Mayor Ford found guilty

[FallenPixels]

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/arti...-can-run-again

Mayor Rob Ford has been found guilty of conflict of interest and will be removed from office.

But Justice Charles Hackland has granted Ford a 14-day stay and he will be allowed to run again.
It is assumed Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday will take over Ford’s duties.
Hackland found the mayor in violation of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. He had the option of banning Ford from running for up to seven years.
The hotly awaited decision follows a two-day hearing in early September that saw Ford grilled over his conduct at a Feb. 7 council meeting and the events that led up to it.
The city’s integrity commissioner ruled in 2010 that then-councillor Ford was wrong to use official letterhead and other city resources to solicit donations from people lobbying him for his namesake football foundation.
Council agreed and ordered Ford to repay $3,150 to lobbyists, their clients and one private firm. Ford ignored six reminders from the integrity commissioner before she brought the issue back to council Feb. 7.
There, Ford made an impassioned speech about why he shouldn’t be forced to repay the money, arguing it was spent distributing football equipment to schools. He voted with the 22-12 majority to cancel the order that he repay.
In March, Toronto resident Paul Magder alleged Ford broke a provision in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act which states elected officials can’t speak to, or vote upon, items in which they have a “pecuniary interest.”
At the hearing before Hackland, Magder’s lawyer Clayton Ruby argued Ford was “reckless” and “wilfully ignorant” of the law when he did not recuse himself from the debate and vote.
Ford, who was on council for a decade before becoming mayor in late 2010, testified he never read the Conflict of Interest Act or the councillor orientation handbook. Nor did he attend councillor training sessions that covered conflicts of interest.
The mayor promised in his oath of office to “disclose conflicts of interest” but, when asked by Ruby if he understood the words, Ford said: “No. My interpretation of a conflict of interest, again, is it takes two parties and the city must benefit or a member of council must benefit.”
Ruby accused Ford of “wilful blindness.”
“As mayor he ought to have had a clear understanding of his obligations. This entire pattern of conduct shows that he chose to remain ignorant, and substituted his own view for that of the law,” Ruby said.
Ford, longtime coach of Etobicoke’s Don Bosco Eagles, vehemently disagreed, saying he acted only in the best interests of high school students.
Ford’s lawyer, Alan Lenczner, offered a three-pronged defence.
He said council had no legislative authority to make Ford repay $3,150 in football charity donations in the first place.
Second, that if council did impose a penalty it was under Toronto’s code of conduct, not the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, so Ford could not have breached the act. If the Act applied, elected officials could not defend themselves when criticized by the integrity commissioner, he added.

[gryphon]

This was a bull case that should never have happened. People didnt like ford not following thier agenda and conspired to get him out. What we have here is a miscariage of justice by people who believe their opinions are more important than the will of the citizens of Toronto.

[FallenPixels]

Back in England I worked for a politician who was found guilty of the same thing, how did he ever think it wasnt a conflict of interests to vote on a matter about him?

[VeeVee]

He has the I can do anything bc I am Mayor syndrome. He needed a reality check and this is it. Everyone has to follow rules even a mayor!

[vesper]

I never heard of this before. The just kicked out the mayor for using city letterheard to ask for donations? No idea a single judge had that authority.

I kind of like that, but something creepy about a single judge being able to do that over a minor thing. Don't feel right.

[FallenPixels]

Not quite, the city found him "at fault" for that and told him to pay back the money since it should never have been requested on city letterhead which gives it more legitimacy
He voted on a debate about whether he should pay it back (and the vote went 22-12 so he didnt even have to vote to win it) but voting on anything that directly impacts you is against politician rules (sometimes you can vote but have to stand and declare an interest, others you just cant vote)

Say you are a landlord, it would be unfair of you to vote on rules against landlords bc all the other landlords cant either - its a rule to ensure fairness and make sure politicians are doing things for the greater good and not their own good

[Natalka]

FP, I don't know much about this story, but it's very odd about the vote you mention - even here in our small city, the city solicitor is at all council meetings, and she makes herself heard when something is going against procedure! Wouldn't that be the same there?

[i_forget]

Glad to see him go. Sick of reading about all of his BS.

[vesper]

It still seems kind of overkill. A judge should not be able to overturn the democratic process for a non criminal matter IMO. The city must have a process to remove a mayor if they felt it was warranted, an impeachment process.

If this is the new standard, then you can rest assure every mayor is going to get kicked out part way through his or her term.

[Patty Smyth]

Great now Gerald Tremblay can have a golf partner

Hmmmmm, mayors of both biggest cities ousted within a month of each other, whoda thunk it.

[frugal50]

sad news today for toronto

left wing politics did every thing in their power to get rid of Mayor Ford

not happy

i can just see that miserable oliva chow doing the happy dance.

[glenglen]

Wow surprised that Mayor was made to quit or kicked out,years ago Ralpf Klein had used his wife's name and other relatives to promote a company in china he should have been kicked out for conflict of interest[involved millions of dollars] they had an inquiry that lasted about a day,then another one that was reviewed and thrown out in the same manner.

[FallenPixels]

It still seems kind of overkill. A judge should not be able to overturn the democratic process for a non criminal matter IMO. The city must have a process to remove a mayor if they felt it was warranted, an impeachment process.

If this is the new standard, then you can rest assure every mayor is going to get kicked out part way through his or her term.

The judge part happened when Ford refused to cooperate with the integrity commissioner. They held two days of hearings a while back and it took this long for a judgement
To be honest it doesn't surprise me, when the reported on the hearings his response was well no one gets hurt its not really a conflict type of thing

[FallenPixels]

Great now Gerald Tremblay can have a golf partner

Hmmmmm, mayors of both biggest cities ousted within a month of each other, whoda thunk it.

London next?

[Darth Penguin]

Ford testified he "had never read conflict of interest act"

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford says he never read a councillor handbook that spells out the rules for declaring conflicts, or the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act he is accused of breaking. Ford was testifying in a Toronto court on Wednesday, as part of a conflict of interest case that could cost him his job.
While in court, Ford said he didn’t believe he was in conflict when he participated in a vote earlier this year that absolved his need to pay back donations that were collected for his private football foundation.

Ford is facing allegations that he violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act when he took part in a debate and subsequent vote in February.
That was when councillors decided that Ford did not have to pay back funds that had been collected for his private football foundation two years earlier.
The mayor said neither staff nor councillors advised him that he would be in conflict during the February vote.

eta Ignorance of the law is never a good defense..