Corp Comm Connects

2 Richmond Hill councillors found in breach of ethics code; 1 docked pay

'I think those of us who have been following the antics of this council can join the dots and come to their own conclusion'

Yorkregion.com
Sept. 24, 2019
Sheila Wang

Richmond Hill council decided to come down hard on one elected official and go easy on another in two related conduct complaints the two councillors filed against each other to the city’s integrity commissioner.

Four councillors voted Sept. 18 in favour of suspending Ward 5 Coun. Karen Cilevitz’s pay for 45 days for not notifying the rest of council of a residents meeting she organized in March.

An integrity commissioner's report found Cilevitz’s failure to provide notice of the residents meeting regarding a development application to all members of council was the result of “an oversight or accident,” and not achieved through deliberate planning.

Investigator Marvin Huberman from the integrity commissioner’s office recommended a reprimand.

“A resident’s input is my most valuable source of information when it comes to making any decisions and I did not have the opportunity to hear those residents at that meeting,” said Regional Coun. Carmine Perrelli, who filed the complaint.

He brought forward the motion to impose a much higher sanction than the recommendation.

Regional Coun. Joe DiPaola said he was “equally offended” for not being invited to Cilevitz’s residents meeting and supported Perrelli’s motion, along with councillors Tom Muench and Greg Beros.

“You’ve gotta be kidding me,” said Coun. David West who was strongly opposed to the sanction and found it “remarkably unfair.”

“I can’t believe I’m sitting on a council that would recommend a 45-day pay [suspension] as an appropriate response to an inadvertent mistake and it goes against the thorough investigation by the integrity commissioner that we hired to do this work,” West told his fellow councillors.

West’s comment was backed by Mayor Dave Barrow and Coun. Godwin Chan and also a number of residents who expressed their objection to imposing a harsher sanction on Cilevitz than the recommendation in their letters to the clerk’s office prior to the meeting.

“Please do not foolishly increase the recommended sanction to Councillor Cilevitz as was done so wrongly and so blatantly on Dec 17, 2018. The reprimand sanction must remain. The sanction for Perrelli should have been higher,” wrote resident Lily Ramyar.

In stark contrast to the sanction imposed on Cilevitz, council let up on Perrelli when dealing with his violation of the code of conduct in a related complaint.

Integrity commissioner Deborah Anschell found Perrelli guilty of “abusive conduct” toward Cilevitz at the end of a council meeting on April 17 when the regional councillor publicly criticized her for not informing him of the residents meeting.

"That bylaw was violated,” Perrelli was recorded telling the public at that meeting. “I didn’t have the benefit, I didn’t have the legal right to hear those comments. And I will be making an inquiry to the integrity commissioner under our code of conduct for the councillor’s lack of following the bylaw.”

The commissioner recommended a reprimand to Perrelli as his statements were considered “derogatory and upsetting” to Cilevitz and constituted unwarranted public humiliation.

However, council voted to receive the report, making no mention of the suggested reprimand.

“If we were to accept a report like this, I think it really stifles the input that we could have between each other in this public forum,” said Beros, who was quick to introduce the motion.

Coun. Castro Liu, who stepped out of the council chambers at the time of voting on Cilevitz’s case, returned to vote in favour of the motion.

“I don’t believe as a council we should be imposing anything greater than what she (the commissioner) suggests, but I fully accept her findings,” said Cilevitz, who asked to amend the motion by reprimanding Perrelli as recommended.

“We have a code of conduct in place to permit the public to judge us and also in place to permit members of council to hold each other accountable for what it is they do and they say. That’s why this complaint is put forward,” she said.

Barrow dismissed Cilevitz’s attempt for an amendment at the meeting, and told The Liberal later he might have misinterpreted Beros' motion that the reprimand was included.

Barrow confirmed with The Liberal on Sept. 20 that "the motion was received. That means there were no actions taken on the recommendations in the IC Report."

For the residents who watched the meeting, the decision seemed to be rather clear-cut.

"No such penalty was imposed on Coun. Perrelli for bad behaviour. I think those of us who have been following the antics of this council can join the dots and come to their own conclusion," said resident Pat Pollock who attended the council meeting.

Pollock said she was annoyed rather than shocked "because prior action that this council has done."

Last December, Perrelli moved to go beyond the recommended reprimand and dock Cilevitz’s pay for 90 days -- the maximum sanction that the Municipal Act permits -- following an integrity commissioner report that found she breached the code of conduct by harassing resident Steffi Goodfield.

The troubled relationship between the two councillors stemmed back to as early as 2011, the commissioner report noted.

Cilevitz launched a defamation action against Perrelli and a few other individuals in March regarding a series of events that took place in 2018.