For almost two years now, Hamilton Mayor Larry Di Ianni has been embroiled in controversy about illegal contributions to his successful 2003 campaign. The law allows a maximum of $750 per individual or group of related companies. Dundas bookseller Joanna Chapman took Di Ianni to court and obtained an order for an audit. Di Ianni has returned thousands of dollars in overcontributions.
The case reads like a cheap mystery novel, full of shady characters, and a plot full of deceit. The problem is, this case is no piece of trashy pulp fiction. Real people will be held accountable and in the end that could be Hamilton tax payers to the sum of $100,000 by the time all the lawyers are paid.
Lets look at the story chapter by chapter. First the issue, Should Mayor Larry Di Ianni be forced to answer to a judge for accepting $26,000 in illegal campaign donations he says were honest mistakes?
The players, Mayor Larry Di Ianni: elected in 2003 after more than two decades as a Stoney Creek councillor. Joanna Chapman: a Dundas bookseller and former councillor. John Best: a communications consultant who lost in Ward 3. Marvin Caplan: former Ward 1 councillor defeated in 2003.
The rules, The Municipal Elections Act sets the rules for campaign donations. An individual or company cannot donate more than $750. It also stipulates how contributions must be documented. The act has been widely criticized as confusing and vague. It states council can take legal action if an audit finds possible contraventions.
Now the story, July 2004: Chapman asks council to audit Di Ianni's mayoral campaign expenses after she found possible violations. She also fingers councillors Tom Jackson, Bill Kelly, Terry Whitehead and five failed candidates. Council rejects her request. Chapman announces she is going to court. Di Ianni hires an auditor to examine his books, which are already under review by his team.
December 2004: Complaints against most of the candidates are dropped after they agree to play by the rules. Chapman continues to pursue Di Ianni, John Best and Marvin Caplan, who claim they've done nothing wrong.
May 2005: After months of arguments, Justice Timothy Culver makes history by ordering an audit of Di Ianni's books. Culver says Chapman had reasonable grounds to believe Di Ianni contravened the Municipal Elections Act. The judge chastises council for failing or refusing to exercise its jurisdiction and not considering the merits of Chapman's case.
Di Ianni has returned $19,500 in illegal donations after his own audit and investigation. The violations included companies making multiple donations which put them over the limit. He says any errors were unintentional.
Also, May 2005: Chapman lays charges against 18 companies for overcontributing to Di Ianni's campaign and violating the elections act.
Spokespersons for three of the companies -- J. Voortman and Associates, The Effort Trust Company and St. Lawrence Cement Inc. -- express surprise at the charges but acknowledge overcontributions. All suggest it resulted from simple error.
August 2005: Council hires Ken Froese, a chartered accountant with LECG Canada, to audit the books of Di Ianni, Best and Caplan.
October 2005: Froese's investigation finds five new violations worth $3,300 beyond those uncovered by Di Ianni.
Among the violations are donations from ineligible contributors including a charity, a Quebec-based company, an estate without the supporting will and two unincorporated companies. The auditor noted all contraventions, "were appropriately addressed by the candidate."
He asks to continue his audit to dig deeper. Froese finds three apparent contraventions and one reporting error in Best's books. Caplan can't find his records.
February 2006: Froese reports he's found another $3,100 in illegal donations to Di Ianni. He found three groups of connected companies that exceeded the $750 limit and donations from ineligible companies. In each violation, Froese notes his conclusions, "relied on information not otherwise provided to Di Ianni."
Caplan's audit finds a violation for not keeping his campaign finance records and two reporting errors. The auditor adds two reporting errors to Best's possible violations. Council hires a Kingston lawyer to advise on whether they should charge Di Ianni, Best and Caplan.
The decision, March 7, Larry Di Ianni told to answer to a judge for breaking election financing rules in his quest to be Hamilton's leader. City council made legal history yesterday, voting 12-1 to charge Di Ianni for violating the Municipal Elections Act. The decision came as vindication for citizen activist Joanna Chapman, who has fought for nearly two years to see the election of 2003 scrutinized.
The Mayor says "he will take his lumps". Council also voted to charge failed candidates Marvin Caplan and John Best. The mayor returned nearly $26,000 in illegal donations from his $330,000 mayoral campaign after his own investigation and a court-ordered audit. He says any violations were honest mistakes by a volunteer-driven campaign.
An outside legal opinion, debated by councillors behind closed doors for nearly two hours yesterday, advised there were reasonable grounds to charge Di Ianni. It countered a report by the city's own legal team, which recommended taking no action.
The alleged offences include failing to return illegal donations as soon as possible and poor bookkeeping of donor information. Under election rules, a corporation or individual can not donate more than $750. If found guilty of violating the act, a candidate can be fined up to $5,000 or kicked out of office.
The legal opinion forced the hand of councillors, many who feared taking no action would only lead to judicial review of their decision. Councillor Bill Kelly was the only councillor to vote against charges.
Flamborough Councillor Margaret McCarthy said it'd be "irresponsible" for council to ignore the legal advice.
Di Ianni said he wanted to speak to his lawyer before deciding if he will plead guilty to the charges.
But Best already plans to plead guilty. He has always maintained his errors, which the outside lawyer cited as reporting violations and not refunding an illegal donation in a timely manner were honest mistakes.
"I'm ready for the next round," he said, adding he does plan to seek legal advice about how the city handled his case.
He believes they were negligent in not going ahead with an audit months ago when he asked.
But Caplan, who was cited for not keeping proper election records, said he plans to fight the charges.
"I am not guilty," he said, questioning if it's even fair that Chapman, who does not live in his ward, can pursue him.
Di Ianni has already thrown his hat back in the ring for the fall election.
Voters will be the judge, he said.
The timing of Di Ianni's re-election campaign announcements is "interesting to say the least," said Chapman.
"It just seemed to me like extremely strange timing. I don't think it would have been my choice in his shoes."
Stay tuned for the next chapter in this Steeltown saga.
Final word, Mayor Larry Di Ianni still doesn't get it. He continues to blame Joanna Chapman for his problems and at the same time manipulating the public.
The issue is not about whether the mayor is doing a good job or not. The real issue is that his campaign accepted and deposited to his account dozens of illegal election donations, prohibited by the Municipal Elections Act. This was clear nearly two years ago but the mayor has been trying to avoid the consequences ever since.
And because of the choices he made, we, the taxpayers of Hamilton, have to pay the expenses of an audit and now a court case. Along with Chapman, we law-abiding citizens are the victims of this embarrassing situation.
Hopefully come November, Hamiltonian's will speak loud and clear with their votes and burn Di Ianni's little black book of lies. Furthermore, I hope this saga gives a wake up call to our elected officials downtown, sending them the message that us city folk are sick of the scandals that have plagued our city. Can we have a clean city election?
Later,
Kenaz
