Sex, lies, and municipal mistakes: small-town corruption on the eve of an election

Mayor Harold McQuaker photographed personally receiving donor funds in the Emo municipal office in December 2024.

Last week exposed a series of troubling facts about misconduct, missing money, incompetence, and mounting taxpayer expense at the Township of Emo.

First, on August 11, Emo’s integrity commissioner presented the findings of an investigation to its council. The commissioner’s report, published on the Township’s website, confirms that Mayor Harold McQuaker personally received $5,300.65 in donations raised ostensibly to support the municipality and its taxpayers. McQuaker deposited the money into his personal bank account and failed to disclose the gift as required.

Despite the commissioner recommending that McQuaker’s pay be suspended, McQuaker then chaired the very council meeting at which the report was presented, contrary to conflict of interest laws. The integrity commissioner’s report is clear that despite having notice of the complaint against him since early 2025, as of this month, McQuaker has made no effort to return the funds to the municipality.

Second, nearly $30,000 remains unaccounted for by the municipality. After the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) found in November 2024 that the Township and McQuaker had discriminated against Borderland Pride – a local 2SLGBTQIA+ Pride organization that was denied a municipal proclamation – third parties launched online crowdfunding campaigns purporting to raise money to support the municipality’s efforts to overturn that decision. Those campaigns raised at least $34,151.

We now know where $5,300 went: into McQuaker’s personal bank account. We do not know where the rest went. The Township has confirmed, in response to a freedom of information request, that it has no record of receiving any of those funds. The implication is that either the people who raised it defrauded donors, or some or all of it went somewhere that has yet to be disclosed. In response to a referral from our firm, the Ontario Provincial Police has confirmed that it is looking into the matter.

Third, on August 14, the HRTO dismissed the Township and McQuaker’s request to overturn its November 2024 decision. The HRTO found that the reconsideration request was filed 597 days late and, in any event, repeated the same meritless arguments already made and rejected in 2024.

The HRTO’s dismissal follows proceedings in Divisional Court, where the Township and McQuaker prematurely sought judicial review before exhausting the HRTO’s process. Before that, they lost a preliminary motion to introduce “fresh evidence.”

The losses are piling up, and taxpayers are paying for all of it. The price is unknown.

For more than two years, the Township has refused routine requests seeking the total amount spent on this litigation. Those refusals have themselves spawned proceedings before the Information and Privacy Commissioner — for which the Township has retained yet more lawyers, even though previous cases are clear that the records are public.

The Township is also paying to defend two additional HRTO proceedings arising from alleged reprisals by the Township and McQuaker following the November 2024 decision.

Inconvenient as it may be for McQuaker’s defenders, those are the facts.

And facts — as U.S. President John Adams famously observed — are stubborn things. So, apparently, is Mayor McQuaker when confronted with them. In response to these events, he has now repeatedly attacked the honesty of everyone else.

On August 10, he cast doubt on the integrity commissioner’s findings by telling the media that he had not met with the commissioner. But the commissioner's report shows that he participated in the investigation.

He also told the media that the allegations against him were untrue. Yet the commissioner’s report records that McQuaker acknowledged receiving the money. At the August 11 council meeting, McQuaker again publicly acknowledged receiving the funds and stated that he accepted the commissioner’s findings.

But later on August 11, when questioned about the missing money, McQuaker complained that he had “never been put through so many lies” and accused the media of reporting accusations without real sources. When asked what was false, news reports say he declined to identify anything.

Then, after losing again at the HRTO on August 14, McQuaker told the media that this "is the worst case of dishonesty I have seen", without indicating what was untrue, or whether it was the HRTO he was accusing of dishonesty.

The revelation that McQuaker received $5,300 in donor money also casts new light on his earlier motion in Divisional Court seeking the return of the compensation he had been ordered to pay by the HRTO. The premise of that taxpayer-funded motion was that McQuaker was personally out of pocket and should have his money returned while the judicial review proceeded. We now know that he had already pocketed sufficient donor funds to cover his personal liability.

All of this is unfolding on the eve of an election.

On Friday, nominations close for Emo’s next municipal council. It is a fateful election, which will ultimately confirm that, while voters are never wrong, they also tend to get the representation they deserve – particularly if they choose to ignore the poor record of incumbents.

Those heading to the polls may disagree about 2SLGBTQIA+ inclusion. They can disagree about the HRTO’s decision. They can also disagree about whether their municipal leadership should ever have fought this case in the first place. But none of that answers the questions now facing their municipality.

Where is the missing money? How much have taxpayers spent? Why has that cost been kept secret? And why, when confronted with documented findings and repeated legal defeats, does their mayor respond with flagrant lies and by accusing everyone else of dishonesty?

Those are not questions about Pride. They are questions about whether the people entrusted with elected office are faithful stewards of the public’s money and confidence.

Emo’s next council will inherit those questions. Those putting their names forward to serve on it should be prepared to answer them. Sadly, there is not a single person on the current council who has shown themselves up to that task.

Douglas W. Judson is a lawyer with Judson Howie LLP and a director on the board of Borderland Pride. A version of this column was published by the Kenora Miner & News.