Ford granted reprieve from ouster
Toronto mayor stays in office during appeal
An Ontario judge says Toronto Mayor Rob Ford can remain in office while he appeals a decision that turfs him for breaking conflict-of-interest rules.
If not for the stay granted by Superior Court Justice Gladys Pardu, the mayor would have had to vacate his seat next week, as so ordered by Justice Charles Hackland. Now he can remain until a judgment is rendered on his appeal, scheduled to be heard Jan. 7.
“I’m very pleased with today’s decision and I can’t wait for the appeal, and I’m going to carry on doing what the people elected me to do,” the mayor said. “They voted for me to be mayor to get this city back on financial footing, which we’ve done. I’ve got a lot of work to do and I’m going to continue doing it to the best of my ability, and I can’t wait until January 7.”
Justice Hackland found the mayor violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act when he spoke and voted on a matter at city council requiring him to repay donations made by others to a charitable football foundations. The sanction was overturned at that February meeting.
The stay proceeding at Osgoode Hall lasted half an hour, with lawyers for both sides arguing in its favour.
“It is clear that the appellant would suffer irreparable harm if he were removed from office, but it later transpires that his appeal was successful, and the order of Hackland J. was set aside,” Justice Pardu read in court. “If the decision under appeal is stayed for a short interval until the appeal is heard, there is no basis to conclude that any harm will be caused to the public interest.”
Clayton Ruby, representing Toronto resident Paul Magder who brought the lawsuit, had said “it would be inappropri- ate for the city to start down the complicated and perhaps expensive road of replacing May or Ford ”given how quickly an appeal will be heard.
Alan Lenczner, Ford’s lawyer, also provided a preview of what he will argue on appeal, saying the judge erred in law when he ruled that the city had the authority to impose the sanction it did, when he decided that an “error in judg- ment” had not been committed even though the mayor had declared a conflict on seven previous occasions, and that he used the wrong “test” to determine if the money in question was likely to influence Ford’s actions. “Mayor Ford would have made the same speech if it was $5 or $500,” said Lenczner. “For him it was a matter of principle.”
The mayor’s brother, Coun- cillor Doug Ford, said he was “very appreciative” of the judge’s ruling. As to how his brother was coping with the uncertainty, he responded: “Stress is an understatement, but we’re going to move forward for the people of Toronto.”
He acknowledged his brother was “maturing” in the position of mayor and would have to do some things “a little differently” if he is ultimately returned to office.
“Most people believe that [the mayor] should have his day in court and that he should remain in his position until a decision is rendered,” Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong said.
Asked whether he remained a strong supporter of the mayor, Minnan-Wong responded: “I’m still focusing on my work at city hall.”
Councillor Karen Stintz, who has been touted as a possible byelection candidate, agreed the city can now enter a brief “period of calm” until the appeal is heard in January.
“My only hope now is that the decision on the appeal is also rendered quickly, so we know the direction the city is going and we can bring this political instability to an end,” Stintz said.
But don’t expect discussions among potential candidates from the left to dampen, said Councillor Shelley Carroll. She wants to run against the mayor, but so far, the group has not settled on one person to carry that cause forward.