The Mississauga Muse     Oct 3, 2009 10:49 AM

Regarding MissyNews CLARIFICATION. Records Destruction By-Law is NOT followed (I guess unless convenient)

MissyNews writes, "CLARIFICATION *This editorial, published Friday, Oct. 2, suggested a City Hall clerk discarded her notes prematurely. In fact, the clerk kept the notes for the prescribed amount of time. The News regrets the error." Over $2,000 worth of Freedom of Information shows that Mississauga Staff that I've been researching DO NOT COMPLY with the Records Destruction prescribed amount of time. While the City claims, for example, that Youth banning letters are destroyed in seven years (going on memory here), Freedom of Information in 2008 retrieved Youth ban letters going back to the 90's and the earliest from 1993. Here's another fact (irrefutable through Freedom of Information). If it's in Staff's interests, documents used to support bans are downright FABRICATED. Other documents claimed to esist, DON'T. And to be clear, these problems I've uncovered are in Corporate Services --Keepers of the "Records".

* Agree 1

The Mississauga Muse     Oct 3, 2009 10:36 AM

No Choice. The other alternative was to be accused of sweeping it all under the rug.

Mississauga News concludes, "It’s not a witch hunt: It’s a smart move, the only move City Council could make, really." Yep. And let me quote Councillor Nando Iannicca, mover of the motion (video transcript) “And the highest level of obligation that I have to constituents, they had better know the integrity of this place is the most important thing to me. So on behalf of them, on behalf of my council colleagues including the Mayor, on behalf of my senior staff, on behalf of all of our employees I’ve said in moving the motion, we’re gonna [sic]come clean, let some other party review it and let that course unfold as it may. To do anything other than that in my opinion, in moving the motion makes you unworthy of public office.” Now I can’t use the YouTube URL directly here but to view Councillor Iannicca’s entire “This is Mississauga. It’s not Vaughan” address, please see http://tinyurl.com/yb5kxhq to “Get It”.

* Agree 1

Therese Taylor     Oct 2, 2009 4:47 PM

You're right to say that an inquiry is the only choice.

There are too many unanswered questions here and contradictions. I use to admire Hazel, but the first time I became involved in municipal politics in 2002, her halo quickly evaporated. She said one thing at a public meeting defending a woodland and did the exact opposite when it came time to rezone the property, setting the stage to clear cut rare, mature trees. Clearly Hazel's made many mistakes. Too bad too many citizens are asleep at the democratic wheel. This is the second time she's been embroiled in serious conflict of interest charges, yet some will give her another pass. She should have been removed from office in the 80s, the first time this happened. At her age, she should know better. Ignorance of the law is no defense. Besides, anyone who knows anything about power and corruption understands that 31 years as mayor is an abuse of power. If Hazel cared a fig about the citizens of Mississauga, she would have released her stranglehold on democracy long ago.

* Agree 4

Stephen Wahl     Oct 1, 2009 10:52 PM

Right ands Wrong

Focus not on who is right and who is wrong. Look at what is right and what is wrong. The path to truth will become clear.

* Agree 1