Protections for councillors’ assistants fall short: clerk
Claims bias against him regarding complaints made by six women last fall
Rick Chiarelli intends to seek a judicial review against the city and its integrity commissioner, claiming bias against him regarding complaints made by six women last fall, according to an internal memo sent to councillors Tuesday.
Chiarelli has denied all accusations made against him and previously threatened to go through the courts to halt the integrity commissioner’s investigation. He has also argued the commissioner, Robert Marleau, lacks the authority to investigate the complaints, indicating they should be looked into either under workplace harassment policies or before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.
The application by Chiarelli’s lawyer, Bruce Sevigny, which has yet to be filed with the Ontario Divisional Court, was included in a memo sent Tuesday by the city’s legal department to the mayor and council. Sevigny sent the application to the city on Monday. In the application, Sevigny says that Marleau and council members “demonstrated a predisposition and/or predetermination reflecting a reasonable apprehension of bias, and/or a ‘closed mind,’ that gives rise to a breach of natural justice, in relation to six formal complaints” filed against Chiarelli.
The application cites numerous examples of alleged bias by
Marleau and the city, including: Statements by councillors that they don’t wish to sit near Chiarelli and that they believe the allegations against him; That all but three councillors participated in a “public act of protest” against Chiarelli when they refused to sit at council table when he was present; That council refused Chiarelli’s request for a medical leave of absence; That Mayor Jim Watson publicly called for Chiarelli’s resignation from office; That council has attempted to “overwhelm and out-resource” Chiarelli, while refusing to reimburse his legal expenses; and, that Marleau has exhibited bias by focusing his investigation on evidence that is potentially beneficial to the complainants while disregarding or mischaracterizing evidence favourable to Chiarelli. The application further asks that the decision by Marleau that the initial complaints fall under his office’s purview be quashed; that a declaration be made that Chiarelli was denied “natural justice” and “procedural fairness”; and, that an order be put in place, prohibiting Marleau or the city from further acting on the complaints.
If successful, this would presumably preclude Marleau from issuing his report on Chiarelli, which is expected before council’s next meeting on July 15.
The integrity commissioner can recommend penalties if he finds truth in the allegations of inappropriate behaviour against Chiarelli, although the decision would ultimately be up to council, which would be required to vote on any penalty. The strongest penalty available is a 90-day suspension in salary, though it’s possible the penalty could be applied for each separate complaint.
Marleau published an interim report in May, saying that Chiarelli would not agree to an interview, after which Chiarelli’s lawyer sent an email to Marleau complaining of Marleau’s “combative, defiant and clearly partisan tone.”
In Tuesday’s memo, the city’s legal department expressed the opinion that if Chiarelli and his legal team file the application in the coming days, the “mere commencement of the process does not impede either the integrity commissioner’s presentation of his report on the findings of his investigation, nor does it impair council’s receipt and consideration of that report.”
Sevigny did not reply to a request for comment Tuesday afternoon.