Port Dalhousie's Community News Magazine  
Volume 14  Issue 2 APRIL 2010 #150

Dalhousie Peer Online
clear3.gif (815 bytes)

Home

From the Editor

Letters

Our Staff

 
 
clear3.gif (815 bytes)
Help Center
Contact Us
Suscribe Info
Advertising Info
clear3.gif (815 bytes)
Other Links
Local Interests

 

CODE OF CONDUCT

For Elected and Appointed Officials

Dalhousie Peer will keep readers informed of the process of implementing the proposed Code of Conduct with regular updates.

 

 

It’s all in the timing

City Council finally passed their Code of Conduct for Elected and Appointed Officials. It’s taken six years and exactly the same amount of time that it took to have Port Place approved. Both issues surfaced in 2004. It’s understandable that a development such as Port Place could take six years to be approved, especially when one considers the determined opposition it received from the citizen’s group Proud. But why six years to pass something as simple as a code of conduct which is nothing more than a policy for proper behaviour? The fact is that Port Place and the Code are intrinsically linked and a potential embarrassment of this council. Let’s first reflect back on what was said about this council at the OMB hearing that approved Port Place. Chair Susan Campbell stated, “if there is one process that is flawed, it is that (of this council) upon which Proud relies.”

Council abandoned its own procedural bylaw in order to withdraw its support for Port Place given by the previous council. The basis for their withdrawal was the advice of the Port Dalhousie Heritage Committee which is dominated by Proud members
This is not to say that this action of council would fall under the jurisdiction of the Code of Conduct but there is an issue with the heritage committee that certainly would. The conflict of interest is that a city advisory committee is dominated by a group of people who hold office in an organization that fundraises in the community. This means that anyone who wishes the blessing of the advisory committee can appeal to them by donating to their organization. Or one may perceive that to be the case and act accordingly.

This is where the words “perceive” and “appear to” become very important elements of the code—words that this council deleted from the original draft recommended by staff. If challenged, council can argue that unless there is actual proof that a donation was actually made to influence the advisory group, then the complaint would be invalid. But how can one actually obtain proof when those types of deals are done behind closed doors and without the benefit of financial disclosure or an audit? One can’t. One can only perceive that this the sort of thing that can happen. And that alone is reason enough to call a conflict of interest.

I have said for the past three years that I would file a formal complaint against the Port Dalhousie heritage committee as soon as the code was adopted by council. Why it took so long for council to adopt the code was to allow Proud to finish their fundraising. Complaint’s can’t be retroactive, and though Proud still dominates the heritage committee, it is no longer fundraising to stop Port Place, which only recently received all final approvals to proceed. That being over, City Council was free to approve the code without threat of a challenge issued to one of its advisory groups. It's all in the timing. Late enough not to expose the conflict of interest of a city advisory committee and early enough not to be an election issue. What will be interesting is if the new council will re-appoint the same members to the Port Dalhousie Heritage Advisory Committee--all P:roud membes except one and two married couples as well. It will be interesting to see what an integrity commisioner would have to say on the matter.


Posted June 2009

STILL MAKING THE SLOW CRAWL BACK TO COUNCIL--but with passages removed

Whew! We said we’d keep this issue alive until such time as the Code was passed, but this is ridiculous—and it’s costing us time, energy and valuable space.

So where is the code now? Same place as it was two months ago when we last reported on it. It was supposed to come before council at the end of May but the deadline to hear from boards and committees was extended to June 1st. The public may go online to the city website and add comments. Sure, go ahead, for all the good it will do.

Mayor McMullan refers to the draft code as if it’s already been passed into law using it to explain why he is not to be held to the same restriction as staff would be because the word ‘perceived’ was deleted from the code governing council.

What is more troubling is this passage deleted from the draft code:
“An elected or appointed official shall not give, in the performance of official duties, preferential treatment to relatives or friends or to organizations in which relatives or friends have an interest, financial or otherwise.”

This may explain the Mayor’s double standard as exposed in a St. Catharines Standard column authored by Doug Herod and titled “Mayor demonstrates double standard during council gong show.”
At issue was the fact that McMullan allowed a speaker to insult the Port Place architect (who was present in the gallery) and to call for “making life a living hell for people pushing this affront (Port Place) on Port Dalhousie”.

Whoa! What did this have to do with the sale of Hogan’s Alley which was the agenda item? A couple of months earlier, McMullan interrupted me several times through my talk in which I was attempting to implore council to put an end to the hostilities in Port Dalhousie by correcting the conflict of interest that exists with those who are both members of PROUD and the Port Dalhousie Heritage Committee. The agenda item that I was speaking to included the staff recommendation “that Staff report on the possible review of the Port Dalhousie Heritage Conservation District Guidelines,” which, not only specifies the make up of the committee but also contradicts the current makeup of the membership.

Not only was I interrupted several times but I was also threatened with ejection. And this came after PROUD leaders exalted themselves in front of council and presented council with a framed print in appreciation of their opposition to Port Place, which had nothing to do with the agenda item. The first part of the staff recommendation stated “that Staff be directed to work with PDVC to implement the OMB decision,” which, in case anyone has forgotten, approved the development. Yet here we have the very people who lost their case, congratulating council on supporting them in their losing bid. And this was after council had been duly admonished in the OMB decision for failing to follow their own procedural bylaw in withdrawing council’s support from the project.
It becomes too obviously clear who McMullan’s friends are. They certainly aren’t the many citizens in Port Dalhousie and across the city who support the Port Place development. Not that McMullan has to worry about the Code of Conduct being used against him in this case because it is only my “perception” that he is giving “preferential treatment to friends or to organizations.”

I can work with the delay. It only brings it closer to becoming an election issue this coming year. ¤


MAKING THE SLOW CRAWL BACK TO COUNCIL (Feb 09)

I wouldn’t want to accuse anyone of deliberately delaying the process, but it’s been over two years since Councillor Kushner brought the issue back to life —and that was after first making the request in 2004 to adopt a code of conduct. The delay was, in part, to hear from the city’s appointed advisory committees, only half of whom felt they needed to weigh in. A committee of council was formed to deal with this consisting of Mayor McMullan and Councillors Kushner, Gill, Williamson and Elliot.

The committee has since revised the draft prepared by staff and now it’s being sent back to the boards and committees for a final review. City staff expect to have it before council by the end of May.

The committee of council revised the original draft adding a few things but mainly taking certain phrases and passages out. This makes for a very interesting study.

As was expected, terms like ‘perceived’, ‘appears to’ and ‘be seen to’ were removed in every instance. The implication is that only ‘real’ conflicts will be dealt with. So how does one question whether a conflict is real or not without first perceiving it to be real before challenging it?
A more troubling situation is a point that was removed under Item #3, Principals of Conduct. The original draft prepared by staff included this point: An elected or appointed official shall not: give, in the performance of official duties, preferential treatment to relatives or friends or to organizations in which relatives or friends have an interest, financial or otherwise.

This makes one wonder why it was removed and begs the question “Who are the relatives, friends or organizations who could be given preferential treatment?

Would a majority of council actually give preferential treatment to a certain organization—let’s say one that claims to have helped get most of them elected in the last election? Would a city advisory committee actually give preferential treatment to an organization and its opinions? Well, maybe if that committee was made up of a majority of members from that same organization.

It has been published both in Dalhousie Peer and the St. Catharines Standard that I will file a formal complaint against members of the PROUD dominated Port Dalhousie Heritage Advisory Committee the moment that the Code of Conduct is passed into law for all the reasons I stated in our February issue. Removing that one passage makes it harder to prove that there is a ‘real’ rather than a ‘perceived’ conflict but it doesn’t stop me in my tracks.

And, to note, the revised draft still contains the clause: All members of council have a duty to treat members of the public...without abuse, bullying or intimidation. Or will that too be taken out in the final draft?

David Serafino

 

11
Pick up your free copy of Dalhousie Peer at your local Avondale Store or Branch Library. Look for our magazine stand in food and retail outlets across the city.

[Home] [From the Editor] [Letters] [Our Staff] [Beach Fest]
[Subscribe Info] [Advertising Info] [Contact Us] [Local Interests]

Questions or Comments regarding this website should be sent to the Webmaster.

 


 


Complete
Dalhousie Peer
Digital Edition