Jeff Thomas, Jeffery Thomas and Jeffery D Thomas - 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

  2. Section 88.34(2) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 requires the City Clerk to prepare a report identifying each contributor to a candidate for office on a council who appears to have contravened any of the contribution limits under Section 88.9.   3. Section 88.9(4) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 states that the maximum total contribution that a contributor may make to multiple candidates for office on the same council or local board is $5,000.   4. The report dated September 10, 2024, from the City Clerk identified Jeff Thomas, Jeffery Thomas, and Jeffery D Thomas (the "Contributor(s)") as a contributor or contributors that appeared to have exceeded the $5,000 contribution limit to the election campaigns of Ana Bailao, Josh Matlow, Brad Bradford, and Mark Saunders (the "Candidate(s)"). Specifically, the report (September 10, 2024) from the City Clerk identified multiple contributions of $1,000, and one contribution of $500, from an individual and/or individuals with similar names - Jeff Thomas, Jeffery Thomas, and Jeffery D Thomas - and with the same address. Accordingly, it appeared that a contributor had made a donation of $5,500 to the election campaign of the Candidates.   5. The auditor, BDO Canada LLP, explained in their report, attached as Attachment 1 to the report (September 10, 2024) from the City Clerk, setting out the audit process and the findings with respect to Jeff Thomas, Jeffery Thomas, and Jeffery D Thomas.   6. Neither the Contributor(s) nor the Candidate(s) attended, and no written submissions were provided. An agent (the "Agent"), Tom Giancos, appeared for the Contributor and provided an oral submission to the Committee. The Agent stated that Jeff Thomas, Jeffery Thomas, and Jeffery D Thomas are the same individual. The Agent explained that the alleged overage that caused the contravention of the contribution limit was due to being unaware that the post-election contribution, which gave rise to the overcontribution, would be included in the contribution limit. 7. For the reasons stated below, the Compliance Audit Committee has decided not to commence a legal proceeding against Contributor(s) Jeff Thomas, Jeffery Thomas, and Jeffery D Thomas for the contravention of Section 88.9 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. 8. 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 consider 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. 9. In accordance with s. 88.22(1)(r)(ii) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, it is a candidate's obligation to ensure that each contributor is informed of the total maximum of $5,000. In the Committee's view, the responsibility rests with a candidate(s) 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 contribution limits under the Act.   10. Consequently, the Committee has determined it is not in the public interest to commence a proceeding against the Contributor.