To the editor,
It is without a doubt that when executive member(s) of a board, either appointed by council or of a local board, who have issues about anyone policing their activities, they go on a defensive and use members of council powers to do their dirty work. I have seen this over-and-over again - especially where I live.
When issues arise that put executive board members' integrity to question, what do they do? They file a bogus complaint to the integrity commissioner and try to rid that person from the board. The next step is to ruin the reputation of the accused. The final step is to create a veil so that only a third party would have jurisdiction to exercise a penalty. How pitiful our quasi-judicial system has become.
To be a true administrator is to act in an administrative way that would set non-punitive directions for the accused to follow. To cut off one's arm just because the finger has a sliver in it is not acting in the best interest of administrative powers.
As stated in the Municipal Act, it is law for the integrity commissioner not to reveal the complainant's name. However, one would only believe that the complaint may have been submitted by an executive of Fort William Business Improvement Area's board.
Equally disturbing is the fact that the reporter cited previous complaints about Coun. Agarwal's behaviours of her past. Was this really necessary? It's as if a penalty never goes away when it is suggested by an IC. It's a life sentence for the accused to be the victim of mud-slinging.
It is my opinion, given the nature of the complaint and culture differences, that issues as such should be dealt with on the board and let council deal with more pressing issues for the rest of their constituents. I don't believe that taxpayers should be picking up the tab for this investigation.
Ed Dunnill
