More compliance audit revelations

Complaints about campaign financial irregularities have forced councillors to release more information on their spending and fundraising activities. Complainant Viv Saunders says these confirm many of her allegations and generate some additional ones which she has now submitted to the compliance audit committee.

The committee met with several city staff in secret session for several hours last Wednesday but so far has posted no new decisions on eight cases raised by Saunders. They have decided against further action on two defeated candidates, despite agreeing with complainant Joanna Chapman that each violated two sections of the Municipal Elections Act. In two nearly identical statements dated today but released before 8 am this morning, the committee says despite the “seriousness” of the breaches, it believes it has the discretion not to order audits.

“Apart from the lack of an Auditor’s Report, we are of the opinion the Financial Statement was completed appropriately and any additional submissions or review is [sic] not necessary,” the written statement on each candidate declares. “The committee strongly emphasizes that this should not be constructed as an open invitation for any current or future candidates to breach this section of the MEA, or any other section for that matter.”

The decisions are posted on the city’s website. Minutes of the committee’s two May meetings are also now on the city website – reversing an earlier policy – but none have been posted for the July 8 or July 13 sessions.

New revelations at the latter meeting included Chad Collins describing his voting day party as “essentially an open house on the entire election day” with free food and drinks. Saunders notes this “may be interpreted as inducing votes” but clearly “is not an eligible post voting day expense”.

Lloyd Ferguson was queried at the meeting about an apparent conflict of interest because his auditor was also a substantial contributor to his campaign. He argued the audit had been done by someone else in the Barry Brownlow firm, but Saunders is now pointing to an email submitted by Ferguson that seems to suggest Brownlow himself was involved. The hand-written signature on Ferguson’s audit reads “Brownlow Partners”.

Tom Jackson is accused of numerous violations and his situation may have been worsened by his submission of a full-colour program used at a pre-election party that Saunders argues was a social event, not a fundraiser. If the $15,000 cost of the event is determined to be an election expense, it will push Jackson well past the legal spending limits.

Jackson hasn’t yet submitted a list of the individuals who received gift cards from him after the election – another item that Saunders contends should be considered as potential salaries or honourariums for work done during the election campaign.

Alone among the councillors being challenged, Terry Whitehead presented evidence that he had warned contributors in writing that total gifts to all candidates cannot exceed $5000. Saunders has reviewed all donations and says several companies and at least one union broke that rule. Other accused councillors say it’s not possible for them to know about this type of violation, and therefore unfair to require it.

In her response to Whitehead’s submissions, Saunders says it confirms her suspicions about one group of companies whose cheques were signed by one individual – Sergio Manchia.

“Records submitted now state these companies have the same president (based on corporate search conducted although Mr. Whitehead is showing Mario Nesci which is incorrect), they have the same cheque signatory for campaign contributions, same accounting firm (who is also a shareholder of Ancaster Self Storage) and now share the same controller,” notes Saunders.

She has calculated that over $12,000 was donated to council and mayoralty candidates by three firms whose cheques were signed by Manchia. A fourth also possible related company (DCR Holdings) had their donation returned by Ferguson’s campaign worried that it was illegal when added to another one signed by Manchia from Dundas Self Storage.

Flamborough representative Rob Pasuta admitted using signs from a previous campaign that he didn’t include in his 2010 financial statement. He also failed to include the costs of his audit which he explained was because he didn’t get the bill until after he submitted his financial records – a shortcoming that Saunders notes “is probably a violation” of the election law.

Sam Merulla’s submissions also drew a response from Saunders identifying several outstanding issues including his receipt of a donation from a company whose address is vacant, and another company that appears to be an ineligible donor.

Excessive election donations

How they voted in June