Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Pray Tell":
How does this reflect on any charitable event that a current politician
supports and does through their office?
The Ford case and the Morris case
are very different.
************
I know only what I have read in the paper and heard from others.
The decision does not impose the penalty of not being allowed to hold office for seven years.
The decision is stayed which means it does not take effect for fourteen days. when the decision is final.
Cost of a by-election in Toronto is said to be $7million dollars.
The mess stems from a decision of an appointed Integrity Commissioner
It was a finding of hers , the Mayor should retirn $3,150 in donations from different donors to buy equipment for a high school football team .
The money was used for the purpose it was raised.
A Commissioner cannot impose a penalty Only Council has that authority.
In a vote of 22 to 12 including Mayor Ford, Council voted not to accept the decision of the Integrity Commissioner.
Mayor Ford extolled the whole thing ridiculous. How could he return money already spent with tax receipts provided and all that?
He said so in full bluster. He believe it so strongly, he voted with the majority. His vote did not make the decision.
So, he used the letterhead , stationary and staff provided by the city to solicit funds for a good cause. He didn't raise a lot.
Nevertheless, it was not an appropriate use of municipal resources.
There was a fire once in a rental town house in Aurora.
Former Mayor Morris, and Councillors Gaertner and MacEachern
promptly announced a fund-raising campaign. It was a Saturday.
I commended the Mayor and Councillors for their quick reaction to a problem. .
I also notified the Mayor's office and town resources could not be used.
About then the Mayor sought an answer from the solicitor about her status as an employee, being harassed and kept from doing her job properly..
No fund-raising campaign had emerged.
At the same time, when Council votes to waive fees for use of facilities for charitable fund-raising events, the principle prevails.
Town resources should not be used for that purpose.
Political advantage is engendered by council's generous but inappropriate use of town resources.
All votes in favour could conceivably be regarded a conflict of interest.
It's not actually a pecuniary interest to Councillors It's not money in their pockets.But it's not their money they are giving away.
Neither was Mayor Ford's endeavour on behalf of a school football team.
He argued with his usual lack of subtlety, it didn't go into his pocket, how could it come out of his pocket.
It has been said. the Conflict of Interest charge against Aurora's former Mayor is not the same.
We shall reserve comment on that pending a decision .
Monday, 26 November 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Who knows? He might run again and be re-elected. Unless Olivia decides to run. It does seem heavy-handed and I would be concerned about Hazel M except that she does not plan to run again. Nice for a place other than Aurora to be setting the precedent.
Thank you for the day. Whew! The Auroran is up.
The Judge in Mayor Ford's case was quite specific about it not being about the actual amount of money. Rather he seems to say, & I might have it wrong, that it was the ' appearance ' of a conflict that was the problem. He also made some suggestions about future wording to straighten out just what qualified as a conflict. He was fairly harsh and other elected officials are probably reading the verdict carefully.
I guess the difference is a little more than $3000 to benefit a sports team vs. a potential $6 million for personal gain.
So the "resident" has it in his genes. Paul Magdar... actually Paul Magdar Jr. His father, for those that remember, was infamous for opening his fur store on Sundays back when the stormtroppers in Ontario would not allow Sunday shopping. He would spend more money fighting for his right to be open than he made at the store.
From the "Where are they now" file, Paul Magdar Sr closed up his shop a number of years ago. I wonder how much of that decision was based on lost money defending himself from the Government or the fact that furs are something of a dead-end venture in the 2000's?
Post a Comment