Ed Smith, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, The Pointer

In a decision that appears to contradict itself, the municipal watchdog hired by Council members to hold them accountable has determined that even though Mayor Mat Siscoe violated rules set out in the Code of Conduct that governs the behaviour of local elected officials, his conduct somehow did not rise to a punishable contravention of the code.

The Integrity Commissioner for the City of St. Catharines, Michael Maynard, concluded his investigation into complaints concerning the use of taxpayer resources for Siscoe’s endorsement of Premier Doug Ford ahead of the recent provincial election. 

The report on this week’s council agenda makes it clear that rules were broken: “Some City resources appear to have been used to organize the Mayor’s appearance at the event with Premier Ford,” Maynard wrote.

Section 13.1 of the City’s Code of Conduct, which details the rules council members have to follow regarding election-related activities, states: “The use of the City’s resources, both property and staff time, for any election-related activity is strictly prohibited.”

Section 10 of the Code details rules council members have to follow regarding “Improper use of Influence”: “A Member shall not use the influence of their office or appointment for any purpose other than the exercise of his or her official duties in the public interest…A Member shall not use the status of their position to influence the decision of another person…”. The Code makes it clear that no member of council is to use their office, title or status as a local elected official to endorse candidates during a provincial or federal campaign. 

Asked to explain his behaviour, when Siscoe had his office staff organize and arrange his attendance at a campaign event for Ford during the provincial election campaign, where the Mayor endorsed the eventual winner, he told Maynard that he attended and spoke at the event as a private citizen, not as the mayor and that he did not mention his title. 

“Mayor Siscoe asserted that he never specifically mentioned his role as Mayor, nor did he express that he was speaking on behalf of the City’s residents or ratepayers – but he was speaking from his personal experience of working with Premier Ford,” Maynard wrote. 

He acknowledges in his investigation report that Siscoe clearly was at the Ford campaign event as the Mayor of St. Catharines: “I agree with the Complainants that Mayor Siscoe was invited to the event because he is the Mayor, which was the only reason his endorsement would have had weight beyond that of an ordinary citizen. I acknowledge that Mayor Siscoe’s statement did not explicitly refer to his title as Mayor, but his endorsement was obviously based on his experience in the role. His rationale for providing the endorsement was in fact connected to his working knowledge of political issues in St. Catharines. I reviewed Mayor Siscoe’s prepared remarks from the event. While he did not directly identify himself as Mayor, he did refer to his Mayoral work through statements such as: “Since I’ve taken office, we’ve identified areas where we needed help from the Province, and Premier Ford and his government have consistently delivered.”  

Despite the obvious violations of the Code of Conduct, Maynard ultimately decided that the contraventions were not significant enough to warrant any punishment or even an official acknowledgement that Siscoe was clearly out of bounds. 

“I do not believe it is appropriate to apply the Code of Conduct to severely restrict free political expression,” the Commissioner wrote in his final decision. “To the extent that City resources were consumed through the Mayor attending this event, I find that usage de minimis and pragmatically unavoidable. The Code of Conduct should not set impossible standards or be applied so inflexibly that it creates absurd and impractical outcomes.”    

As previously reported by The Pointer, Siscoe was one of three Niagara Region mayors who gathered on January 31 during Doug Ford’s appearance in the region to publicly endorse him to be the next premier. Siscoe was joined by Mayor Jim Diodati of Niagara Falls and Mayor Frank Campion of Welland. The endorsement immediately raised eyebrows among residents as municipal politics in Canada are traditionally non-partisan and separate from the influence of party politics. The code of conduct in each of the three cities contains clauses that prohibit elected officials from using their positions to improperly influence others beyond the scope of their official duties.

Subsequent reporting revealed, based on information obtained through a freedom of information request, that Mayor Siscoe had utilized City resources in preparation for the endorsement. The St. Catharines’ Code of Conduct states: “The use of the City’s resources, both property and staff time, for any election-related activity is strictly prohibited.”

Maynard, who works for the firm ADR Chambers, instructed that his report should appear on the agenda at Monday evening’s council meeting, but received neither questions nor discussion from members of council. 

The FOI documents revealed City staff were involved in arranging Siscoe’s participation for at least 48 hours prior to the event, as well as dealing with the fallout from the event for days afterward.

In his response to the Code of Conduct complaints submitted by three residents, Mayor Siscoe acknowledged that he endorsed Premier Ford, but argued that, even if he had made the endorsement in his official capacity as mayor, he is not expressly prohibited from doing so. Additionally, he stated that he did not utilize City resources in the course of the endorsement. He also emphasized that he did not reference his position as mayor or claim to speak on behalf of the residents of St. Catharines when he endorsed Ford.

A review of the video from the endorsement event shows that he was introduced as “Mayor Siscoe of St. Catharines” before he took the podium to make his endorsement remarks. After telling a quick joke, Siscoe said, “In St. Catharines the decision to endorse Doug Ford was relatively simple. I’ve been in office now for just over two years.” He then listed reasons why, in his opinion, it made sense to endorse Ford.

In his report, Maynard wrote, “An improper use of influence must be more obvious than what Mayor Siscoe did in this case. For instance, had he worn the Chain of Office while endorsing Premier Ford formally on behalf of the City, there would be a much stronger argument for a Code breach.”

It’s unclear if Maynard saw all the evidence that shows Siscoe used his office resources, beyond what is addressed in the Commissioner’s report. The FOI  documents obtained by The Pointer include emails between Ford’s campaign staff and City of St. Catharines staff coordinating Siscoe’s attendance at the event and his direct participation as mayor. City staff even suggested which previously scheduled meetings regarding municipal business could be rearranged so Siscoe would not miss Ford’s appearance. The FOI documents show City staff doing extensive work to reorganize Siscoe’s schedule, reach out to those whose meetings had to be cancelled or postponed and coordinating with Ford’s campaign staff, all to make sure the mayor attended the campaign event where he endorsed the current Premier.

Emails included in the documents obtained by The Pointer show that City resources including emails, computers and phones were used by staff to coordinate Siscoe’s appearance at Ford’s event which took place at the end of January during the Ontario election campaign. 

Once again, Maynard appears to acknowledge the Code of Conduct violations: “I would still use this opportunity to remind the Mayor and all Members of Council to be cautious in their activities, and to avoid using City equipment and resources for things that are not official City business or as otherwise permitted in accordance with policy expectations,” he wrote in the report.

For at least one St. Catharines’ resident, Maynard’s final decision makes little sense. 

Dennis Van Meer—a lifelong resident of the city and one of the three individuals who filed a complaint against Mayor Siscoe—described the Integrity Commissioner’s conclusion as “absurd”. 

“Whether or not Siscoe wore the Chain of Office is irrelevant to whether he used his public position to lend weight to a political endorsement of Premier Ford,” Van Meer says. He believes Siscoe was asked to participate in the endorsement event precisely because he is the mayor; was introduced as the mayor; and spoke as the mayor. He pointed to the mayor’s repeated references to “our accomplishments” and the use of “we” when describing achievements, asserting that these remarks clearly indicate he was acting in an official role and not as a private citizen. 

“To conclude anything else is wilful blindness or stupidity.”

Addressing the use of municipal resources paid by taxpayers, Van Meer emphasized that the language in the Code of Conduct is clear and unequivocal regarding election-related activities.

“It’s hard to see any gray area in an official code that states the use of municipal staff time or property is strictly prohibited for the support of any election activities,” he says. Van Meer expressed a broader concern about the integrity of the accountability system as a whole, questioning its effectiveness and legitimacy.

“How can it be that there is no integrity with the Integrity Commissioner?”

The qualifications required to be appointed as an Integrity Commissioner are not defined. While the Municipal Act mandates that all municipalities must appoint an Integrity Commissioner, it does not prescribe any specific qualifications for the role. Although many individuals serving as Integrity Commissioners are lawyers, legal training is not a requirement and some lawyers who have served in the role have had no experience in municipal law. Michael Maynard’s online profile describes him as an “investigator, mediator, and adjudicator”, but does not list any specific academic or professional credentials. Maynard did not respond to questions about his qualifications to carry out this type of municipal investigation. 

An IC is appointed by City Council and they work directly for and report to members of Council, who can fire or choose not to rehire the Commissioner responsible for holding them accountable. 

The Ontario Ombudsman does not regulate Integrity Commissioners, but does publish a guide outlining best practices for their conduct. Section 9 of that guide states that, while the extent of disclosure around a complaint is at the discretion of the Integrity Commissioner, complainants should be informed if their identities will be disclosed to the member whose conduct is under investigation. 

In the case of Siscoe’s endorsement of Ford, the identities of at least two complainants were disclosed to the Mayor. Both individuals confirmed to The Pointer that they were not consulted and were not asked for permission prior to the disclosure of their identity to the mayor. Questions sent to Maynard’s office about the disclosure of the complainants’ names to Mayor Siscoe were not answered. 

In its 2023–2024 Annual Report, the Ontario Ombudsman office raised concerns about the lack of standardized qualifications for Integrity Commissioners across the province. The report noted the absence of formal accreditation requirements and highlighted the Ombudsman’s observation that there is a “wide range of skills and knowledge amongst individuals acting as municipal integrity commissioners. In some cases, appointed integrity commissioners lack familiarity with applicable legislation and case law, including with respect to procedural fairness.” 

The Ombudsman recommended that the provincial government establish a baseline of skills and core competencies for the role.

“Integrity Commissioners and the municipalities they serve would benefit from the establishment of core competencies. Professional standards would also increase the public’s confidence in the accountability framework, and would assist when my Office reviews complaints about integrity commissioners.”

Van Meer expressed his frustration with a system that allows an Integrity Commissioner to be directly hired by the people that the watchdog investigates. He is calling for swift reforms.

“Mayor Mat Siscoe may have won this Code of Conduct complaint, but he lost in the court of public opinion.”

The Pointer reached out to Mayor Siscoe and Maynard. Siscoe did not respond.

Maynard’s office stated: “It is not our practice to publicly comment on Code of Conduct matters beyond what we report to Council in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001”.

The response illustrates concerns raised by Ontario’s Ombudsman. It appears Maynard is not familiar with the sections of the Municipal Act that govern the conduct of Integrity Commissioners. 

Contrary to the claim by Maynard’s office, that the Municipal Act prohibits comment beyond “what we report to Council”, the Act states an Integrity Commissioner “may have a public meeting to discuss the inquiry”, which is a common practice in municipalities to ensure public interest matters are properly addressed by an Integrity Commissioner. 

Maynard states in his report that: “I do not ordinarily publish reports when I find there has been no violation of the Code.”

His ordinary practice, of not publishing reports which do not include a violation of the Code, prevents the public from understanding how he reaches such conclusions. It would be akin to a judge in a criminal case not making public the evidence and legal justifications for their decisions that result in the acquittal of a defendant. Maynard’s stated practice appears to contravene the very piece of legislation that governs his conduct. 

The Municipal Act states that when an investigation is conducted and a report, which municipal taxpayers pay for, is produced, “The municipality and each local board shall ensure that reports received from the Commissioner by the municipality or by the board, as the case may be, are made available to the public.”

According to Maynard himself, he has not followed the rules that are supposed to govern his responsibility to taxpayers.  

Email: ed.smith@thepointer.com

At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you

Learn more about our News Monitoring here.

---