News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 5.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 29K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 2.8K     0 

How many non-incumbent winners will there be on council?


  • Total voters
    22
  • Poll closed .

King of Kensington

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
589
I'm noticing a divide on who is best positioned to defeat Mammoliti in the (almost certain, unfortunately) switch to 25 wards. Some are say Anthony Peruzza because of incumbency (John Filion called on people to support him at last week's rally for example) but Tiffany Ford seems to have a lot of progressives supporting her (such as Kristyn Wong Tam and Jill Andrew).
 

steveintoronto

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2016
Messages
10,167
Reaction score
4,339
City:
Toronto
My bet is that the application for stay is declined...if 'intervenors' aren't allowed at stay hearings, then the Province's appeal hearing will. And on the basis of a pending appeal, the leave for stay might be even further in jeopardy. 'Intervenors' could/would include 'the Elders' who've spoken so vociferously, some of whom know the courts inside out (McMurtry immediately comes to mind).
This is discussed in today's TorStar:
Court hearing Tuesday could decide future of upcoming Toronto election — for now
By JENNIFER PAGLIAROCity Hall Bureau
Mon., Sept. 17, 2018
[...]
Lawyers from Goldblatt Partners, representing a candidate, volunteer and community group, say going back to 25 wards would not be returning to the status quo, since the city is currently preparing a 47-ward election — the option that was approved by council in 2016 after years of study.

It was the province, with unconstitutional legislation, that “upended” the election, they argue, and granting a stay would return the city to an “unconstitutionally chaotic state of affairs.”

Lawyers from Paliare Roland, representing candidates and community groups who intervened in the earlier court challenge with their own evidence, say going back to the 25-ward structure now would cause harm.

“Should this stay be granted, the opportunity for the people of Toronto to participate in a fair and democratic 2018 municipal election will be irretrievably lost and the expression rights of candidates and electors will continue to be infringed by the unconstitutional legislation,” their written materials say. “To conduct an election in a manner that has already been determined by a court of this province to be unconstitutional is inconsistent with the principle of democracy, and is not in the public interest.”

Meanwhile, city clerk Ulli Watkiss, who is responsible for administering the election, is taking an unusual step to intervene with her own lawyers in the court case Tuesday.

“Without clarity on the structure of the election, the clerk is rapidly reaching a point at which she will be unable to conduct an election on October 22, 2018 in accordance with the requirements of the (Municipal Elections Act) under either a 25 or 47-ward structure,” her filings submitted by independently-retained lawyers from Stikeman Elliott say.

That undermines the province’s assertion that it would be better to go back to 25 wards, relying on the clerk’s earlier comments that she would may not be able to carry out a 47-ward election if Bill 5 was struck down.

Watkiss also outlined that she may be forced to cancel advance polling days and reduce “accuracy testing” for tabulator machines that marked ballots are fed into, which she says “may undermine the integrity of the voting process in order to hold the election.”

While the province asked the motion for a stay be heard in front of a lone judge, the Court of Appeal has made the decision to convene a panel of three judges to hear arguments — Associate Chief Justice Alexandra Hoy and Justices Robert Sharpe and Gary Trotter.

Ford and his government have taken aim at the judiciary in recent days, saying Justice Belobaba is appointed, while they were elected to make law.

The court hearing begins at 10 a.m. at Osgoode Hall.
https://www.thestar.com/news/toront...ure-of-upcoming-toronto-election-for-now.html

More than ever, it looks like the Province getting a stay is doubtful. The Appeal Court might be willing to grant one, eventually, but not until many other legal arguments are examined and a clear case made possible.

Remember: The 'Status Quo' is the 47 ward council, not the 25, something the Court will use as a neutral default reference.
 
Last edited:

EagleEye

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Messages
2,098
Reaction score
754
This is discussed in today's TorStar:

https://www.thestar.com/news/toront...ure-of-upcoming-toronto-election-for-now.html

More than ever, it looks like the Province getting a stay is doubtful. The Appeal Court might be willing to grant one, eventually, but not until many other legal arguments are examined and a clear case made possible.

Remember: The 'Status Quo' is the 47 ward council, not the 25, something the Court will use as a neutral default reference.

I hope you're right but I also hope there is an extension to the election. In my current ward, which may change, Michelle Holland was going door to door today, Crawford has been all over the place and because they have both done this before they have such a head start on the new people who aren't career politicians. I'm sure it's no different in other wards.
 

steveintoronto

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2016
Messages
10,167
Reaction score
4,339
City:
Toronto
I hope you're right but I also hope there is an extension to the election. In my current ward, which may change, Michelle Holland was going door to door today, Crawford has been all over the place and because they have both done this before they have such a head start on the new people who aren't career politicians. I'm sure it's no different in other wards.
This is right to the point! I don't see how the Judiciary could overlook this, and as reluctant as they need to be on any political aspects, Constitutional Rights are uppermost in this case. That's what it's all about. And that's where the "Status Quo being 47 wards" kicks in, because if all legal action is removed, which is the gist of the 'stay'...it will be to default to the Status Quo: 47 wards. That could be conditional on the granted stay.

In my prior post I quoted, I expressed concern over whether intervenor status would be party to the stay or not. Clearly it is, and the many intervenors with very powerful arguments. Presented with such arguments, I don't see how a stay can be granted, *especially in lieu of an Appeal applied for, but the Province not asking for an expedited hearing on it*. The Judges are going to query that....and ask 'why not'?

And as to the election date itself, being the highest court in Ontario (branch of the Ont Supreme Court), the Judges might just rule (albeit the mechanism eludes me, I'm not an attorney) that a case be submitted to their court for a new date with added time for the election, or to the appropriate court to doing so. I don't know if this is the venue for ruling on it, but effectively the Toronto election date might be declared null and void until a court can examine the arguments to set a new one.

I also wouldn't be surprised that the Triumvirate excuse themselves from deciding on this case, and move it to the SCC. No matter what the outcome, Ford Incorporated is going to have to shut down the production line, at least for the 25 ward Civic Election model, for the next four years.
 
Last edited:

adma

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,987
Reaction score
1,594
I'm noticing a divide on who is best positioned to defeat Mammoliti in the (almost certain, unfortunately) switch to 25 wards. Some are say Anthony Peruzza because of incumbency (John Filion called on people to support him at last week's rally for example) but Tiffany Ford seems to have a lot of progressives supporting her (such as Kristyn Wong Tam and Jill Andrew).

If Deanna Sgro's still running, she could peel away votes on the right, too.
 

SunriseChampion

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
6,777
Reaction score
2,724
Toronto should ignore the Province and go ahead with the 47-Council election!

Yeah, wait, that's not a bad idea. Why isn't this being done as a matter of course?
What legal recourse is there against the clerk for doing this?

I mean, it could potentially be an illegitimate election anyway (not too many of ours are very legit, but that's another point entirely) so we may as well have an illegally elected council.
 

steveintoronto

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2016
Messages
10,167
Reaction score
4,339
City:
Toronto
I won't quote sections of this, legal arguments seem to not resonate with most readers. For those of you who are intrigued on the legalities, this is a must read:

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/con...nding-clause-must-be-challenged-in-court.html

Author:
Tim Armstrong, QC, is a former deputy minister in the Davis, Peterson and Rae governments.

Tim Armstrong, Q. C.

Tim is a former Ontario arbitrator, Labour Board chair, deputy minister of labour and industry, and Ontario agent general to the Pacific Rim. He is the Toronto Liaison Officer for the Japan Bank for International Cooperation.
https://www.cardus.ca/contributors/tarmstrong/
 
Last edited:

Top