Provincial bill to kick out misbehaving councillors a good, but flawed start
Article content
If passed, Bill 9 would give Ontario municipalities a standard code of conduct with the power to remove council members from office for serious violations. To remove a member, a recommendation from a municipal integrity commissioner, approval from an Ontario integrity commissioner and a unanimous vote by the rest of council would be necessary.
Article content
Article content
Article content
This bill comes three years after former Ottawa Coun. Rick Chiarelli refused to resign and was docked a maximum penalty of 450 days of pay for various code of conduct violations. The city's integrity commissioner issued three reports between 2020 and 2022 that condemned Chiarelli's behaviour toward women who were on his staff or had applied to work for him.
Article content
Article content
The Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy met at the Sheraton Hotel in Ottawa from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 17 for public consultations on the bill.
Article content
Stephanie Dobbs, a former employee of Chiarelli and complainant against him, told the committee that she never saw justice or accountability.
Article content
After telling the committee to not take her criticism of Bill 9 as a lack of gratitude, Dobbs called it 'ludicrous' to let the decision to remove a member from office rest in the hands of other council members.
Article content
Article content
'As the legislation currently stands, I'm doubtful of the ability to enact change,' Dobbs said.
Article content
She added that putting the decision in council's hands turns the situation into a 'political spectacle,' which she later told the Citizen is her biggest concern about the proposed law.
Article content
Article content
Throughout the public consultation, speakers like Coun. Lisa Deacon from the Township of Russell, Robin Jones with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, and University of Ottawa emeritus professor Barry Wellar all called for the voting requirement to be changed to a two-thirds supermajority.
Article content
Many speakers, including Dobbs, think the decision to remove a council member should be a matter decided by the courts.
Article content
'My concern is (the committee) dismissing the many voices that have been really pushing today,' Dobbs told the Citizen. 'If they choose not to go with amendments and to make this improvement, they'll be met with a lot of criticism and a lot of unhappy constituents.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
7 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Republicans and independents have warmed on the Supreme Court, but Democrats haven't: AP-NORC poll
WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans' views of the Supreme Court have moderated somewhat since the court's standing dropped sharply after its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, according to a new poll. But concern that the court has too much power is rising, fueled largely by Democrats. The survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that about a third of U.S. adults have 'hardly any confidence at all' in the court, but that's down from 43% three years ago. As the new AP-NORC polling tracker shows, about half of Americans have 'only some confidence' in the court, up from 39% in July 2022, while a relatively small number, about 1 in 5, have 'a great deal of confidence,' which hasn't shifted meaningfully in the past few years. The moderate increase in confidence is driven by Republicans and independents. Still, views of the nation's highest court remain more negative than they were as recently as early 2022, before the high-profile ruling that overturned the constitutional right to abortion. An AP-NORC poll conducted in February 2022 found that only around one-quarter of Americans had hardly any confidence in the court's justices. Persistent divide between Republicans and Democrats The partisan divide has been persistent and stark, particularly since the Dobbs ruling, when Democrats' confidence in the nine justices plummeted. The survey shows Republicans are happier than Democrats and independents with the conservative-dominated court, which includes three justices appointed by President Donald Trump, a Republican. Few Republicans, just 8%, view the court dimly, down from about 1 in 5 in July 2022. For independents, the decline was from 45% just after the Dobbs ruling to about 3 in 10 now. The views among Democrats were more static, but they are also slightly less likely to have low confidence in the justices, falling from 64% in summer 2022 to 56% now. In recent years, the court has produced historic victories for Republican policy priorities. The justices overturned Roe, leading to abortion bans in many Republican-led states, ended affirmative action in college admissions, expanded gun rights, restricted environmental regulations and embraced claims of religious discrimination. Many of the court's major decisions from this year are broadly popular, according to a Marquette Law School poll conducted in July. But other polling suggests that most don't think the justices are ruling neutrally. A recent Fox News poll found that about 8 in 10 registered voters think partisanship plays a role in the justices' decisions either 'frequently' or 'sometimes.' Last year, the conservative majority endorsed a robust view of presidential immunity and allowed Trump to avoid a criminal trial on election interference charges. In recent months, the justices on the right handed Trump a string of victories, including a ruling that limits federal judges' power to issue nationwide injunctions. Katharine Stetson, a self-described constitutional conservative from Paradise, Nevada, said she is glad that the court has reined in 'the rogue judges, the district judges around the country' who have blocked some Trump initiatives. Stetson, 79, said she is only disappointed it took so long. 'Finally. Why did they allow it get out of hand?' she said. Growing concerns the court is too powerful Several recent decisions were accompanied by stinging dissents from liberal justices who complained the court was giving Trump too much leeway and taking power for itself. 'Perhaps the degradation of our rule-of-law regime would happen anyway. But this court's complicity in the creation of a culture of disdain for lower courts, their rulings, and the law (as they interpret it) will surely hasten the downfall of our governing institutions, enabling our collective demise,' Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote when the court ruled on nationwide injunctions. The July AP-NORC poll found a growing similar sentiment. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults now say the court has 'too much' power in the way the federal government operates these days. In April, about 3 in 10 people were concerned about the court's power. The shift is largely due to movement among Democrats, rising from about one-third in April to more than half now. Debra A. Harris, a 60-year-old retired state government worker who now lives in Winter Haven, Florida, said the court's decisions in recent years 'just disgust me to my soul.' Harris said the court has changed in recent years, with the addition of the three justices appointed by Trump. 'I find so much of what they're doing is based so much on the ideology of the Republican ticket,' Harris said, singling out last year's immunity decision. 'We don't have kings. We don't have dictators.' George Millsaps, who flew military helicopters and served in Iraq, said the justices should have stood up to Trump in recent months, including on immigration, reducing the size of the federal workforce and unwinding the Education Department. Wednesdays What's next in arts, life and pop culture. 'But they're bowing down, just like Congress apparently is now, too,' said Millsaps, a 67-year-old resident of Floyd County in rural southwest Virginia. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,437 adults was conducted July 10-14, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.6 percentage points. ___ Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at
CBC
21 hours ago
- CBC
Rick Chiarelli was a victim of 'cancel culture,' his wife tells Bill 9 hearing
The wife of a former Ottawa councillor whose alleged sexual harassment prompted a provincial bill to enhance municipal accountability says the legislation would make it easier for public servants to be harmed by false accusations. Lida Chiarelli told a consultation on Bill 9 in Whitby, Ont., on Thursday, that her family had "lived through a nightmare" after her husband Rick Chiarelli was accused of sexual harassment in his role as an Ottawa councillor in 2019. "We all know beyond a shadow of a doubt that my husband did nothing wrong, but he had absolutely no way of defending himself," she told the Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy. Three damning integrity commissioner reports in 2020 found that Chiarelli had sexually harassed women working for him. The council imposed the strictest penalty available — docking his pay for 450 days and then a further 90 days on his way out of office — but was unable to force him from office. Bill 9 aims to make it easier to remove misbehaving officials with a process that would include a unanimous vote by the rest of council. 'Cancel culture' But Lida Chiarelli said the bill would encourage "cancel culture" to destroy politicians via anonymous complaints. "Political assassinations should not be given credibility by a supposedly confidential formal process that favours the accuser but muzzles the person who should have the right to defend themselves," she told the hearing committee. "My husband was falsely accused of allegedly having said things to women in work interviews that they didn't like," she said. "There was no documentation, no proof, only hearsay for these allegations." Three women lodged formal complaints that the then College ward councillor had asked them inappropriate questions during job interviews, including about not wearing a bra to work events. Another report found that Chiarelli bullied and harassed a young female staffer by offering to pay her money to pick up a man from a Montreal nightclub and perform a sexual act on him. Chiarelli left office in 2022 having always maintained his innocence. Last week, two of Chiarelli's accusers addressed a Bill 9 consultation in Ottawa, with one of them saying the legislation as currently formulated would not have protected her.
Ottawa Citizen
a day ago
- Ottawa Citizen
Adam: Tim Tierney should know better than to mess with road pylons
Ottawa councillor Tim Tierney turned into a vigilante last week when he took the extraordinary step of tossing construction cones off city roads because they blocked traffic. Comrade-in-arms Coun. Matt Luloff was by his side in this escapade. Article content The two east-end Ottawa councillors took matters (law?) into their own hands out of frustration at unannounced road and ramp closures on Highway 174 that they say caused traffic chaos. Roads and ramps east of St. Laurent Boulevard on the 174 have been routinely closed during Stage 2 LRT east extension apparently without proper notice, and this has riled residents. The councillors claim the cones were left blocking roads even when construction was already completed. 'I know that brings a lot of discussion about (safety),' Teirney said of his action. 'If I can open up a lane of traffic seven or eight hours in advance of the next crew coming to move those cones, I'm just going to do it. It's sad when a councillor physically has to do it.' Article content Article content Article content So, what we've come to is that councillors can take it upon themselves to throw cones off roads if they feel the pylons don't belong there. And Luloff agrees: 'When they make these changes without any notice, there's very few viable routes for us to get into the core or move about the city. What are you supposed to do?' Article content Go rogue and throw cones off the roads, of course. Article content But then, what happens if there is a serious accident on the arbitrarily re-opened roads? Who takes the blame? The city, the contractor or the councillors who took matters into their own hands? Article content When I read the story in the Citizen, I wondered if you or I pulled that kind of stunt on a public road, would we find ourselves on the front page of the Citizen or in the back of a police cruiser being interrogated for, say, vandalism? But we are not Tierney and Luloff, are we? Article content Lane closures are happening all over the city as the construction season kicks into full gear. You'll find major roads closed, and often access to malls blocked. It can be frustrating, and it may well be that the extent of the problem in the east end is much worse. Commuters sitting in traffic for hours unnecessarily is not fun. The councillors are right to be frustrated at OC Transpo and the contractor, and right to demand better. Any contractor of a major road project should have the sensibility to understand the importance of putting up proper signs about road closures so commuters can plan their routes ahead of time. And if an LRT contractor is failing in its duty, OC Transpo should have stepped in much earlier to fix the problem. Article content Article content But if the closures were causing chaos, as the councillors say, it is surprising that the issue was not raised at Transportation Committee, Transit Commission or council itself for remedy. Article content OC Transpo general manager Renee Amilcar has apologized for a Montreal Road ramp closure that happened without proper notice, and the contractor has promised it won't happen again. Article content Tierney and Luloff are right to be frustrated and angry, but that is no license to arbitrarily remove cones because they feel the pylons shouldn't be there. They should know better. It sets a bad precedent. The summer months are a time for road construction, which comes with high frustration—from commuters who have to put up with detours to businesses that are losing customers. But we don't want other people to think they can also take matters into their own hands and start removing inconvenient pylons.
