Quote:
Originally Posted by Brannigans Law
While I agree somewhat the mayor was given ample chance to pay back the 3000 and then to put the cherry on top he took part in a vote that would benefit him financially. The Global News video mentioned the mayor recused himself on a vote for a change of speed limit 5 blocks from his house, so he knows about conflict of interest. He raised money using the citys letterhead, was told to pay it back 4 times, then voted himself out of having to do so. Seems pretty corrupt to me. The fact that it's over 3000 dollars shouldn't mean too much because if he's willing to be this corrupt over 3000 it really puts his whole character and morality into question.
|
Right, and I get that: he should've paid back the $3,000. The part that worries me is the potential precedent though. Admittedly, I don't know if there is one here, or how this impacts things going forward, but that's my concern. I mean, if you can get a mayor booted for a mere $3,000 (which doesn't sound like it went directly into his pocket either as it went to his football charity), how else could people with an axe to grind railroad a public servant?
Do I like Rob Ford and his politics? Not particularly. Would I vote for him? Almost certainly not. But that shouldn't mean that he should be stripped of his public office for this; its a piddly amount that was directed to a charity he runs. If he took the $3,000 and spent it on a keg party or whatever, ya fair enough. I just think that the context matters somewhat here, as well as the fact that its a harsh penalty to pay in the first place.