CITY OF BRAMPTON integrity commissioner, GUY GIORNO
INTERIM REPORT ON COMPLAINT
Notice: Municipal Integrity Commissioners provide investigation reports to their respective municipal council and, in most cases, make recommendations for imposition of penalty or other remedial action to the municipal Council. Therefore, reference should be made to the minutes of each particular municipal council to obtain information about the particular council's consideration of each report. When possible, a link to the relevant municipal council minutes is provided.
Please find below the link to the corresponding council decision. http://www.brampton.ca/EN/City-Hall/meetings-agendas/City%20Council%202010/20180711ccmn.pdf (see minutes of July 11, 2018, resolution C208-2018)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTERIM REPORT 3
THE COMPLAINT 3
STATUS 3
CONCLUSION 4
INTERIM REPORT
Subsection 5(4) of the Complaint Protocol provides that, “The Integrity Commissioner may make interim reports to Council where necessary …”
This is such a report.
Section 223.5 of the Municipal Act requires that I maintain confidentiality. Subsection 223.6(2) provides that in a report on whether a Member has contravened the Code, I may disclose such matters as in my opinion are necessary for the purposes of the report.
It is not necessary to identify the parties in this interim report.
THE COMPLAINT
The Complainant alleges that the Respondent contravened Rule No. 15 (decorum) of the Code of Conduct for Members of Council.
The Complainant is a constituent of the Respondent.
The issue arises from a noise complaint, made by the Complainant, about the users of a City facility.
The Respondent, as Councillor, became involved in the noise complaint.
The Complainant alleges generally that the Respondent was rude and unprofessional in the course of dealing with the noise complaint. The Complainant alleges specifically that the Respondent discussed the Complainant with other local residents and said disparaging things about the Complainant to local residents.
STATUS
The Complainant and the Respondent have very different recollections of what occurred. The Respondent denies the allegations.
In order to determine what actually occurred, it would be necessary to interview local residents about any communications they may have had with the Respondent about the Complainant.
Because this process would necessarily involve mention of the Complainant to local residents, I sought the Complainant’s consent to this course of action.
The Complainant consented to me attempting to interview a particular local resident – someone with whom the Respondent allegedly discussed the Complainant.
I have attempted repeatedly to contact this witness, both by telephone and in writing, without success. This has continued for months.
I will not close the file, but at the same time it is impossible to complete the investigation until I interview this witness.
CONCLUSION
- The investigation file will remain open until I succeed in contacting the witness identified by the Complainant.
Respectfully submitted,
Guy Giorno
Integrity Commissioner
City of Brampton
July 10, 2018