Headline News

Mono deputy mayor was in conflict in trail vote: integrity commissioner

February 20, 2025   ·   0 Comments

By JAMES MATTHEWS

Mono Deputy Mayor Fred Nix has been found to have been in a conflict of interest when he participated in a council decision to allow the Bruce Trail Conservancy to use municipal land.

Mono resident Elaine Kehoe complained to the municipality’s integrity commissioner, Guy Giono, about an Oct. 22, 2024, council vote regarding land to be used by the Caledon Hills Club of The Bruce Trail Conservancy (BTC).

During previous town council meetings, Nix would recuse himself from discussions regarding the BTC to avoid any conflicts of interest from his past involvement with the group.

But he said during the October meeting that, in conversations with Mike Dunmore, the town’s CAO, and Fred Simpson, the town’s clerk, he was told he wouldn’t be in a conflict for taking in the club’s presentation to council.

“So I’ll be staying for the presentation,” Nix said during the meeting.

Three road sections were remaining on the trail in the south half of Mono and each of those sections is about one kilometre long.

One of the properties the club needed to fulfill its plans is owned by the municipality. Another is privately owned by an Ottawa resident who hasn’t seen the parcel of land in about 25 years, council was told.

The BTC obtained a “handshake agreement” with that landowner to use the property for the trail.

Conservancy representatives asked the town’s permission to use its parcel of land to build part of the trail. And, over the longer term, the town was asked to investigate if the property was needed by the town.

If it was to be deemed surplus land, council was told that the conservancy would be in the market to buy it.

Town council ultimately voted to allow the BTC use of the land and council waived the requirement that the BTC pay a parkland levy.

Kehoe took issue following the meeting with how Nix previously recused himself from past issues relating to the trail for fear of a possible conflict of interest. But then he proposed during the Oct. 22 meeting a motion “that allowed a handshake deal with Caledon hikers” and it was passed.

“If he had to excuse himself every meeting when the Bruce Trail came up because of a conflict of interest, how can he present a motion that was passed?” she said.

Giorno released the reasons for his decision on Feb. 1.

“After considering all the evidence and the submissions of the parties, I am of the opinion that, because Deputy Mayor Fred Nix is a member of The Bruce Trail Conservancy, he had an indirect pecuniary interest in the Oct. 22 motion, he should have declared his pecuniary interest orally and in writing, he should not have moved the motion or participated in decision-making on it, and, consequently, he contravened section 5 and section 5.1 of the (Municipal Conflict of Interest Act),” Giorno wrote.

“Had Mr. Nix made different choices, this inquiry could have been avoided. Based on my previous advice to him, and other factors, he should not have participated in the decision.”

Giorno further wrote in his decision that “In his response to the draft of this decision, Deputy Mayor Nix argues against the finding that the Bruce Trail Conservancy derives an ‘economic benefit’ from the motion.”

He wrote that neither the conservancy’s revenues nor expenses are impacted. Its economic prospects and asset value do not change. The Deputy Mayor argues that the benefit is intangible or, at least, it is a benefit that cannot be reduced to money.

“I have considered Mr. Nix’s submission,” Giorno wrote. “Respectfully, I disagree. The interests that he mentions (such as revenues and expenses) are examples of pecuniary interests, but the list of potential pecuniary interests is not closed. This case involves land. Land has value. The value of land is a pecuniary interest. The Bruce Trail Conservancy routinely pays for land, and it was interested in purchasing this land. That is evidence of a financial or economic interest: in other words, a pecuniary interest. Just as land has value, the use of land has value.”

Readers Comments (0)