Dollars and votes: Richmond Hill councillors received big bucks from developers for election campaign

All candidates appeared to have taken money from developers, but only a few disclosed

Yorkregion.com
June 13, 2019
Shelia Wang

Richmond Hill candidates received a total of over $734,000 in the 2018 municipal election where some big money -- if not most -- came from the development industry despite the new campaign finance rules.

While some candidates had to break the bank to run for office, others seemed to have found ways to run an expensive campaign without paying a dime themselves, according to the recently released 2018 municipal elections financial statements.

Regional Coun. Joe DiPaola -- the biggest fundraiser of all, and the biggest spender-- reported about $111,000 dollars in money, goods and services received from contributors for his campaign. He didn't spend his own money on the campaign, nor did his wife Charity McGrath.

A bulk of his campaign funding came from 99 individuals who contributed over $94,000 in total, DiPaola’s donation report reveals. He also used a $16,000 inventory from his previous campaign in 2014.

Unlike his 2014 campaign, for which half of the contributions came from corporations, there weren't any corporate contributions in DiPaola’s donation report in 2018, as a result of new changes to the Municipal Elections Act in 2017, which ban corporations and trade unions from making contributions.

However, oodles of money from the development industry found its way into the Richmond Hill election campaigns, just in a less obvious way.

“They still try to cloak who wields the influence, particularly in the development industry,” retired York University political science professor Robert MacDermid said of the new rules in campaign finance.

While it has become more difficult for corporations to exert influence on election campaigns, MacDermid said they can still contribute as individuals who, more often than not, donate several times through family members and employees of corporations.

Big names in the development industry can be found in DiPaola’s individual donation report, such as the prominent DeGasperis family of buildings and developers, the Ghadakis of Times Group Corporation and Dino Taurasi of Stateview Construction.
In many cases, the same family appeared to have made donations to DiPaola’s campaign multiple times under different first names. Individuals who may be associated with the same corporations also contributed to his campaign.

For example, DiPaola received at least $6,400 from people whose names were associated with G Group Development Corp, a Richmond Hill-based real estate developer and builder.

The 15-storey Grand Palace Condos on Yonge Street near Weldrick Road is one of G Group’s recent projects in Richmond Hill.

G Group principals Stefano Guizzetti and Jack Scivoletto donated $2,000 to DiPaola’s campaign.

The two developers also gave the same amount to regional Coun. Carmine Perrelli's campaign.

The Guizzettis were not the only donors who contributed to more than one candidate in the election. In fact, a number of the donors to DiPaola's campaign appeared on the donation reports provided by Perrelli, and councillors Greg Beros and Tom Muench.

However, it is difficult to track where most of the money came from since individual donors are only required to disclose their names and home addresses.

“We need to improve disclosure, so we can see who is trying to get around the rules. That involves releasing more information about contributors,” MacDermid said, suggesting information such as occupation and employers should be required.

In an attempt to confirm the findings, The Liberal reached out to all council members to ask whether they have accepted money from individuals in the development industry and how much they received from them.

Only four council members -- Mayor Dave Barrow, and councillors Karen Cilevitz, David West and Godwin Chan -- provided a direct response to the request. They all acknowledged receiving varying amounts of donations from individuals in the development industry.

“Only because of the new rules, I decided I would only accept such campaign donations from individuals I had been able to work with collaboratively in the best interests of our residents,” wrote Cilevitz, who said she received less than a quarter of her individual contributions from developers.

The mayor received about half of his contributions from the development industry and West accepted $2,900 in total from developers, according to their respective responses. Chan said he accepted less than 10 per cent of his contributions from individuals in the development industry.

For the rest of council, the replies were less straightforward.

“I was fortunate to have donors from many walks of life contribute to my campaign during the last election,” DiPaola wrote in an email, without providing the numbers requested.

The Liberal received a similar response from Perrelli and Beros as well.

In Coun. Tom Muench’s response, he stated he was not “entirely sure” about the profession of each donor or their family influences.

But Muench's campaign finance records seem to have "developers" written all over it, including big names such as Silvio DeGasperis, Mohamad Ghadaki and Saeid Aghaei.

Money from outside

From Mississauga to Scarborough, some Richmond Hill candidates’ campaign finance spread all over the GTA, where many people gave as much as they were permitted to, records show.

“That often happens, particularly for candidates who rely on development money, because many of those folks live outside Richmond Hill,” MacDermid said.

• Only 13 per cent of DiPaola’s campaign contributors actually lived in Richmond Hill;

• Some 70 per cent of Perrelli’s donors came from outside Richmond Hill; and

• More than 80 per cent of Muench’s donors were residents elsewhere.

Voters should ask questions about candidates taking money from outside the municipality, MacDermid said, after learning of the findings on the campaign finance from The Liberal.

“Say, 'If you’re running here and running to represent me, why does your money come from some wealthy people outside? Who are you representing?' ”

These outside donors also tended to be generous givers, as records reveal that many of them donated $1,200, which is the maximum an individual is allowed to contribute to any candidate under the new rules.

The limit was increased from $750.

“Ordinary people of average income or below would not write cheques for $500 for political candidates. These are all wealthy individuals who are supporting the candidates,” MacDermid said.

On DiPaola’s disclosed donor list, more than half of his contributors donated the maximum -- $1,200 -- to his campaign.

His fellow regional Coun. Perrelli had some 70 per cent of the individual contributors give him the maximum donation. Only three individuals donated less than $500 to Perrelli’s campaign.

More than 80 per cent of Coun. Beros’s individual contributors donated $1,200.

“Let’s not be naive. When people write a cheque for $500 or $1,200, they wanted to say something to the candidate or they want something later on,” MacDermid said.

In comparison, the big-buck givers made up less than one-third of Coun. Cilevitz’s campaign funding.

Only three individuals donated $1,200 to West’s campaign funding, most of whose donors gave money in smaller sums, and Coun. Chan only accepted two big cheques for $1,200.