Playing Euchre with Jane Twinney

In the past, Councillor Twinney had tweeted numerous times about how she enjoys playing Euchre with her friends. 

At last night's council meeting, she "Euchre'd" Tony Van Bynen.   

Mayor Van Bynen has a clear majority of votes that he can count on no matter the issue.  He also has a local paper that has never, ever written a critical editorial about any policy he has championed.  If Councillor Di Muccio, without any allies of her own, is able to grind the legislative process to a standstill, then that is more a reflection on Mayor Van Bynen's weak leadership than on her behaviour.  Van Bynen believes that using the Code of Conduct will make him appear as a strong leader in the eyes of the public but he has badly missed his mark.

Last night Council voted unanimously to proceed with a code of conduct matter.  Not being total idiots, Council was at least somewhat aware that tax dollars shouldn't be used to assuage the Mayor's fragile self-esteem. 

The Mayor's original motion was altered through a series of add-ons proposed by Councillor Vegh. 

The first change, aptly named Item A, (to which the Mayor declared a "pecuniary interest" on), says that if his complaint is not proven, then the Mayor will need to "voluntarily" reimburse the public coffers the cost of the investigation. 

The second change, named Item B, (which nobody declared a pecuniary interest, although Councillor Di Muccio was absent), says that if the complaint is upheld by the integrity commission then Councillor Di Muccio is asked to "voluntarily" reimburse the coffers (note:  it is voluntary because applicable legislation provides she can't be forced to pay for it.  Vegh's proposal reminded me of certain communist totalitarian regimes where the families of executed prisoner traditionally receive an invoice for the cost of the bullet). 

The obvious question is, "what if no one volunteers to reimburse the public?"

Not to worry because Councillor Twinney has a contingency plan.  She revealed that she has met with her Council colleagues and they have agreed that if Councillor Di Muccio is "unwilling/ unable" to reimburse the funds, that collectively the others will contribute money towards the costs.  

When she spoke about this plan, Twitter erupted with a number of tweets expressing incredulity and distrust.  (Apparently its hard for the gang of 8 to appear credible and trustworthy these days after many of the antics that they have pulled lately). 

No member of Council, nor any member of staff contradicted Councillor Twinney's words.

Mayor Van Bynen's original motion, as well as the two endorsements were passed unanimously. 

There are significant issues with what Councillor Twinney spoke about that go the the very core of the Integrity Commission process.  All members of Council now have a pecuniary interest because they are potentially all on the hook to fork over the dough when the investigator submits his/her bill.

In my opinion, there is no way that this integrity commission can be conducted that will satisfy the appearance that money somehow influenced the outcome.   

If the integrity commission finds Di Muccio violated the code of conduct, then very plausibly, (like she did with last year's Integrity Commission findings), Councillor Di Muccio can argue that the scope of the investigation was too restrictive. How can these members of council defend against the idea that things were done "on the cheap" because these council members were concerned about their own potential out of pocket expense? 

I get the impression that Councillor Di Muccio is itching to have a discussion on the topic of misogyny while the gang of 8 want to avoid that topic like the plague.  However, if the scope of the investigation does not include the question on whether Tony Van Bynen is a misogynist, then it is very plausible to say that the investigator wasn't allowed to be thorough in his/ her reporting.   

If the Integrity Commission finds against Tony Van Bynen, then he too can argue that the rest of Council stacked the cards against him to avoid paying the bill on their own.

Either way, the public isn't well served when Council has decided to "muddy the waters" on what should be an open and transparent process. 

Bottom line: the "integrity" of the integrity commision process has been tainted by Councillor Twinney's meddling.