Toronto Community Housing CEO booted from her job, but oh-so-many questions remain
In news that was about as inevitable as this morning’s “subways hosed down after St. Patrick’s Day festivities,” Toronto Community Housing Corporation CEO Keiko Nakamura was fired by Rob Ford’s hand-picked housing czar, Case Ootes, yesterday. Nakamura was basically the last woman standing after the Fords engineered their Night of the Long Knives last week in council, so this seems to put the TCHC more or less directly under Ootes’s control and, less directly, under the control of the Fords.
According to the Globe and Mail:
Councillor Doug Ford, Mayor Ford’s older brother, said overall, the decision to have Ms. Nakamura leave is “absolutely” a good thing.
“People want accountability. They want transparency. And there was a lack of transparency, as far as I’m concerned,” he said. “And I think 90 per cent of the people in Toronto felt the same way. There’s rules in place and people have to apply them. And the board of directors has to be accountable.”
But he wouldn’t comment on whether Mr. Ootes will appoint Ms. Nakamura’s successor.
“Case is more than capable of putting things in place. We’re going to get the board in place and move forward, find a new CEO and change the governance… Over the next four or five weeks we’ll be updating you.”
There are now all sorts of questions about what the future holds for the TCHC. Opposition councillors are concerned that the doors for privatization have been opened up and that the Fords will try and push through a Shock Doctrine–style “reform,” but that would be a tall order for the three short months Ootes has before the new TCHC board is hired. The more likely scenario—if it’s likely at all—is that the Fords will engage in a longer privatization process once they have a new, more obedient TCHC board in place. (Giorgio Mammoliti, pick up the white courtesy phone—the mayor is calling.)
The more immediate question we have for the gravy-hating mayor: what did this prolonged tantrum about the TCHC cost the city? Nakamura was making more than $200,000 before she was fired—did she get three months’ severance pay? Considering nobody has seriously alleged that she was responsible for the misspending at TCHC, this seems like an expensive and unnecessary sacking.
• ‘One-man board’ ousts TCHC CEO [Globe and Mail]
• Nakamura booted from TCHC [Toronto Sun]
Expensive and unnecessary sacking? No one has seriously alleged that she was responsible for anything…but it has not been proven that she wasn’t part of it either.
Any remnants of the old regime needs to be purged. Keiko has as much blood on her hands as the others for not following up on the ridiculous spending until the auditor general came along. We don’t know that she wasn’t one of those being wined and dined at expensive restaurants, going to training on luxury cruise liners and receiving expensive chocolates for gifts.
An example needs to be made.
Should she have been fired? ABSOLUTELY
Yes, she should have been fired, absolutely. In her position, and in her tenure as both as CEO and COO AND earning almost a quarter million dollars a year in salary and bonuses you would think that she could have supervised her staff more closely, especially concerning financial matters. She had to go, either she turned a blind eye to what what going on or she was “asleep at the wheel.” Either way she deserved to be let go.
The reason she waited until she was fired instead of resigning is so she could collect a big fat severance cheque. The TCHC has no transparency or ethics just like many other non-profit corporations out there. There are others that steal money from the public purse but they will be found out because there are whistleblowers who have strong morals and ethics about taxpayers money. I had to laugh the other night when one board member: Wilkinson stated on Goldhawk Live that perhaps funds were not used appropriately. Give me a break! These are the kinds of directors we have on our boards, no wonder the system is not honest.
Oh and one other thing, stop using Rob Ford as a scapegoat in all this. At least he has some transparency.
I agree 100% with Jessica, Suzi & Scott. Nuff said!
even with severance, in the long run the city saves,
her competence level was to hire consultants to recommend how to follow city policies at $90k. Hey I can do that too…
no to mention being ignorant as a COO.
enough with the spin of defending the indefensible.
In response to the following comment:
“Expensive and unnecessary sacking? No one has seriously alleged that she was responsible for anything…but it has not been proven that she wasn’t part of it either.”
So you are suggesting that it needs to be proved that she was not responsible for “anything?” This hardly makes sense. The burden of proof rests on the Ford regime to prove that they are justified in ousting her for something she actually did. It’s ridiculous to punish someone for something they didn’t have a hand in. So Jessica, if you’re accused of doing something corrupt and are punished without any proof, would you just sit there and accept the punishment? Or would you see this as a huge violation of democracy? Please think before you comment.
Scott – “some transparency?” Please don’t try to suggest that Ford runs a transparent office or that he is a democratic mayor. I’ve actually been to a number of City Council meetings and it’s actually disgusting how undemocratic things are now that he is in power. His cronies are told how to vote by Ford…like seriously? Absolutely disgusting.
Oh and Scott, why should she have quit if she did nothing wrong. A fat severance is the least she should be awarded. She should NEVER have been fired. Would you step down if you felt you did nothing wrong at your job but were accused of all sorts of corruption? I know I wouldn’t. She should sue, she has every right to.
If the CEO and COO can not be held responsible for the loss millions of dollars due to the corporation’s failure to follow its own policies prohibiting single-sourcing of contracts, who should be held to account? The janitors?
ss.44
The firing is justified. We don’t know that she did not partake in the squandering of millions, but in her position, she either knew it was going on and did nothing or did not care to follow up on how money was being spent. A CEO who doesn’t care or doesn’t want to know is not qualified to run an organization. It makes her as guilty as the people who were recklessly spending taxpayer money.
There has to be more accountability than that.
And…you don’t keep incompetant people on just because it would be too expensive to remove them. That’s just stupid.
I don’t think she or anyone who works for TCHC as an executive should make that much money after all they are supposed to be providing subsidized housing not a rich lifestyle to one person. I think she knew full well what was going on and instead of doing something she let them carry on unpertubed. Shameful of all those elected persons on the board to live it up on the back of the poor. It is bad enough that most of the TCHC housing are in bad crime areas and most are riddled with rats and bedbugs and they carry on like this is nothing short of disgusting. With as many homeless and poor working class as there is and those expected to live on less on Ontario Works and ODSP and yet expected to take gracefully any hovel TCHC has to offer. I have been on the list 6 years and have yet to be shown a place that isn’t a health hazard or isn’t in a bad neighborhood and there isn’t much choice other than that.
So an overhaul and cut salaries of all new staff including the CEO I think will improve the quality of the actual housing we do get when we sign up.