Jim Karygiannis lost his city council seat due to clerical error, lawyer tells court

An Ontario Superior Court judge heard Jim Karygiannis'sbid to win back his Toronto city council seat on Thursday, about two weeks after he was removed for overspending duringlast year's municipal election.

Earlier this month, Ulli Watkiss, the city's clerk,served notice to Karygiannisstating he is no longer thecouncillor for Ward 22, Scarborough-Agincourt, due tothe supplementary financial statement he filed following last October's election.

That statement included spending that the clerk says exceeded his expense limit by almost $25,000. Karygiannishas said it was for afundraising dinner party that took place after the 2018 municipal election.

Karygiannis's lawyer, Sean Dewart, argued in courtthatthe dinner was miscategorized and the former councillor merely listed it incorrectly. Dewartsaidthere was no attempt to hide the spending,a clear sign that Karygiannis wasn't trying to deceive anyone. Karygiannis was not in court Thursday.

Provincial rules set a limit on the amount of candidates can spend in an election. For Ward 22 last year, that totalwas $61,207.95, with a maximum of 10 per centor $6,120.80 to be spent for "parties and other expressions of appreciation" after voting day.

Watkiss said Karygiannis filed expenses under "parties and other expressions of appreciation" showingthat he spent $32,083.50, whichexceeds the expense limit by $25,962.70.

That overspending led to Karygiannis's immediate removal from office.

Adam Challef filed theapplication for a compliance audit of Karygiannis' expenses that led to his removal, pointing outKarygiannis raised over $217,000 during the election.

Challef, the City of Toronto andWatkiss are listed as respondents in the case.

Not 'an isolated infraction'

According to therespondents' argument,Karygiannis's removal from office "was not the result of an isolated infraction."

Karygiannis had a pattern of violations in which he "disregarded campaign finance laws," the respondents' affidavit alleges.

It claimsKarygiannis was being kicked out for three offences in particular: failure to file a return, overspending, and not remitting a campaign surplus.

The respondents' court application notes that Karygiannis may have been given incorrect information from the city clerk regarding raising funds and remitting a surplus, but says he has not produced any evidence from his accountant that the expenses were misclassified.

Mismatched expenses

Karygiannissays he had a dinner partyon Dec.21, 2018 for people who wanted to contribute to his campaign. He calls the dinner partya fundraiser.

The expenses of the party totalled $27,803, according to the court filing. Karygiannis also apparently held a victory party upon winning the election which totalled $5,000.

In his court application obtained by CBCToronto, Karygiannis claims "some expenses are not subject to the spending limits, including expenses incurred for the purpose of raising campaign funds."Under the Municipal Elections Act, candidates wereallowed to raise funds after the election campaign ended onDec.31, 2018.

The former councillor argues that the expenses for the party should be considered as fundraising, and not a part of the general spending limit.Karygiannis claims he was audited by his own accountant, who verified his financial statements.

However,Chaleff saysdinner expenses "were subject to the spending limit of appreciation after voting day."

Once thecompliance audit was conducted, Karygiannissays he filed a a supplementary financial statement. He says he had to re-open his campaign for one week to raise funds related to the compliance audit.

The supplementary financial statement saw the dinner costs moved to a line for parties and "other expressions of appreciation." That category has a spending limit of $6,120.80.

He further claims that the supplementary financial statement containedan error that made it seem that the "total expenses for the parties and other expressions of appreciation were $32,083.50," which included the sum of the $5,000 for the victory party and the December dinner party."

Karygiannis claims only his victory party expenses should have appeared on that line, with the dinner party expenses appearing on the line for fundraising.

In court Thursday, city lawyers saidthe decision to remove Karygiannis isn't negotiable, since the expense violated provincial legislation.

Justice William Chalmerssaid he would "endeavour" to reach a decision by Tuesday the same day city council is set to discuss the vacancy.

"But I'm not making any promises," he said.