Integrity commissioner says former Thornhill councillor broke code of conduct
Howard Shore’s lawyer rebuts report, says client did not speak with commissioner

YorkRegion.com
May 15, 2015
Laura Finney  

Markham’s integrity commissioner has recommended city council reprimand former Ward 2 councillor Howard Shore for breaches of the Council Code of Conduct.

A report from the Integrity Commissioner’s Office was released after closed door discussions were held in council and committee meetings earlier this week. 

In the report, 12 complaints were made by resident Paul Glionna on behalf of a group of Thornhill residents.

Among the complaints were accusations Shore allegedly sent angry, mean spirited emails, appearing to be from other residents, criticizing people who didn’t agree with him and campaigned at a city ceremony.

“I was struck by how many of the people I spoke to accused Mr. Shore of not being truthful and making false allegations,” integrity commissioner Donald Cameron said in his report. “Mr. Shore was accused of twisting facts, bullying, throwing temper tantrums, uttering threats and engaging in other inappropriate behaviour.”

Of the dozen complaints, Cameron recommended council reprimand Mr. Shore for three.

Shore was accused of engaging in campaigning while hosting a Movie In the Park event at a city-owned facility, which is against section 12.1 in the code.

The commissioner also said Shore breached the code of conduct when he campaigned during a city ceremony at City Hall and reacted inappropriately when a resident said Shore would not have his support in the election.

Finally, according to the report, Shore’s conduct was a breach of the code when he was chair of the German Mills Meadow Natural Habitat Liaison Committee, and allegedly didn’t allow members of the committee to vote, unless they were members of council.

Some complaints in the report were dismissed and some did not have sufficient evidence, according to the integrity commissioner.

Other complaints, including allegations of mean-spirited emails, occurred before the code of conduct came into affect, Feb 1, 2014.

Before the report was made public, several residents came to give deputations during the evening council meeting on May 13.

“Residents have had a very tumultuous experience in the last four years in the former ward two Thornhill,” said Eileen Liasi, a longtime Thornhill resident. “It was a very difficult period to work through.”

It was noted some of the members of the resident group had not met in person before the council meeting.

“Our only common goal was to ensure that Mr. Shore is held accountable for his actions while on council,” said Liasi. “And that the council code of conduct actually stands for something in the City of Markham.”

Shore did not attend the council meeting himself, but his legal council Jack B. Siegel attended, and made a deputation.

This is the first exercise by the integrity commissioner, he said, and added there are protocols and processes to follow.

“In this circumstance, unfortunately the process has been significantly, I would argue, fatally flawed,” he said. “Council now has the difficult challenge before it of dealing with a commissioner’s report that was put together without complying with the protocols that you put together.” 

He said in any process where somebody’s interest or position is affected there needs to be an opportunity to hear the other side.

“The notation that Mr. Shore never had an opportunity to speak personally to the integrity commissioner, and yet had his credibility evaluated by the integrity commissioner flies entirely in the face of that basic fundamental principal of justice.”

 He also said it appeared the commissioner did not review certain legal submissions that he received while producing the report.  

There were other flaws regarding the language and jurisdiction of the commissioner, he said.

 “To begin with, the legislation clearly refers to a councillor and not a former councillor,” he said and said there is clear law out of New Brunswick from a similar situation. “In the absence of clear language giving jurisdiction of a former councillor, it doesn’t exist.”

Siegel said there was non-compliance with some of the protocols established by Markham.

The protocols state the individual whose conduct is in question will be given supporting material, said Siegel. That includes an affidavit signed by Glionna.

“It was never given,” he said. “From the outset the commissioner is operating in breach of his own governing ordinance.”

Additionally the report recounted several rejected complaints in a way that is damaging to Shore’s reputation, he said.

“The accusations, if you release the report in its present form are out there, unanswerable in an entirely unfair and inappropriate manner,” he said.

He requested council either dismiss the complaints and reject the recommendations by the commissioner, or refer the report back to the commissioner with requests that he address legal submissions he received and follow protocols set by council.

The report is available on the City of Markham’s website by clicking here.