DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Frank Furgiuele, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
FRANK FURGIUELE (REGISTRATION #175631)
PANEL: Marlène Marwah, Chair Brian Serafini, OCT Terrence Singh, OCT
HEARD: August 9, 2024
Ava Arbuck, for the Ontario College of Teachers Elizabeth Creelman, for Frank Furgiuele Ahmad Mozaffari, Independent Legal Counsel
PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing.
1This proceeding was heard electronically before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on August 9, 2024, in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.
2Frank Furgiuele (the “Member”) attended the hearing and had legal representation. The Panel was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.
A. PUBLICATION ban
3The Panel ordered a publication ban pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), which makes such an order mandatory. Accordingly, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of, any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing.
B. THE ALLEGATIONS
4The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated June 2, 2023 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that the Frank Furgiuele is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in the Act in that:
(a) he failed to keep records as required by his professional duties, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(10);
(b) he signed or issued, in the member’s professional capacity, a document that the member knew or ought to have known contained a false, improper or misleading statement, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(12);
(c) he falsified a record relating to the member’s professional responsibilities, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(13);
(d) he failed to comply with the Act or the regulations or the by-laws, specifically section 32 of the by-laws, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(14)1;
(e) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(f) he committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18);
(g) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
C. AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
5College Counsel presented the Panel with the parties’ Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:
Frank Furgiuele is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers in the Inactive/Non-Practising status. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information with respect to the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (the “Board”) as a Principal at [XXX] Catholic Secondary School (the “School”) in Mississauga, Ontario. As of September 2018, the School’s population was approximately 1800 students.
Background and Overview of Collection of Monies for the 2018-2019 Academic Year
From time to time, funds were raised at the School for the benefit of students at the School to enhance the development of educational programs and to support school initiatives. These school/student generated funds (“SGF”) were raised through fundraising activities, ticket sales, sales of school items, and collection of other voluntary fees. According to the Board’s policy, SGF funds raised for a specific purpose must be used for the intended purpose. Funds generated for general purposes must be used for the benefit of students and/or the school community. Whenever possible, funds raised in a given year are to be spent on students within the same year. A copy of the Board’s policy relating to the use of SGF funds is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B”.
All SGF funds are under the direction and control of the School principal, and the principal is accountable for the money to both the School community and the Board. The specific responsibilities of the principal are outlined in the Board’s policy.
In addition to being responsible for SGF funds, the principal is responsible for direction and control of all school funds including public funds received from the Board to cover educational expenses, including equipment and curriculum based learning materials. This includes purchases made for the benefit of the School, handling of petty cash, and administration of the School budget.
During the 2018-2019 academic year, the School collected approximately $1,042,798 in SGF funds.
The majority of the SGF funds were related to the following categories:
Athletics:
$293,575
Activity Fees:
$216,227
Graduation/Prom:
$104,900
Other Programs:
$79,711
Students Clubs:
$69,550
Hospitality Services:
$63,563
Student Initiatives:
$61,589
Retreats/Chaplain:
$54,230
Yearbook:
$38,797
Commissions:
$26,511
Field Trips:
$21,269
Drumline:
$10,152
Fundraisers (i.e. Sharelife, Locks, donations):
$2,625
School Council (from grants):
$500
During a routine audit performed by the Board on the School’s finances, several financial irregularities were discovered as well as questionable conduct by the Member in his role as Principal of the School.
Subsequently, the Board conducted a more in-depth internal audit of the School’s finances and the audit was completed on July 26, 2019. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a copy of the School’s Audit Report.
Mishandling of Funds and Failure to Follow Board Policies
The internal audit of the School’s finances revealed several areas where Board policies were breached and monies were mishandled – this was done under the instruction, permission and approval of the Member or by the Member himself.
Examples of the mishandling of funds identified in the audit report are described below.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding A1.1 that the Member approved multiple high dollar value purchases to be processed through petty cash which was contrary to the General Administrative Procedure (“GAP”) 704.00 of the Board’s policy. These should have been paid for through Board cheque requisitions. The payment of multiple items over the threshold led to the depletion of petty cash funds and increased requests to the Board for replenishment.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding A1.2 that School cheque requisition forms were not consistently completed and/or signed by the Member prior to the issuance of cheques which was contrary to GAP 722.00 of the Board’s policy. This led to inappropriate and unauthorized purchases.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding A1.3 that the SchoolCash.Net system was supposed to be used to pay referees at sporting events. The Member failed to process the cheques for referees through the SchoolCash.Net system contrary to GAP 704.00(8) of the Board’s policy.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding A1.4 that staff expenses unrelated to students [sic] activities, which included the cost of staff meal claims were processed through petty cash and/or without appropriate documentation, contrary to GAP 704.00(2) of the Board’s policy.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding A1.5 that, on instruction of the Member, several petty cash requests were divided into multiple transactions each below $200. The Member approved these requests. This was contrary to GAP 704.00(6) of the Board’s policy. By dividing the purchase costs into multiple transactions, the Member circumvented the proper approval channels applicable to transactions of greater than $200.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.1 that students were charged or assigned costs for curriculum-related learning materials such as cahiers, work books and supplements. These items are considered curriculum-related and should have been provided by the School rather than being paid for by students. The Member should have known that this was contrary to GAP 531.00 of the Board’s policy. As a result funds were received by the School inappropriately, which later had to be reimbursed.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.3 that the Member failed to ensure that the SchoolCash.Net platform was fully implemented for receipt of all monies to be collected by the School. The School had a very good parent adoption rate of 98.8% and had been accepting online payments since April 2017. It was the Member’s responsibility to ensure that all monies were transferred to the School electronically. In addition, the Member failed to review and balance SchoolCash.Net at the end of the 2018-2019 academic year which resulted in a remaining outstanding balance contrary to GAP 704.02(7) of the Board’s policy. All balances should be cleared so that cheques that remain outstanding for greater than six months could be written off and any other accumulated balances could be cleared before the start of the new academic year.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.6 that the Member made and approved technology purchases of a digital camera and iPads without proper approval. These purchases were non-compliant with Information and Communications Technology procedures of the Board, and the Board’s staff will not provide technical support for these devices. This was contrary to GAP 704.02(3) of the Board’s policy.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.13 that the Member failed to ensure that Friday Night Lights tickets were reconciled to cash received in a timely manner. Pre-numbered, colour coded tickets used for Friday Night Lights events were not accounted for and reconciled. Funds received, ticket stubs and returned unsold tickets were not reconciled and documented. Tickets assigned as complementary and pre-game date ticket sales were not properly tracked. This was all contrary to GAP 704.02(5B)(7) of the Board’s policy. As a result, it was not possible to determine whether all cash collected from ticket sales was being deposited in the School’s account.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a copy of the Board’s GAP regarding Criminal Background Checks & Offence Declarations, Fundraising, Fees for Learning Materials and Activities, Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Management Administrative Procedures (Purchasing and Acquisition), Accounting – Petty Cash, Travel, Meal Hospitality and Perquisite Expenses, Approval and Execution of Agreements and Other forms of Contracts including Leases, Use of Schools and Other Board Facilities, and Administration of School Council Funds.
Misuse of School Facilities and Improper Access to School
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.7 that the Member permitted external parties to be on School premises and participate in School activities without a Criminal Background Check being completed and without informing the Board of such, contrary GAP 318.00 of the Board’s policy.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.10 that the Member arranged for individuals to provide services to the School without identifying those individuals to the Board. As a result these individuals were paid for services, but did not receive T4A slips from the Board as required by the Canada Revenue Agency.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.12 that the Member permitted an external party to use the School’s gymnasium for a Nike Basketball Camp which was advertised to take place at the School between August 26 and August 30, 2019 without a permit. This should not have been permitted because the timeframe was during a school permit blackout to prepare the School for the new academic year in September. This was contrary to GAP 711.00(3) of the Board’s policy.
The Member acknowledges he permitted students who did not live in the School’s catchment area to attend the School without applying the proper procedures and consideration, and without following up on whether the required documentation was received prior to enrollment.
Improperly Receiving Personal Benefits
The Member accepted a gift of Buffalo Bills football tickets from a vendor who was doing business with the School, contrary to Board policy. The Member attended a game on October 29, 2018 and allowed the tickets to be used by teachers, students, and coaches.
The Member accepted a gift of tickets to a Duke University basketball game from a city councillor, contrary to Board policy. The Member provided these tickets to parents of students at the School, selected by the Member. The game was played in Mississauga on August 15, 2018 and one of the Duke University players was a former student at the School. The Member also attended the game using a free ticket provided to him by the family of the former student.
The Member purchased food for himself and for his family from Molisana Bakery using SGF funds. This included food for his family on Christmas Eve 2018 and for a funeral for a family member in 2019. The purchases were charged to the account containing the SGF funds, but delivered to the Member’s home. This was not an appropriate use of the SGF funds.
Inappropriate Use of Student/School Generated Funds
On February 8, 2018, the Member purchased and approved the purchase of Toronto Argonauts’ football season tickets from the SGF funds which was inappropriate and contrary to GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy. The tickets to the Argonauts’ football games were distributed by the School’s Director of Football to students, parents and teachers he selected. The Member ultimately provided restitution to the Board for these amounts, as described in more detail in paragraph 38 below.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.5 that SGF funds was improperly used for building alterations and/or renovations to the School. An external building shed was purchased and installed at the School using SGF funds without appropriate approvals and contrary to GAP 701.01 of the Board’s policy.
The School’s Audit Report concluded under Finding B1.8 that original invoices were not appropriately annotated for payment in accordance with SGF funds and School Council fund requirements. The requestor had not signed the invoice and the invoice was also not stamped as “PAID”. Adequate documentation was not provided with respect to the goods or services related to invoices which were being requested for payment by the Board. The failure to enact these controls by the Member was contrary to GAP 704.02 and 722.00 of the Board’s policy and further could have resulted in unauthorized and/or duplicate payments.
The Member purchased, permitted and approved the use of SGF funds when he purchased food for school staff on several occasions from Molisana Bakery, which also included incomplete documentation for staff meal claims. This was not an appropriate use of SGF funds and contrary to GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy.
The Member purchased, permitted and approved the purchase of School “swag” - clothing and gifts for coaches and various student groups - such as umbrellas, sandals, and cooler bags, from SGF funds which was not an appropriate use of SGF funds. This was contrary GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy.
The Member used SGF funds to pay for a male student to attend a basketball skills clinic at the School when no other member of the School had their attendance paid for by the School. This was contrary to GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy.
The Member used SGF funds to buy tickets for the School prom for former students, contrary to GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy.
The Member used SGF funds to pay for external parties to hold sports clinics at the School, contrary to GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy.
The Member used SGF funds to pay for an external third party to be a keynote speaker at a School event, contrary to GAP 704.02 of the Board’s policy.
The Member’s use and approval of the SGF funds with regards to the examples noted above in paragraphs 29 to 37 are contrary to GAP 704.02(3). The Member made restitution to the Board in the amount of $6,737.56 to compensate for any monies that were used for personal reasons and/or for reasons that were contrary to the GAP Board policy. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “E” is a copy of the receipt regarding same.
The Member failed to follow several GAP and Board policies and failed to ensure that the School staff followed GAP and Board policies regarding School funds and Board procedures.
Inappropriate Absence from Duties
The Board’s Principals’ conference was held during the week of January 28, 2019 before the start of the second semester which was Friday, February 1, 2019.
The Member told his Superintendent that he could not attend the conference. Further, the Member did not record his absences in the Board tracking system and was absent from his duties without Board approval.
The Member attended a Duke University basketball game at the University of Notre Dame on January 28, 2019 instead of attending the Principals’ conference.
Further, during that same week, the Member also sat through some classes at the University of Notre Dame.
Inappropriate Request to Change a Student Grade
On April 11, 2019, the hockey coach of the School spoke to the Member and requested that a Grade 10 female student’s marks be increased so that she could compete for a scholarship. The Member understood that the student in question had been an honour roll student, and for this reason, the Member believed the requested alteration would fairly reflect the student’s earned grade. The Member told the hockey coach that he “would take care of it.”
Subsequently, the Member discussed the hockey coach’s request with the student’s teacher, the School’s guidance department, and the Vice-Principal assigned to the teacher’s department, and ultimately directed the School’s guidance department to “do [him] a favour and raise [the student’s] mark” for hockey scholarship eligibility. The Member has since reviewed the Ministry of Education guidelines and, acknowledges that changing a mark for the purpose of achieving a hockey scholarship is not one of the reasons permitted by the Ministry of Education. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “F” is a copy of the email communication from the Member to the Guidance department head.
Member’s Retirement from the Board
- During the Board’s investigation of the matter, the Member retired from the Board effective December 31, 2019. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “G” is a copy of the retirement letter.
Current Status
- The Member is currently retired and not employed in any teaching or administrative capacity.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in the paragraphs above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and pleads guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(10), 1(12), 1(13), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18), and 1(19).
By this document the Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations against him;
(b) he understands that by signing this document he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Admitted Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading guilty to the allegations, he is waiving the right to require the College to otherwise prove the case against him and the right to have a hearing;
(d) he understands that the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons shall be published on the College’s website, and that a summary of the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons, including his name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) he understands that any agreement between him and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed does not bind the Discipline Committee;
(f) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea voluntarily, unequivocally, and having had the opportunity to obtain the advice of legal counsel.
- In light of the Admitted Facts and the circumstances and the plea of guilt, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
D. DECISION
6Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Panel rendered an oral decision on August 9, 2024 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(10), 1(12), 1(13), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
E. REASONS FOR DECISION
7The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 47 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and admitted the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Panel accepts that the admitted facts constitute professional misconduct under the heads of misconduct set out above. The admitted facts demonstrate that the Member engaged in a pattern of dishonest actions, inappropriately misused school funds and facilities, and failed to comply with Board policies regarding school/student generated funds.
8The Panel finds that the Member failed to keep records as required by his professional duties, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(10). On multiple occasions, the Member breached several Board policies with regards to the collection of monies and management of funds. Among other things, the Member did not appropriately annotate original invoices for payment in accordance with the SGF funds and School Council fund requirements. Further, the Member approved the use of SGF funds to purchase food for school staff on multiple occasions without appropriate documentation. Also, the Member issued cheques without properly completing cheque requisition forms which led to inappropriate and unauthorized payments. Finally, the Member failed to record his absences in the Board tracking system.
9The Member signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew or ought to have known contained a false, improper or misleading statement, contrary to subsection 1(12) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. As principal, the Member was responsible for the direction and control of all school funds and public funds received from the Board. The Member ought to have known that SGFs must only be used for the specific intended purpose for which they are raised. Additionally, he ought to have been familiar with Board policies regarding the use of other funds. By authorizing the use of SGF and public funds for purposes other than what was intended by the Board policy and by otherwise mishandling the School’s funds, the Member ought to have known that he was issuing documents that contained improper statements. For example, the Member approved multiple high dollar value purchases to be processed through petty cash, contrary to Board’s policy. The Member divided several petty cash requests into multiple transactions below $200, which circumvented the proper approval channels for transactions greater than $200. By these actions, the Member signed or issued documents that he knew or ought to have known contained misleading information.
10The Panel finds that the Member falsified a record relating to the Member’s professional responsibilities, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(13). The Member inappropriately directed the School’s guidance department “to do [him] a favour and raise [the student’s] mark” for hockey scholarship eligibility. In other words, the Member directed a staff member to falsify a student’s record thereby committing professional misconduct.
11The Member failed to comply with section 32 (now section 26) of the by-laws, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(14). In particular, the Member failed to adhere to the Ethical Standards of the Teaching Profession. The ethical standard of “integrity” refers to honesty, reliability and moral actions as core values of the teaching profession. By falsifying financial documents, the member did not act honestly or morally, thereby failing to adhere to this standard. The ethical standard of “trust” requires members to embody fairness, openness and honesty in their professional relationships. The Member failed to act openly and honestly and to uphold this standard by inappropriately misusing school funds for his personal benefit, by directing a member of the school staff to increase a student’s grade and by failing to attend his professional duties at the Board’s Principals conference.
12The Panel finds that the Member failed to comply with the Education Act, and specifically subsection 264(1), contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15). Members have a duty to inculcate by precept and to exemplify the virtues set out in section 264 (1) c) of the Education Act. This is commonly understood to mean that members have a duty to serve as a role model for the staff, students and school community. Administrators have a particular responsibility to set an example to all staff by acting honestly, morally, and professionally. By failing to follow Board policies, accepting gifts from external parties (i.e. Buffalo Bills tickets and Duke University basketball tickets), and making unauthorized purchases (for example purchased food for himself and his family on Christmas eve) the Member showed poor judgment and failed to act as a role model in his position as a school administrator.
13The Panel finds that the Member’s actions would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional contrary to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member, as principal, set a poor example for the School when he treated students unequally by directing the guidance department to falsely increase a student’s grade and providing tickets to various games to certain students and families without authorized justification, which put other students at a disadvantage. This behaviour casts doubt on the member’s ability to appropriately discharge his professional duties. The Member was responsible with following and upholding Board policies, instead he either ignored these policies or failed to familiarize himself with them. In either case, the Member’s behavior fell short of what is expected from a member and administrator. The Member ought to have known that his conduct was unacceptable and that it fell below the standards. Finally, the Member’s actions showed lack of good judgement and professionalism.
14Finally, the Member’s conduct was unbecoming a member, contrary to subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. As a principal, the Member was in a position of increased responsibility, specifically regarding the management of school and public funds. The Member abused his authority through his misconduct. By his dishonest actions the Member disregarded his responsibility to appropriately manage the School, which undermined the reputation of the teaching profession.
F. PENALTY DECISION
15The parties entered into a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on August 9, 2024, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:
The Member is directed to appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand which will be delivered in person at the offices of the Ontario College of Teachers, 101 Bloor Street W., Toronto, Ontario or by videoconference and the fact of the reprimand shall be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”).
The Registrar is directed to suspend the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member for a period of 18 months commencing on the 15th calendar day following the date of the Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee relating to this matter.
The Registrar is directed to impose the following terms, conditions, or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration:
(a) prior to commencing or resuming a teaching position for which a Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding professional ethics, subject to the following conditions:
(i) the Member will provide to the course practitioner approved by the Registrar, a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and Joint Submission on Penalty documents made exhibits at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee;
(ii) upon review of the documents noted at paragraph (i) above, the course practitioner will provide to the Registrar, for approval, a syllabus for the proposed course which specifically addresses the Discipline Committee’s concerns regarding the Member’s professional misconduct. The syllabus proposed by the course practitioner shall also specify the length of the course to be undertaken by the Member, and the assignments to be completed by the Member;
(b) within thirty (30) days of his completion of the course outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written report from the course practitioner:
(i) stating that the Member has successfully completed the course and reporting on the progress of the Member with respect to addressing the outlined goals of the course.
G. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
16The Panel accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties. The Panel recognizes that, once it ensures that it has jurisdiction to make the order requested, the law confines the Panel’s role to determining whether the proposed penalty is so unreasonable that accepting it would bring the administration of the discipline process into disrepute or be otherwise contrary to the public interest.2 The Panel finds that the penalty proposed in the Joint Submission on Penalty is neither unduly harsh nor unduly lenient such as to bring the administration of the discipline process into disrepute, based on the following prior decisions of the Discipline Committee presented by College Counsel: Ontario College of Teachers v. Rocco, 2021 ONOCT 42, Ontario College of Teachers v. Howard, 2014 ONOCT 48, Ontario College of Teachers v. Sincennes, 2020 ONOCT 221 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Lajoie, 2022 ONOCT 19.
17The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The aggravating factors in the Member’s case are that he engaged in numerous instances of misconduct regarding his duties and responsibilities, and that the Member took advantage of his leadership position as principal. The Panel also finds that there are four mitigating factors in this case. First, the Member admitted the misconduct, saving the time, expense and calling of witnesses for a contested hearing. Second, not all of the Member’s actions were intentional and not all expenses were for personal gain. Third, the Member made restitution to the Board to compensate for any monies that were used for personal reasons. Fourth, the Member has not been the subject of discipline proceedings in the past. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed would not bring the administration of the discipline process into disrepute.
18The Panel finds that the Member’s pattern of misconduct warrants a reprimand. A school principal is expected to behave with professionalism, honesty and integrity with respect to the school, Board and community at all times. The Member demonstrated a serious lack of judgement and integrity. The reprimand will allow the Panel to directly address its concerns with the Member and will serve as a specific deterrent. Recording the fact of the reprimand on the Register will serve as a general deterrent to other members of the profession.
19Given the nature and severity of the Member’s misconduct, the Panel finds that an 18-month suspension is reasonable and appropriate. While the cases presented are factually distinct from this case, the misconduct represented in those cases is of a similar underlying nature and the cases confirm that an 18-month suspension is justified. The suspension will serve as a specific deterrent to the Member and a general deterrent to other members of the profession, making clear that the kind of misconduct the Member exhibited is unacceptable. In accordance with the parties’ joint submission, the Member’s suspension will begin on August 24, 2024, which is 15 days after the Panel’s Oral Decision and Order.
20The Panel finds that the course of instruction regarding professional ethics will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. If the Member returns to a position for which a Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required, the coursework will remind the Member of his obligations as a member of the profession and will help him make better professional and ethical decisions in the future.
21The Panel is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: August 16, 2024
Marlène Marwah, Chair, Discipline Panel
Brian Serafini, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Terrence Singh, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Footnotes
- At the time of the hearing, section 32 was amended to be section 26 of the by-laws.
- See R. v. Anthony-Cook, 2016 SCC 43, [2016] 2 S.C.R. 204, and Bradley v. Ontario College of Teachers, 2021 ONSC 2303.