|
Municipal - Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA) (2). Patrie v. City of Elliot Lake (Integrity Commissioner)
In Patrie v. City of Elliot Lake (Integrity Commissioner) (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court considered an appeal under s.11 of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA) "from a decision in an application initiated by the Integrity Commissioner of the City of Elliot Lake". The grounds of the application were under s.5(1)(c) ['When present at meeting at which matter considered - influencing voting'] and s.5.2(1) ['influence'] of the MCIA:
In these quotes the court considered whether the penalty imposed on the appellant was appropriate (issue #7):[178] In concluding that disqualification for two years was appropriate, the application judge accepted that cases which had imposed a more severe penalty had involved actual realization of gain, unlike this case.
[179] The application judge said that she did not make her decision in respect of penalty lightly, and that she understood the ramifications of the decision for Mr. Patrie. She said that the province of Ontario has highlighted the importance of integrity, independence, and accountability in local government decision-making. She said that members of municipal councils are expected to perform their duties of office with integrity and impartiality and in a manner that will bear the closest scrutiny. She said that Mr. Patrie had fallen significantly below these expectations.
[180] Decisions on the appropriate penalty are discretionary and entitled to great deference. In imposing the penalty in this case, the application judge carefully considered the evidence, the aggravating and mitigating factors, and the principles in relation to the duties of members of municipal councils endorsed by the province of Ontario and set out in the MCIA. The application judge made no error in principle and there is no reason to disturb her decision with respect to penalty in this case.
|
