Mississauga Musings

I had the following in the P.S. section but I think it's important enough to put here up at the front --so readers can see what we're dealin' with here.

This morning my Yahoo email alerted me that "2619920" had left comments for three of my Mississauga Corporate Security YouTube videos.

I surfed to "2619920"'s' YouTube site and he listed "Canada" as Country and "28" as his age. (NOTE: I check out every new contact. You should too.)

Well, I approved all three of "2619920"'s comments and responded all three times. Then I summarized what happened in this Blog to let you-all in on it.

Get this. When I went back to YouTube so I could link you to "2619920"s comments, he'd deleted his three comments leaving only my responses!

[UPDATE: March 18, 2008 8:02 pm. Earlier I'd stated that "2619920" had bugged entirely off the YouTube site. I was wrong. Because he had no videos of his own a YouTube search came up dry. Apologies.]

I'm hoping that "2619920" might find this Blog. This is for him.

HEY "2619920"'!

You went to one of my Mississauga Corporate Security videos and posted this:

"2619920 (3 hours ago)

New Comment (Pending Approval)

Don't you have anything better to do than film Transit Enforcement vehicles?"

Then you went to my other Mississauga Corporate Security video and posted this:

"2619920 (3 hours ago)

New Comment (Pending Approval)

Don't you have anything better to do than film Enforcement vehicles?"

Funny you didn't drop down those same comments on my Peel Regional Police or Maui Police videos --or ask the hundreds of other YouTubers who are fans of enforcement vehicles the same question. Why no comments from "2619920" asking them if they had anything better to do than videotape enforcement vehicles, huh?

Why your fascination, "2619920", with serving up comments on Mississauga Corporate Security vehicle videos?

Oh. And another thing, "2619920".

You posting your witty comments three times "(3 hours ago)" would've made that around 9:30 am. Two questions.

1. Shouldn't you be pretending to "work"?

And.

2. How's it feel to be totally unaccountable to the public?

Last comment, "2619920".

HEY! BUTTERCUP! I'm USED to having things "deleted" from YOUR end! Yeah. Like in ALL TRACE OF IT! INCLUDING "gaps" in video surveillance footage!

Love,
The Mississauga Muse

OKAY. THAT OUT OF THE WAY --NOW FOR TODAY'S BLOG

It's clear from my emails that I'm picking up new readers. So. For all my loyal cranks, crackpots, nutbars, lunatics, malcontents, whackos [insert "Other" pejorative here __________ ] who move their lips while deciphering this Blog, forgive this Readers' Digest version while I bring the new cranks, crackpots, nutbars, lunatics, malcontents, whackos [insert "Other" pejorative here __________ ] readers up to speed.

Okay, okay, Liss'n up, new readers. Okay. Here goes. There's this contemptuous piece of Ontario legislation (yeah, I know you're already finding this boring but bear down, it's worth it.) --there's this contemptuous piece of Ontario legislation crapped out (literally) by the Mike Harris regime. It's called the 2001 Municipal Act but I call it THE EVIL EMPIRE ACT.

If you ever meet anyone who also refers to the 2001 Municipal Act as THE EVIL EMPIRE ACT, then you've met a Brother. Or Sister. By which I mean they have Two Clues about what's goin' on in Ontario Municipal Governance.

Okay. Time for some ol' cut-and-paste. From THE EVIL EMPIRE ACT.

Role of council

224. It is the role of council,

(a) to represent the public and to consider the well-being and interests of the municipality;

(b) to develop and evaluate the policies and programs of the municipality;

(c) to determine which services the municipality provides;

(d) to ensure that administrative policies, practices and procedures and controllership policies, practices and procedures are in place to implement the decisions of council;

(d.1) to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality;

(e) to maintain the financial integrity of the municipality; and

(f) to carry out the duties of council under this or any other Act. 2001, c. 25, s. 224; 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 99.

There. That wasn't too bad, was it? Here's the pay-off.

See (d) "ensure that administrative policies, practices and procedures... are in place to implement the decisions of council;and (d.1) "ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management"

WELL THEY AIN'T HAPPENING! ESPECIALLY (d.1) to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality.

Which brings us to the topic of today's Blog.

The First for 2008 AUDIT COMMITTEE meeting

And check out what was on the agenda. Yep, "Code of Conduct and Complaint Procedure for Security Staff". Proving, Mississauga Boys and Girls, what I'd said all along --that there hasn't been one up to now. Proving, Mississauga Dudes and Dudettes, that even though Mississauga became Mississauga on January 1974, Mississauga Council hasn't managed to get around to ensuring that citizens (especially At-Risk Youth) had a complaints procedure in case they got "jacked" and rumpled by Mississauga Corporate (City) Security.

Proving, (I know you're all still with me here... ) "that [some] administrative policies, practices and procedures and controllership policies, practices and procedures" are not "in place to implement the decisions of council."

AND (she winds up for the fastball) that... "accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality" *IF* THEY HAD BREATH IN MISSISSAUGA, WOULD BARELY FOG A MIRROR!

After all, how accountable or transparent can a municipality be if it took 34 years, 3 months and 18 days before anyone could finally prove that "administrative policies, practices and procedures and controllership policies, practices and procedures" on "uniforms" with the power to tag, "jack" and arrest you, were not in place?! (And it had to be two citizens to bring that to light?)

And --AND jeez, we-all gotta wonder how many other Canadian municipalities slap trop-faux-police uniforms on their employees, give 'em power of "jack-and-arrest" and then (to quote one intuitive new reader) create an "Abyss" where a reasonable human being would expect Checks-and-Balances.

Moving Forward...

THE SCOOP ON THE SNOOP

I have video of the entire Audit Committee meeting already loaded on my computer. However, there's no way I would YouTube that thing "raw". There were statements made that ran contrary to what my Freedom of Information (FOI) requests had already confirmed. In addition, a couple of other claims spewed forth and I'm droppin' down a couple FOI's on those today.

Since Freedom of Information takes about 30 days... well, we'll all have to wait.

(MISSISSAUGAWATCH is all about "homework".)

However, I pulled off some freeze-frames and made a transcript of a few Mississauga Audit Committee highlights.

THIS IS THE PICTURE

At no time did Mayor and Councillors actually DISCUSS the new Mississauga Corporate Security Code of Conduct and Complaints Procedure. I didn't even get to see the thing til after the meeting. Yes. Really.

Me not seeing the Code of Conduct and Complaints Procedure beforehand turned out to be a good thing. (I'd have found it tough to keep my emotions in check). Hint: If you loved the Corporate "Ducking-the-Ontario-Ombudsman" response to Bill 130's "complaint procedure", this newly-inked Mississauga Corporate Security "complaint procedure" is one heckuva Jewel-in-the-Corporate-Clown. (And yes, you can quote me.)

Heck, I'm gonna quote myself!

"This Mississauga Corporate Security "complaint procedure" is one heckuva Jewel-in-the-Corporate-Clown." (The Mississauga Muse, March 18, 2008)

Proving that No Complaints Procedure is better than what my eyeballs saw yesterday on the way out.

Oh! And get this. You couldn'ta gotten three more "Dream-team" Councillors for yesterday's Audit Committee Corporate Security rubber-stamping proforma.

Councillor Eve Adams (Malton and Ward 5 area). I was at Malton Community Centre a week or so ago and I counted no fewer than nine video surveillance cameras mushrooming about. Plus there was a "Response Unit" at the entrance. AND there was a security guard at the "reception desk".

I BET THERE ARE FRIENDLIER-LOOKING MINIMUM SECURITY PRISONS than Malton Community Centre!

Then there was Frank Dale, Chair of the Violence and Vandalism Task Team AND Mississauga rep on the Peel Police Services Board. I think of Frank Dale as Mr. "Justice Department". OK, maybe not "Justice".

And then there's Katie Mahoney, one half of the team who started the Mississauga Crime Prevention Association (although she bugged out of the floundering dawg around July of last year to the complete surprise of Hazel McCallion --but not to me.). And she's also on the Peel Youth Violence Prevention Steering Committee.

Yep. Les-Three. And I just marvelled. Like how can you be part of the Peel Police Services Board and Violence and Vandalism Task Team and not know that the guards implementing your policies (cuffing and arresting people) had no public complaints procedure?! Surely you had to know. I mean how could you not know?

Or in the case of Councillor Mahoney, how can you be a co-founder of the Mississauga Crime Prevention Association and not know that the "community partner" Mississauga guards had no public complaints procedure?!

Or in the case of Councillor Adams... well, we'll leave that for another time.

MOVING FORWARD LEADING TODAY FOR TOMORROW. THE "HIGHLIGHTS"

TRANSCRIPTS

McCALLION: "I think that this is an extremely important report regarding the procedures regarding security staff that is established --and I think we can appreciate that we were a little weak on this in regard to procedures."

[ No complaints procedure for 34 years "a little weak"?!!!!! Try "NON-EXISTENT". ]

McCALLION: "Yeah, you raised the issue, Ursula. You know we don’t always complain --sometimes we do accept suggestions and I think this covers it. The only question I have, Madam Chairman is, what check do we make on security officers that we hire? What is the process in finding out their background etc because quite honestly, it’s very important that we hire people that meet certain standards and criteria. So what research do we do? And I hope it’s not just reference."

[Madam Mayor, the fact that you're asking those "checks-standards" questions confirms that you haven't taken me up on my offer to read all of my Freedom of Information results. Because if you had read them, you wouldn't be asking those questions. And the fact that you accepted the answers you got from staff confirms that you didn't get answers!]

McCALLION: "And I think we should thank --what’s her name, Ursula --I think she raised the question, didn’t she?"

BAKER: "She certainly raised the issue."

[Yeah, and this "The Problem" has been raising the issue since forever. The truth is that citizens can thank "Nutbar" Donald Barber for his December 12, 2007 call for a "the city to go public with a broad disclosure of its security department operations" that we're this baby-step along --that is, confirmation that there was no complaints procedures all these decades. ]

MCCALLION: "What training occurs? Like, no matter who they work for, I think that when they work for a public body or security at a city hall is in my opinion a little bit different than working in a store or the security officer working at the airport etc. What special training do we give them when we hire them?"

[Five times, I've offered you and Councillors all my FOI's, Madam Mayor. Had you read them, you'd know about a cynical piece of prose called the "City of Mississauga Corporate Security 2003 Strategic Draft Plan". However KUDOS for acknowledging that municipal security guards should have special training.]

McCALLION: "I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that we are dealing with the public and we should give them every understanding possible."

Worth repeating.

McCALLION: "I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that we are dealing with the public and we should give them every understanding possible."

(She rifles through her email...) I wrote almost the same thing that McCallion said to Mississauga Corporate Security... here.

"Only yesterday while reading, "A Guide to Service Delivery Review for Municipal Managers" did I finally see my belief echoed in the statement:

"In other words, in fulfilling the fundamental principles of municipal governance, "doing the right things" (satisfying citizen needs) is far more important than "doing things right."

"'doing the right things' (satisfying citizen needs)" that's what McCallion meant by Mississauga being "sensitive to the fact that we are dealing with the public and we should give them every understanding possible."

So when did I write that email to Mississauga Corporate Security?

Wed, 10 May 2006, Yes, "2frikkin'006"

Less than a month later, June 7, 2006 Donald Barber was arrested thanks to Les Sensitives-to-Les-Publique!

(Click here to go directly to YouTube or Google Video)

To repeat one of the first things that Hazel McCallion admitted yesterday.

McCALLION: "I think that this is an extremely important report regarding the procedures regarding security staff that is established --and I think we can appreciate that we were a little weak on this in regard to procedures."

Here's the question. About municipal security guards. How many more Ontario municipalities are (in the words of Hazel McCallion) "a little weak on this in regard to procedures."? How many more municipalities --IN CANADA?

Tomorrow, MISSISSAUGAWATCH will post the Code of Conduct/Complaints Procedure to the net and various User Group forums in an attempt to get public input. Including (hopefully) law enforcement input.

For "homework" I ask that readers please watch this so that you will understand why I repeat Mr. Barber's call for "the city to go public with a broad disclosure of its security department operations"

(Click here to go to YouTube or Google Video)

Yes, "go public with a broad disclosure of its security department operations". After all, it is the Role of council

(d.1) to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality;

Signed,
The (QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?) Mississauga Muse

P.S. Sorry about no Blog yesterday. Had to go to Whitby to document yet another responsible and accountable Ontario municipality avoid responsibility and accountability by ducking the Ontario Ombudsman and hiring Local Authority Services instead. Fascinating evening.

P.P.S. Thanks to "Deep Oakville" for noticing "2".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I hope that the people we hire are sensitive to the fact that we are dealing with the public and we should give them every understanding possible." (Hazel McCallion on MIssissauga Corporate Security, March 17, 2007)

"But other councils made their decisions quickly and with little public interaction. Just this past week, Peel Region set a new speed record. It reportedly voted to go with an LAS investigator, and according to a citizen blogger who videotaped it, they did it in just 14 seconds. According to the same blogger, Mississauga council had the previous record, when it did the same thing in 16 seconds."--Address by André Marin Ombudsman of Ontario (March 6, 2008)

"We must employ every possible tactic to dissuade those who try to silence us with fear" ---The Mississauga News Editorial (2007-03-24)

Want (or worse, need) to learn more? Link to MISSISSAUGAWATCH.CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------