|
|
|
Hazel McCallion on Hot Seat
- Thread starter ShonTron
- Start date
syn
Senior Member
Which is exactly why she shouldn't have been involved in negotiations...yet there she was...
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
If y'all wanna punish someone, punish McCallion, but not Sheridan.
Thathurts
New Member
Look to be clear she has admitted part of the conflict already. However, we have not heard her speak to her involvement in the Enersource discussions. You see OMERS (potential seller of land to son Peter) also owns 10% of Enersource. There was a big scandal on that one. You see at the last minute the contracts were switched and Hazel signed one giving 10% owner OMERS effectively 50% control. Nice eh! You pay for 10 and you get 50.
Now, here is an interesting fact -- instead of her being outraged and insulted and I demand they fix this... blah blah -- like she did protesting at Queens Park just hours ago... No she is fine with it. In fact, she held a public meeting to say what a great partner they are and how the city should not try and terminate their partnership. Now, if you are interested -- overlap the Enersource discussions with the land negotiations.
Oh I bet she will scream victim again (surprise surprise). But just how many times does she need to pull this off before enough is enough?
There were how many Enersource ownership meetings? How many land meetings? Why the secret settlement? What are we not allowed to know?
Hey is politicians using their title/office to help their relatives with land deals is OK now then I need to catch up.
Now, here is an interesting fact -- instead of her being outraged and insulted and I demand they fix this... blah blah -- like she did protesting at Queens Park just hours ago... No she is fine with it. In fact, she held a public meeting to say what a great partner they are and how the city should not try and terminate their partnership. Now, if you are interested -- overlap the Enersource discussions with the land negotiations.
Oh I bet she will scream victim again (surprise surprise). But just how many times does she need to pull this off before enough is enough?
There were how many Enersource ownership meetings? How many land meetings? Why the secret settlement? What are we not allowed to know?
Hey is politicians using their title/office to help their relatives with land deals is OK now then I need to catch up.
Marko
Active Member
It seems to me you're thinking aster than you're typing and things don't make complete sense to the reader.
You need to spell out the conflict you think occurred and not just throw out random items without linking them together, since they are not all related to the current issue.
You need to spell out the conflict you think occurred and not just throw out random items without linking them together, since they are not all related to the current issue.
lordmandeep
Banned
Hazel will never surrender her position.
As in the words of the late Charleston Heston (he was a good actor though, Ben-Hur and Planet of the Apes were great!!)
FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!!
As in the words of the late Charleston Heston (he was a good actor though, Ben-Hur and Planet of the Apes were great!!)
FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!!
Red Mosquito
New Member
If for the past 30 years McCallion had to to be put under the media spotlight that any Toronto mayor gets put under, she would of chosen the " I want to spend more time with my family" route long ago.
Thathurts
New Member
Mississauga Council voted today to launch a Judicial Inquiry into Hazel McCallion's behaviour as it relates to her son's land deal/OMERS and the many many meetings where she should have declared a conflict but DID NOT!
This deal involves millions of dollars at play. I am not a PI or journalist so I will leave you to educate yourself on this scandal.
Watch for the Mayor's buddies to say look we hired a lawyer who says this is a small issue -- what they are not telling you is that the lawyer only looked at where anyone violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. Instead they should have asked did anyone break ANY laws? The details matter.
I asked the questions before because they are legitimate questions that some may not want you to ask.
This deal involves millions of dollars at play. I am not a PI or journalist so I will leave you to educate yourself on this scandal.
Watch for the Mayor's buddies to say look we hired a lawyer who says this is a small issue -- what they are not telling you is that the lawyer only looked at where anyone violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. Instead they should have asked did anyone break ANY laws? The details matter.
I asked the questions before because they are legitimate questions that some may not want you to ask.
The Mississauga Muse
Active Member
HAZELGATE and the (no surprise) DOCTORED MINUTES
Found my way here Googling and thought I'd reply.
As people know I've been researching City of Mississauga municipal governance through Freedom of Information since January 2007.
In addition I've attended Audit, Budget, Council and General Committee meetings and videotaped most of them since June 2006.
I took my video of that May 21, 2008 meeting and compared them to minutes as well.
This is the picture.
McCallion not only failed to declare, she stumbled badly on the words "direct and indirect pecuniary interest".
Watch for yourself. My video of the opening minutes of that May 21, 2008 meeting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nh5wNHKiic
Failure to declare isn't the most worrisome part.
The media seem to ignore it --and there's zero mention of it here. The WTF-thing is that the minutes DO show that she declared. And in two places.
THE MINUTES WERE DOCTORED! That's what I have the problem with.
And in two places. Here on page 2
and under Unfinished Business.
So how does that stink? DOCTORED minutes are the issue here more than anything.
Sure the City Clerk's put it down to one minion and an error but no way. (What? Anyone actually expect someone to chirp up with "Well, McCallion told me..." or "Well the three of us in Corporate Services decided...")
Also, I've been saying for years now how City minutes are highly manicured such that negative information that would show the City in a bad light are left out or carefully worded to a point where they are rendered meaningless (the worst minutes for vital stuff left out are the Audit Committee's).
Few people research municipal governance to the degree that I do. I shoot my own videotape to compare with minutes and of course for retrospective analysis.
Freedom of Information has already confirmed FABRICATION of documents by the City's Corporate Security personnel. (going by memory but something like 20 or 24 documents fabricated as "evidence" pertaining to a ban.) So doctored minutes I believe and big time.
I just feel stupid is all. I've been inspecting minutes looking for stuff left out. Never considered they'd put stuff IN!
For those interested in why Council decided on a judicial inquiry here's video of the mover of the motion, Councillor Nando Iannicca and why it was important to see the process through.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1CS9uADg5A
Surely no one here seriously believes that anything will come of this. It's perfectly obvious that Hazel McCallion is above the Law. And that she believes so as well.
The inquiry is mere formality but an important one none the less.
Mississauga simply saying well, we hired outside lawyers and they said X and we agree so sweep under the rug, onwards and upwards etc etc.
That would put Hazel McCallion even more Above the Law than she is now.
Signed,
The ($3,000 in Freedom of Information and still counting) Mississauga Muse
Found my way here Googling and thought I'd reply.
As people know I've been researching City of Mississauga municipal governance through Freedom of Information since January 2007.
In addition I've attended Audit, Budget, Council and General Committee meetings and videotaped most of them since June 2006.
I took my video of that May 21, 2008 meeting and compared them to minutes as well.
This is the picture.
McCallion not only failed to declare, she stumbled badly on the words "direct and indirect pecuniary interest".
Watch for yourself. My video of the opening minutes of that May 21, 2008 meeting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nh5wNHKiic
Failure to declare isn't the most worrisome part.
The media seem to ignore it --and there's zero mention of it here. The WTF-thing is that the minutes DO show that she declared. And in two places.
THE MINUTES WERE DOCTORED! That's what I have the problem with.
And in two places. Here on page 2
and under Unfinished Business.
So how does that stink? DOCTORED minutes are the issue here more than anything.
Sure the City Clerk's put it down to one minion and an error but no way. (What? Anyone actually expect someone to chirp up with "Well, McCallion told me..." or "Well the three of us in Corporate Services decided...")
Also, I've been saying for years now how City minutes are highly manicured such that negative information that would show the City in a bad light are left out or carefully worded to a point where they are rendered meaningless (the worst minutes for vital stuff left out are the Audit Committee's).
Few people research municipal governance to the degree that I do. I shoot my own videotape to compare with minutes and of course for retrospective analysis.
Freedom of Information has already confirmed FABRICATION of documents by the City's Corporate Security personnel. (going by memory but something like 20 or 24 documents fabricated as "evidence" pertaining to a ban.) So doctored minutes I believe and big time.
I just feel stupid is all. I've been inspecting minutes looking for stuff left out. Never considered they'd put stuff IN!
For those interested in why Council decided on a judicial inquiry here's video of the mover of the motion, Councillor Nando Iannicca and why it was important to see the process through.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1CS9uADg5A
Surely no one here seriously believes that anything will come of this. It's perfectly obvious that Hazel McCallion is above the Law. And that she believes so as well.
The inquiry is mere formality but an important one none the less.
Mississauga simply saying well, we hired outside lawyers and they said X and we agree so sweep under the rug, onwards and upwards etc etc.
That would put Hazel McCallion even more Above the Law than she is now.
Signed,
The ($3,000 in Freedom of Information and still counting) Mississauga Muse
Last edited:
syn
Senior Member
Welcome back Muse, you were gone for quite a while. I find that disturbing as well - minutes were doctored and many seem to have no problem with it.
This seems to be a good time to approach the media with your concerns.
This seems to be a good time to approach the media with your concerns.
Thathurts
New Member
Muse Look Closer...
The doctored minutes point to a potential coverup. Ordinarily, it is likely that those minutes would not have been challenged. Some one took a risk and instead of making the issue disappear it has become a finger pointing to a larger problem.
The issue here is OMERS is both the City's partner in the hydro utility (Enersource worth hundreds of millions of dollars) and Peter McCallion's partner. OMERS gets caught switching the contracts on the city (Mayor signed wrong contract). Instead of simply being a minority partner at 10% they get no less than veto power on every issue that matters regarding Enersource. In other words, OMERS is effectively a 50% partner for only 10% cost. The City Council is outraged and votes to buy out OMERS and send them packing. Enter the Mayor who participates in every OMERS/Enersource meeting without declaring a conflict (remember her son is in constant contact with them over his deal -- read the affifavits!
GETS BETTER -- OMERS is pissed at the Council vote and I am sure in an unrelated move it signals an end to Peter McCallion's deal. A month goes by and the lawyers exchange email with OMERS telling Hazel's son its over (jan 8and9) -- next day Hazel announces special meeting (see press release dated Jan9). At this meeting, the evidence of OMERS vetos is suppressed and the majority of Council refuses to participate in the meeting. Hazel spends the meeting convincing the public watching on TV at home that there is no need to buy back the OMERS 10%. Then she hugs the head of OMERS right there on video. She has never publicly demanded they return the vetos they took without Council approval yet she can go to Queens Park and protest about power plants. When is the Star, the Globe, the Sun and the NationalPost finally going to check out the two timelines?
Sure she met her son's partners at a time the deal was falling apart and sure she did not declare a conflict when Council voted and sure she might have forgot to tell the Council that they were handling a land deal involving her son and sure the City deal might have made possible a settlement to her financially strapped son but is the other half of this story the Enersource meetings.
Read the documents and look at the timeline!
The doctored minutes point to a potential coverup. Ordinarily, it is likely that those minutes would not have been challenged. Some one took a risk and instead of making the issue disappear it has become a finger pointing to a larger problem.
The issue here is OMERS is both the City's partner in the hydro utility (Enersource worth hundreds of millions of dollars) and Peter McCallion's partner. OMERS gets caught switching the contracts on the city (Mayor signed wrong contract). Instead of simply being a minority partner at 10% they get no less than veto power on every issue that matters regarding Enersource. In other words, OMERS is effectively a 50% partner for only 10% cost. The City Council is outraged and votes to buy out OMERS and send them packing. Enter the Mayor who participates in every OMERS/Enersource meeting without declaring a conflict (remember her son is in constant contact with them over his deal -- read the affifavits!
GETS BETTER -- OMERS is pissed at the Council vote and I am sure in an unrelated move it signals an end to Peter McCallion's deal. A month goes by and the lawyers exchange email with OMERS telling Hazel's son its over (jan 8and9) -- next day Hazel announces special meeting (see press release dated Jan9). At this meeting, the evidence of OMERS vetos is suppressed and the majority of Council refuses to participate in the meeting. Hazel spends the meeting convincing the public watching on TV at home that there is no need to buy back the OMERS 10%. Then she hugs the head of OMERS right there on video. She has never publicly demanded they return the vetos they took without Council approval yet she can go to Queens Park and protest about power plants. When is the Star, the Globe, the Sun and the NationalPost finally going to check out the two timelines?
Sure she met her son's partners at a time the deal was falling apart and sure she did not declare a conflict when Council voted and sure she might have forgot to tell the Council that they were handling a land deal involving her son and sure the City deal might have made possible a settlement to her financially strapped son but is the other half of this story the Enersource meetings.
Read the documents and look at the timeline!
ducati0000
Active Member
she could be the antichrist but she win the next election by a landslide,she made a mistake.She didnt hide the fact there was some influence by her for her son but the bottom line she admits it and she made a mistake.
Thathurts
New Member
Oh My
She admits only about one of the meetings with her son and OMERS. She has yet to admit to the many many meetings where she took part regarding OMERS and Enersource. She also does not admit to trying to save her son's deal in Mid-December when he had his house on the line. Then what exactly was her role in the city buying THE SAME land. Wow and hey did that not mean that OMERS had to settle with her son and pay him out and he keeps his house. Would that have happened if the deal timed out in a few short months? I am sorry but I am not that easily BSd.
While we are talking about poor conduct -- Did you know that she has been triple dipping? I am amazed that the media does not care. She is paid a large and good salary for her role as Mayor and regional councillor (Peel). Then she gets her pension -- mandatory. Then for several years she took a salary from the hydro utility. When she was caught she made a big pronouncement about giving it back. How nice. What happened to the $500 thousand or so that she collected? Oh the people of Mississauga don't need that money. I know you would like to sweep it under the carpet. She is so nice and good and righteous she does not need bother with silly things like laws and doing right by the people.
She admits only about one of the meetings with her son and OMERS. She has yet to admit to the many many meetings where she took part regarding OMERS and Enersource. She also does not admit to trying to save her son's deal in Mid-December when he had his house on the line. Then what exactly was her role in the city buying THE SAME land. Wow and hey did that not mean that OMERS had to settle with her son and pay him out and he keeps his house. Would that have happened if the deal timed out in a few short months? I am sorry but I am not that easily BSd.
While we are talking about poor conduct -- Did you know that she has been triple dipping? I am amazed that the media does not care. She is paid a large and good salary for her role as Mayor and regional councillor (Peel). Then she gets her pension -- mandatory. Then for several years she took a salary from the hydro utility. When she was caught she made a big pronouncement about giving it back. How nice. What happened to the $500 thousand or so that she collected? Oh the people of Mississauga don't need that money. I know you would like to sweep it under the carpet. She is so nice and good and righteous she does not need bother with silly things like laws and doing right by the people.
nfitz
Superstar
Thathurts
New Member
One very small part of a larger potential problem
I do not mean to diminish the seriousness of changing the minutes but it is just one small element of a much broader scandal.
It is simply obsurd to suggest that one of the best minute taking offices in Canada (sixth largest city) would just add text in two places and then suggest it was an ooopsy. The minutes are different from meeting to meeting and their is a very serious legal obligation to get them right. I am sure the "Hazel can do no wrong she is entitled to break the law if needed" crowd will rush in to insist it was an honest mistake that just happened to favour the Mayors adamant protests of innocense (until the video now nothing).
Short answer -- no one is talking -- yet...
I do not mean to diminish the seriousness of changing the minutes but it is just one small element of a much broader scandal.
It is simply obsurd to suggest that one of the best minute taking offices in Canada (sixth largest city) would just add text in two places and then suggest it was an ooopsy. The minutes are different from meeting to meeting and their is a very serious legal obligation to get them right. I am sure the "Hazel can do no wrong she is entitled to break the law if needed" crowd will rush in to insist it was an honest mistake that just happened to favour the Mayors adamant protests of innocense (until the video now nothing).
Short answer -- no one is talking -- yet...