Ontario needs strong provincial legislation to hold mayors & municipal councils accountable

Niagara Falls city council proved once again, that the public council chambers are not a safe space for women. 

At the Tuesday July 8th Niagara Falls City Council meeting, just two weeks after Mayor Jim Diodati denied the Women of Ontario Say No (WOSN) a chance to speak about bill 9—a provincial legislative proposal to greatly strengthen accountability over municipal elected officials—he silenced them a second time.

Bill 9, if passed, will see a member of council who commits an “egregious” act of violence or harassment, lose their seat.

Diodati has repeatedly prevented WOSN members the opportunity to address the proposed accountability legislation because his good friend, Councillor Mike Strange, was recently charged with domestic assault. 

The mayor’s claim, defended by City staff, is that no discussion in council can in any way touch on the criminal charge Strange faces or the ongoing legal proceedings.

Despite this justification, and despite assurances from WOSN founder Emily McIntosh that she had no intention of addressing the criminal matter in any way—she made it clear that the proposed provincial legislation was the only topic she intended to delegate on—McIntosh was barred by Diodati and staff from speaking in the public chamber.

Nothing could have proven the need for bill 9 more than the actions of Strange, who secretly directed his friends on the ‘Fallsview Hose Brigade’, a local service organization, to descend on the council chamber for a scheduled public meeting where WOSN had organized a show of support for bill 9 following the forcible removal of some women who had been arrested by Niagara Police during an earlier public meeting.

A Niagara Falls security officer speaks with members of the Women of Ontario Say No during a June meeting before some of them were arrested by Niagara Police without incident.

(Ed Smith/The Pointer)

Strange’s email to the community group instructed many of the men he knew and others to crowd out the women planning to attend council chambers so they would have nowhere to sit. He told the men he was going to declare his innocence during the public meeting, that the criminal charge against him was part of an agenda and instructed them to stand and applaud him when he was done lobbying for himself.

Even though clapping during a council meeting is against the rules of decorum, Strange told the group not to worry because Diodati knew exactly what was being orchestrated by the councillor, who is facing a criminal charge for allegedly assaulting his domestic partner.

Strange promised those who attended and clapped in support of him free pizza and drinks after the council meeting.

Accountability over municipal politicians has suffered greatly over the past few years. Ontario’s Ombudsman, who previously held firm when investigating widespread wrongdoing at Niagara Region, publishing the scathing “Inside Job” report that detailed alarming conduct, has been AWOL while widespread problems have plagued municipalities. 

In Brampton, Mayor Patrick Brown has made a mockery of the Ombudsman’s ineffective calls for internal accountability, ignoring requests for renewed investigations into alarming evidence of widespread misconduct inside City Hall under Brown’s controversial leadership. 

Patrick Brown has faced allegations of misconduct throughout his controversial political career.

(Alexis Wright/The Pointer)

In 2022, he cancelled a half-dozen investigations that had previously been ordered by a majority group of councillors following shocking evidence and allegations against Brown.

Taxpayers and other residents The Pointer has spoken with have given up on the Ontario Ombudsman’s office, describing a culture of indifference within the watchdog agency that is legislatively responsible for providing investigative oversight of the municipal sector to ensure rules and laws are carefully followed. 

The Pointer contacted the Ombudsman’s office last year about its failure to hold Brown and his Brampton council allies accountable after they had cancelled the very investigations the Ombudsman had instructed should be carried out until their findings had been presented to the public. A spokesperson suggested it was beyond the watchdog’s authority to step in, justifying the ongoing failure to act using the legislated power the Ombudsman was given by the people of Ontario to protect them from abuse.

The spokesperson wrote: “I would like to try to clarify what seems to be a misconception of the Ombudsman’s role.

The Ombudsman is not a policing agency or an anti-corruption commissioner.

The Ombudsman’s role is to ensure that the provincial government and public sector serve people in a way that is fair, accountable, transparent and respectful of their rights. We intervene to resolve or investigate issues involving government and public sector administration and make evidence-based recommendations for corrective action when necessary. We foster sound public administration by promoting accountability, transparency, fairness and a respect for rights. We provide free assistance to people who need help accessing public services or having their rights respected.

The Ombudsman resolves most issues without need for formal investigation. We do not take sides when resolving complaints or investigating concerns. Our decisions and recommendations to improve public services are based on the facts and the evidence. We are independent. We do not take directions from government, public sector agencies, interest groups or individual complainants.

The Ombudsman’s role is NOT to intervene in political or policy decisions by politicians, who are put in office (or voted out) through elections. Nor is it to investigate elected officials, or allegations of criminal wrongdoing, such as corruption. Every municipality is required to have an integrity commissioner to look into alleged violations of their code of conduct or the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

Municipalities have the power to appoint their own local ombudsman, auditor general, and/or lobbyist registrar. The Ontario Ombudsman’s role is not to substitute for or redo the work of any of these accountability officers. When we review complaints about them, we review whether they have followed a fair process and suggest improvements as warranted.”

The spokesperson continued: “Unfortunately, some of The Pointer’s past coverage and questions to our Office (including your comment about our 'apparent refusal to step in') seem to be based on a perception of our role that is quite different from what it actually is. For instance, The Pointer told readers last September (2023) that the Ombudsman’s 2019 investigation (the ‘Inside Job’ report) of Niagara Region’s 2016 CAO hiring 'exposed the corruption there,' while suggesting he should do the same in Brampton.

Not only does it (the ‘Inside Job’ report) never mention 'corruption,' our Niagara report very clearly explains that the investigation was a review of the processes followed by the municipality in hiring its CAO, and in its two third-party reviews of the matter (a local ombudsman review and a governance audit). It stresses that it is focused on administrative conduct."

For clarification, the claim by the Ombudsman’s spokesperson that “corruption” was never mentioned in the “Inside Job” investigation report, is highly problematic. The very title of the report—Inside Job—is a clear expression of the very real corruption that took place. 

Here is some of the wording directly from the report authored by Ombudsman Paul Dubé in November of 2019 after the 2016 Niagara Region hiring process for a new CAO:

• “The Regional Municipality of Niagara’s 2016 CAO hiring process was an inside job, tainted by the improper disclosure of confidential information to a candidate – a candidate who was ultimately successful and became the region’s most senior administrator…”.

• “I found that the regional municipality’s actions with respect to the CAO hiring process were unreasonable, unjust, and wrong.”

• “Individual actions led to some of the wrongdoing I found during my investigation…”.

• “On Friday, October 7, 2016 at 12:51 p.m., the Director of Communications (Jason Tamming, who is currently a senior staffer in Brampton in charge of communications and other strategic policies) created a document saved as ‘Q&A,’ which appears to answer the questions assigned to the CAO candidates. A list of suggestions at the top of the page is specific to Mr. D’Angelo’s experience at the conservation authority… the document is organized with the five assigned questions as headings...The Chair’s Director of Communications (Tamming) provided information to help Mr. D’Angelo draft his written submission and presentation…”.

• “I conclude that information that should have been kept confidential by regional officials and staff was instead provided to an external job applicant. Confidential information about the 2016 CAO hiring process was improperly shared with Mr. D’Angelo during that process, and Mr. D’Angelo received information from insiders at the regional municipality to assist him in the competition… Mr. D’Angelo was the only candidate provided with confidential information about Niagara Region’s CAO hiring process during the competition.”

• “I find that Niagara Region’s failure to preserve the integrity and fairness of the hiring process was unreasonable, unjust and wrong, in accordance with s. 21(b) and (d) of the Ombudsman Act.”

The clear corruption described and highlighted by the Ombudsman and detailed in the evidence that was presented in his “Inside Job” investigation report, was reframed by the spokesperson, who said in her response to The Pointer last year that the Inside Job report never mentions “corruption”.

A scan of various reputable dictionaries shows the definition of “Inside Job” is commonly associated with “fraudulent” conduct. Merriam Webster uses the following sentence under its definition of ‘Inside Job’: “Though there are instances of the fraud being an inside job.” 

It’s unclear why the Ombudsman’s spokesperson tried to distance the 2016 actions of municipal officials in Niagara from the fact that much of their conduct was corrupt.

In 2023 it appeared Dubé was at least trying to put pressure on Brown and other Brampton council members to follow through with his direction to reopen the investigations they had cancelled.

His May 2023 letter discussed how complaints to the Ombudsman’s office involved council’s decision (led by Brown who pushed the voting in 2022 despite being the subject of most of the allegations) to cancel the forensic investigations in August of the previous year, before they could be completed. “Based on our review in this case, we are writing to express our Office’s concern that there are unaddressed issues with respect to the BramptonU initiative and RFP procurement processes that have not been thoroughly investigated, given the previous council’s decisions (in 2022) to cancel these audits prior to finalization.”

Dubé wrote that “[S]erious issues identified in the BramptonU preliminary report would receive no further investigation and that there would be no accountability for individuals involved (if the investigations were not completed)”.

The serious issues Dubé referred to were highlighted in a scathing preliminary investigation report that was presented to Brampton councillors earlier in 2022, after the probes (described by the Ombudsman as audits) were initially ordered by the majority group of councillors. The preliminary report by one of the external investigators hired to probe the allegations and evidence against Brown and others inside City Hall, including Councillor Rowena Santos, found examples of apparent conflict of interest in the handing out of contracts to friends, and shocking payments for hundreds of thousands of dollars made without council’s knowledge and out of line with agreements that were in place.   

“Some expressed concern that municipal funds were spent on the audit, only to have the audit cancelled without any conclusions or improvements to municipal administration,” Dubé wrote. He conveyed there were individuals who expressed concern about the lack of transparency and accountability around the cancelled RFP investigations and added “the RFP audits were inappropriately referred to the (Brampton) Integrity Commissioner despite municipal funds already being spent on these audits.”

“The Ombudsman encourages the City to revisit its decision to cancel these audits and take steps to ensure any outstanding concerns are comprehensively investigated and addressed at the municipal level.” 

What’s confusing is that despite acknowledging that Brown’s ploy to redirect the external investigations to Brampton’s integrity commissioner who does not have jurisdiction to carry out such investigations, was “inappropriately” handled (Brampton’s integrity commissioner later rejected Brown’s request to have the IC handle the investigations, confirming the lack of jurisdiction), Dubé has since ignored his responsibility to step in once all of council’s own authority to investigate has failed. 

After the corrupt Niagara CAO hiring process in 2016, the Ombudsman allowed municipal officials to manage an initial investigation. But when that process unfolded and was clearly flawed, Dubé eventually stepped in, brought his own experienced investigators, and even used other tools at his disposal to unearth all the evidence that proved the “inside job”, resulting in sweeping changes, dismissals and voter confidence to take matters into their own hands once the Ombudsman had finally gotten to the bottom of the matter. 

In response to The Pointer last year, after Brown cancelled the probes that were being conducted by external investigators hired by a previous majority group of councillors, Dubé’s spokesperson wrote: “Anyone is free to contact us if they have a concern about municipal administration, and we will review the matter according to our normal, confidential process. As always, we refer people to appropriate complaint mechanisms if their matter is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.”

The current unwillingness of the Ombudsman to step in as conduct concerns in the municipal government sector mount, and as mayors with unprecedented power granted by Doug Ford’s PCs push the limits of that power, has created mounting frustration among many residents across the province.  

In response to the delegation requests in Niagara Falls by the Women of Ontario Say No, regional councillor Haley Bateman is now facing heavy handed actions by staff, the mayor and others on council.

A recent Niagara Falls staff report condemns Bateman for attending one of the council meetings when she refused to put down her small Women of Ontario Say No sign on July 4. 

Diodati and staff claim the display was a violation of a council rule aimed at protecting decorum during public meetings.

The report says Bateman’s conduct deserves to be examined by the region and an integrity commissioner complaint is warranted. Meanwhile, the mayor and staff are not backing down from mounting pressure after their conduct was challenged on constitutional grounds following the arrest of three Women of Ontario Say No members who attended a June council meeting holding small signs with the name of the group.

Some of the women who held up signs in Niagara Falls council chambers were arrested without incident by Niagara police before they were released.

(Ed Smith/The Pointer)  

Lawyer Susan Toth, a partner with Spero Law in London, sent letters to Niagara Regional Police and Niagara Falls Council, obtained by The Pointer, warning them that the harsh treatment of women seeking to address proposed provincial legislation aimed at holding municipal officials who commit assault accountable, will not be tolerated. 

“With respect to the abhorrent treatment of my clients who attended City Hall on June 17, 2025, I understand that you have already received correspondence from the Canadian Constitutional Foundation with respect to the violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in not allowing my clients to peacefully hold up signs that said, ‘Women of Ontario Say No’,” Toth wrote in her letter, dated July 3 and addressed to The City of Niagara Falls, Mayor Jim Diodati and Council.

Toth questioned why, if Diodati, other council members and staff feared Strange’s legal proceedings would be drawn into the conversation, he was not asked to recuse himself, instead of blocking a general discussion on an important issue entirely. She points out the legal proceedings are not against the City of Niagara Falls, it’s a private citizen who was charged with assault and he happens to work as an elected member of council. She likened the tactic to denying any conversation during a council meeting about any matter that could be loosely connected to a legal proceeding.

“I am confident that at no time has the City of Niagara Falls refused a deputation about safety on the basis that there is a case against them involving a slip and fall. Similarly, individual city councilors have no doubt been involved in various private legal proceedings over the years, none of which prevented deputations that were tangentially related to those proceedings.” 

At the July meeting when WOSN was barred from speaking due to concern the criminal case might be brought up, Strange stood up to speak saying he was going to talk about bill 9. Even though the mayor and staff had claimed the criminal charge could not be brought up in council, Strange immediately launched into a legal lesson about being innocent until proven guilty.

Councillor Lori Lococo stood up on a point of order to point out that the WOSN members were barred from speaking to protect Strange and his alleged victim, so why should the man charged be allowed to defend himself.

Diodati claimed he did not know what Councillor Strange was going to say, despite the email from Strange to the Fallsview Hose Brigade instructing them that Diodati knew exactly what was being planned.

Strange then proceeded to do exactly what he outlined in the private email sent to drum up support, declaring his innocence in front of the men gathered in the chamber to voice their support on the councillor’s request.

Strange claimed he was charged with criminal domestic assault because of vindictiveness and a vendetta and said the truth will come out.

Meanwhile, Diodati repeatedly told the women gathered in the same chamber that they would be kicked out for “breaking decorum” if they didn’t behave.

Strange’s legion of supporters stood up when he was done, broke decorum, and clapped.

Today marks the start of the annual Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference in Ottawa, where local elected officials and staff will have the opportunity to engage provincial legislators on the most pressing issues facing residents in cities and towns across the province. 

Accountability should be at the top of the agenda, to restore the confidence in local government that is steadily being eroded.

Carolynn Ioannoni is a former Niagara Falls councillor and a regular freelance contributor to The Pointer.

Email: [email protected] 

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