Jan 12, 2009 - 04:30 AM

By Iain Marlow

DURHAM -- Election campaigns in Toronto's satellite municipalities are overwhelmingly bankrolled by corporate money, most of it from the same developers responsible for cascading sprawl in the region, new research suggests.

No one thinks city councillors can be bought by a developer's $750 campaign contribution, the maximum allowed per donor under the Municipal Elections Act.

But Robert MacDermid, an associate professor of political science at York University who is publishing a paper on the subject today, says the sheer amount of cash flowing from developers to incumbents -- as opposed to coming from citizens who believe in a candidate's platform -- erodes the concept of democratic representation.

In the 905 in 2006, election winners got 54.3 per cent of their funding from developers, losers 35 per cent. In Toronto, the numbers are 12 per cent and four per cent.

Since there are no rules restricting the number of candidates to whom corporations can donate, they often do so multiple times. Mr. MacDermid contends all that money, combined with shortcomings in the Ontario Municipal Elections Act, puts new candidates at a disadvantage, especially those who oppose developers' interests.

"It reduces the choice that citizens actually have," he says. "The difficulty with (a candidate) opposing development is that it's hard to find enough money."

There are several factors involved.

One is that abysmal voter turnout, and minuscule citizen interest in municipal politics, means few people bother to donate to candidates.

Municipal election rules also allow incumbents, who can raise funds more easily than new challengers, to save any surplus campaign cash until the next election.

As one of the few political scientists in Canada studying municipal election financing (he knows of two), Mr. MacDermid has made it his mission to lobby for reforms in the Municipal Elections Act. He's published 10 papers on the subject.

According to the figures, Pickering and Vaughan city councils are the most beholden to corporate interests. Collectively, corporate gifts accounted for 76.7 per cent and 62.8 per cent, respectively, of recorded campaign donations to candidates in those cities (counting donations of $100 or more, for which donors' names must be disclosed).

The highest percentage of union donations was in Oshawa, a bastion of organized labour, but even that amounted to just four per cent.

Just over two-thirds of Vaughan councillor Alan Shefman's donations (67 per cent) came from developers in 2006, the highest percentage of any Vaughan councillor.

Still, he raised only $24,068, the lowest of any Vaughan candidate and, he says, the bare minimum needed. "To be really honest I'd rather not take any money whatsoever from any developer or any business if that was possible," he says. But putting signs on the street "is an expensive proposition."

Mr. Shefman says most municipal voters see little reason to contribute to local councillors' campaigns. "There's so little interest in a ward councillor election, that it's really tough to get donations," he says. "And we don't have a tax incentive."

Provincial and federal governments offer tax breaks for political contributions, but only three municipalities offer equivalent rebates: Markham, Ajax and Toronto.

The lack of such rebates, which typically reimburse up to 75 per cent of contributions, partially explains the lack of interest.

Both Ajax and Toronto have actively discouraged corporate and union donations. Last week, Toronto's executive committee voted 7-4 to ban them, though the decision must still go before city council.

Long-serving Ajax mayor Steve Parish says he does not take money from developers. He believes that accepting corporate donations instills an "inherent bias" in councils toward development, regardless of the community's best interest.

"In the municipal business, especially in growth municipalities like in the 905, what we do is we consider and approve rezoning and official plan amendments and change land from wild land into developed land," Mr. Parish says. "To me, it's ethically a conflict of interest."

Ajax has a low ratio of corporate to citizen donations - 22.4 to 28.1 per cent, the lowest outside Toronto. It also has the highest percentage of candidates using their own money, which Mr. MacDermid says gives unfair advantage to the rich.

Mr. MacDermid says it's unlikely the province will ban corporate and union donations at the municipal level. "They don't want to reform their own system. The provincial parties allow corporate and trade union contributions and they don't want to give them up," he says.

"So if they did change the Municipal Act, they'd look awfully stupid, wouldn't they?"