The City of Toronto recognizes that City employees, Members of Adjudicative Boards, and Members of Council are expected to conduct themselves with personal integrity, honesty and diligence in the performance of their duties. This policy builds on this recognition by addressing conflict of interest in the administration of the City’s Administrative Penalty System (APS).
This policy sets out the requirements that apply to Screening Officers, Hearing Officers, and City officials and employees in order to prevent real and perceived conflicts of interest. Failure to comply with this policy could undermine the public faith in the administration of the APS program.
Ontario Regulation 611/06, Administrative Penalties, which applies to parking violations, requires the establishment of a policy to define what constitutes a conflict of interest in relation to the administration of the APS, to prevent such conflicts of interest and to redress such conflicts should they occur. Although Ontario Regulation 355/22, Administrative Penalties for Contraventions Detected Using Camera Systems, which applies the red light camera and automated speed enforcement violations, does not have the same requirement, this policy is being implemented for these violations as well as a best practice.
This policy applies to:
For City officials and City employees (including Screening Officers) engaged in the administration of APS, the conflict of interest, disclosure of wrongdoing and reprisal protection provisions in Chapter 192, Public Service (the “Toronto Public Service By-law”), apply to their activities in relation to the APS.
For Hearing Officers, the conflict of interest provisions in the Code of Conduct for Members of Adjudicative Boards and any conflict of interest provision in the Toronto Public Appointments Policy apply to their activities in relation to the APS. In addition, the provisions of Article 4 of the Toronto Public Service By-law applies to Hearing Officers as if they were City employees with any necessary modifications.
“APS” – means Administrative Penalty System.
“City” – means City of Toronto.
“Conflict of Interest” – as defined in the Public Service By-law.
“Chair” – means Chair of the Administrative Penalty Tribunal.
“Council” – means Toronto City Council.
“Hearing Officer” – has the same meaning as set out in Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 610.
“Hearing Review” – has the same meaning as set out in Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 610.
“Penalty Notice” – has the same meaning as set out in Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 610.
“Reprisal” – means any measure taken or threatened as a direct result of disclosing or being suspected of disclosing an allegation of wrongdoing, initiating or co-operating in an investigation into an alleged wrongdoing and includes but is not limited to:
“Screening Decision” – has the same meaning as set out in Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 610.
“Screening Officer” – has the same meaning as set out in Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 610.
“Screening Review” – has the same meaning as set out in Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 610.
General
All Screening Officers, Hearing Officers, City officials and City employees involved in the administration of the APS must comply this policy.
Screening Officers and Hearing Officers
All Screening Officers and Hearing Officers must, in accordance with this policy, other applicable City policies and by-laws including the Toronto Public Service By-law and the Code of Conduct for Members of Adjudicative Boards;
(a) both be and appear to be independent, impartial, and unbiased;
(b) avoid all conflicts of interest, whether real or perceived, and are responsible for promptly taking appropriate steps to disclose, resolve, or obtain advice with respect to such conflicts when they arise;
(c) not be influenced by partisan interests, public opinion, or by fear of criticism;
(d) not use their title and/or position to promote their own interests or the interests of others;
(e) discharge their duties in accordance with the law, City by-laws, City policies and APS policies, procedures, and guidelines;
(f) refrain from openly and publicly criticizing the administration of the APS program or the conduct of others in relation to the administration of the APS program;
(g) not accept, arrange to accept, give or request to be given a reward, gift, advantage or benefit of any kind from any person or entity that influences or could be perceived to influence the performance of the officer’s duties;
(h) not directly or indirectly use or disclose any confidential information obtained by him or her during the course of his or her duties to another person or entity unless the officer is required by law; and
(i) not participate in a decision-making process with respect to a matter that the officer is able to influence in the course of his or her duties if the officer, or family, friends or business associates of the officer, could benefit from the decision.
City officials and City employees involved in the administration of APS
All City officials and City employees involved in the administration of the APS must conduct themselves in accordance with this policy, other applicable City policies and by-laws including the Toronto Public Service By-law with respect to any conflicts of interest.
Screening Officers and Hearing Officers
The keys to preventing conflicts of interest are identification, disclosure and withdrawal from a Screening Review or Hearing Review. The need for identification, disclosure and withdrawal from a Screening Review or Hearing Review applies to any real, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.
Screening Officers
If a Screening Officer becomes aware of any real, potential or perceived conflict of interest with respect to their review of a Penalty Notice, the Screening Officer must report the conflict of interest to their supervisor/manager. If the Screening Officer is not sure a conflict exists, they should seek advice from their immediate supervisor/manager or their Ethics Executive as defined in the Toronto Public Service By-law.
In the case of a scheduled Screening Review that has not yet commenced, where a Screening Officer has reported a conflict of interest, their supervisor will assign another Screening Officer to conduct the Screening Review.
In the case of a review of a Screening Review that has commenced, the matter will be adjourned immediately on the Screen Officer becoming aware that a conflict of interest exists and will be rescheduled with another Screening Officer.
Hearing Officers
If a Hearing Officer, except the Chair, becomes aware of any real or perceived conflict of interest with respect to their review of a Screening Decision, the Hearing Officer must report the conflict of interest to the Chair.
If the Chair becomes aware of any real or perceived conflict in relation to the performance of their duties as Chair, including the review of a Screening Decision, the Chair must report the conflict of interest to the Administrative Penalty Tribunal Administrator.
If a Hearing Officer, including the Chair, is not sure if a conflict exists, they should seek advice from the Integrity Commissioner.
On reporting a conflict the Chair, the Chair will designate another Hearing Officer to carry out the duties of the Chair in relation to the matter in which the conflict arose.
In the case of a scheduled Hearing Review that has not yet commenced:
(a) where a Hearing Officer, not including the Chair, has reported a conflict of interest, the Chair will assign another Hearing Officer to conduct the review;
(b) where the Chair has reported a conflict interest, the Administrative Penalty Tribunal Administrator will assign another Hearing Officer to conduct the review.
In the case of Hearing Review that has commenced, where a Hearing Officer, including the Chair, has reported a conflict of interest, the matter will be adjourned immediately upon the Hearing Officer becoming aware of the conflict of interest and the Administrative Penalty Tribunal Administrator will then reschedule Hearing Review with another Hearing Officer.
In addition, where a conflict has been reported, the Administrative Penalty Tribunal Administrator may immediately assign the matter to another available Hearing Officer so that the review of a Screening Decision can occur without delay.
City officials and City employees involved in the administration of APS
The keys to preventing conflicts of interest are identification and disclosure by City officials and employees to their immediate supervisors/managers or their Ethics Executives in accordance with applicable City policies and by-laws including the Toronto Public Service By-law.
Screening Officers
If an individual believes that a Screening Officer conducted a Screening Review when they had a conflict of interest, the individual may make a complaint in accordance with the Administrative Penalty System: Public Complaints Procedure.
If a supervisor receives a formal complaint in accordance with the Administrative Penalty System: Public Complaints Procedure and determines that a Screening Officer made a Screening Decision when they had a conflict interest that was not reported, the supervisor will set aside the Screening Decision and reschedule the Screening Review with another Screening Officer.
Hearing Officers
If an individual believes that a Hearing Officer conducted a Hearing Review when they had a conflict of interest, the individual may make a complaint under the Code of Conduct Complaint for Members of Adjudicative Boards or the Administrative Penalty System: Public Complaints Procedure. The Administrative Penalty System: Public Complains Procedure provides that these complaints are processed through the Code of Conduct for Adjudicative Boards including its Complaint and Application Procedures.
If the Chair receives a formal complaint made under the Administrative Penalty System: public complaints Procedure of learns of a formal complaint made under the Code of Conduct for Members of Adjudicative Boards that a Hearing Officer conducted a Hearing Review when they had a conflict of interest that was not reported, the Chair will set aside the Hearing Decision and reschedule the Hearing Review with another Hearing Officer.
City officials and City employees involved in the administration of APS
The Toronto Public Service By-law provides for discipline for wrongdoing by City officials and City employees, including those with respect to conflicts of interest.
No Reprisals
No person shall take a reprisal against a City employee or other individual performing duties related to the administration of the APS because the employee or individual:
(1) Has sought information or advice about making a disclosure about wrongdoing contrary to this policy;
(2) Has made a disclosure about wrongdoing contrary to this policy in good faith;
(3) Has initiated or co-operated in an investigation or other process related to a disclosure of wrongdoing contrary to this policy;
(4) Has appeared as a witness, given evidence or participated in any proceeding relating to the wrongdoing contrary to this policy, or is required to do so;
(5) Has alleged or reported a reprisal; or
(6) Is suspected of any of the above actions.
The identity of an employee or other individual performing duties related to the administration of the APS involved in an investigation, including the identity of an individual alleging a conflict of interest contrary to this policy, will be protected to the fullest extent possible.
If an employee believes they have suffered reprisal, this should be reported in accordance with Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 192.
This policy will form part of the orientation for all current and new Screening Officers, Hearing Officers and APS administration staff.
This policy is administered by the Executive Director, Court Services and the City Solicitor.
Questions or comments about this policy, including reports of contraventions of the policy that are not otherwise addressed in the policy, can be made to:
Director of Prosecutions, Legal Services, care of:
APS Screening Office
55 John Street, Metro Hall 3rd floor
Toronto, ON
M5V3C6
Executive Director, Court Services, care of:
92 Front Street East, 3rd floor
Toronto, ON
M5E0G2