Council showed bias against Rick Chiarelli, court finds

A panel of judges has found that city council was biased againstCoun. Rick Chiarelli and has thrown outcouncil's decision to dock the College ward representative's salaryfor 270 days over his "sexist" and "disgraceful conduct,"according to an Ontario Superior Court ruling released late Wednesday.

And in the same decision, the judges themselves re-imposed the 270-day salary suspension.

In practical terms, nothing much changes for Chiarelli. The judges Justices David Corbett, Geoffrey Morawetz and Robyn Ryan Bell agreed with the findings of the integrity commissioner's investigation into Chiarelli's conductand imposed the maximum penalty available.

• Council's public denunciation 'crossed the line,' Chiarelli's lawyer tells judicial panel
• Councillors needed to denounce allegations against Chiarelli, judicial panel told

But the ruling does confirm Chiarelli's argument that his council colleagues showed they had a "closed mind" against him when Mayor Jim Watson and a number of other elected officialscalled on himto resign, and when most council members stood in protest at a public meeting, months before the investigation findings were made public.

• 3 Ottawa councillors call for Chiarelli to resign
• Analysis: Councillors taking a stand on Chiarelli, the only way they can

A CBC investigation in the fall of 2019spoke to manywomen who accused the councillor of inappropriate behaviour and reported the experiences of eight of them. The women said they were asked questions, told stories and shown pictures that were inappropriate and sexual in nature.

Three female job applicants made official complaints to then-integrity commissioner Robert Marleau, who found in a July 2020 reportthecouncillor contravened the code of conduct and that hisbehaviour had been "offensive and disreputable," qualifyingas harassment under the city's policies.

Marleau recommended Chiarelli be docked nine months' pay 90 days for each complainant, the most severe penalty available under law and council approved the recommendation.

• First of 2 reports finds College ward councillor engaged in 'offensive and disreputable behaviour'

Last year, Chiarelli's lawyer Bruce Sevigny, filed for a judicial review of the report, arguing, among other things, thatcouncil was biased, and that the integrity commissioner did not have the authority to investigate the complaints againstChiarelli, and that Marleaudidn't accommodate the councillor's health issues.

The councillor did not dispute, or even address, the findings of the integrity commissioner's report during the one-day judicial review hearing last May.

Rick Chiarelli at city hall sparks protests from residents and councillors

5 years ago

Duration 0:47

Over a dozen residents wearing #ResignRick t-shirts and most city councillors remained standing at city hall Wednesday in protest of Coun. Rick Chiarelli's presence at council.

This week, the three-judge panel has dismissed outright all ofChiarelli's arguments against the integrity commissioner, stating the women's "complaints all fall squarely in the jurisdiction of the commissioner." The judges also found that Marleau "reasonably accommodated" Chiarelli's health issues.

• Timeline: How the integrity commissioner tried and failed to interview Rick Chiarelli
• Analysis: Let's take a closer look at Chiarelli's denial

However, the judges took issue with council's behaviour toward Chiarelli before the integrity report was released in July 2020.

Councillors calling for his resignation, refusing to sit with him, "and theabsence of their commitment to set aside their preconceptions" showed bias, the Superior Court judges found.

In fact, council was reminded by the city solicitor of its obligation to appear neutral in advance of the meeting where they all stood. Only Councillors Theresa Kavanagh, council's special liaison on women and gender equity, Jan Harder and the mayor stayed seated. Watson later said he was standing "in spirit."

The judgesdid not fault council for denying Chiarelli's request for a leave of absenceor for expressing support for the women who came forward to make complaints, but found that council members did not act properly in their role as adjudicators in this instance. While the integrity commissioner recommends sanctions, the final decision on whether to approve them rests with council.

Chiarelli out $20K

The judges explained in a case where bias was found, the issue would normally go back to a new decision-maker. But since the same council would be the decision-maker in this case, the court found that inappropriate, and took it upon itself to decide the appropriate sanction itself.

The court agreed with Marleau, and instated the maximum penalty for Chiarelli's "pattern of sexist harassment that demeaned the complainants who were seeking employment in his office."

The judges ordered the city to pay Chiarelli $20,000 in legal costs, but only after Chiarellipays$40,000 in costs to the integrity commissioner.