The URL can be used to link to this page

07/12/2016ADDITIONS TO COUNCIL, TUESDAY, JULY 12, 2016 Revised Page One Order of Business PRESENTATIONS/DEPUTATIONS 1. Niagara Sustainability Initiative NOTE: This presentation was inadvertently missed on the Order of Business, hence, the revised Order of Business for Page 1. Copy of the related Powerpoint is attached. REPORTS 1. Re: TS -2016-27 Victoria Avenue between Bridge Street and Valley Way Designated Bicycle Lanes and Reduced Lane Width Copy of revised mapping and related Powerpoint. 2. Re: Water Rate Structure Review Request from Ed Bielawski to address Council and related documentation. COMMUNICATION/ INFORMATION 1. Report of Workplace Investigation - Lisa M. Bolton, Sherrard Kuzz LLP Niagaraq1Js COUNCIL MEETING July 12, 2016 0 Canada to be sung by Kylie Mason ADOPTION OF MINUTES: Council Minutes of June 14, 2016 DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST Disclosures of pecuniary interest and a brief explanation thereof will be made for the current Council Meeting at this time. PRESENTATIONS/ DEPUTATIONS 5:00 P.M. Foundation for a Drug -Free World The Mayor will recognize the winners from the "Why I Want a Drug -Free Community" essay contest recently held at various local schools. Knights of Columbus Free Throw Championship The Mayor will recognize Joey Ciampa, Dante De Benedetti, Matteo De Benedetti, and Tavish McMahon for winning the Knights Of Columbus free throw competition. Share the Road Cycling Coalition Jamie Stuckless, Executive Director, of the Share the Road Cycling Coalition will recognize the City with a bronze award. Sears National Kids Cancer Ride Neil Babbage will outline his involvement in the event, which is a coast to coast bicycle ride to raise funds for childhood cancer. Wildplav Niagara Falls Rich Merlino, General Manager, will inform Council of the new Niagara Parks Commission attraction. Niagara Sustainability Initiative Matt Brunette, Development & Engagement Manager, will inform Council on the Niagara Sustainability Initiative. Dean Iorfida From: Carey Campbell Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 1:07 PM To: 'Matt Brunette'; Dean Iorfida Subject: RE: NSI - Request for Council July 12th Hi Matt: Thanks for this. I'm including Dean lorfida, our City Clerk to help facilitate your request. carey From: Matt Brunette [mailto:matt@niagarasustainability.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 12:48 PM To: Carey Campbell Subject: NSI - Request for Council July 12th Hi Carey, Pleasure to speak with you today. I just wanted to follow-up the conversation to request to speak to Council at the July 12th Council Meeting. We will be having another meeting on June 14th and will not be available for that meeting. Our delegation will be to provide information from NSI's Evening of Recognition next week and share the important news/ member updates from our 2015 Annual Report. Please let me know if there is a delegation form that we must fill out in advance. Thank you again. Best, Matt Matt Brunette 1 Development and Engagement Manager 1 289 786 0970 ext. 2 1 niagarasustainability.org Niagara Sustainability Initiative 189-91 St. Paul Street, Suite 301 1St. Catharines, ON 1 Subscribe to our Newsletter Niagara Sustainability Initiative Confidentiality Notice The information contained in this communication including any attachments may be confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, disclosure, or copying of this communication or any of it's contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of it from your computer system. Thank you. 1 Niagara's go -to source for organizations interested in tackling environmental and economic sustainability N AGARAIAINITIATIVE Tikvah Mindorff Matt Brunette Executive Director Development and Engagement Manager 289 786 0970 ext 3 289 786 0970 ext 2 kvah@niagarasustalnability org mattcvniagarasustainability.org 6.1 •410 sMy& ... &Oil ...me.NIWrr Suite 300, 89.915t Paul Street St Catharines °atato Ln 3M! wwmniagsrasustainailikv.arg AGENDA 5th Annual Evening of Recognition Highlights Climate Change & Sustainability A Multi -Level Approach Niagara Sustainability Initiative Membership Benefits Recommendations Copyright 2016 Niagara Sustainab:l Initiative. Suite 300, 89-91 St Paul Street St Catharines Ontario L2P, 3M3 we e. niagarasustainaba ty org 07/12/2016 1 5th Annual Evening of Recognition Greatest GHG Reduction (Percentage) — Tulip Tree Award Beatties Basics Best Green Team— Pin Oak Greatest GHG Reduction (Total Award tonnes)—Sugar Maple Award Niagara Ina Grafton Gage Village Fallsview Casino Most Engaged — Eastern White Pine Award Niagara College Sustainability Champion — White Oak Paul Lacy. General Motors Canada Cop ;right 22010 Niagara Su, tair,ahil ty In wive Ste ?OC 2 -71 St Paul SIle, St CLIMATE CHANGE & SUSTAINABILITY "The scientific evidence is clear: climate change is one of the greatest threats of our time. From increased incidences of droughts, to coastal flooding, to the expanding melt of sea ice in our Arctic, the widespread impacts of climate change compel Canada to take strong action now." Government of Canada, 2015 Environment Sustainability Social Community Economy "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." ,y Initiative. Seita 900 09-01 SS ?a»1 Street St Catharines Ontario 320.. 3M3 v, ivr niagarasustainability. org 07/12/2016 2 A MULTI-LEVEL APPROACH International • COP21 2016 • Compact of Mayors National • Signatory of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change • Committed $2 billion to Low Carbon Economy Trust Provincial • Cap -and -Trade Program introduced in 2016-2017 • Invested $325 million to Green Investment Fund (with $1 million committed to Sustainability CoLab Network) Local • Niagara Sustainability Initiative CLIMATE CHANGE ISA GLOBAL PROBLEM THAT REQUIRES GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Copynght 2016 Niagara Sustains hi1ty Initietrre Suite 300, 39-31 St Paul Street.St Catharines Cntano L20 351,3, •r_vr-.'r e e rasuste Ana h,hty. erg NIAGARA SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVE Vision & Mission Our vision is a Niagara where the greening of local businesses and municipalities in an environmentally and economically thriving community. Our mission is to support local organizations through education, outreach and services on the benefits of environmental responsibility for their organization and community. cal t GA E. Independent Social Enterprise Established 2010 8 full time staff and over 100 volunteers The Carbon Project Additional Offerings: - Peer to peer learning - Internship placement - Premium services Copyright 2016 Niagara Sustainability Initiative Suite 300, 39-91 St Paul Street St Catharines Ontario L29 3M3 www niagaresustainability org 07/12/2016 3 MEMBERSHIP • Organizations taking the initiative to publicly report their carbon footprint • 23 members representing over 10% of Niagara's workforce • Join many of Niagara's public and private sector leaders and top employers, including: — Niagara College — Brock University — Walker Industries — General Motors — City of St. Catharines — CN Power — Niagara Health Systems • Annual membership fees range from $520 to $5,200 — Offer is to sponsor 20%-50% of the annual fee for municipalities Copyright 2016 Niagara Sustainability Initiative, Suite 300, 30-91 St PauI Street St Cather es Ontario L2R 3913, c.r •.v ruag3rasustalnab0ly.org BENEFITS MUNICIPAL Bolster municipal sustainability plan • Streamline GHG reporting process • Local leadership and recognition • Leadership for businesses • Local events and support ORGANIZATIONAL Cost Savings Iimpluyce r1LLr.rWon /Retention ilr,md E.rh•inn• 111 1.1 MEM :Copyright 2016 Niagara Sustainability Initiative Suite 300, 09-61 St Paul Street St Catharines Ontario L2R 3913 www.niegarasustainability.org 07/12/2016 4 RECOMMENDATIONS Mal Niagara Region passed motion to join Carbon Project. NSI is currently in the process of discussing membership with the Region and support for other municipalities wishing to participate in the program. NSI suggests: Region provide 20% - 50% subsidy on municipal membership fees in addition to its own separate fee for membership and Carbon Project reporting. NSI recommends: City of Niagara Falls provide a letter of support on behalf of NSI to Niagara Region stating the City's interest and support for eventual participation in the Carbon Project for the September 2016 Regional Council meeting fight 2016 Niagara Sui,t,Ina b:I ty Initial :e, _rte 300 91 St Paul Street St thar'ro-n t r RECOMMENDATIONS Potential Membership Options: A. Individual: Regular membership fees B. Regional Subsidy: Regular membership fees with financial support from Region C. Hybrid Membership: Unique membership designed with inter -organizational sustainability committee in mind Copyright 2016 Niagara Sustainability Inez, t e Suite 300 09-91 St Paul Street St Catharine; Ontario [21 3M3 wWe niagaresustainabd rty nig 07/12/2016 5 CONTACT INFORMATION Matt Brunette Development & Engagement Manager matt@niagarasustainability.org 289-786-0970 ext. 2 Connect with us online! © Twitter: @SustainNiagara Facebook.com/sustainniagara ® Linkedln: Niagara Sustainability Initiative copyrism bale NIrypora Sus l;InabIR{y InlliiIYla• Sure NO, 59-91 Si P4u4 'Areal SS Calhsnnp5 01141 rip UR 3kS3, www.mrlaraal pis' lnihlllty,ei� 07/12/2016 6 TS -2016-27 Attachment #2 Sample cross-section Victoria Avenue between Valley Way and Queen Street 1 M July 12, 2016 Nirtir: f alts On -Street Cycling Facilities ❑ Policies & Best Practice ❑ Facility Types ❑ Design Elements ❑ Opportunities & Challenges Victoria Avenue Pilot Study A GREAT CITY... FOR GENERATIONS TO COME ,r4Ar 07/11/2016 1 Policies & Best Practice 1) Transportation Master Plan — 2011 ❑ Active Transportation Component ❑ On -street ❑ Trails 2) Canadian/Ontario Guidelines 3) Highway Traffic Act - HTA 4) Niagara Region Transportation Master Plan (recently commenced) Cycling Facilities AMMEMM A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME 118 NiagaraTalis 07/11/2016 2 07/11/2016 sseW.00d vara Trail • 415=re.:taltarlrood Trail I•WsrrenWoods Roc Trod inYn� __ •Trail • r..o.wWr Existing On -Street Facilities 1) Full Bicycle Lane (17.4 km) 2) Wide Shoulders (48.5km) 3) Shared Lane with Sharrow (1.6km) A GREAT CITY... FOR GENERATIONS TO COME M°arapafils 3 Bicycle Lanes Typic Conventional Bicycle Lane *Currently in Use Bicycle Lane Adjacent to On -Street Parking 0 A GREAT CITY... FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Wide Shoulders - Typical Signed Bicycle acute Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulder with Bid leaed PevudShuulder *Currently in Use A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Niar.ira j aIs 07/11/2016 4 Shared Lane - Typical *Currently in Use (Assn opianal growl A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Niagararrills Lane Widths City of Niagara Falls standards Transportation Association of Canada, Geometric Design Guide, 1999 Vehicle Lane • Arterial & Collector = 3.5 - 3.7 metres • Local / Residential = 3.0 - 3.7 metres Parking Lane • Arterial & Collector = 2.8 metres • Local / Residential = 2.4 metres �I iitgaraf api 07/11/2016 5 Discussion — Lane Widths Vs. Safety Desirable lane width. Lane Width Considerations: 1. Vehicle Volumes 2. Vehicle Speeds 3. Required Capacity 4. Users / Classifications 5. Maintenance, Snow Remove/Storage. A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Niagarel tlI.w Lane Width Considerations Maximum allowable width in Ontario = 2.6 metres (does not include peripheral hardware (mirrors, plow, etc.), - Passenger vehicle = -1.8m - Transit Bus = 3.0m (with mirrors) - Municipal Snow Plow = 3.35m (with wing down 5.34m) - Commercial Delivery Vehicle = 2.9m (with mirrors) Other (Construction, Garbage, etc.) A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME 07/11/2016 6 Bicycle Lane Width,/ :.f.: rn Based on mformaoon from the AASHTO Gu.de for the Plann.rg Dew and Operatron o1 Bcycle Facdtles, 2012 City of Niagara Falls standard from OTM Book 18 o Minimum = 1.5 metres o Desired = 1.8 metres A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME _'-� Ni.�cir j Is Rural Suburban all Urban b n e.7. r.....nen. Mow YNd. Consider Shared Roadway- ,r.1 foie M'��Ye.• - Mt, Cu.. la,* CtElPk4r,af1 Alternate rinnd dT 5p.ortlted F elfity4oeh.41.E mist -iliverormietiormi:, CSS y mw.. dp el Confider Designated Cydf,S Operating Space !w ' elrwYa• f.d•.rre relit w + $.P..w Salami -00W Cede Tech "'-Y�M4li I e n r . it a.eraae Daft Tedllo Mame (kw 2 erre tamest." ala et ease dndlenl (Thw.andel A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME NiagaraJei►,I[s ao 40 n 1 4 07/11/2016 7 V • A -P. kSt -•t oB i•• S - t Total Pavement Width = 14.6 rnetres Existing Cross -Section 2.8 4.5 Alternative Cross -Section lad 4.7 2.6 2.0 10.5 1.5 2.0 Victoria Avenue - Park Street to Bridge Street A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME i.1 ;11.1/(iII.: 07/11/2016 8 Victoria Street at Valley Way Total Pavement With = 145 rAg4t. es !WEECC Sat - Existing Cross -Section Victoria Avenue - Valley Way to Queen Street A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME 07/11/2016 9 Going Forward Prior to implementing: 11Obtain feedback from committee and City departments: U Transit ❑ Municipal Works ❑ Fire ❑ Parking 1d Obtain feedback from residents and businesses: Involve the Downtown B.I.A. ❑ Obtain Council direction on Pilot Study (July 12th Meeting) Following implementing: ❑ Monitor and report back to stakeholders A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COMENiagararrills i THANK YOU! COMMENTS & QUESTIONS A GREAT CITY...FOR GENERATIONS TO COME N 1 1 ga rilFl[ ll,S 07/11/2016 10 Dean Iorfida From: Bill Matson Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 2:17 PM To: Dean Iorfida Cc: Todd Harrison Subject: Water Rate Structure Review Dean, Ed Bielawski just called and said he would like to speak at Council on Tuesday regarding the Water Rate Structure Review. He is meeting with Todd this afternoon as well. Ed's email has not been working and asked that I send you an email. Bill Matson Manager of Clerks Services / Deputy Clerk The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls billmatson@niagarafalls.ca 905-356-7521 ext. 4342 905-658-0411 cell 1 Why lithe sewer charge based on consymptlon? It is the most coni.'non method of 3aee ng eeWer usage ira'Oatario. This method was recommended by the City's consultant is the most e4uitsble,.way of charging consumers for sewage because it is based on the amount of water used Some municipalities place sewage�' used, the sewage� on. t tacit` hills. !� such� a rapes are determines t ausaopament value: of the !too* thietwator consumption rates Seers to be a wore inggi'vel twig of d+oti nuinlog those Opargett, If the Newer charger were to go on the tax hills what would the ranks be? • A resident', tax bill coved in ease 30%. (Of course, the water bill would decrease). • Because of Provincial capping requirements. (certain classes of taxes can only rise a certain. Percentage per, year), homeowners• would be subsidizing' the sewer charges of commercial clesSeS. h 166 re#identjel beefier rarreatiy aubaldtdog ihoncinkterdal vector? No. Under the former flat rate system residential custarnera contributed about 59% of the revenues of water bills despite the fee: that usage is spilt fairly evenly between the two The user -based water meter system has helped rectify this incquhy. Note: Current Rate Structure implemented January. 2001 Commercial VS . Homeowners Consumption & Service Charge Customer 15 Largest users Homeowners Consumption (m3) Service Charge 2,244,051 19.1% <4,700,000 40.0% $248,580 1.5%', $12,680,066 77% Total Consumption: 11,737,283 m3 Total Service Charge Budget: $16,462,733 Commercial vs. Residential Consumption & Service Charge Active Accounts Consumption % of Total Service Charge % of Total Commercial 743 5,573,475 Residential 27,950 Total 6,163, 886 47.49 11,737,283 $2,248,231 13.7 52.51 $14,176013 100 86.3 $16,424,244 100 Commercial Consumption and Service Charge Active Accounts 15 Largest Users 778 Consumption Cubic meters 2,244, 051 41.7% Service Charge $248,231 % of Total 10% 3,329, 396 58.3% $2,232,751 90% Total 793 5,573,476 100% $2,481,331 100% Rate Comparison - Residential - 5 Options Consumption in cubic meters Option 1 20 Current Rates Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 75% Vol, 25% Service 100% Volumetric 541.29 364.99 $ 75.60 100% Vol Water 100% Fixed Sewer Option 5 Infrastructure Expenditure 698.72 40 597.42 420.45 $ 151.20 $ 733.72 272.47 380.66 60 80 100 $ 608.07 $ 475.54 $ � $ 695.74 531.42 717.80 226.80 $ 302.40 768.72 $ 803.72 $ $ $ 586.91 378.00 838.72 180 $ 894.31 240 300 $ 1,026.70 1,158.88 808.85 $ 680.4 $ 433.86 $ 497.05 $ 555.24 970.72 788.01 $ 975.31 $ 1,141.77 907.20 1,134.00 1,083.72 $ 1,188.72 $ 962.58 1,137.16 REPORT OF WORKPLACE INVESTIGATION Prepared for the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls by Lisa M. Bolton, Sherrard Kuzz LLP July 11, 2016 MANDATE I was retained by the City of Niagara Falls ("City") to conduct an investigation into a verbal altercation between Mr. Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer, and Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni during a Council meeting on June 14, 2016. Following the altercation Councillor Ioannoni made a written complaint to the City against Mr. Todd. My mandate is to investigate the allegations to determine if they can be substantiated and, if so, whether such conduct constitutes a violation of the Ontario Human Rights Code' (the "Code"), Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act2 (the "OHSA") and/or any City policy or by-law. I have set out my findings and conclusions in this report. OVERVIEW OF INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS I interviewed Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd, as well as numerous other witnesses for the purpose of obtaining information regarding the complaint and background information relevant to the mandate. Most interviews were conducted in person. A few interviews were conducted by telephone. Some information was provided by email. The following individuals were interviewed: 1. Councillor Ioannoni: Interviewed in person on June 20, 2016 with follow up communication via email. 2. Mr. Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer: Interviewed in person on June 20, 2016, and additional documents requested on June 20, 2016 were provided in person on June 22, 2016. 3. Mr. Todd Harrison, Director of Finance: Interviewed in person on June 20, 2016. 4. Mr. Geoff Holman, Director Municipal Works: Interviewed in person on June 20, 2016. 5. Mr. Stoyan Penev, Cogeco Camera Operator: Interviewed by telephone on June 21, 2016. 6. Councillor Wayne Thomson: Interviewed in person on June 22, 2016. 7. Mr. Phil Ross, Acting Fire Chief: Interviewed in person on June 22, 2016. 8. Mayor Jim Diodati: Interviewed in person on June 22, 2016. 9. Mr. Trent Dark, Human Resources Manager: Interviewed by telephone June 27, 2016. 10. Ms. Teresa Fabbro, Office of the City Clerk: Interviewed by telephone July 7, 2016. 1 RSO 1990, c H.19. 2 RSO 1990, c 0.1. In addition, I was provided with the following documents and records: 1. City By-law No. 89-155 governing the proceedings of the Municipal Council of the City. 2. Accountability & Transparency Policy dated December 10, 2007. 3. Code of Ethics/Conduct (Conflict of Interest), revised June, 2012. 4. Corporate Values 2011. 5. Employee Rules and Regulations, revised June 2012. 6. Respect in the Workplace (Harassment Prevention) Policy dated June 2010 and revised January 2016. 7. Inter -department memorandum dated April 7, 2008 from Senior Staff to Members of Council regarding Council meetings of March 17, and 31, 2008. 8. Minutes of Twelfth Meeting Regular Council Meeting dated September 11, 2012. 9. Niagara Falls Business Case and Land Capacity for a Downtown Post -Secondary Campus Study Report dated September 30, 2013. 10. Minutes of Seventeenth Meeting, Regular Council Meeting dated October 8, 2013. 11. In -Camera Council Update University Campus for Niagara Falls dated October 8, 2013. 12. Letter dated January 20, 2015 from Serge Felicetti, Director of Business Development to Federal Development Review Committee. 13. Letter dated January 20, 2015 from Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer to Federal Development Review Committee. 14. Council Resolution dated February 10, 2015. 15. Letter dated February 12, 2015 from Mayor Jim Diodati to Federal Development Review Committee. 16. Letter dated May 5, 2015 from Michael Warchala, Small Business Consultant & Office Manager, Niagara Falls Small Business Enterprise Centre to Dr. Wendy Cukier, Vice President, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University re Letter of Support for the Niagara Falls -Ryerson Innovation Zone. 17. Video recording by Cogeco of live television broadcast of June 14, 2016 Council meeting. 18. Email correspondence exchange between Carolynn loannoni and Jim Diodati, Ken Todd, Council Members, Ken Beaman and Ray Spiteri of Sun Media and R. Hutton of Niagara This Week dated June 14, 2016. 2 19. Newspaper article by Ray Spiteri, Niagara Falls Review, dated June 15, 2016 re "Falls Councillor Calls for CAO to be Fired". 20. Newspaper article by Ray Spiteri, Niagara Falls Review, dated June 16, 2016 re "Councillors React to Ioannoni, CAO Exchange". 21. Newspaper article by Ray Spiteri, Niagara Falls Review, dated June 16, 2016 re "Councillor Wants CAO Fired". 22. Audio recording from radio show aired on June 16, 2016. 23. Newspaper article by Richard Hutton, Niagara This Week — Niagara Falls: "Falls CAO Needs to Resign, Councillor Says". 24. Newspaper article by Ray Spiteri, Niagara Falls Review, dated June 20, 2016: "Transit Union, Management Resolve Issues". 25. Email dated June 22, 2016 from Jim Diodati to Carolynn Ioannoni attaching supporting documents from the City to Ryerson for the FedDev application. 26. Email exchange dated June 23, 2016 between Carolynn Ioannoni, Dr. Cukier and Jim Diodati. 27. Audio recording from radio show aired on June 23, 2016 and interne posting of content from radio show. 28. Newspaper article by Ray Spiteri, Niagara Falls Review, dated Monday, June 27, 2016: "Council Mislead over Ryerson Plan: Ioannoni". I also had an opportunity to inspect the Council Chamber while the microphone system was in operation and view the assigned seating location of members of Council, staff and the media during Council meetings. I also reviewed background information available on the City's website regarding the City and Council. BACKGROUND INFORMATION City Council Meetings The Council for the City is made up of the following elected officials: Mayor Jim Diodati Councillor Wayne Campbell Councillor Kim Craitor Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni 3 Councillor Vince A. Kerrio Councillor Joyce Morocco Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Councillor Mike Strange Councillor Wayne Thomson Council meetings take place in the Council Chamber and are currently held approximately once per month. In addition to the Mayor and Councillors, various City staff members routinely attend Council meetings, including Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer, Geoff Holman, Director Municipal Works, Todd Harrison, Director of Finance, and Phil Ross, Acting Fire Chief. Also in attendance are one or more Cogeco camera operators and representatives from local media. Members of the public are also permitted to attend. Attached as Schedule A is a diagram I prepared identifying the location of various individuals seated near Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni during Council meetings. Councillors and staff have individual microphones at their desks which they are able to turn on when addressing Council. There is also a microphone on the Mayor's desk and a pendant microphone suspended from the ceiling in the centre of the room. Both the pendent microphone and the Mayor's microphone remain switched on during the Council meeting. The sound captured by the microphones is amplified and projected through various speakers in the ceiling located above the Council desks and in the public gallery. Cogeco broadcasts Council meetings live on cable television. Cogeco uses the sound projected through the speakers in the Council Chamber for the audio portion of its live television broadcast. Two video cameras are located in the Council chamber during the meeting. The audio and video feed is streamed to a mobile Cogeco truck located in the City Hall parking lot and broadcast remotely on cable television. Other than Cogeco's recording from its live broadcast there is no other audio or video record at made of open Council meetings. Summary of the Complaint and Response Councillor Ioannoni alleges Mr. Todd said "you are such a bitch" to her at the end of a verbal exchange during the June 14, 2016 Council meeting. Councillor Ioannoni alleges Mr. Todd said that to her in response to questions she raised regarding the City's participation in a federal grant application for the development of a post -secondary campus in downtown Niagara Falls. This issue had previously been the subject of discussion in an in -camera meeting of Council in February 2015. Attached hereto as Schedule B is a copy of the written complaint sent by Councillor Ioannoni to Mayor Diodati following the meeting. Councillor Ioannoni also sent a copy of her email complaint to Mr. Todd, Council members, the City Solicitor and local media. Mr. Todd admits he said the word "bitch", but denies saying the preceding words alleged by Councillor Ioannoni. Mr. Todd says the preceding words he uttered were: "son of a [bitch]". 4 In addition to gathering evidence about the verbal exchange between Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd during the Council meeting, I also received information from a number of witnesses about: 1. The City's handling of the post -secondary campus initiative. 2. The Amalgamated Transit Union ("ATU") protest which occurred outside City Hall during the June 14, 2016 Council meeting. 3. Complaints by the ATU President against City management and Mr. Todd. 4. Harassment -type complaints against Councillor Ioannoni by other Councillors and staff. As these issues and/or prior complaints are outside the scope of this investigation, I have not made any determinations regarding whether these issues and/or complaints are founded and/or whether they resulted in any breach of policy or law. However, I have considered this evidence for the limited purpose of providing background and context for the verbal exchange between Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni on June 14, 2016 and, to the extent appropriate, in assessing credibility, as discussed below. OVERVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE The June 14, 2016 Council Meeting Prior to conducting any interviews I reviewed the recording of a portion of the live broadcast of the June 14, 2016 Council meeting provided by Cogeco. Described below are my observations from my review of the video. In the "other business" section of the meeting Councillor Ioannoni asked questions regarding an application for federal funding for a post -secondary campus in Niagara Falls. She inquired about the identity of the post -secondary institution and whether, at an in -camera Council session held in February 2015, a firm commitment had been made by the City to contribute $10 million to the project. In response, Mr. Todd identified Ryerson as the applicant for the federal grant. He also advised that the vote which had taken place during the in -camera meeting was to determine if Council was interested in proceeding, in principle, to partner with a post -secondary institution, understanding that in doing so the City may need to contribute up to $10 million. He also confirmed that Council had not made a funding commitment during the in -camera session and a further vote would occur when the details of the proposal were known. Finally, he confirmed that Council had been advised it could decide at a later date not to proceed with the initiative if it was not content with the terms proposed. Councillor Ioannoni replied expressing her displeasure that Councillors had not previously been provided with information about the identity of the applicant or the application. Councillor Ioannoni then repeated many of her initial questions and advised of the steps she planned to take to get the information she wanted about the application. Councillor Pietrangelo and Mayor Diodati then provided their recollection of what occurred at the in -camera meeting, which recollection was consistent with the information provided by Mr. Todd. 5 Mr. Todd maintained a calm demeanor while responding to Councillor Ioannoni's questions and comments, even when she repeatedly interrupted him. Throughout the exchange Councillor Ioannoni's questions and comments became increasingly strident and accusatory in nature. It is apparent from reviewing the nature of Councillor Ioannoni's questions and comments, together with her tone and demeanor in reacting to the responses from Mr. Todd on the recording, that Councillor Ioannoni did not believe the answers given by Mr. Todd. Councillor Ioannoni confirmed this by stating as she sat down: "that was the spin". During my interview with Councillor Ioannoni I asked her what she meant by "spin". She said it meant, "that was the `spin' he [Mr. Todd] wanted the media to see". When I asked whether by using the term "spin" she was calling Mr. Todd's integrity into question, she did not answer directly and said the "spin" was "just part of the back and forth". When I asked whether she believed Mr. Todd's answers, she said she did not believe him when he said: 1) Ryerson was the applicant; 2) Council had not yet committed $10,000,000; and 3) Council could change its mind later if it was not content with the terms proposed. During my interview with Mr. Todd I also asked him what he understood Councillor Ioannoni to mean when she said "that was the spin". He said he had heard her use that term before. He advised he believed she was calling into question his integrity and calling him a liar. Mr. Todd also told me when he heard Councillor Ioannoni say "that was the spin", he "lost it". He said he was frustrated and without thinking said "son of a bitch". He said he did not intend for anyone to hear it but the word "bitch" ended up being louder than the other words and he believed "bitch" was audible to people sitting nearby. He said he does not think he would have said that if Councillor Ioannoni had not used the word "spin" to challenge his integrity. Mr. Todd did not recall saying anything else in response to Councillor Ioannoni's comment about "spin". He also told me he was embarrassed by what he said. He expressed regret and advised he plans to apologize to the Mayor and Council. However he denied he directed the phrase "son of a bitch" at Councillor Ioannoni personally or that he said "you are such a bitch" as alleged by Councillor Ioannoni. He encouraged me to speak to others seated nearby about what they heard. When I asked Councillor Ioannoni what she heard Mr. Todd say, she said she heard him say: "you are such a bitch". She said "bitch" was louder than the preceding words. She also said other people present at the meeting and people who watched the live television broadcast told her they also heard Mr. Todd say those words. When I asked Councillor Ioannoni to identify the people who told her they heard Mr. Todd say those words on the television broadcast so I could verify that evidence, Councillor Ioannoni refused. Councillor Ioannoni told me the Cogeco camera operator came up to her after the meeting and told her he heard the words clearly on his headset. She also made similar statements during a radio interview she gave two days after the Council meeting. During the radio interview she said: "watch the Cogeco tape. That's all you have to do. Not only can you hear it, you can see him say it". On the radio program Councillor Ioannoni also described a call she said she received from a woman who told her she was watching the broadcast when she and her hearing impaired husband, who she said had been reading a book at the time, both jumped up and said to each other at the same time: "he just called her a bitch". Councillor Ioannoni said the woman's 6 husband read Mr. Todd's lips. Councillor Ioannoni also said on the radio show: "if you watch the tape it's irrefutable". Councillor Ioannoni also advised me she had reviewed a recording of the live broadcast stored on a resident's DVR machine, and that she and the residents watching the broadcast heard Mr. Todd say the words "you are such a bitch". Despite my request, Councillor Ioannoni would not disclose the name(s) of the residents. I reviewed the recording myself. Set out below are the statements, some of which overlapped, I was able to hear on the recording of the live broadcast: [Lengthy submissions by Councillor Ioannoni and responses by Mayor Diodati, Dean Iorfida, the City Clerk, and Mr. Todd] Councillor Ioannoni in reply to Mr. Todd's response: "...That was the spin" Mayor: "Any other discussion or any other comments?" Mr. Todd: "That is not a spin... [Mr. Todd reaches forward and appears to turn off his microphone. Words appear to continue to be spoken by Mr. Todd but they are not audible on the recording]" Councillor Pietrangelo: "Your worship, I guess I feel like..." [this was spoken at the same time as the inaudible words spoken by Mr. Todd] Councillor Ioannoni: "Pardon me" Councillor Pietrangelo: "...I have to echo the CAO's comment" Councillor Ioannoni: "Wait, wait, wait..." Mayor Diodati: [to Councillor Ioannoni] "Councillor, Councillor Pietrangelo has the floor" Councillor Ioannoni: "No...Our CAO just called me a bitch" Mayor Diodati: "I'm sorry...I never heard. I never heard that Councillor" Councillor Ioannoni: "Inappropriate...Yes he did..." Mayor Diodati: "I never heard that Councillor" Councillor Ioannoni: "Sure you did Jim" Mayor Diodati: [to Councillor Thomson] "I don't know...did you hear that Councillor?" Councillor Thomson: "I want to stay out of it" 7 Even with the volume of the recording at its maximum level, I was not able to hear any of the words spoken by Mr. Todd after he said "that is not a spin". Due to the camera distance I was not able to discern the words spoken by Mr. Todd by watching the video. In addition to viewing the video and listening to audio of the Council meeting, I also interviewed other individuals who were sitting near Mr. Todd to ask them what they heard. Councillor Wayne Thomson was sitting between Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni. He advised me he heard Mr. Todd say the word "bitch". He said he did not hear the words which preceded "bitch". He said he was looking out toward the direction of the public gallery at that time and Councillor Pietrangelo was speaking into his microphone. Before he heard Mr. Todd said the word "bitch" Councillor Thomson said he heard Councillor Ioannoni say "that is your spin on it", or words to that effect. He described Councillor Ioannoni's voice as loud, almost yelling when she said that. When I asked him why he told the Mayor during the Council meeting he wanted to "stay out of it" he said he had seen this kind of attack from Councillor Ioannoni before and did not want any part of it. Geoff Holman, Director of Municipal Works, was sitting behind Councillor Thomson and Mr. Todd. He advised he heard mumbling from Councillor Ioannoni and a mumbled rebuttal from Mr. Todd after he sat down, but did not hear the actual words spoken by either of them. He said he was checking the next item on the agenda and was not paying attention at that time. He also said there were other conversations taking place and noise in the background which made it difficult for him to hear at that time. Todd Harrison, Director of Finance, was sitting to Mr. Holman's left, behind Councillors Ioannoni and Thomson. Mr. Harrison advised that sometimes Councillors and staff talk after they sit down and he doesn't always hear that. He said he heard something about "spin" from Councillor Ioannoni when she sat down and then the word "bitch" after that from Mr. Todd. He did not hear the words spoken by Mr. Todd that immediately preceded the word "bitch". He also advised he didn't hear Mr. Todd say "that wasn't a spin". Mr. Harrison said he was on his phone looking down at the time. He also said he wasn't paying full attention to the discussion because Councillor Pietrangelo previously interjected and explained his understanding of the financial status of the in -camera vote. Mr. Harrison said Councillor Pietrangelo's understanding was consistent with his own so he didn't feel the need to address Council to provide further clarification to Councillor Ioannoni. Phil Ross, Acting Fire Chief, was sitting to Mr. Harrison's left, behind Councillors Ioannoni and Craitor. Mr. Ross advised he heard Councillor Ioannoni say "spin". By "spin" he understood Councillor Ioannoni to mean senior staff were not coming forward with information. He said he had heard Councillor Ioannoni say that before to accuse senior staff of not providing information. He said he doesn't believe she trusts staff. He said he heard Mr. Todd say the word "bitch" after Councillor Ioannoni said "spin". He confirmed Mr. Todd also said something before the word "bitch" but he couldn't hear what he said. He was not sure if Mr. Todd's microphone was switched on at the time. After the meeting he spoke to Mr. Harrison and asked him what had happened because he didn't hear it himself. Mr. Harrison told him he didn't know because he was on his phone at the time. 8 The Mayor, Jim Diodati, was sitting directly adjacent to Mr. Todd on his right. He said he heard Councillor Ioannoni say "that's the spin" in reference to Mr. Todd's answer to her question. He said she has used the word "spin" many times in the past. He said she uses that word to say people are lying. He also said she talks when other people are addressing Council and has been disrespectful to presenters in the past. After Councillor Ioannoni sat down Mayor Diodati turned to Councillor Pietrangelo and recognized him as the next speaker to address Council. Moments later Councillor Ioannoni stood, interrupted Councillor Pietrangelo, and said "he called me a bitch". In reply, Mayor Diodati advised he had not heard what Mr. Todd said. I also interviewed Stoyan Penev, the camera operator for Cogeco. Councillor Ioannoni advised me that Mr. Penev came up to her after the meeting and told her he heard the same words as she. Although Mr. Penev was located much farther away from Mr. Todd than anyone I interviewed, I interviewed him because Councillor Ioannoni said he had told her he heard everything clearly on his headphones. Mr. Penev confirmed he was operating the video camera during the June 14, 2016 Council meeting and he wore a headset. He told me the audio from the Council chamber microphones are streamed to his headset. However, he advised during Council meetings he turns the volume in his headset down lower than he could otherwise hear without his headset. He said Councillor Pietrangelo was speaking at that time and he was not paying much attention to the verbal exchange between Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni. He was not able to say what was said by either of them word for word. He said he heard Mr. Todd say something like "bitch" but he is not sure what words came before that. He advised that after the meeting Councillor Ioannoni asked him if he heard what happened on his headset. He said he advised her that he had heard Mr. Todd. However, when I specifically asked Mr. Penev whether he heard Mr. Todd say "you are such a bitch" or "son of a bitch", he was unable to identify hearing either of the specific phrases. However, he did say believed he heard the word "bitch", Other individuals were present in the Council Chamber during the verbal exchange between Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd. However, it did not appear anyone else was close enough to hear what Mr. Todd uttered before the word "bitch". However, before making that determination, I asked the witnesses I interviewed if they were aware of anyone else who may have heard what was said or if anyone had told them they heard what was said. Aside from Councillor Ioannoni stating that residents, whom she refused to identify, had heard it on the television broadcast, I interviewed everyone identified as possibly having heard the words preceding the word "bitch". I also confirmed with Mr. Penev that the video from Cogeco provided to me was the only source of recorded audio from the meeting and that the audio and video on the recording provided to me had not been altered in any way and was the same audio and video that was broadcast on television that night. Analysis and Findings The purpose of this investigation is to determine whether the verbal exchange between Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd during the June 14, 2016 Council meeting took place as alleged in the complaint and whether the Code, OHSA, or any of the following City by-laws or policies were violated: -9 • Corporate Values • Employee Rules and Regulations (revised June 2012) • Code of Ethics/Conduct (Conflict of Interest) (revised June 2012) • Respect in the Workplace (Harassment Prevention) (revised January 2016) • Accountability & Transparency • Consolidated By-law No. 89-155 as amended (by-law to provide for the Standing Rules of the Council) My determination of whether the allegations can be sustained ultimately turns on a review of the video recording and an assessment of the information provided by Councillor Ioannoni, Mr. Todd and the other witnesses. To the extent there are conflicting versions of what was said, it is my task to assess the credibility of the evidence, and if possible, determine which version is most consistent with what a practical and informed person would readily recognize as reasonably having been said in the circumstances. Having reviewed and weighed all of the evidence, I am satisfied Mr. Todd uttered the word "bitch". Although I am unable to hear the words spoken on the video recording, both Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd agree that word was said. Others located nearby also heard Mr. Todd say that word and I have no doubt it was said. It is apparent from watching the Cogeco recording Mr. Todd also said other words which preceded the word "bitch". However these words are not audible on the recording. Councillor Ioannoni alleges Mr. Todd said "you are such a bitch". Mr. Todd denies he said that and says he said "son of a bitch". Nobody else located nearby reported hearing the words spoken by Mr. Todd preceding the word "bitch". This is consistent with the evidence of several of the witnesses, including Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni, that: 1. the words preceding "bitch" were spoken at a lower volume than the word "bitch"; 2. Councillor Peitrangelo was speaking at that time; and 3. prior to uttering the words, Mr. Todd appeared on the video recording to reach forward, possibly to turn off his microphone. As well, Mr. Penev advised he had turned down the volume of the audio recording and did not hear the preceding words through his headset. This leaves conflicting versions of what was said by Mr. Todd, which I am unable to resolve by direct evidence from the witnesses. As such I have considered the credibility of the witnesses and in particular which version of the evidence is most consistent with what a practical and informed person would readily recognize as reasonably having been said in the circumstances. In so doing, I have considered the evidence of Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd as to what was said, as well as their statements and conduct during and after the Council meeting. When Councillor Ioannoni initially reacted during the Council meeting to the words spoken by Mr. Todd, Councillor Ioannoni stood up and said "he just called me a bitch". Other than the word "bitch" Councillor Ioannoni did not identify the specific words spoken by Mr. Todd at that - 10 - time. It was not until she submitted her written complaint to the Mayor later that night that she alleged Mr. Todd said "you are such a bitch". When I interviewed Councillor Ioannoni she was adamant Mr. Todd said "you are such a bitch" and not "son of a bitch". In support of her allegation Councillor Ioannoni told me a number of residents had contacted her after the meeting to tell her they had clearly heard the words she described when they watched Cogeco's live broadcast of the meeting. She also told me she had viewed a recorded copy of the television broadcast at a resident's house and heard the words again. I was not able to determine the veracity of Councillor Ioannoni's evidence regarding the residents, as Councillor Ioannoni refused to identify the residents to me. As such, I am unable to give any weight to Councillor Ioannoni's evidence about what residents told her. I am also troubled by the statements Councillor Ioannoni made to the media and to me regarding what can be seen and heard from the Cogeco recording. As a guest on a local radio show on June 16, 2016, Councillor Ioannoni referred to the recording of the Cogeco broadcast and said "not only can you hear it, but you can see him say it". Having reviewed the Cogeco recording I am unable to reconcile Councillor Ioannoni's assertion that Mr. Todd's words could be heard and seen with the fact that the words are not audible on the recording, and the camera distance makes it highly improbable anyone watching the recording could discern the words spoken. That Councillor Ioannoni misrepresented to the media and again to me during her interview that Mr. Todd's words can be heard and seen on the recording, when in fact they cannot, calls into question the veracity of what she alleges she heard Mr. Todd say during the Council meeting. Councillor Ioannoni may have been honestly mistaken about what she thought she heard Mr. Todd say that day. However, her vigorous statements to the media and to me about the clarity of the broadcast are not accurate. Councillor Ioannoni also told me the Cogeco camera operator (Mr. Penev) and Councillor Thomson told her immediately after the Council meeting they had heard Mr. Todd say those words. I interviewed Mr. Penev and Councillor Thomson and asked them what they heard. Both advised me that other than the word "bitch" they did not hear what Mr. Todd said. Mr. Penev told me he had the volume in his headset turned down low. In addition Councillor Pietrangelo was speaking at the time and there were a number of sources of background sounds in the room. Although I am unable to independently verify what Mr. Penev and Councillor Thomson heard, I accept their evidence that they did not hear the words preceding "bitch". Before accepting Councillor Thomson's evidence as to what he heard, I asked him what he meant when he said "I want to stay out of this" when the Mayor asked him if he heard Mr. Todd. Councillor Thomson explained that he had previously been subject to verbal altercations by Councillor Ioannoni in the past. He said his relationship with her had improved and he did not want it to deteriorate. I have also considered Mr. Todd's evidence as to what he said during the meeting. Mr. Todd appeared forthright during his interview with me and readily acknowledged he said the word "bitch. However, he maintains the preceding words were "son of a". He denied saying "you are such a bitch". He said he was frustrated with Councillor Ioannoni's repeated questions on the post -secondary campus issue and her refusal to accept the information he provided. He said he lost control and said "son of a bitch" after she said "that was the spin". He believed her - 11 - statement about his answers being "spin" was an attack on his integrity. He also candidly admitted he was embarrassed by what he said. He said he was sorry it happened and planned to apologize to the Mayor and Council at the next meeting. Mr. Todd also encouraged me to speak to others seated nearby about what they heard. I have considered all of the evidence on this issue and I am not able to find, on a balance of probabilities, Mr. Todd said the words "you are such a [bitch]" as alleged by Councillor Ioannoni. I have also considered whether Mr. Todd said "son of a bitch". In making this determination I have considered evidence provided to me about: the handling of the post -secondary campus initiative by the Mayor and City staff; a complaint by the ATU president against Mr. Todd and other members of management; and prior complaints by Councillors and City staff regarding their interactions with Councillor Ioannoni. I have not made any factual determinations with respect to the veracity of these issues or complaints. However I have taken the evidence I received into consideration for the purpose of providing context for the verbal exchange which took place during the council meeting and insight into the relationship between Councillor Ioannoni, Mr. Todd and other members of Council and staff. It was apparent from the information I received from Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni that there is a longstanding lack of trust between them. Councillor Ioannoni believes Mr. Todd withholds information from her which she believes she ought to receive. Mr. Todd expressed concern about Councillor loannoni's ability to keep sensitive information provided to Councillors confidential. This lack of trust affects their relationship and I believe contributed to some degree to the words exchanged during the June 14, 2016 meeting, how the words were understood, and the reaction that followed. Within this same context, I have also considered Councillor Ioannoni's statement "that was the spin". It concerns me that she publically challenged Mr. Todd's integrity without providing any factual evidence to support her contention. The resolution adopted by Council during that meeting does not indicate funds were committed by Council during the in -camera meeting. The resolution stated: "THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Niagara Falls City Council authorize staff to submit an application to the Investing in Regional Diversification (IRD) program, through FedDev Ontario, related to the economic development initiatives in the municipality; and FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that Niagara Falls City Council authorize staff to investigate possible partnerships related to the Investing in Regional Diversification (IRD) program." During the June 14, 2016, Council meeting Mayor Diodati and Councillor Pietrangelo confirmed Mr. Todd's description of what occurred at the February 2015 in -camera meeting in response to Councillor Ioannoni's questions. This was also consistent with evidence provided to me by Mr. Harrison, Director of Finance. He confirmed Council did not commit the expenditure of funds to the post -secondary initiative during the in -camera meeting. He also confirmed that in order to - 12 - commit to spend $10 million Council would have to pass a resolution at an open Council meeting. After I interviewed Councillor Ioannoni she sent me an email attaching a copy of a letter, dated February 12, 2015 from Mayor Diodati to the Federal Development Review Committee, which she received after our interview. In her email to me Councillor Ioannoni stated: "Here is the supporting documentation I asked for before Ken Todd swore at me. Note the first paragraph in the Mayor's letter. It confirms the city committed $10,000,000 to an application submitted by Ryerson. Also note it was not in principle. Just another example of Ken lying. I misunderstand very little, especially the committing of $10,000,000. Now his anger is understandable yet still unacceptable." I believe Councillor Ioannoni sent this to me in an effort to justify her statement "that was the spin". Although Councillor Ioannoni is correct that the portion of the Mayor's letter she referenced states "City Council committed $10 million in the project over the 4 year period as a partner in this initiative...", it does not establish Mr. Todd was lying when he described what happened at the in -camera meeting. I also note Councillor Ioannoni did not have a copy of this letter at the time she made her statement. Accordingly I find Councillor Ioannoni did not have any factual basis to challenge Mr. Todd's integrity when she did so at the June 14, 2016 Council meeting. Having reviewed and considered the evidence as to the words spoken, including the broader context of the relationship between Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Todd, I believe Councillor Ioannoni was challenging Mr. Todd's integrity when she said "that was the spin". I also believe Mr. Todd understood Councillor Ioannoni's statement to be an attack on his integrity and as he described, he "lost it". Having considered all of the evidence I conclude Mr. Todd responded out of anger and frustration and said "son of a bitch" in response to the statement made by Councillor Ioannoni. Application of Legal and Policy Requirements I now apply these findings to the applicable legal and policy requirements governing the conduct of City staff and elected officials at Council meetings. Does the Human Rights Code apply in this context and if so, was there a breach of the Code? The Code protects against discrimination and harassment in specific enumerated contexts, including in respect of employment. Section 5 provides: s. 5(1) Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to employment without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability. - 13 - (2) Every person who is an employee has a right to freedom from harassment in the workplace by the employer or agent of the employer or by another employee because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability.3 Section 7(2) provides: s. 7(2) Every person who is an employee has a right to freedom from harassment in the workplace because of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression by his or her employer or agent of the employer or by another employee.4 The preliminary question to be determined is whether a municipal Councillor, as an elected official, is an employee for the purpose of the protections provided under s.5 and 7(2) of the Code. The Code does not define "employee" and or "employment". However, this question has been considered in a number of previous human rights decisions. In Di Muccio v Corporation of the Town of Newmarket5 ("Di Muccio ") the applicant was a member of the municipal Council for Newmarket. She alleged fellow council members discriminated against her on the basis of sex contrary to s. 5(1) and 7(2) of the Code. In determining whether a municipal Councillor was an employee within the meaning of the Code, the Human Rights Tribunal relied on two prior decisions of the Superior Court6 in which the court found a municipal Councillor was not an employee. In JR v Springer Estates the court stated: There is a distinction to be made between a municipal employee and its elected official...he [the elected official] is not subject to the direction, supervision, and sanction, as are employees...the municipality has no control over the electorate's choice of representative.8 In St. Elizabeth Home Society9 the court stated: It is an equally long-standing principle of municipal law that an elected member of a municipal council is not an agent or employee of the municipal corporation in any legal sense. Elected members are not employed by or in any way under the control of the local authority while in office.1° 3 The Code, supra note 1 at s.5 4lbid at s.7(2). 5 2016 HRTO 406. 6 JR v Springer Estates, [2004] OJ No 3419 (SCJ) cited in Di Muccio, supra note 5 at para 25; St. Elizabeth Home Society v City of Hamilton, 2005 CanLII 46411 (Ont SCJ) cited in Di Muccio, supra note 5 at para 26. 7 Supra note 6. 8 JR v Springer Estates, supra note 6 cited in Di Muccio, supra note 5 at para 25. 9 Supra note 6. 10 St. Elizabeth Home Society, supra note 6 cited in Di Muccio, supra note 5 at para 26. - 14- Based on these decisions the Human Rights Tribunal in Di Muccio concluded a municipal Councillor was not an employee for the purposes of s. 5(1) and 7(2) of the Code. The Tribunal stated: I find that the cases cited above apply for the purposes of the Code and neither the applicant nor the alleged perpetrators are "employees" of the respondent... Given that neither the applicant nor the alleged perpetrators were "employees" of the respondent, the applicant cannot invoke the protection of s. 7(2) of the Code that specifically protects "employees" from harassment in the workplace on the basis of the sex by their "employers" or from "other employees." [...1 The Tribunal derives its jurisdiction to adjudicate claims of discrimination from the Code, which names five social areas in which discriminatory treatment is prohibited. Allegations that do not fall within one of these social areas are not within the Tribunal's jurisdiction to decide. While I appreciate that in determining whether a dispute falls into one of these social areas I must give the words of the Code a "liberal and purposive construction", I cannot ignore the limiting language or "otherwise circumvent the intention of the legislature.12 A significant factor taken into account by the Tribunal in making this determination was the lack of control exercised by the municipality in light of the Councillor's status as an elected officia1.13 Control is a salient factor in determining whether a municipal Councillor is protected from discrimination "with respect to employment" under s. 5(1). The leading decision regarding the interpretation of the scope of "with respect to employment" is John Michael McCormick v. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP14 ("McCormick"). In that case the Supreme Court applied a "control and dependency" test to determine whether an equity partner at a law firm is considered to be in an employment relationship. The Court stated: Deciding who is in an employment relationship for the purposes of the Code means in essence, examining how two synergetic aspects function in an employment relationship: control exercised by an employer over working conditions and remuneration, and corresponding dependency on the part of the worker. In other words, the test is who is responsible for determining working conditions and financial benefits and to what extent does a worker have an influential say in those determinations?15 McCormick concerned the British Columbia Code, but the Code contains very similar employment-related provisions. The test from McCormick has since been adopted and applied to municipal Councillors in a number of cases, and in each case municipal Councillors have been 11 Di Muccio, supra note 5 at paras 29-30. 12 Ibid at para 47. 13 Di Muccio, supra note 5 at para 29. 14 2014 SCC 39. 15 Ibid at para 23. - 15 - found not to be employees for the purposes of 5(1) of the Code (or the equivalent in the British Columbia Code). This test has also been applied in Ontario by the Tribunal in interpreting s. 5(1). In Janice Wing v Niagara Falls Hydro Holding Corporation16 ("Wing") the applicant was a municipal Councillor for the City of Niagara Falls. As a Councillor, Ms. Wing also sat on the Board of Directors of the Niagara Falls Hydro Holding Corporation ("HOLDCO"). The applicant made a complaint under 5(1) of the Code, claiming HOLDCO was discriminating against her on the basis of family status by holding board meetings at a time which interfered with her childcare obligations.17 Applying the test of "control and dependency" from McCormick, the Tribunal found that although the applicant was remunerated for sitting on the Board of Directors, that was not sufficient to create an employment relationship. Because the applicant held a great deal of control over the conditions in which she operated as Director the Board found there was not a relationship of dependency and therefore any discrimination alleged was not "with respect to employment".18 Finally, the applicant in Di Muccio also made a discrimination complaint under 5(1). Applying the test from McCormick, the Tribunal dismissed her application for lack of employment relationship, finding the municipality did not have the ability to fire, hire, or sanction a Councillor.19 The Tribunal stated: Importantly, the respondent did not hire and could not fire the applicant or the individuals on Council she alleges were discriminating against her. As a general rule, the power to "hire" and "fire" a municipal Councillor resides with the electorate...Not only does the respondent not have the ability to fire the Members of Council, but it has no authority to sanction them....To apply the test set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in McCormick, the respondent does not exercise control over a Council Member's "working conditions and remuneration." As a Member of a nine person Council, it was the applicant who was, to use the words in McCormick, "responsible for determining [her] working conditions and financial benefits." There is simply no basis for finding she was in an "employment relationship" with the respondent (emphasis added).20 Based on the analysis of the status of municipal councillors in these prior decisions, I conclude Councillor Ioannoni is not an employee of the City for the purposes of sections 5 and s. 7(2) of the Code. As such, any alleged discrimination or harassment, even if found to have occurred, does not result in a violation of the Code. However, in the event that I am not correct, I determine s. 5 and/or 7(2) were not violated in this case. I make this determination regardless of whether Mr. Todd stated "you are such a bitch" as alleged by Councillor Ioannoni or "son of a bitch" as I have found. Although neither phrase is 16 Janice Wing v Niagara Falls Hydro Holding Corporation, 2014 HRTO 1472. 17 Ibid at para 31. 18 Ibid at para 48. 19 Di Muccio, supra note 5 at paras 35, 40. 20 Ibid at paras 35, 40. - 16 - 1 appropriate or professional language to use in a Council meeting, use of the term "bitch" does not constitute harassment or discrimination based on the prohibited grounds set out in s. 5 or 7(2). Although context is important in determining whether a violation has occurred, in many cases calling someone a "bitch" has not resulted in a finding of discrimination or harassment absent other accompanying misconduct. In Hill v Intersteam Technologies Inc21, the applicant was called a "fucking bitch" and a "bitch" by another employee in the workplace. The applicant alleged discrimination with respect to employment based on her sex. The Tribunal found that "fucking bitch" and "bitch" were gendered words, but the comments were not perceived by the applicant to be sex discrimination and occurred in the context of a violent verbal altercation where much profanity was used. The Tribunal found there was no breach of the Code and no discipline was imposed. In Gubrenko v TOJEmpire Auto22, the applicant filed a complaint under the Code alleging she overheard one of the business owners call her a "bitch", "whore", and "slut" in the course of a conversation with another business owner. The Tribunal found the word "bitch" in the context in which it was said to be a "derogatory expletive connoting an unpleasant woman", and to be connected to the applicant's gender and objectively offensive. With respect to the use of the term "bitch", while inappropriate, the Tribunal found it was "not sufficiently egregious or virulent to amount to a violation of the Code." . Based on these decisions, if Councillor Ioannoni is considered to be in an employment relationship with the City, I find the use of the term "bitch" did not amount to a violation of the Code. Does the Occupational Health and Safety Act apply in this context and if so, has there been a violation of that act? The OHSA sets out health and safety-related rights and obligations which apply to workplace parties, including a worker and an employer. Pursuant to the OHSA an employer is required, among other things, to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker. A worker has a corresponding obligation to work in compliance with the OHSA and to report any hazards in the workplace. The OHSA defines "employer" and "worker" as follows: "worker" means any of the following, but does not include an inmate of a correctional institution or like institution or facility who participates inside the institution or facility in a work project or rehabilitation program: 1. A person who performs work or supplies services for monetary compensation. 21 2015 HRTO 804. 22 2014 HRTO 1232. - 17 - "employer" means a person who employs one or more workers or contracts for the services of one or more workers and includes a contractor or subcontractor who performs work or supplies services and a contractor or subcontractor who undertakes with an owner, constructor, contractor or subcontractor to perform work or supply services. In addition to the general obligations stated above, the OHSA sets out specific obligations relating to harassment in the workplace. The current OHSA provisions governing harassment in the workplace are set out below: Policies, violence and harassment 32.0.1 (1) An employer shall, (a) prepare a policy with respect to workplace violence; (b) prepare a policy with respect to workplace harassment; and (c) review the policies as often as is necessary, but at least annually. Written form, posting (2) The policies shall be in written form and shall be posted at a conspicuous place in the workplace. Exception (3) Subsection (2) does not apply if the number of workers regularly employed at the workplace is five or fewer, unless an inspector orders otherwise. Program, harrassment 32.0.6 (1) An employer shall develop and maintain a program to implement the policy with respect to workplace harassment required under clause 32.0.1 (1) (b). Contents (2) Without limiting the generality of subs. (1), the program shall, (a) include measures and procedures for workers to report incidents of workplace harassment to the employer or supervisor; (b) set out how the employer will investigate and deal with incidents and complaints of workplace harassment; and (c) include any prescribed elements Information and instruction, harassment 32.0.7 An employer shall provide a worker with, (a) information and instruction that is appropriate for the worker on the contents of the policy and program with respect to workplace harassment; and - 18 - (b) any other prescribed information. The OHSA does not contain any specific obligations for a worker with respect to the prevention of workplace harassment. As such, I find Mr. Todd has not violated any of the provisions of the OHSA. However, as the City has implemented a Respect in the Workplace (Harassment Prevention) policy, I will also determine whether his conduct constitutes harassment under this policy. Did the conduct violate any City policy or by-law? The following City policies and by-laws set standards for and govern the conduct of and interactions between employees and elected officials: • Corporate Values • Employee Rules and Regulations (revised June 2012) • Code of Ethics/Conduct (Conflict of Interest) (revised June 2012) • Respect in the Workplace (Harassment Prevention) (revised January 2016) • Accountability & Transparency • Consolidated By-law No. 89-155 as amended (by-law to provide for the Standing Rules of the Council) I have reviewed these governing documents and determined the Accountability and Transparency policy and the Consolidated by-law for the Standing Rules of the Council do not set out any specific requirements relevant for the purpose of this investigation. The other governing documents do contain relevant requirements which I have considered in my analysis below. Code of Ethics/Conduct (Conflict of Interest) June 2012 This Code of Conduct sets out standards for conduct of employees and elected officials. The relevant portions of the Code of Conduct, excluding provisions relating to conflict of interest, are as follows: CODE OF ETHICS/CONDUCT (CONFLICT OF INTEREST) PURPOSE Employees of the City of Niagara Falls are expected to conduct themselves with personal integrity, ethics, honesty and diligence in performing their duties for the organization. Employees are required to support and advance the interests of the organization and avoid placing themselves in situations where their personal interests actually or potentially conflict with the interests of the City. - 19 - The City of Niagara Falls is committed to conducting business in an open and ethical manner. We accomplish this by creating a workplace built on the core values of accountability, leadership, teamwork and respect in all our business practices. It is the responsibility of every employee to build and maintain this code of ethics by supporting, and actively participating in the process. SCOPE This policy applies to all City of Niagara Falls employees, including but not limited to regular, temporary and contract employees, and to volunteers, students and interns (collectively called "Employees"), as well as elected officials. This Policy is intended to supplement any other requirements imposed by applicable legislation, standards of professional practice, or any other requirements imposed by relevant City entities or departments. The standards outlined in this policy are also particularly relevant to employees or elected officials who are in a position to make or influence decisions of the organization. RESPONSIBILITIES AND EXPECTATIONS 3.1 Elected Officials All elected officials are expected to work together to promote a workplace built on our core values of accountability, leadership, teamwork and respect. Elected Officials are expected to set a prime example. In all their business dealings, honesty and integrity shall be required. In accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (R.S.O. 1990, Chapter M.50), City Councillors must report any conflicts of interest regarding their position at the City of Niagara Falls. Must report any suspected violations. 3.2 Senior Management All senior management staff are expected to work together to promote a workplace built on our core values of accountability, leadership, teamwork and respect. Senior Staff are also expected to set a prime example. In all their business dealings, honesty and integrity shall be required. Shall have an open door policy allowing for the free discussion of suggestions and concerns from employees. Must report any conflicts of interest regarding their position at the City of Niagara Falls. - 20 - Must report any suspected violations. 3.3 Managers and Employees All employees are expected to work together to promote a workplace built on our core values of accountability, leadership, teamwork and respect. Disclose any conflicts of interest regarding their position at the City of Niagara Falls. Report suspected violations. *Retaliation against employees who use these reporting mechanisms to raise genuine concerns will not be tolerated. The Code of Ethics/Conduct policy expressly requires both senior management staff and elected officials to "work together to promote a workplace built on our core values of accountability, leadership, teamwork and respect". Corporate Values The City has a separate governing document that provides additional guidance regarding how people are to work with each other to implement the City's Corporate Values: The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls is committed to enhancing the quality of life of, and service to, its customers through a corporate culture that embraces and rewards our core values of: Accountability, Teamwork, Leadership and Respect. We believe... that people are our most important resource and essential in striving for the Corporations' mission and common goal of excellence in customer service. Our City Council, staff, and volunteers are committed to working together and demonstrating the highest standards of service and individual conduct. We believe... that core corporate values are critical to our success, and essential to the way we work on a daily basis. Our shared values are the guiding principles for the organization. Our corporate values will influence the way the organization works, how staff and customers are treated, and how people work with each other, inside and outside the organization. The Corporate Values also identifies the following behaviours to provide additional guidance as to how the Corporate Values are to be implemented by employees and elected officials in their day-to-day activities on behalf of the City: -21 - Accountability ...Do the right thing! We are responsible and timely in our actions and commitments. We act with integrity and continuously strive for excellence in the delivery of service to our customers. We are personally responsible for our own decisions, actions, and behaviours. We are accountable for accomplishing quality work in a timely manner. We recognize the importance of achieving positive results and continuously strive for excellence in the delivery of service to our customers. We are committed to managing the public resources entrusted to us in an efficient and effective manner We display integrity through open and transparent decision-making and action consistent with policy. Teamwork ...All for one! We collaborate and cooperate with each other in an open trusting and truthful fashion enabling us to build consensus, share information, and achieve our goals. We value positive, effective working relationships with our internal and external customers. We understand that innovation, creativity, and good decision making are best achieved through teamwork. We collaborate and support one another as team members across departmental boundaries to meet common goals. We value a working culture that supports a safe, clean, healthy, and productive work environment. We value honesty and integrity, and expect everyone to treat each other with respect. Leadership ...Everyone takes the lead! We are professional, progressive, and knowledge leaders in our field. We achieve our vision, mission, and goals by empowering staff, by entrusting our team, and by role modeling behaviours that others will choose to follow. We value empowerment and initiative, and support one another to identify opportunities, solve problems, and respond to challenges. - 22 - We communicate and share information often, openly, and honestly. We understand the role we play, at all times, as ambassadors for the City of Niagara Falls. We continuously examine, adapt and improve the service we provide to our customers. We encourage and support staff in accessing learning and development opportunities to continuously develop, improve, and upgrade their knowledge and skills. Respect ...Give and you shall receive! We value the rights and opinions of every person and ensure that everyone is treated with dignity, honesty, and fairness. We act with integrity and treat others as we want to be treated. We have relationships between Council, staff, and volunteers that are open and respectful. We engage in active listening and allow the opinions of others to be heard. We believe gossip is often negative, hurtful, and counter-productive to the workplace. We do not label people, bully, or tolerate any workplace harassment or discrimination, and we use appropriate language in the workplace. We do not harbour past resentment, jealousy, guilt, or bitterness towards others. We value positive and timely conflict resolution, but recognize that healthy disagreement can lead to constructive and innovative outcomes. As set out in the Corporate Values, City staff and elected officials are accountable for their actions and behaviour. Everyone is expected to treat others with respect and to use appropriate language. Under the Corporate Value "respect", there is also an express confirmation that the City does not tolerate workplace harassment or discrimination. As both Mr. Todd and Councillor Ioannoni are subject to the terms of the Code of Ethics/Conduct policy and the City's Corporate Values, I have assessed their conduct in light of those requirements. I find Mr. Todd violated the Code of Conduct/Ethics policy and the Corporate Values when he said "son of a bitch" in response to Councillor Ioannoni's allegation "that was the spin". He used profanity in the workplace during a public meeting and his language was disrespectful. I find his conduct fell below the standard required of a senior staff member. As - 23 - the Chief Administrative Officer, Mr. Todd is expected to lead by example and model appropriate behaviour in his interactions with others. He failed to meet this standard. I also find Councillor Ioannoni's comment "that was the spin" violated the Code of Conduct/Ethics policy and the Corporate Values. Her comment, which was made at a public meeting and broadcast on live television, was not respectful. As an elected official, Councillor Ioannoni is expected to work together to promote a workplace built on respect. By calling into question Mr. Todd's integrity in a public forum without providing supporting facts, she failed to treat him with respect, contrary to the Code of Conduct/Ethics policy and the Corporate Values. Employee Rules and Regulations I have also reviewed the City's Employee Rules and Regulations which contain requirements for appropriate work behaviour. These rules and regulations apply to employees. The relevant portions of the Employee Rules and Regulations are as follows: PURPOSE To provide guidelines and assistance for employees in upholding the integrity and impartiality of the City's operations and to act, and be seen to act, in the interest of the City and not for personal gain while maintaining a high standard of ethical, moral, and legal conduct. PROCEDURE The City of Niagara Falls Rules and Regulations apply to all City employees. Employees are encouraged to discuss any situations of concern or doubt regarding the Rules and Regulations with their Supervisor, Manager, Director and or CAO as appropriate. All Employees will abide by the Corporate Values and the policies and procedures of the City. 2.3 Behaviour on the Job No employee shall use profane or abusive language, engage in horseplay, fight, be negligent, careless, and disobedient or exhibit willful misconduct while in the performance of job, duties or on City property, or display attitudes or actions of a nature to intimidate, inhibit or annoy fellow employees engaged in their normal duties. - 24 - I have considered Mr. Todd's conduct at the June 14, 2016 Council meeting and find he violated paragraph 2.3 of the Employee Rules and Regulations when he used profane language during the meeting. Respect in the Workplace (Harassment Prevention) The City has a separate policy entitled Respect in the Workplace (Harassment Prevention). This policy expressly applies to employees and elected officials. The obligations set out in the Harassment Prevention policy that are relevant to my analysis are reproduced below: RESPECT IN THE WORKPLACE (HARASSMENT PREVENTION) POLICY STATEMENT The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls is committed to providing a workplace that ensures employee safety and security, and shall take all reasonable, necessary precautions to prevent harassment in the workplace. In December 2009, the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), was amended to ensure workplace violence and harassment is addressed by all employers. The City of Niagara Falls prohibits any form of workplace harassment and discrimination, and is committed to fostering an environment that respects the dignity, self-worth and rights of every individual as prescribed by the Ontario Human Rights Code (OHRC) and the Occupational Health & Safety Act. PURPOSE The intent of this policy is to identify individual roles and responsibilities to prevent workplace harassment and, where necessary, act upon any alleged complaints in a timely, fair and judicious manner APPLICATION This policy shall apply to all employees of the City of Niagara Falls, including but not limited to elected officials, volunteers, students, interns, consultants and contractors. Members of the general public, visitors to City facilities or individuals conducting business with the City are expected to refrain from harassment and discrimination against City employees. Employees found in contravention of this Corporate Policy, may be subject to discipline by the Corporation, up to and including termination, and may also be personally subject to other civil or criminal liabilities. DEFINITIONS - 25 - 4.1 "Workplace Harassment" As per the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Workplace Harassment means engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct against a worker in a workplace that is known, or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome. Harassment may result from one incident or a series of incidents, and may be intentional or unintentional. It may include actions and behaviours that, while not directed to a particular individual, create a "poisoned environment" which is hostile, intimidating or offensive. The Human Rights Code prohibits workplace harassment and/or discrimination under one or more of the following grounds: Race Colour Marital Status Ancestry Creed Family Status Place of Origin Sex Disability Ethnic Origin Sexual Orientation Record of Offences Citizenship Age 4.2 "Workplace" Workplace is defined as the office, corporate buildings, lunchrooms, washrooms, work -sites, on -road vehicles and any other location where the business of the municipality is being conducted. 4.3 "A Work -site" A Work -site includes not only physical locations, but also any other location associated with the work of the Corporation, such as corporate social gatherings, conferences, training sessions, electronic communications, business travel or customer calls. Places and occasions where people are gathered together for work purposes are all situations where violence can potentially occur. 4.4 "Sexual Harassment" Sexual Harassment includes any unwelcome act, comment, or conduct based on sex that is known or ought to be known to be unwelcome. This also includes person(s) in position(s) of authority making sexual advances or requesting sexual favours (sexual solicitation) and/or threatening or taking punitive action against someone who does not comply with such requests or advances (sexual reprisal). - 26 - 4.5 "Poisoned Work Environment" Deals with how we treat one another. It occurs when comments or actions create real or perceived inequality in terms or conditions of employment, accommodation, service, contracts and membership in vocational associations for persons or groups protected under the Human Rights Code. For example, insulting jokes, slurs or cartoons about sexuality or racial groups, or pin-up photos that demean women, all contribute to a poisoned environment for members of those groups. 4.6 "Personal Harassment" Personal Harassment is a pattern of repeated inappropriate behaviour, and/or conduct that makes an individual feel embarrassed, offended and intimidated. Although personal harassment may not violate the prohibited grounds outlined in the Human Rights Code, the types of behaviour and conduct that may constitute personal harassment will include, but not be limited to bullying, false accusations; ongoing condescending comments; yelling and shouting; practical jokes that result in insult or embarrassment; repeated and offensive gestures/comments; abuse of authority; and coercion. RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Employer As the employer, The City of Niagara Falls is responsible for providing a workplace free from all forms of harassment and ensures that policies, procedures and practices comply with the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Occupational Health & Safety Act. Further, the City will endeavour to create a workplace environment that encourages the reporting of alleged incidents and will ensure that harassment complaints are handled and investigated in an effective, fair and expeditious manner. 5.2 Managers / Supervisors All managers or persons in a position of authority (i.e., those directing work of others) are responsible for maintaining a workplace free from harassment and/or discrimination. Managers are responsible for their own actions and the actions of their staff. Where harassment is alleged or has occurred, managers must not tolerate, ignore or condone such conduct, and must act in a timely and appropriate manner in accordance with this policy. In addition, Managers must consult with Human Resources on guidance and direction relating to this policy. - 27 - 5.3 Employees All employees have the right to work in an environment free from harassment and or discrimination. It is the responsibility of every employee to refrain from any form of harassment in the workplace. Employees are encouraged to report incidents of harassment/discrimination, and cooperate fully in any investigation into an incident. All employees are expected to familiarize themselves with this policy and abide by its terms and conditions. I have considered Mr. Todd's conduct at the Council meeting on June 14, 2016 in light of the requirements of this policy. The words spoken by Mr. Todd were said in frustration and anger in response to Councillor Ioannoni's comment "that was the spin". I find they do not meet the standard for harassment under the policy. They did not constitute a "course of vexatious comment or conduct" and did not create a "poisoned environment which is hostile, intimidating or offensive." Although Mr. Todd's statement "son of a bitch" was not appropriate in the circumstances, I conclude it did not breach the requirements of the Harassment Prevention policy. CONCLUSIONS For the reasons outlined above, it is my determination that by saying "son of a bitch" in response to Councillor Ioannoni's statement "that was the spin" Mr. Todd violated the Code of Conduct/Values policy, Corporate Values, and Employee Rules and Regulations. I conclude he did not violate any other City policy or by-law. I further determine that his conduct did not violate the Code or OHSA. I further determine Councillor loannoni violated the Code of Conduct/Values policy and the Corporate Values by publicly challenging Mr. Todd's integrity when she had no factual basis to support her allegation. -28- i CITY CLERK DEAN IOP F[OA SCHEDULE A MAYOR ,JIM DIODATI CAO KEN TONG PUBLIC GALLERY O. WAYNE THOMSON C, CAROLYNN IOANNNI SCHEDULE B -------- Original message From: Carolynn Ioannoni <carolynnioannoni@me.com> Date: 2016-06-14 9:41 PM (GMT -05:40) To: Jim Diodati <j_diodati@,niagarafalls.ca>, Ken Todd <ktodd@niagarafalls.ca>, CouncilMembers <councilmembers6a?,niagarafalls.ca>, Ken Beaman <kbeaman@niagarafalls.ca>, ray.spiteri@sunmedia.ca, RHutton@,niagarathisweek.com Subject: You are such a bitch Jim This is to follow up on the incident that occurred tonight during the council meeting. Following the discussion on the Fed dev application our CAO Ken Todd sat down and said to me, loud enough to for me and Wayne Thomson to hear " you are such a bitch". Wayne confirmed that to myself, Vince and Kim when we were exiting city hall telling Vince that Ken said that loudly. Vinces response was " what do you want us to dol". The cameraman stopped me as 1 was leaving to tell me he picked it up on his headset -and heard it clearly. There are numerous witnesses that heard him tell me that. 1 have lef a message with Jack Custer, asking for a copy. I have texts, entails and phone calls from residents who heard it clearly. Not only was that inappropriate, insubordinate, sexist, bullying, and intimidating it was against every city policy and allowable behaviour we have. No staff should be allowed to talk to any other staff or councillor that way, including our CAO. Under Bill 16g, and common decency, 1 am allowed to go to work and do my job, whether you like my position on an issue or not and not be sworn at and called names. I will be taking appropriate action As should this council. Carolynn