THE DEMOCRATIC REPORTER
Pages of Special Interest;
Other Table of Contents;
|The news release & Election section |
The following action has been filed with;
City of Mississauga
RE: A formal request for police and the province to participant in the City of Mississauga's municipal election and for two members of City of Mississauga to be removed from participating in the municipal election.
Dear Sir: Nov. 9, 2000
I am writing to the Peel police requesting they seriously consider intervening/participation in the City of Mississauga municipal election, with a technology specialists to ensure the ballots are properly counted, totals recorded and reported to the public.
I am writing to the City of Mississauga requesting that the two persons that have been placed in charge of the City of Mississauga's municipal election be replaced. This is to ensure that those responsible for the accurate counting of the ballots and the accuracy of the totals being recorded, will be properly presented to the public. That the overall, over seeing of the technology, should be handled by persons from the province, who have unquestionable integrity.
The two persons, Arthur Grannum, Director of Legislative Services and Deputy City Clerk and Joan LeFeuvre, Manager of Administration & Records/Freedom of Information Co-ordinator have in the past been involved with and at the direction of the Mayor, Hazel McCallion (a politician who is currently seeking re-election), violated provincial legislation, violated a City By-Law and a signing false affidavit. In this letter are facts that show how totally untrustworthy they are, in carrying out provincial legislation for the benefit of the public. This also shows a complete disrespect for the laws that govern their professional lives and the laws that ensure a lawful and fair democracy as well as showing a lack of personal and professional integrity. As they have committed these acts in the past, there is a reasonable chance they will again. At the Nov. 2, test of the voting machines, a time to question the integrity of the voting process, they were asked if any persons who had violated provincial legislation or signed false affidavits, were involved in the overseeing the election process.
....2 - 2 -
The question was not answered and I was told that was not the place to ask such a question.
The documents presented (and many more pieces of evidence not enclosed), show that Arthur Grannum, and Joan LeFeuvre, have both, under direct from the Mayor, Hazel McCallion, violated provincial legislation and Joan LeFeuvre has signed at least one false affidavit.
These persons have complete control over the election process and there are significant opportunities to input false election results. They have shown a desire to disregard the laws of the land, the rights of Canadians/Mississaugans, in favor of carrying out a political agenda. The most reasonable thing to do is to have them removed from the process, that they should be replaced with persons from the province and the Peel police to review and over see the technology before and during the election. That the overall, over seeing of the technology, should be handled by persons from the province. If they are willing to violate provincial legislation for their political masters, then a endorsement from those very same politicians or others who work at City Hall is a meaningless gesture.
More details and sound bites are on my web-site www.eol.ca/~ donbar
- 1 - ....2 - 2 -
Concerns about the voting machines, the counting of ballots and the final totals reported. The City of Mississauga has upgraded its voting system to be a more fully computerized system. In the 1994 election they was legal action brought regarding the City's handling of the election and ballots. I watched on election night, 200+ votes change from one candidate to another, who just happened to be a Councillor's secretary. I enquired about what happened but an explanation was not provided by the City Clerk.
I have spoken to the "Local Government Policy Branch of Municipal Affairs", and they agree the rules regarding scrutineers and scrutineering a computerized election are both out of date and inadequate. They plan to update them for the 2003 election. The voting process is not longer transparent, it is mostly hidden and open to abuses and inaccurate results. As the election is totally in the care and control of City staff, it is imperative that the persons responsible for the accuracy of the election be above suspicion. The easy at which tampering can be done (where cost is not an issue), is surprising. The questions about the security of this process produced this understand. In 1994 candidates were not allowed in the main counting and there were serious questions about that election. Due to our protest we were allowed in, in 1997. In the 2000 election we are again shut out. Are the phone lines that the poll results are sent over secure? No. Is the link between the poll machine and the counting room tamper proof? No. Would the candidates be allowed to review the software of the machines and computers to make sure they have not been tampered with? No. The City's assurances are all verbal and the candidates don't get a written break down of the technology used, how it works together and what the security features are. The list goes on and on. Given how hard it is to get a recount and that the City control access to ballots after the election, the opportune for election fraud is great, easily done and next to impossible to discover after the fact.
When the ballot test was done, we were treated to seeing two different results come up on the computer screen. The fact is, if the candidate does not have a computer expert overseeing all operations then how would you catch tampering, if it was done by those operating the computers and voting machines? Maybe the reason Hazel McCallion doesn't feel the need to campaign during an election, is the outcome is never in doubt, for her?
The violation of provincial legislation - the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and City By-law 53-91, (dated Feb. 11/91, ... the Council of The Corporation of the named City ENACTS as follows: 1. That the City Clerk is hereby delegated the powers and duties of the Head of The Corporation of the named City prescribed in the Municipal Freedom and Protection of Personal Privacy Act 1989.)
On July 19/94, a meeting was held at Mississauga City Hall that included Hazel McCallion, the Mayor, Arthur Grannum, acting Duty City Clerk, Joan LeFeuvre, Manager of Administration & Records/Freedom of Information Co-ordinator and myself. At this meeting Hazel McCallion gave directs to Arthur Grannum and Joan LeFeuvre to violated the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and they did. Hazel McCallion gave directs to Arthur Grannum and Joan LeFeuvre to violate City By-law 53-91 and they did. Neither protested or even commented that there was the chance their actions could legally questionable (and why should they, they work for Hazel McCallion).
....3 - 3 -
Joan LeFeuvre and the Mayor refused to put their decisions in writing and this ment I couldn't Appeal it to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. This is an abuse of process designed to deny me my rights as a Canadian citizens to due process. As there was no decision letter from Joan LeFeuvre and the Mayor this violates not just the letter of the law but also its intent and spirit. They know the law and they knew what they were doing was wrong. Their wish was to avoid the rules of law, to cover up their actions and this shows their willingness to do so for their own advantage.
Freedom of Information is a key aspect of democracy, taxpayers can't make informed decision unless that have all the facts. The goal of my requests, was to provide to Mississaugans with City records, gained by the Freedom of Information process, so they could be used for decision making. Other details that are documented. The Mayor unlawfully required Joan LeFeuvre to refuse, to accept my Freedom of Information requests, made under the power of the FOI Act and Joan LeFeuvre did so. There were five "deemed refusals" in 1994, regarding my Freedom of Information requests.
The Mayor's promise to "not be providing you with the information, that you are requesting", (this quote is on my web-site as a sound bite), was one that Joan LeFeuvre continue to carry out over the years, to disregard the FOI Act by not responding as required by law and/or process my FOI requests in a unprofessional fashion. Many efforts has been made to interfere with the FOI Act and my lawful access to records for the benefit of the community as well as other service Joan LeFeuvre has been involved with.
1). Information and Privacy Commissioner's Investigation, I94-045M (compliance), found that Joan LeFeuvre violated the privacy section of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, by improperly providing to City staff with my personal information.
2). Information and Privacy Commissioner's Investigation, I95-091M (compliance), found that Joan LeFeuvre violated the privacy section of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, by improperly providing my personal information/FOI requests to the Mayor.
The July 19/94 meeting was tape recorded with the permission of the Mayor and below are some of the quotes from the transcript.
Mayor. ... So, I just want to make that clear. Uhm I don't see time as important in this regard, I think that, we are going the right way, we are going the responsible way and therefore I have to tell you, we will not be providing you with the information, that you are requesting.
....4 - 4 -
Mayor . O.K. uhm, I eh, I am assuming the responsible for all this now and therefore you will be dealing with the Mayor and any visits to City Hall you come to the Mayors office. uhm, to request whatever you want, otherwise I just can't according to the staff, they have informed me, that uhm, that uhm the time involved is considerable, and that is their opinion, and therefore I would appreciate if you...(she is cut off)
The signing of a false affidavit or oath by Joan LeFeuvre.
It is important to note I went directly to the Region of Peel and they listened to my concerns. The City's Official plan was changed but the City did try to keep a community representative out of the an official process by unlawful practises.
Having shown that City staff have offended, re-offended and are likely to re-offend in regards to violating provincial legislation to serve a politicians agenda, the question needs to be asked is Hazel McCallion the kind of person to direct staff to violate provincial legislation to serve her politicians agenda? Consider the following.
1982 July 22, County Court, Judicial District of Peel, Ontario, West Co. Ct.J. - RE Graham and McCallion - Municipal law - Conflict of interest and duty - Mayor declaring conflict.
....5 - 5 -
Hazel McCallion was found to have violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act 1980. It was found she had "breached the Act in all four ways in which the Act could be breached". The judgement to pay the cost was upheld in Appeal, High Court of Justice Divisional Court, Sept. 30/82.
The following is only provided as background to other events going on in Mississauga that add an air of concern. I am not asking for any of the parties, that this letter is being sent to, to become involved in the following at this time.
Hazel McCallion talks about "coup" that is out to get her in City Council, sound bite on my web-site. This act shows to me her mental state is one that is likely to feel the need to control the outcome of the election.
It should be noted that in 1984 a subdivision application was filed for her land (the same one that got her in trouble in 82), which didn't fulfill the legal requirements of properly declaring who the legal land owner was and who was the legally authorize agent, to deal with the City/Peel, regarding the subdivision application. It was refereed to as "Willson McTavish "In Trust"". Mr. McTavish is now a prominent lawyer in the provincial government and says he only "lent his name" to the application.
One of the first things Hazel McCallion did in 1974 (Mar. 12), when the City of Mississauga was created and she was elected as a Councillor, was to set up a company, Macran Associates Limited. This company could do land development and John Downing wrote an article about a land purchase and sale that made $132,900 in just seven months. As well as other disturbing facts about how Hazel's business partner was appointed and reappointed to the City of Mississauga's committee of adjustment and the Peel land division committee, a key position for a developer. Again details on my web-site.
The most telling proof of the threat, that her worship's leadership posses to our government and our rights as Canadians, is the new "Vandalism and Violence in City Facilities", policy, that is so extreme, it can be called fascist. This new policy is an act of violence against the community with its police state rules.
This policy sets up a new legal system in the City with a set of laws designed to be abused. The vast majority of Mississaugans' were not asked for input or told its details. I asked Council to post notice of this policy so all Mississaugans would know what is going on and was refused.
This policy is better suited to going after those who oppose politicians, then for sports. This policy covers all City property including all parks and buildings with the rules of a concentration camp. The City claims this policy is for stopping sport's violence but you can't even have a hockey game now that it is illegal (Zero Tolerance), to use a threatening tone, rasing your voice is verbal assault, to deliberately throw articles, whatever can be interpreted as an attempt at intimidation or to goad others, are now called acts of violence. Parents are required to sign forms like criminals, saying they will not be violent. A true insult to Canadians, what happened to being innocence till proven guilty. By the way this policy applies to the public,
....6 - 6 -
How can you feel safe sending your children to City parks knowing a few bullies can gang up on your child, lie and then you are forced to pay for an act of vandalism they didn't not commit or be banned from City property?
Worse of all, City Staff can use it as a weapon against the public, to be confrontational toward the public, as they do toward me. The City Manager has confirmed it. City staff need only say they felt a little intimidated to refuse service. Staff can also bait you by frustrating you till, you raise your voice, call that a violent act and refuse to serve you. They can also call the police on you at the drop of a hat, their word matters not yours. Using human natural against people is a predator thing to do. What this means is that taxpaying Canadians must be meek and submissive toward City politicians and staff. Is that what Canadians fought in two World Wars for?
There are many other examples of the Mayor's and City staff's abuse of power.
I am willing to discuss my letter with you, in case the wording seems a little ambiguous or you want something explained. My phone number is (905) ***-**** & e-mail is email@example.com. There is an answering machine you can leave private messages on. As long as you are talking the machine will record. If someone answers the phone before the machine can come on, please ask them to hang up and let the next call ring through. I would appreciate your co-operation in using the answering machine, rather than leaving messages with anyone else answering the telephone.
Please find enclosed:
Your Financial Donations are Greatly Appreciated