Barrie city councillor Clare Riepma has been docked 15 days' pay by his colleagues who unanimously supported the findings of the city's integrity commissioner that he attempted to use his influence regarding a south-end development.
According to a second report by integrity commissioner Suzanne Craig, Riepma violated city council's code of conduct regarding personal emails, and on that matter, council supported her recommendation that he should be reprimanded over his actions.
Council ordered Riepma to respond in writing to the city clerk by Oct. 31 that he acknowledges and recognizes that the use of the city's voice mail system, computer network (including the city's email system including website, social media etc.) and/or equipment to distribute election-related correspondence or record election-related messages is prohibited. Riepma must also acknowledge in writing by Oct. 31 that distribution or contact lists developed utilizing City of Barrie corporate resources or through contact in an elected official's role cannot be utilized for election purposes.
Riepma excused himself from the council chambers while both matters were dealt with at Wednesday's city council meeting.
In Craig's report, Riepma allegedly used a Barrie constituent's email address for municipal election purposes.
The response from Riepma in the report claimed the complaint against him was politically motivated and that he had complied with the code.
"The complainant, (named individual), ran against me in the 2022 election campaign for councillor in Ward 1. Her accomplice worked for the other candidate by spreading information of questionable validity," Riepma alleged.
As for the matter that has now cost Riepma 15 days' pay, the complaint alleged the councillor improperly interfered with staff performing their duties about a planning rezoning application.
Craig, in her report, said the complaint alleged Riepma, a licensed planner, used his knowledge and status as a professional planner to request that staff change the approved policy parameters to generate data for consideration that was favourable to his opinion.
The complaint alleges that this action constitutes Riepma's improper uses of influence of office through his attempt to interfere with the professional role of staff to advise based on political and objectivity and without undue influence from any individual member or faction of council.
Craig determined Riepma violated the code of conduct specific to four areas concerning the Yonge Street project. The report does not identify the development.
Specifically, the code requires members of council to respect that staff must act impartially and respect the professional expertise and subject matter independence of staff.
In Craig's report, Riepma said the complaint does not provide a list of the alleged inappropriate requests and he has no way of responding to the allegation.
"Except to say in general that to my knowledge I have never asked anyone to change policy parameters. I have certainly questioned staff about their opinions. I am an engineer and a professional planner. I believe that I am entitled to use my credentials in exactly the same way the complainant uses his degree in his email address. I however do not use any of my credentials in my city email signature line."
Riepma added that his background is unique and gives him greater insight into city planning than most citizens.
"However we all bring our particular expertise to the job of councillor. Similarly, it would be a loss to the public if an economist had to limit their comments on city financial matters or a teacher on traffic safety in school zones."
