Noah Geist - A Contributor in the 2023 By-Election for Mayor Who Appears to Have Contravened Contribution Limits under Section 88.9 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996

  3. Section 88.9(3) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 states that the maximum total contribution that a contributor may make to a candidate for the office of Mayor in the City of Toronto is $2,500. 4. The report dated September 10, 2024, from the City Clerk identified Noah Geist as a Contributor that appeared to have exceeded the $2,500 contribution limit to the election campaign of Josh Matlow ("the Candidate"). The report (September 10, 2024) from the City Clerk identified Noah Geist to have contributed $3,500.00.   5. The auditor, BDO Canada LLP, explained their report, attached as Attachment 1 to the report from the City Clerk, dated September 10, 2024, setting out the audit process and the findings with respect to Noah Geist.   6. The Contributor, Noah Geist, appeared in-person, and provided oral submission to the Committee. The Contributor explained that the alleged overage that caused the contravention of the contribution limit was due to being unaware that the post-election fundraising event, which gave rise to the overcontribution, would be included in the contribution limit. The Contributor does not recall receiving or being provided with communication from the fundraiser or candidate after the election regarding the maximum contribution limit. 7. For the reasons stated below, the Compliance Audit Committee has decided not to commence a legal proceeding against contributor Noah Geist for the contravention of Section 88.9 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.   8. There was a contravention of the contribution limit because the individual made a contribution of $3,500.00 which exceeded the applicable limit of $2,500 due to lack of information. The Contributor, from their submission, appears to be remorseful.   9. The Committee is not bound to commence proceedings in the face of a breach or contravention of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. The Committee is entitled to look at all of the circumstances to determine whether legal proceedings should be commenced. This has been recognized by the courts in Lancaster v. Compliance Audit Committee et al., 2012 ONSC 5629. 10. In accordance with s. 88.22(2) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, it is the candidate's obligation to ensure that each contributor is informed of the total maximum of $2,500. In the Committee's view, the responsibility rests with the candidate to fully understand their legal obligations with respect to the receipt of contributions and contribution limits. When a candidate chooses to seek office, they accept that they must understand and comply with the rules including campaign finance rules. A candidate should seek professional or legal advice in order to ensure that they meet their obligations in the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. It is especially important for candidates to ensure their communication with potential contributors in the post voting day period clearly indicates that donations made in this period count for the purposes of limits under the Act.   11. Consequently, the Committee has determined it is not in the public interest to commence a proceeding against the contributor.