Summary#
Toronto City Council adopted the Integrity Commissioner’s report about two tweets by Councillor Josh Matlow that criticized specific City staff. Council accepted the findings that parts of his conduct broke the Council Code of Conduct and imposed penalties. The stated goal is to uphold respectful treatment of staff, protect staff from reprisals (punishment for filing a complaint), and maintain trust in City decision‑making.
Key points:
- Council issued a formal reprimand (official censure) to Councillor Matlow.
- Council suspended his councillor pay for 10 days, starting May 1, 2023.
- Findings: No breach for conduct in the meeting itself; violations for disrespectful conduct toward staff and discreditable conduct; a further violation for reprisal after a staff complaint.
- The case centered on a June 2022 tweet saying the Parks GM “lied” about park washroom openings, and a July 2022 tweet opposing the interim City Manager’s appointment while citing past report errors and encampment clearings.
- The Integrity Commissioner noted two prior reports (2017 and 2018) that found similar breaches by the same councillor.
What it means for you#
-
Councillor Josh Matlow
- Receives a formal reprimand.
- Loses 10 days of councillor pay (effective May 1, 2023).
- The findings state he violated rules on respectful conduct toward staff, discreditable conduct, and reprisal.
-
City staff
- Council’s decision reinforces that public attacks on named staff can breach the Code.
- It confirms employees are protected from reprisals when they make complaints to the Integrity Commissioner.
-
Other City Councillors
- Clear signal that naming and denouncing specific staff on social media can lead to sanctions.
- Reprisal against staff who complain to the Integrity Commissioner is prohibited.
- The maximum available penalty under law is up to a 90‑day pay suspension; Council chose 10 days here.
-
Residents and taxpayers
- No change to services or taxes.
- The decision sets expectations for how elected officials must engage with City staff, including on social media.
Expenses#
No direct public cost is identified in the available material.
- The Integrity Commissioner’s report says there is no financial impact on the City of Toronto and a potential financial impact on the councillor.
- The exact dollar value of 10 days of councillor pay is not provided.
- Any administrative or enforcement costs are not detailed. No publicly available information.
Proponents' View#
- The decision appears intended to protect a respectful, non‑harassing workplace for City staff, as required by the Code of Conduct and City policies.
- Calling a named official a liar in public, and then pursuing staff after a complaint, undermines staff integrity and could intimidate them; enforcing the rules helps prevent that.
- Upholding the reprisal rule is key so staff can report concerns without fear, which supports accountability.
- The report notes past, similar breaches by the same councillor and says the conduct escalated on social media; penalties may deter repeat behaviour.
- The Commissioner concluded the rules were applied in a way that still allows robust political debate while setting limits on false or personally injurious claims about staff.
Opponents' View#
- According to the report, Councillor Matlow argued his tweets and questions were protected political expression and necessary to ensure accountability and transparency.
- He argued that staff had previously allowed incorrect information in a major transit report (SmartTrack), and that raising this and opposing the interim City Manager’s appointment were legitimate positions.
- He contended that his later committee question reflected justified skepticism and should not be seen as reprisal.
- A possible concern is that penalties for public comments could chill how councillors speak about staff performance in contentious policy areas.
- He also asked that, if any breach were found, it be treated as a good‑faith error with no penalty; Council and the Commissioner did not accept that view.