[Kat_YYZ]

I can't imagine companies take things lightly when being publicly outed as having shady dealings with the top ranking politician in Toronto. This has to spook other companies on the client list. C'mon Doug, this is an airtight case!

they don't have shady dealings; they have normal business dealings. They order some labels and DECO prints them. Nothing wrong with that. Even for a company tied to a politician. The thing is, that politician then needs to recuse themselves from certain votes. They can voice support (or lack of support) for a certain motion, participate in discussing it in the council or exec committee debate, but when it comes time to vote, you just don't cast a vote -- as dozens of councillors and mayors have done in the past (including Rob Ford himself on some occasions, so he can't say he "didn't know.") Really, I think trying to portray this as some multi-millions dollar scam is a waste of time, but point out that there are rules, they're not that hard and have been followed before, and that this guy just thinks he should be able to do whatever he wants like a despot.

 

[Yaitsme]

they don't have shady dealings; they have normal business dealings. They order some labels and DECO prints them. Nothing wrong with that. Even for a company tied to a politician. The thing is, that politician then needs to recuse themselves from certain votes. They can voice support (or lack of support) for a certain motion, participate in discussing it in the council or exec committee debate, but when it comes time to vote, you just don't cast a vote -- as dozens of councillors and mayors have done in the past (including Rob Ford himself on some occasions, so he can't say he "didn't know.") Really, I think trying to portray this as some multi-millions dollar scam is a waste of time, but point out that there are rules, they're not that hard and have been followed before, and that this guy just thinks he should be able to do whatever he wants like a despot.

Agreed - it doesn't seem like there's a huge money trail but I think the trail is more about influence and notoriety.
It's more about their refusal to acknowledge rules or accountability.
They're like the Thelma and Louise of politics. Keep going and bust through all the obstacles until you have to crash the whole works.

 

[Yaitsme]

See I knew this would happen. Lying and hiding information will be the new norm.
https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/doug-fo...management-tickets-12552772681?aff=es2&rank=1

Crazy.

 

[stoobiedood]

they don't have shady dealings; they have normal business dealings. They order some labels and DECO prints them. Nothing wrong with that. Even for a company tied to a politician. The thing is, that politician then needs to recuse themselves from certain votes. They can voice support (or lack of support) for a certain motion, participate in discussing it in the council or exec committee debate, but when it comes time to vote, you just don't cast a vote -- as dozens of councillors and mayors have done in the past (including Rob Ford himself on some occasions, so he can't say he "didn't know.") Really, I think trying to portray this as some multi-millions dollar scam is a waste of time, but point out that there are rules, they're not that hard and have been followed before, and that this guy just thinks he should be able to do whatever he wants like a despot.

Uh, no.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90m50_e.htm

"5.1 Where a member, either on his or her own behalf or while acting for, by, with or through another, has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any matter and is present at a meeting of the council or local board at which the matter is the subject of consideration, the member, (a) shall, prior to any consideration of the matter at the meeting, disclose the interest and the general nature thereof;
(b) shall not take part in the discussion of, or vote on any question in respect of the matter; and

(c) shall not attempt in any way whether before, during or after the meeting to influence the voting on any such question. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50, s. 5 (1)."

 

[pud99]

Got my ticket! Ready for tonight at Mom's!

I'm...putting on my top hat...tying up my white tie...dusting off my tails...

 

[Kat_YYZ]

Uh, no.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90m50_e.htm

"5.1 Where a member, either on his or her own behalf or while acting for, by, with or through another, has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any matter and is present at a meeting of the council or local board at which the matter is the subject of consideration, the member, (a) shall, prior to any consideration of the matter at the meeting, disclose the interest and the general nature thereof;
(b) shall not take part in the discussion of, or vote on any question in respect of the matter; and

(c) shall not attempt in any way whether before, during or after the meeting to influence the voting on any such question. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50, s. 5 (1)."

Okay, fine, no discussion either. (It's not like RoFo and DoFo have anything worthwhile to say anyways. )
But my point is the same. There are no ill-gotten millions in the FordBros pockets because of this, but their attitude towards COI is a big problem.

 

[Kat_YYZ]

Agreed - it doesn't seem like there's a huge money trail but I think the trail is more about influence and notoriety.
It's more about their refusal to acknowledge rules or accountability.
They're like the Thelma and Louise of politics. Keep going and bust through all the obstacles until you have to crash the whole works.

Well, only if Thelma and Louise were Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie -- having it all at their fingertips but going out on a crime bender because they're bored and have expensive lawyers to get them out of trouble.

 

[ndawgg]

Shhhh Hollywood might hear you!

Well, only if Thelma and Louise were Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie -- having it all at their fingertips but going out on a crime bender because they're bored and have expensive lawyers to get them out of trouble.

 

[John_Dee]

No more Stintz, eh? Well, good riddance to bad rubbish. And now begins the other candidates' mad scramble to snatch up all the people who would have voted for Stintz...all 6 of them.

But my question is this: Did that weird day that Stintz came out of Circus Clown's office looking like she'd seen a ghost play any role here? Is she doing this becuase the Fords wanted her to? Because they didn't want her to? What say the rest of you?

 

[stoobiedood]

Okay, fine, no discussion either. (It's not like RoFo and DoFo have anything worthwhile to say anyways. )
But my point is the same. There are no ill-gotten millions in the FordBros pockets because of this, but their attitude towards COI is a big problem.

You're right on both those counts (esp. #1 ).

But the original post that you were replying to ...

I can't imagine companies take things lightly when being publicly outed as having shady dealings with the top ranking politician in Toronto. This has to spook other companies on the client list. C'mon Doug, this is an airtight case!

...spoke of shady dealings with the top politician, not shady dealings with Deco. Yes, their business with Deco is perfectly legitimate. But lobbying the Fobro's ahead of council votes as they have done, knowing full well they have a business relationship and the Fobro's would be in a COI, is shady, and does not reflect on those companies any better than it reflects on the MINO and his co-pilot.

 

[JWBF]

Rob bragged many times that he was Deco's CFO...

A "principal owner" (an oxymoron) that has no "skin in the game" or benefits from being a "principal owner" (still an oxymoron), and he was (or still is) the CFO for Deco, no wonder why he left, and it explains his math skills.

 

[JWBF]

No more Stintz, eh? Well, good riddance to bad rubbish. And now begins the other candidates' mad scramble to snatch up all the people who would have voted for Stintz...all 6 of them.

But my question is this: Did that weird day that Stintz came out of Circus Clown's office looking like she'd seen a ghost play any role here? Is she doing this becuase the Fords wanted her to? Because they didn't want her to? What say the rest of you?

Well, without endorsing anyone it would be hard to say if it's Fordlandia's bidding or not. To speculate, Chow will probably obtain Stintz's NY support, Socks probably the east end, Tory, well lets just say his to much like Robbie, who will get nothing from this; further info will tell more.

 

[basic]

they don't have shady dealings; they have normal business dealings. They order some labels and DECO prints them. Nothing wrong with that. Even for a company tied to a politician.

On Nov. 26, 2012, a lobbyist acting for Nestlé Waters Canada – a division of Nestlé Canada – met with a member of Mayor Ford’s staff to discuss the bylaw, Toronto’s lobbyist registry indicates. A Nestle Waters official met with the Ford administration three times that year to discuss “recycling and diversion of beverage containers from waste, including bottled water.”

That's shady. Nestle shouldn't be meeting with the Mayor's staff knowing that they have a contract with Deco. They should be meeting with other politicians.

And regardless of the semantics of which side is more responsible/culpable, it's very poor optics for any company to be in an article of this nature.

eta: Stoobiedood beat me to the punch

 

[Yaitsme]

Well, only if Thelma and Louise were Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie -- having it all at their fingertips but going out on a crime bender because they're bored and have expensive lawyers to get them out of trouble.

Hahaha exactly !!!

 

[wheeler98]

Yup, she's out. Good. Hopefully the other no-hopers will drop out too, and the anti-Ford vote will coalesce around Chow or Tory.

I just received a robocall from Sarah Thompson who presented herself as one of the top 4 candidates...