The City of Pickering has welcomed a decision from the divisional court that it says fully supports how the city and its integrity commissioner handled two significant code of conduct complaints involving councillor Lisa Robinson.
Robinson countered by stating that the court dismissed her judicial review application solely on procedural grounds, and that the court did not rule on whether councillor Robinson was right or wrong (see below).
Robinson, a single mother, claimed that her pay has been docked for the past nine months, and that council was scheduled to vote on another integrity commissioner recommendation to suspend her pay for an additional 90 days.
“If passed, this would bring the total time she has served without compensation to one full year. To date, she has served nine months without pay — all while continuing to fulfill her duties as an elected official and single mother,” Robinson said in a response statement.
However, the initial statement from the city said, “The court confirmed that the city acted fairly and reasonably when it followed the commissioner’s recommendations and decided to suspend councillor Robinson’s pay in two separate cases.”
Court Ruling
The court’s ruling on the judicial review applications (Court File Nos. DC-23-1427-00JR and DC-23-1440-00JR) upheld the integrity commissioner’s findings and city council’s decisions to suspend Robinson’s pay for 30 days (September 2023) and 60 days (October 2023). According to the city, the court determined that both actions were lawful and “her applications for judicial review were dismissed.”
The city said the court also:
- Refused to grant a motion seeking to add allegations of bias against the mayor
- Rejected all bias allegations brought forward by the applicant
- Affirmed that the integrity commissioner’s recommendations and the city’s sanctions represent a reasonable and proportionate limit on freedom of expression
$30,000 Legal Costs
The city said that “as a direct result of councillor Robinson’s decision to challenge the sanctions through a judicial review, and given the complexity of the case, the divisional court ordered her to reimburse the City of Pickering for $30,000 in legal costs it incurred in defending the matter.”
It described the outcome as “a resounding legal win that fully validates the City of Pickering’s actions and approach on this matter.”
Robinson Responds
In response, councillor Lisa Robinson said, “The City of Pickering has publicly declared a ‘major legal victory’ in its conflict with Ward 1 councillor Lisa Robinson. However, the truth is this: the divisional court did not make any findings on the merits of her case. It did not consider a single piece of evidence. The court dismissed her judicial review application solely on procedural grounds – stating that internal remedies, such as requesting council reconsideration, had not been exhausted.”
She added:
- Yes, the case was dismissed.
- No, the court did not rule on whether councillor Robinson was right or wrong.
- No, the court did not evaluate the truthfulness of the integrity commissioner’s findings.
- No, the court reviewed none of the evidence, documentation, or rebuttals that councillor Robinson submitted.”
Robinson stated that “despite these facts, the city has issued a misleading press release implying that its conduct was legally vindicated. In reality, the decision rested entirely on a technicality — not on the facts or merits of the matter. The city’s statement is not a legal triumph; it is a strategic manipulation of public perception.”
Claims Report is Incorrect
She said the current integrity commissioner report “falsely states that councillor Robinson did not submit a response. In fact, she submitted a full, documented rebuttal via two emails on June 6, 2025. When asked to delay or remove the item from the agenda in order to correct the record, the integrity commissioner refused. Council is now proceeding with the vote despite being fully aware that the report is factually inaccurate and procedurally flawed.”
Robinson stated, “This is not accountability. This is political punishment. And it is being orchestrated by the two most powerful figures at city hall: Mayor Kevin Ashe and Chief Administrative Officer Marisa Carpino. Nearly all complaints leading to sanctions against councillor Robinson have come from them. It is an abuse of office, plain and simple.”
Enforcement Mechanism
In her statement, she described the integrity commissioner, Principles Integrity, as “a paid contractor whose actions have raised serious concerns. This commissioner ignored the June 6 response, excluded evidence, and submitted an incomplete report to council – all while being financially compensated by the same city officials involved in filing the complaints. This is not independent oversight. It is a taxpayer-funded enforcement mechanism used to silence dissent.”
Whitby Council too had a dispute over an alleged secret council meeting, which was resolved. However, the council later voted to replace with paid private firm with the Ontario ombudsman.
Alleged Systemic Abuse
Robinson concluded: “If council approves tonight’s recommendation, it will confirm that Pickering’s local government is willing to strip an elected official of her pay for an entire year based on false reports, manipulated procedures, and internal political agendas.”
“This is not governance. This is not democracy. It is political retaliation. It is systemic abuse. And it must be investigated.”
She called on the public, media, and higher levels of government to step in, stating: “If this can happen to a sitting councillor for telling the truth, what will they do to residents who dare to speak up?”
You May Also Wish To Read
Solemn service bids farewell to 153-year old Clarington church