. How do you respond to those concerned about your husband’s past?

A: First of all, it’s my name on the ballot, not my husband’s. He had an issue in his business career; perhaps an error in judgment was made, but we’ve moved past it. The only people that bring this up are my detractors. I’m very, very proud of my husband and his career.

On the bright side, Ron Starr’s lookin’ pretty good to me right now.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Hazel McCallion secures her Legacy adding Bonnie Crombie to MYTHissauga’s stable of puppet-councillors.

September 19th, 2011  

With Bonnie Crombie now added to Hazel McCallion’s existing stable of six puppet-councillors, Mississauga Council now has unfettered license to fabricate, deceive and lie to the public. All in the best interests of the City, of course.

With Crombie there are now Seven: Tovey, Mullin, Fonseca, Crombie, Starr, Mahoney and Saito.

Cronyism (so rife and so Out There in MYTHissauga) is having one joyous field day.

I’m reminded of Hazel McCallion’s September 8, 2010 speech when she announced she’d run for a 12th term.

This part:

“And I’m not going to conduct a campaign. I am not going to raise money. I’m not going to have signs— because I’ll tell you anyone that wants to donate money to a Mayor’s campaign, I plead with you, to donate it to all the charitable organizations, whose under pressure second-to-none. The Food Bank. The Children’s Aid— the Salvation Army and all those that are struggling, struggling today to look after the people. The Poverty that’s in our city. The Unemployed that are in our city.

So how can I, as Mayor, waste money on signs and literature?”

A year later you find she’s got the Mississauga Board of Trade and the Mississauga Chinese Business Association campaigning for her and she’s not just backed by millions and millions but she has her own ROGERS Cable 10 TV station as well!

Funny how the Mississauga News never mentioned that… or any other media for that matter.

The Mississauga News had to know the millions and millions of dollars greasing McCallion’s campaign machinery. Ron Lenyk sure did. Mississauga Board of Trade. Mississauga Chinese Business Association. Shipp, Kaneff, Nobrega, O’Brien, Starr, Murray… MYTHissauga Inc’s Secret Society.

Just a few of a seemingly endless parade of self-serving MYTHissaugans.Mayor’s Gala 2010 Organizing Committee

Just 241 votes separated Parrish from Crombie. To gauge how HUGE Eve and Peter Adams played in Crombie’s win check out his 1,347 votes… Parrish sure could have used them.

And let’s not forget to factor in McCallion’s Brazil “trade mission” engineered to delay the release of the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report until after the Ward 5 by-election.

Seriously. With Hazel McCallion’s solid wall of puppet councillors, does anyone remotely believe the Inquiry report even matters? There will be nothing in the Inquiry report’s contents that a couple of hastily drafted and pro-forma’d Corporate By-Laws can’t cure! And McCallion can count on her Seven Rubber Stamps to rubber-stamp them.

Orwell again: ‘Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’

F*** me. The Inquiry Commission Counsel even let McCallion control the report!

“This is the way the world ends: This is the way the world ends: This is the way the world ends: Not with a bang but a whimper.

Here’s a cut-and-paste of the Unofficial Results courtesy mississauga.ca

2011 Mississauga By-Election - VOTE!

Unofficial Results
Polls reporting: 26 of 26
Ballots Cast:  11,510
Councillor – Ward 5 VOTES   %
Bonnie CROMBIE   2,479
21.54%
Carolyn PARRISH 2,238
19.44%
Simmer KAUR 1,662
14.44%
Peter ADAMS 1,347
11.7%
Rick WILLIAMS 728
6.32%
Kulvinder Bobbie DAID 633
5.5%
Jake DHEER 573
4.98%
Dianne DOUGLAS 542
4.71%
Mark CASHIN 242
2.1%
Barbara Hazel TABUNO 221
1.92%
Mobeen ALI 174
1.51%
Vlado BERTIC 130
1.13%
Glenn BARNES 58
0.5%
Olive Rose STEELE 57
0.5%
Sandeep PATARA 51
0.44%
Jimmy GHIMERY 51
0.44%
Cheryl RODRICKS 42
0.36%
Frank PERROTTA 40
0.35%
Waqar SIDDIQUI 36
0.31%
Jamie DOOKIE 35
0.3%
Cecil YOUNG 34
0.3%
Mo KHAN 28
0.24%
Shirley ABRAHAM 26
0.23%
Grant ISAAC 25
0.22%
Catherine SOPLET 25
0.22%
Paul KESELMAN 17
0.15%
Steve BATOR 16
0.14%

Get ready for a perpetually-smiling Barbie Doll former public relations hack sitting in the Ward 5 chair.

Hmmm. This just in.

Quote from Hazel McCallion:

“I hope the one that finished close to her will forget any attempts to be on the council of the great City of Mississauga.”

And I hope that public servants who lie to “maintain” the public trust spend Eternity straddling the fifth-lowest rung in Hell.

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

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

Here’s hoping that Carolyn “This isn’t a secret society” Parrish wins the Ward 5 By-election today…

September 19th, 2011  

This should come as no surprise to my readership of dozens. I hope that Carolyn Parrish wins tonight.

Here’s why.

What follows is video from June 2007 —an exchange between Parrish and Mayor Hazel McCallion that never made it into the Council minutes. With hindsight gleaned from the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry we can now see the Mayor’s declaration, “And I have every confidence in my councillors” in its true light. (“And I have every confidence in my councillors” meaning Mullin, Prentice, Mahoney and Saito.)

Then there’s the Mayor’s comment, “There’s a process around here that we follow. And other members of Council have not asked questions. Because what they usually do is when they get a report, they meet with Staff before the Council meeting to go over the issues rather than the questions being asked at Council.” Four years later, “rather than the questions being asked at Council” reads like an admission.

Anyway. It’s always best to view the primary sources doing the talking. Here’s Parrish and McCallion.

If there anyone notices an error either in the YouTube video or in this video transcript I respectfully request that I be advised. Thanks.

Carolyn Parrish to Hazel McCallion on the Public’s Right to Know: “This isn’t a secret society”(3:46 min)

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

June 20, 2007 Council. Regarding Item R-4 Enersource Hydro Mississauga Services Inc. Streetlighting Services Agreement Extension – Procurement Reference Number: FA.49.444-07 Report dated June 11, 2007 from the Commissioner of Transportation and Works with respect to Enersource Hydro Mississauga Services Inc. Streetlighting Services Agreement Extension – Procurement Reference Number: FA.49.444-07.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BEGINS]

Martin Powell, Commissioner of Public Works and Transportation, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

I just want to make sure that I understand the question properly.

Are you saying if we were to tender or are you talking about our arrangement—

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

I’m talking about our current arrangement. And I’m also understanding that you’re going to have to spend some money to do that study. That’s separate and apart.

Martin Powell, Commissioner of Public Works and Transportation, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Well, first of all, we —our contract that we have right now is good until June of 2008. So we’re extending it from June of 2008 to the end of the year. And I think that we can live within the consumer price index.

We will have to get, obviously, if Council approves this, Enersource will also have to approve it. But I think that that’s probably something that can be agreed to.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Well, I thank you, Martin. This has certainly been a long process. You’ve done a terrific job.

I would like to move the motion that we reopen the issue. First. On the by-law. And I have it here.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Okay.

Let me advise you, Councillor Parrish, there’s a process around here that we follow. And other members of Council have not asked questions.

Because what they usually do is when they get a report, they meet with Staff before the Council meeting to go over the issues rather than the questions being asked at Council.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

I have done that, Madam Mayor.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Oh, so you’ve gone over this entire report with the Staff.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

I’ve chatted with Martin extensively.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

So you’ve got the answers from him.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Yes, I do.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Why did you ask the questions today then?

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Because I need to also make sure that my fellow councillors understand the answers as well as I did.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Oh. Well, I think they can speak for themselves. I don’t think they need another councillor to do their homework for them, I have to tell you.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Thank you for that direction.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Yeah. Well, we’ve served very well, you know. We’ve been in operation for quite a few years. And I have every confidence in my councillors. They go and talk to Staff. Like I did this morning with Martin and the City Manager —met with me at 8 o’clock to go over this report.

The questions I had I got the answers.

So therefore I don’t have to ask them at Council.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

That’s very good.

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Okay?

[DIP TO WHITE]
[later in the meeting]

Mayor Hazel McCallion, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Councillor Parrish?

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

Ah, yes, Madam Mayor. I just like to not rebut your comment to me but to explain my position.

The first time this question came before us it was a huge contract. It didn’t even have an amount of money on it. So I asked the questions of the Staff and was told, in private, that it was $3.9 million dollars.

So if I hadn’t asked that question, this whole issue wouldn’t have opened up.

I was not happy with the answers, so I asked a second set of questions. I again discussed it in private with Staff. Still not happy with the answers.

We are here to represent the public.

And we have cable television here and we have people sitting at home, obviously with nothing better to do, watching us on television.

We represent the city. We don’t represent ourselves.

So if I ask questions in open session on television, I have a right to do so. And if I don’t like the answers, I will keep asking questions. That’s my job.

[DIP TO WHITE]
[later in her comments]

Councillor Carolyn Parrish, Mississauga Council  June 20, 2007

And Commissioner Powell doesn’t disagree with me. That this is time for this $3.9 million dollar contract to be put out for proposals.

And I will continue asking questions on every issue that comes forward. And out of courtesy to one of the best staffs that I’ve ever worked with on any level of government, I will ask them in private.

And if I don’t like the answers, I’ll ask them again in public. Even if I do like the answers, I’ll ask them in public so that the people watching on television that vote for this Council know what we’re doing.

This isn’t a secret society.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

So. Will McCallion’s MYTHissauga Inc secret society crack open more champagne tonight celebrating the installation of yet another secret society puppet councillor?

Victor Oh (honourary president of the Mississauga Chinese Business Association)
Victor Oh, honourary president of the Mississauga Chinese Business Association pops the first bottle of champagne.
Photo Credit: “Andrew” at:  https://picasaweb.google.com/tee.andrew8/HazelVictoryNight#5546241316903573778

Victor Oh hands off the second bottle of champagne for Ron Starr to pop.
Victor Oh hands off the second bottle of champagne for Ron Starr to pop.
Stephen Chu (left) president of the Mississauga Chinese Business Association.
Photo Credit: “Andrew” at:  https://picasaweb.google.com/tee.andrew8/HazelVictoryNight#5546368771984252274

 

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

McCallion 2010 Election Night Victory photos reveal Hazel’s behind-the-scenes “Complexities” in Ward 5 by-election

September 3rd, 2011  

In the July 22, 2011 National Post article, “Council watchers claim guardianship of democracy, political scientist says” Megan O’Toole writes about what she describes as “self-styled council watchers” and their “growing presence in recent years as the proliferation of social media has given them a widening platform to share their views”.

O’Toole gets no fewer than three political scientists to weigh in on “council watchers.” All three PhD’s were condescending —and yes, dismissive.

While Ryerson University’s Duncan MacLellan’s opinion wasn’t the worst of the bunch, his is the most relevant for today’s blog.

Regarding council watchers MacLellan had this to say to the National Post:

“There could be some knowledge that they have that is helpful, but sometimes it is more just reactionary,” says Ryerson University municipal politics expert Duncan MacLellan. “They get people sort of fired up, but in the end [may not] understand the complexities around the decisions that get made.”

Notice O’Toole’s use of ” [may not] “. This would suggest the possibility that Dr. MacLellan really wrote “don’t” as in “but in the end don’t understand the complexities around the decisions that get made.”

What with the Mayor successfully blocking the release of the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry report until after the Ward 5 by-election, it’s time to introduce one of MYTHissauga’s “complexities around the decisions that get made.”

Today’s blog is unique.  I discovered a series of 64 remarkable photos by photographer “Andrew”.  His Picasa web album is simply labelled “Hazel Victory Night Oct 25, 2010 photos: 64“.

Andrew clearly has unprecedented behind-the-scenes access to Victor Oh, Honourary President of the Mississauga Chinese Business Association. And through Victor Oh, Andrew had unprecedented behind-the-scenes access to Mayor Hazel McCallion’s private October 25, 2010 Election Night Victory Celebration.

Judging by the grins splitting the faces of McCallion’s “complexities” as they popped the champagne, they weren’t so much celebrating Ron Starr’s victory as silencing Carolyn Parrish. After all, can’t have the public know what’s really going on in MYTHissauga —and especially its “complexities”.

Through experience I’ve discovered that videos and photographs “disappear” once MYTHissauga’s “complexities” find out that I’ve discovered them. So I document them through videotape six ways to Sunday.

Watch and discover (if you don’t already know) a major “complexity” —that informed voters are very, very bad for government. And business.

So make no mistake. The same MYTHissauga Elites swilling champagne in these “Andrew” photos: Hazel McCallion, son Peter, Ron Starr, Starr’s “friends for 30 years” Katie and Steve Mahoney, Bonnie Crombie, Victor Oh et al are busy right now pulling their Strings of “Complexities” in this Ward 5 by-election.

And with that introduction, here is my video “colour commentary” of Andrew’s 64 photos. And of course, the video transcript.

If anyone notices an error either in the YouTube video or in this transcript I respectfully request that I be advised. I have been documenting City of Mississauga municipal governance since May 2006 and this research demands Accuracy. Thanks.

Hazel McCallion, Ron Starr, Victor Oh’s Private Election Champagne: Return to MYTHissauga Secrecy (15:07 min)

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

MISSISSAUGAWATCH August 30, 2011 analyzing Andrew’s  ‘Hazel Victory Night Oct 25, 2010″ 64 photos.

It is Tuesday, August 30, 2011 and this is what the Toronto Star looks like. I’ve discovered something that’s really important and I need to document it before it’s removed.

These are photos by a guy named “Andrew” right here, who seems to have an in somehow with the Mayor. A whole bunch of different activities.

The one that I’m interested in —there it is right there. And it’s “Hazel Victory Night Oct 25, 2010”.

[Photo 1: Ron Starr, Hazel McCallion and Katie Mahoney victorious]

And there’s a whole bunch of them and you can kind of see. I’m going to go a little bit further. But what I’m going to do now is, This is Photo 1 as you can see up here.

And I’m just going to do this as a slide presentation.

And what I’ll do is I’ll identify some of the people here. As you can see, if there’s ever any doubt that Katie Mahoney is Hazel’s favoured #1 Councillor. The Mahoney’s have an incredible influence as far as The Councillors are concerned.

And anyway, so here we’ve got Ron Starr, Hazel McCallion and Katie Mahoney. And we’re just going to go through here.

This is “Victory Night” behind-the-scenes. Nobody’s seen this. Neither have I.

[Photo 2: Smiling guy with microphone at podium. Hazel McCallion beside him.]

Not sure who this is.

[Photo 3: Hazel McCallion, microphone in hand, addresses her Faithful.]

Here she is addressing her Faithful.

[Photo 4: The Mayor’s Faithful in rapt attention.]

More of her Faithful.

[Photo 6: Hazel McCallion surrounded by her Faithful.]

This guy here? Prevented the Mississauga News from asking McCallion questions inside the Great Hall. On Election Night.

[Photo 9: Victor Oh, with Mayor beside him, prepares to pop a bottle of champagne.]

Victor Oh, Honourary President of the Mississauga Chinese Business Association. And here he’s popping open a bottle of champagne. And I’m not sure but I think that that’s actually a mayoral candidate as well [note: will verify].

[Photo 10: Victor Oh successfully pops cork to delight of delighted Faithful.]

But what’s important to me right now is to get these documented.

[Photo 11: Delighted Faithful cheer and applaud Victor Oh’s successful champagne popping.]

[Photo 12: Hazel McCallion hoists champagne glass and toasts her Faithful.]

[Photo 13: Victor Oh pours champagne to the assembled Faithful.]

Peter McCallion and girlfriend Jovanna.

[Photo 14: Victor Oh pours more champagne for the assembled Faithful as the Mayor talks to a Faithful.]

[Photo 15: Hazel McCallion receives huge hug from a smiling Faithful as Victor Oh beams.]

There’s Fran Rider, President, or head of the Women’s Hockey Association.

[Photo 16: Hazel McCallion poses with four of her Faithful.]

[Photo 17. Hazel McCallion with Unidentified Faithful. Longo’s corporate banner in background.]

If you ever wonder why Hazel McCallion doesn’t have to campaign, this is why.

Notice in the background here, you’ve got Jovanna and Peter McCallion here checking —let’s just go back. Let’s just do that. Checking Peter’s cell phone there or something. Going back.

Notice the corporate sponsorship “Longo’s”?

[Photo 19: Smiling Unidentified male Faithful with Hazel McCallion and same Unidentified Faithful.]

Not sure who that is.

He shows up later so I’m going to be interested in these two people.

[Photo 20: Victor Oh, Diane Kalenchuk and same Unidentified Faithful.]

Victor Oh and this here, Diane Kalenchuk, Royal LePage real estate agent. “Selling Homes in Mississauga for Over 25 Years!” and also awarded citizen-of-the-year 2002.

Accompanied Hazel McCallion several times to the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry back in September 2010. And also at the Living Arts Centre, February 13, 2011, she was there hovering around celebrating and organizing Hazel McCallion’s 90th birthday.

[Photo 21: Fran Rider, Victor Oh, Diane Kalenchuk pose happily with two Unidentified Faithfuls.]

Fran Rider, Women’s hockey. Victor Oh, accompanying Hazel McCallion on many of the trips to China. And Diane Kalenchuk —this woman driving, in the car with Hazel, and for that matter, Fran Rider, to the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry.

And those two draw a complete blank to me. Who are they?

[Photo 22: Hazel McCallion in a circle with MYTHissauga Faithfuls.]

 I thought this guy here’s Ted Woloshyn. But you know, when he’s got his back like that, don’t really know.

[Photo 23 Hazel McCallion receives hug from a Faithful as what appears to be Ted Woloshyn looks on.]

Looks kind of like Ted Woloshyn. Now he’s the Toronto Sun columnist and I refer to him as Hazel’s lapdog. But we’re still not sure.

[Photo 24: Hazel McCallion posing with three Unidentified male Faithfuls.]

Not sure who these people are.

[Photo 25: Hazel McCallion at table with her Faithful. Guy who blocked Mississauga News in background.]

Here we have them celebrating at the end. Again, this guy here.

[Photo 26: Hazel McCallion at table with her Faithful. Different angle.]

There’s this guy who looks like Ted Woloshyn in the background. Still not sure.

[Photo 27: Sheldon Leiba smiling with Unidentified smiling Unidentified Faithful and smiling “Starr’s on the Credit” party girl.]

Here’s something that’s really interesting.  This is a guy named Sheldon Leiba, president of the Mississauga Board of Trade. As I keep saying. You don’t have to campaign when you’ve got the Mississauga Board of Trade right behind you.

And this woman right here. She is in a lot of the photographs of Starr’s on the Credit. And I can show that she’s quite the Party Girl.

[Photo 28: Hazel McCallion posing with beaming Katie Mahoney and omnipresent hubbie, Steve Mahoney.]

Keep going.

Like I said, these are the powerhouses beside Hazel. Hazel can depend on these two. December 2, 2009 Rally you had Katie Mahoney going up there saying—”It’s not hard to support our Mayor, trust me.”

[Video insert of Katie Mahoney, December 2, 2009 “Friends of Hazel” Rally]

 Katie Mahoney: “It’s not hard to support our Mayor, trust me.”

[End insert]

It is so true when you’ve got the Mississauga Board of Trade. You’ve got Ted Woloshyn. You’ve got Ron Lenyk, who’s the former publisher of the Mississauga News and was publisher for the longest time.

There’s been no media.

And then Jake Dheer who’s Rogers Cable 10. All these “media”, they were all supporting the Mayor.

Anyway, as I keep saying, two powerful, powerful people and McCallion-backers.

[Photo 29: Hazel McCallion in a talking circle with Katie Mahoney, omnipresent hubbie, Steve Mahoney and Victor Oh.]

Same thing here. Now isn’t this quite the photograph!

 You’ve got Steve Mahoney, Councillor Katie Mahoney, Victor Oh and Hazel McCallion. In the background, Fran Rider, Women’s hockey.

Now there’s a real power photograph.

[Photo 31: Hazel McCallion and Ron Starr in victory embrace.]

Now isn’t that a photograph. Ron Starr hugging Hazel McCallion.

Boy was she happy to get rid of Carolyn Parrish. Because Carolyn Parrish at least for a little while, blew the lid off MYTHissauga

[Photo 32: Hazel McCallion and Ron Starr still hugging.]

And here. Can there be a happier Hazel?

“I got my man in! I got my puppet in!” What a relief it must be for her.

And I suspect now they’re really going to watch the Ward 5 election because the last thing that woman needs is to have Carolyn Parrish back.

After all, Horrors, you wouldn’t want people to know what’s really going on in MYTHissauga.

[Photo 33: Bonnie Crombie, Ron Starr, Hazel McCallion and Katie Mahoney —grins splitting their faces.]

And look at this. Isn’t this the photograph!

If there’s any doubt that Bonnie Crombie is a Hazel puppet —a Hazel uber alles candidate. This is a photograph by Andrew. October 25th—

[Photo 34: Bonnie Crombie, Ron Starr, Hazel McCallion and Katie Mahoney faces splitting in even wider grins.]

2010. Behind-the-scenes look. Look at the delight.

“Yes.! We got rid of Parrish! Yes! We got Ron Starr in! Yes. We can return to our Secrecy!”

Oh! I know! Here’s something else I can tell you. All four of these people were at Starr’s on the Credit and were featured in the Starr’s on the Credit 2008 highlight video.

Including [laughs] Ronnie Hawkins saying something like—

[Video insert of Ronnie Hawkins from Starr’s on the Credit 2008 video highlights]

Ronnie Hawkins: “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!”

[End insert]

Yup. You’re looking at MYTHissauga.

Let’s keep going.

[Photo 35: Hazel McCallion poses with “Elect Ron Starr” sign. Ted Woloshyn stands amused in background.]

Now, here’s the first confirmation that I get that the guy in the hockey jacket or whatever, really was Ted Woloshyn.

If there’s any doubt that Ron Starr was Hazel McCallion’s preferred choice, take a look. That’s why we’re documenting all these pictures, saving them. Because eventually you build a map of MYTHissauga.

And a map isn’t just roads, it’s also connections between people. As you see here. So you know, any wonder why Ted Woloshyn writes the way that he does?

[Photo 36: Hazel McCallion poses with “Elect Ron Starr” sign, Ron Starr. Ted Woloshyn stands amused in background.]

Here again. You’ve got Woloshyn. You’ve got Ron Starr. And you’ve got Hazel McCallion.

Ted Woloshyn did his bit in the Toronto Sun and his Toronto Sun columns. And then you had Hazel with the robocall at the last minute. And there they are. She’s got her puppet in.

And I suspect too that Ron Starr is her choice for her successor in 2014.

[Photo 37: Joyous Hazel McCallion poses with joyous Ron Starr as she holds an “Elect Ron Starr” sign.]

Oh yeah, look at this. Let’s go closer. Look at these faces.

“My Ronnie!…”

Thank you, Andrew for these photographs.

[Photo 38: Hazel McCallion admires Ron Starr’s hockey sweater with “STARR 6” lettering.]

And just for the record, you’ve still got Ted Woloshyn’s jacket right there, so he’s enjoying this.

[Photo 39: Hazel McCallion posing with a smiling Unidentified Faithful male and female.]

Now who have we got here? Let’s go back to make sure we’ve got everybody in. Oh. And over here, Fran Rider.

[Photo 40: Darryl Konynenbelt from Global TV with Hazel McCallion waiting for cue.]

[laughs] And speaking of one of Hazel McCallion’s media puppets, this is Darryl Konynenbelt from Global TV. Made an unsuccessful run as Conservative candidate for Mississauga South.

And I think that’s over here, that’s the head of Victor Oh. And we’ve still got Fran Rider in the background here.

[Photo 41: Darryl Konynenbelt from Global TV with Hazel McCallion waiting for cue.]

He’s pretending to be a reporter pretending to be the ever-vigilant media. And talk about, McCallion can always depend on this guy to toss her some sweetheart questions.

[Photo 42: Darryl Konynenbelt from Global TV adjusting his tie ready to speak with Hazel McCallion]

Goddamighty.

[Photo 43: Smiling ROGERS Cable 10 Mississauga standing next to a smiling Ron Starr waiting for cue.]

Oh! And there’s ROGERS Cable 10 with some more Pretend.

This is why this 19-year old who wrote me saying, “The System is CORRUPT, there is no way to fix it”—

[Photo 44: Serious-looking ROGERS Cable 10 Mississauga standing “reporter” interviewing a serious-looking Ron Starr.]

—you’re looking at why.

Now that’s Jake Dheer’s ROGERS Cable 10 interviewing Ron Starr. And you’re going to expect any kind of real questions?

[Photo 45: smiling Identified, smiling Bonnie Crombie, Smiling Sheldon Leiba]

Don’t recognize this guy, but there’s Bonnie Crombie, Hazel McCallion-approved Ward 5 by-election candidate and Sheldon Leiba, president Mississauga Board of Trade.

[Photo 46: four smiling people, “Starr’s on the Credit girl”. Victor Oh, Fran Rider in background.]

This lady. Again. Starr’s on the Credit. There’s Victor Oh. Fran Rider.

[Photo 47: Victor Oh holding bottle of champagne beside smiling “Starr’s on the Credit girl”]

Victor Oh. Starr’s on the Credit. Bottle of champagne. He’s happy.

[Photo 48: Smiling Victor Oh and smiling “Starr’s on the Credit girl”. Close up.]

And the real laugh? This guy also plays big in Safe City Mississauga and the Mississauga Crime Prevention Association.

[Photo 49: Hazel McCallion about to hug someone introduced by a smiling Victor Oh. Ron Starr’s prepping a burger]

She’s [McCallion} about to hug him so, somebody and he’s [Oh] introducing this person.

There’s the champagne. There’s Ron Starr chowing down on a burger.

This is after the cameras go off. This is Election Night.

[Photo 50: Victor Oh beams as Ron Starr uncorks another bottle of champagne. Hazel McCallion backs away, wary of the cork.]

Looks like a private kind-of-thing.

There’s Ron Starr uncorking another bottle of champagne. Look at Hazel.

[Photo 51: Victor Oh beams even more as Ron Starr launches champagne cork up, up and awaaaaaaaay.]

Look at this.

When Hazel McCallion talks about “my people”, she’s not talking about the residents of Mississauga. Here’s her People.

[Photo 52: Smiling Sheldon Leiba beside Bonnie Crombie who’s talking to the smiling “Starr’s on the Credit girl”.]

There’s the head of Mississauga Board of Trade Sheldon, and Bonnie Crombie.

[Photo 53: Unidentified smiling Faithful standing beside Ron Starr and his campaign manager.]

And we’ve got Ron Starr here talking to his campaign manager, Susan Walsh. And I recognize this guy right here at the back. He was at the “Friends of Hazel” Rally on December 2, 2009. Helped organize it.

[Photo 54: Darryl Konynenbelt from Global TV talking privately to Ron Starr. No microphone.]

It’s also interesting that they let in Konynenbelt or whatever and also ROGERS TV but Hazel McCallion refused to allow the Mississauga News to interview her.

[Video insert October 25, 2010 inside Great Hall earlier that evening as election results were coming in]

Donald Barber: “The short, gray-haired guy who’s making the —he’s getting in the face of the Mississauga News. Telling them to get out of the way. Don’t answer any questions. Hazel doesn’t want to answer any questions.”

MISSISSAUGAWATCH: “Which one’s that?”

Donald Barber: “The guy who’s got the roses. There.”

MISSISSAUGAWATCH: “Oh. Uh oh. Don, help ’em out.”

Donald Barber: “What?”

MISSISSAUGAWATCH: “Just watch the knobs here.”] * Note. “knobs” mean Hazel McCallion’s security guards.

[End insert]

[Photo 55: Hazel McCallion posing beside Ron Starr’s grinning and triumphant campaign manager.]

And here’s Hazel McCallion standing next to Ron Starr’s campaign manager, Susan Walsh.

[Photo 56: Unidentified grinner and Hazel McCallion posing beside Ron Starr’s —yep grinning and triumphant campaign manager. Two kids in background.]

You know when they say about “Our kids are our future?” There they are.

They’re talking about that youth. Not the ones in Malton.

[Photo 57: Unidentified smiling youth and Hazel McCallion posing beside Ron Starr’s —you got it grinning and triumphant campaign manager.]

Ah! There’s what I’m talking about. That youth is their future.

[Photo 58: Bonnie Crombie talking to what appear to be two organizers of the December 2, 2009 “Friends of Hazel” Rally.]

There’s Bonnie Crombie again. And it’s important to get that guy. Again, I think that guy is from the Stop the Inquiry Rally. And I even think I know this guy.

[Photo 59: Hazel McCallion and a smiling unidentified Faithful.]

There.

[Photo 60: Hazel McCallion speaking to Charles Sousa.]

Charles Sousa.

[Photo 61: Ron Starr and a smiling unidentified Faithful.]

Let’s just do a close up here.

[Photo 62: Smiling Hazel McCallion posing with smiling Victor Oh and smiling company.]

 Now given the photographs that you see of Hazel McCallion —I think it’s at the Canadian Chinese Business Association, this one isn’t a surprise. And it will be interesting to see how many of these also show up at the Mayor’s 90th Gala Birthday Party.

That’s the expensive one that was $350.00 a ticket.

[Photo 63: Smiling Ron Starr posing with smiling Victor Oh and smiling company.]

There’s Victor now with his new Councillor.

You’re looking at MYTHissauga.

[Photo 64: Smiling Hazel McCallion sitting around a table celebrating Ron Starr’s election and her re-election.]

And that’s it.

[VIDEO TRANSCRIPT ENDS]

Photo credits and special thanks to Andrew at: https://picasaweb.google.com/tee.andrew8

Signed,

MISSISSAUGAWATCH

MUNICIPALITIES: A ROOT OF YOUTH VIOLENCE

“Although it has become common knowledge that those who are pushed out or who drop out of high school are vulnerable to economic and social insecurity, and that this can often lead them into situations of violence, there has been a shortage of critical assessment of all the institutions implicated in this situation.”

—p. 118  McMurtry/Curling Report on the Roots of Youth Violence:  “Volume 3 COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES REPORT”

Hazel McCallion’s lawyer, “Trade Mission to Brazil…has been in the works since last fall”. TWITTER suggests otherwise!

August 17th, 2011  

“in the works since last fall”?

TWITTER. Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance’s July 22nd Tweet.

Great Toronto Marketing Alliance (GTMA) tweets Brazil "mission" early bird special ends July 29th on July 22, 2011.

Regarding Mayor Hazel McCallion’s Brazil “Mission” delaying the Inquiry Report until after the Ward 5 By-Election…

What Traditional Media won’t tell you. Observe.

TIMELINE.

May 11, 2011 – 5:39 PM (Mississauga News)

Council votes for by-election

Chris Clay

Ward 5 residents will vote for their next representative after City Council passed a motion today calling for a by-election to replace departing councillor Eve Adams.

Jun 28, 2011 – 4:08 PM (Mississauga News)

Inquiry report after Labour Day

Louie Rosella

The much-anticipated final report from the Mississauga judicial inquiry, already delayed several times, will be released sometime after Labour Day.

Jun 29, 2011 – 2:32 PM

By-election set for September

by Chris Clay

Ward 5 residents will go to the polls on Sept. 19 to fill the City Council seat left vacant when former councillor Eve Adams jumped ship to Ottawa.

Jun 30, 2011 www.brampton.ca Business Headlines & BramFacts 

GTMA Plans Business Mission to Brazil – Brampton Companies Invited to Particpate [sic]

Thursday, Jun 30 2011, 09:00

The Brazilian market has been identified as an important future market for Canadian companies seeking trade opportunities and is emerging as a key source of new foreign direct investment for Canada. Specifically the metropolitan region of Sao Paulo which is known as the financial and economic centre of Brazil, with a total population of 19.9 million.

The City of Brampton participated in an exploratory mission to Brazil with the GTMA in November 2010. The mission was focused around meetings with companies and organizations to assess the investment and trade potential in Brazil as well as companies interested in FDI in the GTA.. The mission established a level of awareness about a fast growing economy that will be a market of opportunity for Brampton companies. In addition, through participation with the GTMA, the mission helped to establish Brampton’s prominence as a location of choice.

The Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance (GTMA) is in the planning stages of a return mission to Brazil. The program will run for 5 days from September 12th – 16th and will focus on the Futurecom Conference which will take place in Sao Paulo. A portion of the itinerary will involve pre-qualified meeting in Sao Paulo then traveling to Curatiba for additional meetings and briefings with industry organizations and associations. The itinerary is relatively flexible and can be tailored to the needs of the delegates. For more information please see the attached itinerary.

Jul 22, 2011 TWITTER. Greater Toronto Martketing Alliance announces Business “Mission” to Brazil.

GTMA gtmatoronto GTMAJoin the GTMA on a GTA Business Mission to Brazil! Inquire about the early bird special by July 29th > http://t.co/0dBRiNG22 Jul

City of Brampton’s pdf file on this trip conveniently deletes the following from the original flyer.

 Brazil 2011 –
“Digital Media, ICT & Clean Tech”
Mission to Brazil to coincide with FutureCom
September 10th – 16th, 2011

Aug 16, 2011 – 2:32 PM (Mississauga News)

Inquiry report delayed

Louie Rosella

The much-anticipated release of the Mississauga judicial inquiry report has been pushed back once again because Mayor Hazel McCallion will be out of the country next month.

Commission counsel William McDowell told The News today that the mayor will be leading a trade mission to Brazil from Sept. 9-18.

“We have agreed with her counsel that we will not release the report until she returns,” McDowell said, adding the report won’t be made public until after Sept. 19, the day of the Ward 5 by-election.

McCallion’s trip is part of the Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance Trade Mission to Brazil, which has been in the works since last fall, said the mayor’s lawyer, Liz McIntyre.

Wed Aug 17 2011 (Toronto Star)

Mississauga inquiry report delayed

San Grewal Urban Affairs Reporter

The Mississauga judicial inquiry report expected after Labour Day will be delayed because of a trade trip to Brazil scheduled by Mayor Hazel McCallion and the Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance.

The report on the probe of allegations that the mayor used undue influence to promote a land deal involving her son’s company was expected before the Sept. 19 byelection in Ward 5 that could tip the balance of council against McCallion.

It was thought the report might influence voters choosing between McCallion supporters and former councillor Carolyn Parrish, a longtime rival, who are running for the seat vacated by new MP Eve Adams. It will now be released after McCallion’s return on Sept. 18.

 At least San Grewal gets it!

Next, tweets from MISSISSAUGAWATCH Twitter.

Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseHazel McCallion ****s off to Brazil ensuring the Judicial Inquiry Report won’t come out til AFTER Ward 5 By-election. http://t.co/PsxYLG523 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseHazel McCallion’s gift to her candidates Bonnie Crombie/Jake Dheer. DELAYS Inquiry Report til AFTER Ward 5 By-Election! http://t.co/7BMZ0Cx23 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseHazel McCallion’s lawyer said Brazil trip in works since Fall. So why did GTMA Twitter first announce early bird by July 29th on July 22nd?!7 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseGTMA Twitter first tweets “Join the GTMA on a GTA Business Mission to Brazil! Inquire about the early bird special by July 29th” on July 22!7 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseI favorited Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance’s July 22 tweet announcing Brazil “Mission” Hazel McCallion’s lawyer said in works since fall6 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseCity of Brampton’s GTMA “Brazil Mission” pdf file judiciously-edited. Deletes part about “Mission to Brazil to coincide with FutureCom”.6 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseTimeline. Jun 28, 2011 Mississauga News “Inquiry report after Labour Day” July 22 Tweet “Join the GTMA on a GTA Business Mission to Brazil!”5 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseGreater Toronto Marketing Alliance Stategic Plan photo reveals Hazel McCallion member of GTMA that planned Brazil trip! http://t.co/aWyTawR5 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseInquiry folks should suggest delaying Mississauga by-election date. Vote can’t be that important for McCallion to f*** off to Brazil, right?5 hours ago
Mississauga Muse MISSISSAUGAMUSEMississauga MuseHazel McCallion’s lawyer, “Trade Mission to Brazil…has been in the works since last fall”. TWITTER suggests otherwise! tinyurl.com/3bov28e5 hours ago

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Preliminary investigation of the Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance dredged up this June 16, 2008 Toronto Star article.

Fractured GTA a tough sell

John Spears CITY HALL BUREAU

When the GTMA was born in 1997, then Toronto mayor Mel Lastman and Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion clashed. Lastman said he wanted a Toronto agency. McCallion blasted a GTMA pamphlet that used the naked word “Toronto” without acknowledging the surrounding area.

That tension lingers, insiders say. Some Toronto bureaucrats came to view the alliance as an agent of the suburban municipalities, dominated by Mississauga….

the Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance’s “NEW & REVITALIZED CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN 2007-2010” at york.ca.

August 2011 TSX -491.75 echoes MYTHissauga “city elite” in 2008 market crash (2008 –when Jake Dheer, Bonnie Crombie all smiles)

August 8th, 2011  

World stock markets are in tatters. The ass fell out of the bucket. Perfect timing for today’s blog about Hazel McCallion-approved Ward 5 by-election candidates Jake Dheer and Bonnie Crombie!

The TSX down from a high of 13011 a week ago to 11,671 at time of writing. It’s like the Fall of 2008 all over again.

Freeze-frame "TSX performance just prior to October 17, 2008 Peel Police Services Board meeting" from video "Hazel McCallion Mayor's Gala Scandal: MYTHissauga "raised mmmillions of dollars"

For the record here’s what Mississauga’s city elites were doing on November 8, 2008 as reported by Snap South Mississauga.

22nd Annual Mayor’s Gala

On November 8th, 2008 at Mississauga’s Living Arts Centre, Mayor Hazel McCallion hosted her 22nd Annual Gala Celebration, celebrating her 30th Anniversary in office. This year’s gala saw over 850 guests, with Regis Philbin, from the Regis and Kelly show, performing for the guests and spending some time with Mayor McCallion.The event was all for a good cause and this year’s event raised funds for arts, culture and heritage in Mississauga. Guests laughed the night away as the Mayor and Regis laughed the night away. Guests had a fabulous time this year and will for sure be looking forward to the next gala.

And what was Ward 5 by-election Jake Dheer and his fellow Mayor’s Gala organizers doing on November 8, 2008?

Mississauga city elites were feeling no pain in the last market crash (November 2008)
Turning every ticket dollar into (according to Councillor Nando Iannicca) “this grand fete with the City’s elites. And at the end of the day for every dollar that came in, eighty cents was consumed.” Now that’s a MYTHissauga charity!

And that’s why the only sane response to Mayor’s Gala organizer Jake Dheer’s Ward 5 by-election campaign slogan, “No one runs like a Dheer” is “Let’s hope so”.

Freeze-frame "Percent proceeds of Mayor's Gala" from video "Hazel McCallion Mayor's Gala Scandal: MYTHissauga "raised mmmillions of dollars"
And what of the other McCallion-approved Ward 5 by-election candidate, Bonnie Crombie? What was she doing in 2008?

Crombie, former public affairs consultant, threw thousands and thousands of smiles.

Smiles in August 2008, posing with smiling son, Alex, who campaigned for Vice President Federal of the Ontario Young Liberals.

Just like mom who claimed, “I’m meeting with lots of organizations and groups who are asking me to run,” in the Ward 5 by-election, son Alex wrote, “I have been humbled by the overwhelming call for me to run for this position and the immense amount of support I have been given by my fellow Ontario Young Liberals.”   That was in January 2009.

So many calling for Bonnie and Alex to run…

Alex Crombie who ran for Vice President Ontario Young Liberals with Bonnie Crombie with son Alex at The Ontario Young Liberals held their seventh annual Summer Fling in Guelph, Ont

Even in front of Trooper Marc Diab Memorial Park.

Bonnie "Barbie Doll" Crombie even smiles posing at Trooper Marc Diab Memorial Park

MYTHissauga. Smiles.

Bonnie Crombie would do well to counter “No one runs like a Dheer” with the campaign slogan, “No one smiles like a Crombie”.

And what was Bonnie Crombie doing in November 2008? Haven’t researched that yet but can tell you that on October 14, 2008 she was elected MP for Mississauga-Streetsville, beating Wajid “Cross the Floor” Khan with 21,579 to his 16,946.

One of Crombie’s 21,579 votes was mine!

Better check what the TSX is doing… -491.75.  OUCH!

No worries. Bonnie and Jake will be all smiles. Both lead mythical lives in mythical MYTHissauga.

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

–email from youth (age 19)

Might as well add this update from Twitter Toronto Star News.

Toronto Star News
TorontoStarNewsToronto Star News
TSX drops 492 points, Dow falls 634 as stock markets keep tumbling http://bit.ly/nJ222p
5 minutes ago

Signed,

The Mississauga Muse.
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES: Related video presented to Mississauga Council at the April 13, 2011 Council meeting.

Hazel McCallion Mayor’s Gala Scandal: MYTHissauga “raised mmmillions of dollars” (10:11 min)

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

Video transcript at the blog, “Mississauga Council video presentation, “Hazel McCallion Mayor’s Gala Scandal: MYTHissauga ‘raised mmmillions of dollars’”

Megan O’Toole, Tom Urbaniak, MYTHissauga Inc, Ward 5 By-election, Freedom of Information, Life, the Universe –Everything.

August 4th, 2011  

The last two weeks have been a blur.

A National Post article by Megan O’Toole hit me especially hard. She’d approached me about doing an article on Council watchers and asked if I were interested. I agreed and O’Toole sent me a list of questions. At no time did she say that she’d invited three political scientists to offer comment. And comment they did.

Since then I’ve been trying to get a rebuttal published at the National Post with zero luck —although I did get decent video of both attempts.

The real killer was what Tom Urbaniak served up about me.

[cut-and-paste]

“Some of their messages are valid and might resonate with a larger public — the need for transparency, too much bureaucratic self-justification, the dearth of tough questions … but they start to lose people when they argue or imply that Mississauga is almost a surreal Orwellian state, utterly dominated by sinister myths,” Mr. Urbaniak says.

This from the guy who wrote, “Her Worship: Hazel McCallion and the Development of Mississauga” (all 255 pages plus index etc etc) without filing a single Freedom of Information request!

How, I ask. How?

Have to laugh at how Urbaniak ends his book in his Acknowledgements section:

“Any errors and all deficiencies should in no way reflect on those who so kindly provided assistance or guidance, but rather on my own shortcomings.”

The major “shortcoming” was depending on Peel archives, interviews, Staff at the City of Mississauga clerks office/minutes of meetings (a true joke), more archives, newspaper articles, the kitchen sink —but not filing Freedom of Information!

Then came news of the passing of such a generous and brilliant spirit… Tomorrow is the funeral mass.

But today the Mississauga News announced that Bonnie Crombie had just entered the Ward 5 by-election race. Between Jake Dheer and now Bonnie Crombie, I have to get back at it. Research. Documenting. Reporting.

To be clear, there’s now more than enough evidence that what I do, write, and say makes no difference. A quote I’d stumbled upon when I first began researching the City of Mississauga and the Roots of Youth Violence:

“The truth is that we, as a society – all of us – simply don’t consider children very important. We talk a good game but we don’t think kids are as important as other things, like fixing the roads.” – Jim Paul Nevins (Ontario Court Judge October 4, 2001 report)

and the email I received from a perceptive youth.

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

I continue this MISSISSAUGAWATCH blog knowing that what I do, write, and say will make no difference. I continue only because I know that the likes of Hazel McCallion, Jake Dheer, Bonnie Crombie and the rest of MYTHissauga Inc would just love it if I stopped.

And so, I suspect, would Tom Urbaniak.

 MYTHissauga’s “media”

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

On Controlling the Message, from Tom Urbaniak’s book,“Her Worship: Hazel McCallion and the Development of Mississauga”.

Hazel McCallion emerged from that 1982 election with an extremely strong hand. The old establishment had opposed her. Her old enemies had resurfaced to oppose her. One candidate for the Ward 2 council seat expressed alarm at the “Drapeau-like council,” a reference to the domineering Montreal mayor, but that candidate’s vote had been marginal. The only regularly publishing local newspaper had opposed her. A judge had admonished her. And still she cruised to victory. If everyone were against her, it was, to paraphrase John Diefenbaker, everyone except the people.

On city council there was now but one problem child: Larry Taylor. While the conflict-of-interest proceedings had been going on, he had been allowed to snipe from the sidelines. He had even been calling up citizens in all parts of the city to try to set up a Mississauga-wide feder­ation of ratepayers’ organizations. Now, with McCallion presuming herself to be vindicated, he could be taught a lesson. Returning in Feb­ruary 1983 from a stint out of the country, he headed for what he thought would be a regular city council meeting. To his astonishment, the mayor and the other councillors had prepared a most unexpected greeting.

Taylor had helped to start a non-profit newspaper in his ward, a laudable objective in a media-barren environment. He and the volunteers arranged to print it on a city press in exchange for free advertising­ for the municipality.

This now was portrayed as a major scandal. It was ‘theft’ of city resources. Other groups wanting city support had to apply to council for funding. Senior city staff did not use the word ‘theft,’ but they gravely confirmed that Taylor had been following a rather irregular procedure. The newspaper stopped printing. The city-wide ratepayers’ association concept was also fatally attacked. By trying to set one up, Taylor had supposedly been interfering inappropriately in the business of other wards. The embattled councillor would henceforth be contained.

The Mississauga News for its part was not much of a threat to the mayor now. If sometimes it would report some controversial com­ments, these were always offset by the numerous feel-good photo­graphs of the mayor at one function or another. When McCallion released only a partial list of her campaign donors from the 1982 campaign despite promising full disclosure, it merited only a blip. When an inquest into a fatal fire revealed the city to be short of bylaw staff none of the discussion redounded onto the mayor’s penny-pinching. When social service agencies complained that not enough was being done to build healthy and cohesive neighbourhoods, they were but voices in the wilderness.

Signed,

A Voice in the Wilderness

And so I introduce today’s second entry, “Jake Dheer: Ward 5 By-election MYTHissauga candidate (What the Mississauga News and especially ROGERS Cable 10 TV won’t tell you)”


Bear