►
Description
The Election Compliance Audit Committee is an arm’s length City of Ottawa Committee and does not report to Ottawa City Council. Election Compliance Audit Committee reviews applications for compliance audits of the election campaign finances of candidates and registered third-party advertisers and considers report(s) from the City Clerk and Solicitor on apparent contraventions of contribution limits.
Agendas, minutes, decisions and more information on the Election Compliance Audit Committee may be found at: http://ottawa.ca/ecac
A
B
Yes,
mr.
chair
myself,
be
it
resolved
that
upon
hearing
the
representations
and
reading
the
written
submissions
and
documents
submitted
by
the
applicant
of
the
candidates,
the
representatives
and
the
committee
hereby
rejects
the
application
because
it
was
not
presented
with
compelling
and
credible
information,
which
raises
a
reasonable
probability
that
a
breach
of
the
campaign
finance
provisions
of
the
municipal
actions
act
has
occurred.
The
submissions
presented
on
behalf
of
the
candidate
were
persuasive
and
supported
by
cogent
documentation.
These
submissions
addressed
the
concerns
alleged
by
the
applicant.
A
A
C
Thank
You,
mr.
chairperson
and
I,
thank
you
for
setting
up
at
the
beginning
of
this
meeting
the
test
by
which
you
would
be
considering
these
applications.
I
also
would
like
to
thank
mr.
Leeds,
who
appeared
before
for
adding
additional
clarification
about
what
reasonable
grounds
is
defined.
As
and
I
think.
My
submission
at
this
point
is
that
the
application
contained
no
reasonable
grounds.
C
There
was
two
points
that
the
applicant
had
made,
one
being
that
I
had
run
in
a
campaign
which
incurred
expenses,
I,
don't
believe
that
was
in
question,
I,
don't
believe
any
one
is
believing
that
didn't
happen.
I
admit
that,
and
the
second
point
was
that
I
failed
to
file
Form
four,
which
is
a
submission
of
my
expenses
which
again
I.
Don't
believe
anybody
is
questioning.
That's
that's
a
fact.
The
Municipal
Elections
Act
actually
has
a
prescribed
penalty
for
not
the
FIR
failing
to
file,
and
that
is
that
I
would
lose
any
office.
C
I
had
been
elected
to,
and
I'm
and
I'm
prevented
from
any
appointments
or
running
in
the
next
election.
That's
fine
I
accept
that
penalty.
It's
already
been
assessed
against
me
and
so
I
can't
see
in
the
material
that
was
submitted,
there's
no
grounds
whatsoever
to
believe
that
there
was
any
wrongdoing
in
that
I
ran
an
election
and
there
was
expenses
incurred.
My
election
was
my
campaign
was
largely
unspectacular.
It
was
a
normal
campaign.
I
did
have
signs,
I
did
have
a
website.
I
did
have
these
things.
C
As
for
failing
to
file
I
mean
I've
already
been
assessed.
That
penalty,
so
I
can't
see
any
grounds
presented
and
I
can't
see
any
interest
to
this
committee
or
to
the
public
in
general
and
pursuing
us
further,
as
I've
already
accepted
that
penalty
and
I'm
not
contesting
it.
That's
my
submission.
Thank
you
and
I
hope
that
you
find
the
same.
B
D
E
F
Chair
the
the
penalty
is
in
effect
now,
however,
obviously
leading
up
to
the
next
election
in
2022.
There
would
be
an
opportunity
for
the
candidate,
in
this
instance
to
go
to
a
court
petition
a
judge
to
remove
the
penalty
from
him,
and
that
is
done
on
a
regular
basis.
I
would
say
it's
happened
in
the
last
two
or
three
elections
that
I've
run
just.
E
D
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr.
okay
and
the
the
simple
point
is:
is
that
and
having
transgressed
the
the
requirement
of
filing
under
the
Act
is
not
a
defense
to
not
fall
campaign
finance
rules
and
what
they
both
look
at
different
things.
So
your
mandate
is
with
respect
to
proper
compliance
with
count
with
campaign
finance
rules
with
respect
to
income
and
expenses.
D
E
D
E
F
G
C
And
I,
thank
you
for
the
question.
In
truth,
I'm
just
gonna
speak
for
a
moment
about
the
test.
The
test
is:
is
there
reasonable
grounds
and
then
I
will
answer
your
question?
The
the
test,
though
here
is,
is
there
reasonable
grounds
to
believe
there
was
contravention
of
the
finance
the
election
finances
act,
as
has
just
been
explained,
that
failing
to
file
in
itself,
is
not
evidence
of
that.
I
believe
that
there
is
no
grounds
and
the
question
of
why
I
didn't
follow
or
file,
isn't
necessarily
material
to
that
question
and
test.
C
However,
since
you
asked
I
am
happy
to
answer
it.
I
didn't
include
it
in
my
original
submission,
simply
because
I
didn't
feel
it
like
I
said,
was
material
to
the
test.
However,
during
the
course
of
my
election
and
I'm
gonna
be
careful
about
what
I
say
here,
you've
asked
me
my
reasons
so
I'm
gonna
speak
to
my
opinions
and
my
experiences.
I'm
not
providing
a
testimony
under
a
court
of
law.
Is
that
fair?
There
was
a
lot
of
misdeeds
that
I
saw
by
my
opponents
and
those
surrounding
my
opponent.
C
There
were
things
like
my
tires
were
regularly
popped.
In
my
car
there
was
people
that
I
was
meeting
at
their
door,
saying
that
they
had
been
intimidated
by
the
opponent.
There
was
people
who
had
taken
my
sign
and
then
removed
my
sign
and
told
me
the
reason
he
got
phone
calls.
That
was
urging
them
saying
you
know.
C
Since
the
election
I've
heard
that
there
is
an
investigation
ongoing
into
the
possible
abuse
of
office
that
led
to
harassment
of
members
of
the
community
who
did
not
support
and
that
investigation
is
still
on
if
I
were
to
file
I
believe
I
would
simply
be
providing
an
additional
list
of
names
to
be
added
to
this.
For
lack
of
better
word
hit
list
now,
I
understand
that
nothing
has
been
proven
at
this
point,
but
I
reasonably
believe
there
is
enough
risk
to
want
to
protect
those
people
from
any
potential
harassment
or
threats
or
intimidation.
C
I,
fully
expect
that
the
committee,
or
the
investigation
that's
being
conducted,
will
come
back
with
some
kind
of
answer.
It
will
either
be
that
the
this
thing
has
not
occurred,
in
which
case
I
would
be
happy
to
file
and
provide
those
names
of
my
donors
or
that
it
did
occur,
but
actions
have
been
taken
to
prevent
it
from
happening
again,
in
which
case
I
would
also
be
happy
to
file
my
forms,
which
would
include
a
list
of
my
donors,
but
at
this
point,
I
can't
see
why
there
would
be
incentive
to
do
so.