Hamilton’s integrity commissioner takes no action on complaint against Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson

News Oct 12, 2017 by Kevin Werner Ancaster News

Hamilton’s Integrity Commissioner has rejected investigating a complaint by Sonoma Homes officials against Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson over comments he made about the residential developer earlier this year.

At an April planning committee meeting and later in the month at a council meeting, Ferguson stated he was opposed to Sonoma Homes’ proposal to build a 19-unit condominium project on a unique “triangle” property at Wilson Street and Dalley Drive.

During the planning committee meeting, which Ferguson attended but of which he is not a member, the councillor said he was concerned about the 10 proposed variances the developer was requesting on the property.

“There are too many,” he said at the time. “It sets a dangerous precedent for other applications that will move forward.”

Ferguson said he had been supportive of an earlier proposed medical office on the property, which Sonoma Homes wanted to build. Ferguson said he helped the developer acquire the needed variances when the plan was to construct a two-storey medical centre and business office complex on the 4,473-square-metre property.

“They subsequently abandoned it and went to this residential application,” said Ferguson.

At the time, Ferguson said his “trust had been betrayed” and that the developers “used (the previous rezoning approval) to get this application in.”

Sonoma Homes’ Carmen Chiaravalle and his son, Michael, subsequently appealed council’s decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, and a hearing is scheduled to begin Nov. 8. The businessmen also filed a complaint with the integrity commissioner, calling Ferguson’s comments “political bullying at its worst” and providing “countless misrepresentations and serious allegations” against their characters.

George Rust-D’Eye, in a letter sent to councillors Oct. 11, stated the issue should not be reviewed because Ferguson was conducting himself “in the course of the performance of his duties and responsibilities.

“I do not believe that it is in the nature and intent of the council in appointing me as its integrity commissioner … to monitor or interfere with the conduct by members in the course of their participation in debate …”

Rust D’Eye also argued he should not weigh in on the merits of the appeal because the issue is before the Ontario Municipal Board.

He said his decision “could be seized upon, as questioning the decision-making of the body or bodies in question and the merits of the planning issues.”

Rust-D’Eye’s letter to council does not identify Ferguson or the developers, but the issue that is identified and the timeline is similar to the Sonoma Homes’ proposal the planning committee debated earlier this year.

Ferguson did not actually say he was the councillor in question in the commissioner’s report. He said he was not interviewed by Rust D’Eye.

But he did say he was at the time representing the residents of Ancaster on the issue in his capacity as their elected representative.

 

Hamilton’s integrity commissioner takes no action on complaint against Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson

News Oct 12, 2017 by Kevin Werner Ancaster News

Hamilton’s Integrity Commissioner has rejected investigating a complaint by Sonoma Homes officials against Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson over comments he made about the residential developer earlier this year.

At an April planning committee meeting and later in the month at a council meeting, Ferguson stated he was opposed to Sonoma Homes’ proposal to build a 19-unit condominium project on a unique “triangle” property at Wilson Street and Dalley Drive.

During the planning committee meeting, which Ferguson attended but of which he is not a member, the councillor said he was concerned about the 10 proposed variances the developer was requesting on the property.

“There are too many,” he said at the time. “It sets a dangerous precedent for other applications that will move forward.”

Ferguson said he had been supportive of an earlier proposed medical office on the property, which Sonoma Homes wanted to build. Ferguson said he helped the developer acquire the needed variances when the plan was to construct a two-storey medical centre and business office complex on the 4,473-square-metre property.

“They subsequently abandoned it and went to this residential application,” said Ferguson.

At the time, Ferguson said his “trust had been betrayed” and that the developers “used (the previous rezoning approval) to get this application in.”

Sonoma Homes’ Carmen Chiaravalle and his son, Michael, subsequently appealed council’s decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, and a hearing is scheduled to begin Nov. 8. The businessmen also filed a complaint with the integrity commissioner, calling Ferguson’s comments “political bullying at its worst” and providing “countless misrepresentations and serious allegations” against their characters.

George Rust-D’Eye, in a letter sent to councillors Oct. 11, stated the issue should not be reviewed because Ferguson was conducting himself “in the course of the performance of his duties and responsibilities.

“I do not believe that it is in the nature and intent of the council in appointing me as its integrity commissioner … to monitor or interfere with the conduct by members in the course of their participation in debate …”

Rust D’Eye also argued he should not weigh in on the merits of the appeal because the issue is before the Ontario Municipal Board.

He said his decision “could be seized upon, as questioning the decision-making of the body or bodies in question and the merits of the planning issues.”

Rust-D’Eye’s letter to council does not identify Ferguson or the developers, but the issue that is identified and the timeline is similar to the Sonoma Homes’ proposal the planning committee debated earlier this year.

Ferguson did not actually say he was the councillor in question in the commissioner’s report. He said he was not interviewed by Rust D’Eye.

But he did say he was at the time representing the residents of Ancaster on the issue in his capacity as their elected representative.

 

Hamilton’s integrity commissioner takes no action on complaint against Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson

News Oct 12, 2017 by Kevin Werner Ancaster News

Hamilton’s Integrity Commissioner has rejected investigating a complaint by Sonoma Homes officials against Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson over comments he made about the residential developer earlier this year.

At an April planning committee meeting and later in the month at a council meeting, Ferguson stated he was opposed to Sonoma Homes’ proposal to build a 19-unit condominium project on a unique “triangle” property at Wilson Street and Dalley Drive.

During the planning committee meeting, which Ferguson attended but of which he is not a member, the councillor said he was concerned about the 10 proposed variances the developer was requesting on the property.

“There are too many,” he said at the time. “It sets a dangerous precedent for other applications that will move forward.”

Ferguson said he had been supportive of an earlier proposed medical office on the property, which Sonoma Homes wanted to build. Ferguson said he helped the developer acquire the needed variances when the plan was to construct a two-storey medical centre and business office complex on the 4,473-square-metre property.

“They subsequently abandoned it and went to this residential application,” said Ferguson.

At the time, Ferguson said his “trust had been betrayed” and that the developers “used (the previous rezoning approval) to get this application in.”

Sonoma Homes’ Carmen Chiaravalle and his son, Michael, subsequently appealed council’s decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, and a hearing is scheduled to begin Nov. 8. The businessmen also filed a complaint with the integrity commissioner, calling Ferguson’s comments “political bullying at its worst” and providing “countless misrepresentations and serious allegations” against their characters.

George Rust-D’Eye, in a letter sent to councillors Oct. 11, stated the issue should not be reviewed because Ferguson was conducting himself “in the course of the performance of his duties and responsibilities.

“I do not believe that it is in the nature and intent of the council in appointing me as its integrity commissioner … to monitor or interfere with the conduct by members in the course of their participation in debate …”

Rust D’Eye also argued he should not weigh in on the merits of the appeal because the issue is before the Ontario Municipal Board.

He said his decision “could be seized upon, as questioning the decision-making of the body or bodies in question and the merits of the planning issues.”

Rust-D’Eye’s letter to council does not identify Ferguson or the developers, but the issue that is identified and the timeline is similar to the Sonoma Homes’ proposal the planning committee debated earlier this year.

Ferguson did not actually say he was the councillor in question in the commissioner’s report. He said he was not interviewed by Rust D’Eye.

But he did say he was at the time representing the residents of Ancaster on the issue in his capacity as their elected representative.