Gordon Prentice at Large - Politics in Newmarket
- Details
- Written by: Gordon Prentice
York Regional Council needs a Code of Conduct.
But, scandalously, the Region’s elected officials have resisted the idea for years.
True. They are talking about getting one – but only because the law now requires it and it is being forced on them. The Municipal Act requires all municipalities to establish a Council Code of Conduct by March 1, 2019.
A draft Code of Conduct was presented to elected members at last week’s Council meeting by the Region’s first Integrity Commissioner who was appointed in December. He is hired to keep an eye on them.
And about time too. In the last term of Council, one of its members, Regional Councillor Michael Di Biase, was suspended for 90 days without pay from his home Council of Vaughan for interfering in the tendering process. He still got paid by York Region and suffered no adverse consequences whatsoever. Indeed, the scandalous behaviour of Di Biase was not formally reported to the Regional Council nor even mentioned. Perhaps because it would cause unpleasantness and poison the clubby atmosphere.
Code of Conduct "not needed"
At their meeting in October 2015, members decided that a Regional Code of Conduct wasn't needed. It should remain discretionary. They said it would largely replicate what was already in place at municipal level and would produce unwelcome ambiguity. They did this knowing that the Chair of York Region, Wayne Emmerson, is indirectly elected by members of the Regional Council and not directly by the voters and is therefore not covered by any Code of Conduct applying to his "home municipality". He doesn't have one – then or now.
In any event, our elected officials are deeply troubled by the draft Code of Conduct. They demand the draft be re-written. The new Regional Councillor from Richmond Hill, Carmine Perrelli, is particularly scornful, questioning why one is needed at all. He tells us Canada’s Criminal Code, an observant press and media (as if!) and elections every four years are enough to keep councillors honest and diligent. He says the Code of Conduct is:
“a weapon for political adversaries to use against you.”
This is a theme picked up and developed by the new Regional Councillor from Vaughan, Linda Jackson. In a wildly over-the-top and theatrical contribution to the debate she tells us there are some people out there who will use every trick in the book to accuse elected officials of wrongdoing. And this Code of Conduct is just giving them more ammunition to make the lives of elected officials even more difficult.
Others too want the Integrity Commissioner to go back to the drawing board and bring back something that is altogether more palatable.
Some of the criticisms have merit.
It's a family affair
The Code of Conduct says elected members must at all costs avoid conflicts of interest – especially when matters could touch on their family. However “family” is defined as including aunts and uncles, nieces and nephews all the way out to first cousins. One wag yells that he is Italian and he has hundreds of first cousins. Doesn’t even know how many. And hasn’t met half of them. This gets gales of laughter.
The way in which the draft Code is written is part of the problem. It makes for stodgy and indigestible reading with too many words like “herein”. It imagines wrongdoing in circumstances which seem improbable to me:
“No Member shall obtain personal financial gain from the use or sale of Region-developed intellectual property (for example, inventions, creative writings and drawings), computer programs, technical innovations or any other item capable of being patented.”
Perhaps the new Integrity Commissioner is trying to do a belt-and-braces job. Trying to imagine every possible eventuality. But the result comes across as oppressive.
The draft Code of Conduct stipulates
“Members of Council shall not actively undermine the implementation of Council’s decisions.”
And the Code’s commentary tells us:
“The role of Members, once a council decision is made, is to support the implementation of that decision, not to work against its implementation, publicly or behind the scenes... Members can express disagreement with Council’s decisions, but it is contrary to the ethical behaviour of members of Council to actively seek to undermine, challenge or work against Council’s decisions.”
Whoa!
The Regional Council took a decision in 2015 not to bring in a Code of Conduct or appoint an Integrity Commissioner. Had I been a member of York Regional Council during the last term I would have relentlessly challenged that policy decision in every inventive way I could.
Newmarket’s Mayor John Taylor too felt this was oppressive while acknowledging the thinking behind it perhaps, ironically, lay in Newmarket’s own Code of Conduct.
(Newmarket’s Code of Conduct, in large part, had been written to skewer former councillor Maddie Di Muccio who was seen as a troublemaker sans pareil. For example, it enjoins members to “accurately communicate the decisions of Council even if they disagree with the majority decision of Council, and by so doing affirm the respect and integrity in the decision-making processes of Council”.)
Dos and Don’ts of Social Media
The Region’s Draft Code of Conduct cautions members on the perils of social media, urging them to count to ten before reacting to some provocation. But is this really necessary?
“In a world where a transitory comment can become part of the permanent record, Members should exercise restraint in reacting too quickly, or promoting the social media posts of others whose views may be disparaging of Council’s decisions or another Member’s perspectives.”
It seems to me that effective Codes of Conduct are short and to the point, spelling out in plain English behaviours which are simply not permitted. There should be clarity. And no ambiguity.
I smile to myself and immediately think of Newmarket’s previous Mayor, Tony Van Trappist, who rarely spoke at Regional Council meetings. He didn’t see the point. Why waste your breath offering an opinion?
“Members shall make every effort to participate diligently in the activities of the committees, agencies, boards, commissions and advisory committees to which they are appointed by the Region or by virtue of being an elected official.”
Has it come to this?
That we have to remind politicians to do what should come naturally to them?
Debating. Persuading. Making the argument.
The revised draft Code of Conduct will be considered by the Regional Council later this month.
- Details
- Written by: Gordon Prentice
Back Story: Last November a jury at the Superior Court in Newmarket found that on 20 March 2014 at the PC provincial candidate’s nomination meeting in Aurora Steve Hinder punched Anthony Pullano in the chest but that the subsequent infection of Pullano’s ICD (like a pacemaker) was not caused by the blow. Earlier in 2018, Hinder launched a counter-claim against Pullano for defamation which succeeded. The jury awarded Hinder $50,000 in damages. Hinder has been associated with Magna and the Stronachs for many years, wearing several different hats. Anthony Pullano is a long-time Auroran businessman.
By Thursday of this week (31 January) Steve Hinder must submit to the Superior Court a tally of his legal costs. Anthony Pullano is on the hook for $50,000 in damages for defamation and for Hinder’s legal costs which are likely to be huge. At this stage, I do not know if Pullano is going to appeal.
I sat through the entire trial and one matter continues to perplex me.
When Hinder was being quizzed by Pullano’s lawyer, William Reid, about his employment history with Magna/Stronach we learn in excruciating detail how much he was paid, his employee benefits and so on. Personally, I thought this was a bit intrusive.
Land development = Bonus
And then I learned that Hinder signed a consultancy agreement with Stronach Consulting (part of the Stronach Group) which promised him a bonus if the Stronach “excess lands” were approved for development. That raised my eyebrows.
At the time I recall asking myself why Hinder would be entitled to any bonus at all unless he was facilitating (or thought to be facilitating) the development of the so-called “excess” or surplus Stronach lands in some way. Perhaps the people in the Stronach Consulting Group who signed off on the contract believed Hinder could oil the wheels and get things moving faster than would otherwise be the case.
Hinder told the Court that though entitled to a bonus he hadn’t received anything - at least up until the afternoon of Wednesday 28 November 2018 when the question was put to him.
He was not asked how much the bonus was worth and what he had to do to secure it and he did not volunteer this information.
Pullano’s lawyer, William Reid, pointedly asked if he was a lobbyist for his employer. Hinder was adamant he was not and never had been.
Hinder explains why he went along to Jane Twinney’s provincial nomination meeting on 20 March 2014:
“I was there for the Stronach Group. The faster the development (of the surplus Stronach lands) the bigger the bonus. That’s the way it reads in the contract.”
“The lands are owned by Stronach not Magna. One spot is being developed.”
Where are the Surplus Lands?
It seems likely that two blocks of land south of Wellington between Bayview and Leslie are the surplus Stronach lands. The zoning is shown here.
The applicant for the Stronach South Development Lands is Aurora Bayview SouthEast Development Inc. (shown on the Planning Applications Status Map September 2018 as ID8)
“This is a Draft Plan of Subdivision to divide 9 future development blocks and 1 natural heritage block and a public spine road network.”
The applicant for Adena Views (ID 35) is Leslie Wellington Developments Inc.
“This Draft Plan of Subdivision proposes 145 lots for single detached dwellings and an Environmental Protection block.”
From what I can gather (and there is a multiplicity of entities here) Aurora Bayview Southeast Development Inc and Leslie Wellington Developments Inc were acquired by 2272804 Ontario Inc in 2011 and are subsidiaries of it.
Belinda Stronach is a Director of 2272804 Ontario Inc.
Planning approval was granted by the Town of Aurora in December 2016 for the Adena Views development (ID35) and construction is now underway with a few model homes finished. I assume this is the development Hinder was alluding to when he said in November that one spot (of the surplus lands) is being developed.
The Stronach Family Feud
All this is happening against the backdrop of a very public feud between Frank and his daughter Belinda, among others.
Last October Frank Stronach launched a Court action against his daughter Belinda, suing her for $520M on the grounds that she had seriously mismanaged the family fortune.
Belinda Stronach hit back. She says her father blew $800M on idiosyncratic and often unprofitable projects and is now countersuing him for $33M.
The Toronto Star tells us:
At the heart of the dispute lies “a fundamental disagreement over the proper test to be applied to managing the business and affairs” of the closely held Stronach Group, Belinda Stronach said in her statement of defence.
The affairs of the Stronachs are certainly complicated.
“The parents’ initial lawsuit described TSG (the Stronach Group) as having 253 Stronach family-owned corporations, trusts and other entities established in various jurisdictions around the world.”
In the course of the Pullano v Hinder trial we learned about the nature of Hinder’s employment with Magna and with Belinda Stronach.
Steve Hinder: a man of many parts
After leaving the Toronto Police Service Hinder started his own consulting business and landed a contract working on “corporate security matters” for Magna. When Belinda Stronach was Newmarket-Aurora’s MP from 2004-2008 he was her constituency office manager. When she switched parties and moved from the PCs to the Liberals he followed suit. From 2006-2009 he created a security program for the Magna Campus. After Belinda Stronach left politics in 2008 Hinder became a Magna employee as Head of Campus Security. He then went on to work for Magna but in a different role – Magna for Community. He was responsible, amongst other things, for developing the Neighbourhood Network bringing together volunteers, community groups and charities.
Magna donates, on average, 2% of its pre-tax profits (the percentage varies year by year) to worthy causes in the local community. Hinder told the Court the Stronach family were “very philanthropic folks” and
“It is my responsibility to understand what the needs are in the community.”
Eyes and Ears
Steve Hinder was and is Magna’s eyes and ears in the local community, recommending people (and politicians) for financial support though the final decisions lay elsewhere.
It is part of Steve Hinder’s job description to keep his finger on the pulse of the Town of Aurora and, clearly, he is very good at what he does.
Hinder sits on the Town’s Economic Development Corporation, a non-share, not-for-profit corporation which was set up last year and which
“provides strategic leadership and coordination of community economic development… to strengthen and diversify existing business, attract new business and investment, and coordinate strategic economic development initiatives within the community.”
No surprises there. Steve Hinder is very engaged in a lot of things. And that is to his credit.
But I still find it curious that he gets a bonus when the Stronach Surplus Lands are developed.
Why?
What am I missing?
- Details
- Written by: Gordon Prentice
The Provincial Government is abandoning plans to give municipalities powers to allow development which could encroach into the Greenbelt. 
This is very good news.
The volte-face was announced yesterday by Municipal Affairs Minister Steve Clark in a series of three tweets.
He said the powers would never have been used at the expense of the Greenbelt.
Of course not! Perish the thought!
We are told the proposal – set out in plain English – was simply misunderstood.
So now it’s off the table and Schedule 10 of Bill 66 will be withdrawn when the Legislature returns on 19 February 2019.
Eternal vigilance is required if we are serious about protecting the Greenbelt from Ford’s PCs.
In the course of her long career at Queen’s Park Christine Elliott - now Ford's Deputy - has occasionally expressed views on the Greenbelt and environmental protection issues.
On 22 September 2008 during the second reading debate on the Lake Simcoe Protection Act Elliott said she understood the purpose of greenbelt legislation but:
“the fact remains that there are many individual property rights that were not protected as a result of that. Nobody questions the need for the greenbelt, nobody is opposed to the idea of green space, but I think there has to be the science behind it, and there has to be the rationalization of those areas that are chosen for the greenbelt.”
Growth Plan under review
Elsewhere… the Ford Government’s proposed changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe are out to consultation until 28 February 2019.
“The proposed changes address implementation challenges with the Plan that were identified by the municipal and development sectors and other stakeholders. These changes are intended to provide greater flexibility and address barriers to building homes, creating jobs, attracting investments and putting in place the right infrastructure while protecting the environment.”
There they go again.
More talk about “protecting the environment”.
I think we are meant to find this reassuring.