Guy Giorno

The applicant mayor applied for an inquiry alleging that the respondent councillor contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by attempting to influence the City's spending on legal fees related to the councillor's own judicial review application.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the councillor had a pecuniary interest in the litigation and technically contravened section 5(1)(b) of the Act by discussing the matter at a Council meeting.

However, the Commissioner found no contravention of section 5.2, as there was no attempt to influence decision-making.

The Commissioner decided not to apply to a judge for a determination, concluding that expensive litigation would not be in the municipality's best interests for a technical breach.

The applicant board applied for an inquiry alleging that a city councillor contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act and the municipal Code of Conduct by participating in and voting on a motion regarding the governance of a non-profit housing corporation where he was employed as Executive Director.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the motion, which called for mediation and potential legal remedies to restore municipal oversight, did not affect a real, present, and definable pecuniary interest of either the corporation or the councillor.

The Commissioner also found that the councillor did not use the influence of his office for a private advantage.

The application and complaint were dismissed.

The Chief Administrative Officer and the Mayor filed complaints alleging that a municipal councillor contravened the Code of Conduct by issuing a news release about his judicial review application, which challenged a council decision restricting his in-person attendance at meetings.

The Integrity Commissioner dismissed the complaints, finding that the complaints were filed outside the applicable six-week deadline.

Furthermore, on the merits, commencing a judicial review application and issuing a news release based on publicly filed court documents did not constitute a disclosure of inherently confidential information and did not breach the Code.

The Complainant, a city councillor, filed two complaints alleging that the Mayor and City Council contravened the Council Code of Conduct by issuing a news release about an integrity commissioner complaint and by restricting his in-person attendance at council meetings.

The Integrity Commissioner dismissed the complaints, finding that decisions of Council cannot be found to contravene the Code, nor can the participation of Council Members in making those decisions.

The Commissioner also noted that the allegations did not amount to breaches of the Code and that the issues were already being addressed in the Superior Court of Justice.

Two employees filed complaints alleging Councillor Ritch Noel contravened the Council Code of Conduct.

The Integrity Commissioner reviewed an independent workplace investigation report that found bullying and harassment, which Council had already acted upon.

The Commissioner investigated remaining allegations regarding the Councillor's court testimony and alleged interference in by-law enforcement.

The Commissioner concluded there was no jurisdiction to review privileged court testimony and found the Councillor's actions regarding by-law enforcement constituted asserting his rights as a property owner rather than political interference.

The complaints were dismissed.

The Integrity Commissioner investigated complaints against the Mayor of Peterborough for using a racial slur while quoting a historical figure during a guest lecture at Trent University.

The Commissioner found that while the comment was universally agreed to be unacceptable and harmful, it did not breach section 10 of the City's Code of Conduct as presently drafted, because it was not directed at any individual and did not constitute a course of conduct amounting to harassment.

The Commissioner recommended that City Council amend the Code if it wishes to prohibit such language regardless of context.

Five individuals filed complaints alleging that a city councillor and the mayor contravened the Council Code of Conduct during a General Committee meeting where Strong Mayor Powers were exercised to pass zoning by-laws.

The Integrity Commissioner declined to conduct an inquiry, finding that the allegations related to procedural rulings by the meeting chair, the exercise of Strong Mayor Powers, and Planning Act compliance, all of which fall outside the Commissioner's jurisdiction.

The Commissioner concluded that none of the allegations amounted to a breach of the Code of Conduct and that an Integrity Commissioner inquiry is not the appropriate forum to challenge Council decisions.

The People and Culture Division filed a complaint against a municipal councillor alleging that his communications with staff regarding the eviction of a homeless encampment and a meeting with local businesses contravened the Members of Council – Staff Relations Policy and the Council Code of Conduct.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the councillor's emails, while expressing frustration and containing some hyperbole, did not amount to personal attacks or harassment.

The Commissioner concluded that the councillor reasonably believed he was entitled to information under the Portfolio Chairs By-law to respond to public inquiries.

The complaint was dismissed, with no contraventions found.

The complainant alleged that a municipal councillor contravened the Council Code of Conduct by attempting to persuade residents to remove lawn signs protesting a park redevelopment.

The Integrity Commissioner found that while the councillor did communicate with residents to persuade them to remove the signs, she did not intimidate them or misuse the influence of her office.

The complaint was dismissed, with the Commissioner noting that the councillor also possessed the right to freedom of expression, including the right to attempt to persuade others.

The Mayor of North Bay requested an Integrity Commissioner inquiry into his own expense claims and use of a City-issued corporate credit card.

The Integrity Commissioner investigated whether the Mayor's use of the credit card for personal expenses, which were subsequently reimbursed or offset against mileage allowances, contravened the municipal Code of Conduct.

The Commissioner found no breach of Article VI regarding policy compliance, but concluded that the Mayor contravened Article XII by using City funds for personal family meals, hockey season tickets, and a golf membership, even though the funds were later repaid.

No remedial action was recommended, as the funds had already been reimbursed.

The Integrity Commissioner investigated complaints that a municipal councillor made a derogatory social media post about a recently deceased Indigenous woman.

The Commissioner found that the councillor's comment ('not anymore bahaha') was directed at the deceased individual, who was known to have disabilities and a history of justice involvement.

The Commissioner concluded that the post contravened the municipal Code of Conduct by rendering the councillor unable to perform his duties satisfactorily, particularly his role on a committee dedicated to fostering positive relationships with Indigenous communities.

The post was also found to be discriminatory on the basis of disability.

The Commissioner recommended that City Council consider remedial measures, noting that the councillor had already been removed from the relevant committee.

Several complaints were filed against the Mayor of Peterborough alleging he breached the Council Code of Conduct by participating in decision-making on a park redevelopment when he was not impartial, and by making threats to a councillor during a meeting.

Another councillor filed a complaint alleging the Mayor bullied and intimidated her following the meeting.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the Mayor did not breach the conflict of interest provisions, as the park redevelopment was a matter of general application and did not provide a private advantage.

However, the Commissioner found that the Mayor breached the Code by intimidating the first councillor with threats of repercussions, and by bullying the second councillor during an angry confrontation.

The Applicant alleged that the Respondent, a Deputy Mayor, contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by moving a motion and voting on a matter related to a charity of which he was a member.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the Respondent had an indirect pecuniary interest in the matter because the charity had a pecuniary interest in obtaining free use of municipal land.

The Commissioner concluded that the Respondent breached the Act by failing to declare his interest and by participating in the decision.

However, the Commissioner decided not to apply to a judge for a determination, citing the high cost of litigation to the municipality and the educational value of the report.

Two complaints were filed alleging that a municipal councillor contravened the Council Code of Conduct by posting a Facebook comment critical of a drag storytime event at the local public library.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the councillor's comments, while expressing opposition to the event, were moderate, respectful, and made in a personal capacity without City-related implications.

The Commissioner also found that the councillor did not misuse the influence of his office, as he ultimately did not send a planned letter to the Library Board.

The complaints were dismissed.

The applicant requested an inquiry alleging that the respondent, a municipal deputy mayor, contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by failing to declare a pecuniary interest regarding a zoning by-law amendment.

The applicant alleged the respondent's employer was a supplier to the business benefiting from the amendment.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the business was not a customer of the respondent's employer, and therefore no pecuniary interest existed.

The application was dismissed, and the Integrity Commissioner declined to apply to a judge for a determination.

The Applicant alleged that three municipal council members contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by failing to declare a pecuniary interest in a resolution instructing the Mayor and Reeve to make submissions to local nuclear laboratories regarding support for local businesses.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the resolution was general in nature and did not materially affect the specific business interests of the respondents.

The Commissioner concluded that the respondents did not have a pecuniary interest in the resolution and declined to apply to a judge for a determination.

The Town of Mattawa Council requested an inquiry into the activities of the 2023 Mattawa Voyageur Days Committee.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the volunteer committee members were forced to assume hands-on operational roles typically performed by municipal staff due to severe staff shortages.

The Commissioner investigated several allegations of conflict of interest and Code of Conduct breaches, including the booking of a band, the selection of merchandise suppliers, and the hiring of a security company.

The Commissioner concluded that the committee members acted in good faith and did not breach the Code of Conduct, though some members should have disclosed interests and withdrawn from discussions.

The report provides several recommendations to improve future municipal governance, clarify the roles of staff versus volunteer committees, and update the Code of Conduct.

The Applicant alleged that the Respondent, a municipal councillor, contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by failing to declare a pecuniary interest regarding a council decision on the local community centre.

The Respondent owned residential property near the centre, and his wife had an interest in a nearby commercial property.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the council's decision to renovate the existing arena, rather than close it or change its use, did not have a real and present potential to affect the value of the Respondent's properties.

Furthermore, even if a pecuniary interest existed, it was so remote and insignificant that it fell under the exception in section 4(k) of the Act.

The Integrity Commissioner declined to apply to a judge for a determination of a contravention.

The Complainant alleged that a municipal councillor contravened the Code of Conduct through two social media posts regarding international student housing and alleged workplace toxicity at a local college.

The Integrity Commissioner found that while the posts related to the councillor's office and the Code applied, they did not contain insulting language or constitute inappropriate treatment of a member of the public.

The complaint was dismissed, though the Commissioner recommended social media training for council members.

The applicant alleged that the respondent, a municipal councillor, contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by failing to declare a pecuniary interest and withdraw from voting on a 10-year capital forecast concerning a local community centre.

The respondent owned a home approximately 140 metres from the community centre.

The Integrity Commissioner found that the respondent did not have a real and present pecuniary interest, as the potential impact of the community centre's continued use on the respondent's property value was speculative.

Furthermore, even if a pecuniary interest existed, it was so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence the respondent, particularly given his good faith and focus on the community's best interests.

The Integrity Commissioner declined to apply to a judge for a determination of a contravention.