As new promises emerge from the three leading candidates for mayor, we continue to examine the actual voting records of Brad Clark, Fred Eisenberger and Brian McHattie. Among issues they differed on while sitting together on council were the proposed mid-peninsula highway, drive-thru facilities, the reform of election donation rules, the city’s 9-year Red Hill lawsuit against the federal government, and specific aspects of the Code of Conduct imposed on councillors.
In October 2010 council voted 11-3 in favour of reviving the mid-peninsula highway project that had been deemed unnecessary during a provincial environmental assessment. McHattie voted against the Niagara to GTA highway, while both Clark and Eisenberger supported it. A further attempt to pressure the province on this issue occurred in June 2011 when Eisenberger was no longer on council. McHattie again voted against the project and Clark supported it.
In May 2010 council by a 10-5 vote rejected a staff recommendation and in order to allow the installation of a Tim Horton’s drive-thru in Binbrook. Clark was in favour of approving the drive-thru application, while both Eisenberger and McHattie voted against it.
Corporate and union contributions dominate election donations in Hamilton, but have been banned in Toronto. In August 2009 council voted 9-5 to ask Queen’s Park to allow all municipalities to ban these types of gifts, and to ask Hamilton staff to investigate options for the city to provide rebates for individual donations similar to current federal and provincial practice.
Eisenberger moved these resolutions and McHattie also supported them, while Clark voted against both. The three have adopted different positions on accepting corporate and union donations for their election campaigns, with Clark always doing so, Eisenberger some times, and McHattie not at all – until the current campaign when all three have opened the door to such gifts.
In November 2004 the DiIanni-led council voted narrowly to sue the government of Canada for allegedly delaying the construction of the Red Hill Valley Parkway by trying to conduct an environmental assessment of the project. McHattie opposed the legal action. In the 2006 election where he won the mayoralty, Eisenberger promised to terminate it.
In March 2008 council voted 10-6 to reject a potential out-of-court settlement, and to continue the lawsuit. Part of that decision decreed that the city would also eliminate the maximum spending cap of $450,000 on the lawsuit and would no longer release the cost figures to the public. Clark supported these decisions, while both Eisenberger and McHattie voted against them.
In 2012, the city lost a two year court battle while pursuing preliminary motions described by the judge as “contrary to fundamental fairness and the system of justice in this country”. As a result, the city was forced to pay $310,000 to the federal side. The judge also wrote that “counsel for the city has acted as if it had a client with inexhaustible resources to finance endless experimental litigation and that it could conduct litigation against the federal government with impunity.”
Under pressure from CATCH it was revealed in January 2014 that city costs for the litigation have already exceeded $3 million, with the lawsuit still continuing. That’s in addition to federal government expenditures of over $2.4 million.
In September 2009 council discussed a revised Code of Conduct recommended by its accountability and transparency subcommittee. In a 13-3 vote, the Code was amended to exempt reporting of gifts to councillors of under $200 (instead of the recommended under $100), and to only require review of disclosure statements by the integrity commissioner if a complaint were made. Clark supported the changes; both McHattie and Eisenberger opposed them.