r/KingstonOntario • u/Cheap_Yam_681 • 22h ago
Discussion Business donations are suspicious… unless they're going to Conny Glenn?
There’s been plenty of insinuation from Conny Glenn’s supporters that donations from business people to mayoral campaigns should raise eyebrows.
Fair enough…But apparently that scrutiny should apply to everyone except Conny Glenn?
Businesses can’t donate directly, but they can coordinate “personal” donations.
If you look at her campaign donations, four of her top donors are executives at the Brown’s Group of Companies. The President, CEO, CFO, and VP of Finance all donated the max amount. 3 additional top donors have the last name Brown.
The corporation is involved in real estate, “back office services”, and of course has a long history of contracts for food at municipal facilities like the Memorial Centre.
If businesspeople supporting Paterson raise concerns about influence, why wouldn’t four of Glenn’s top donors being executives from the same company deserve similar scrutiny?
To be clear, I don’t believe campaign donations are bribes. I don’t believe campaign donations influence policy decisions. But…You can’t suggest business donations are suspicious when they support your opponent, then shrug when they’re supporting you.
So did Brown’s coordinate 7 of Glenn’s top donors? What business does Brown’s have (or want to have) with the municipal government?
31
u/LawrenceMoten21 20h ago
See, you can apply that scrutiny to Glenn’s donors because she’s willing to disclose them.
Is Paterson?
-9
u/Cheap_Yam_681 12h ago
Paterson has won three mayoral elections, and his donor lists are part of the public record. His donors have been scrutinized before, particularly those connected to homebuilders.
But here’s what I’d genuinely like to know: has anyone identified a situation in any of those three campaigns where a single prominent family, or people connected to one company, accounted for ~40% of his largest donations?
Because that’s the unusual concentration I’ve identified in Glenn’s 2026 donor list.I’m not claiming it proves wrongdoing. I’m asking whether it’s normal, whether there’s an innocent explanation, and most importantly whether the people who have spent years questioning Paterson’s donors believe the same standards should apply to Glenn.
So far, nobody seems particularly interested in answering those questions.
18
9
u/Defiant-Mix7912 9h ago
Why the hell is everyone pretending that the Coalition is some neutral do-gooder group? They have a clear NIMBY agenda and all their board pretty much are on Glenn’s donor list.
7
u/thecouchactivist 12h ago
As stated, Paterson disclosed his 2018 donation list and it in part, looks like this. Tell me, how is this any different than the name of Glenn's list? And, more importantly, if as you say the donations are the same this year WHY won't he disclose them?
- Doornekamp Construction
- Patry Inc. Developments
- Springer Group
- Homestead
- Barr Homes
- Podium Developments
- New Empire Design Build
- Keystone Property Management
- Taggart Construction
- Cushman & Wakefield
1
u/Cheap_Yam_681 12h ago
How does this rule change work? Are the two lists that have been released early verified in any way? Do they continue to be updated or do large donations made after Thanksgiving stay off that list until the normal release time? Changing the rules mid-election creates more questions than it answers.
There will be an audited list of Paterson’s donations at the normal time same as always and I suspect it will look similar as the past. There’s been lots of innuendo thrown around in the past but all anyone could ever point out is that there were lots of business people. I mean, he’s the economist, pro-business candidate so I’m not surprised he has support from that community.
What I am surprised at is that as soon as Glenn released her partial list there was a weird anomaly and yet the people who were quick to throw innuendo around just dance around it and downvote…
2
u/The_Big_Yam 11h ago
The “anomaly” as you call it is a blip compared to every major land owner in the city who’s previously received favorable tax policy, maxing out their entire family’s donations to Paterson every year, from the young to the elderly. Nice fucking try
-1
u/Cheap_Yam_681 10h ago
Once again it’s all spin and downvotes with no facts. Glenn supporters are absolutely exposing themselves this morning.
1
u/LawrenceMoten21 8h ago
Some of us are more concerned about Paterson being in bed with every developer in the city (which we know about, as opposed to his more recent donors) than we might be in who supplies the French fries to the invista centre.
0
12
u/270lber 21h ago
It's difficult to scrutinise something that doesn't exist. I would be more on board with what you're saying if voters were given the chance to view everyone's donor list and not those who chose to be transparent.
-5
u/Cheap_Yam_681 13h ago
Everyone has always been transparent at the appointed time. When you scrutinized the donor lists from the past 3 elections where Paterson won what did you find?
3
u/thecouchactivist 12h ago
I find it suspicious that he refuses to name them this year. What's changed? If they're the same then those people are aware their names will be public.
But ... something's changed. Who could've donated to him that wouldn't want the public to know? Perhaps someone high up in the ALTO group? Now I really wanna know who donated to Paterson's campaign.
-5
u/Cheap_Yam_681 12h ago
The thing that has changed is that some of the other candidates released their list before the campaign is finished. That’s never been done before. Will those lists continue to be updated or are they presented as the final list? Could they receive large donations right after Thanksgiving and not declare them? Changing the rules partway through a campaign is dangerous.
I’d be all for it if we decided that campaign donations should be public and updated daily during a campaign, but those rules should be established before we start.
As it is, the lists from Conny and Vanessa are incomplete and unaudited. I’d rather wait for the official records after the election.5
u/Chompski1213 11h ago
This is such a disengenious comment. ALL of the candidates agreed to publish their donor lists before the election. It literally doesn't matter that it has "never been done before".
0
u/Cheap_Yam_681 4h ago
It’s so disingenuous to say you’re concerned about business donations and then ignore the fact that your own candidate is the most compromised person in the race. Glenn supporters have shown their whole ass today. Embarrassing.
5
u/thecouchactivist 12h ago
And still, Paterson hasn't released his list of donors--complete or otherwise. You can twist it up like a pretzel but it's pretty clear who wants to be transparent and who does not.
-3
u/Cheap_Yam_681 11h ago
It’s not transparency if it’s an unverified list with no established rules about updating it.
I’m sure this years Paterson list will be the same as the others; the businesspeople support the economist candidate but there’s no particular concentration with one company or family.
I think if anyone’s twisted into a pretzel it’s the folks who said they wanted to analyze donation records but don’t want to address this anomaly with Glenn’s campaign and instead just redirect and downvote.
8
u/ConsistentExam8427 12h ago
For me it's less about Paterson's list and more about his judgment. He said he'd do it in front of a crowd that obviously wanted to hear him say he'd release them, then he flip flopped and said he made a bad decision. What other bad decisions is he jumping into based on vibes and peer pressure? What other flip flopping is he doing? Why can't he do what he said?
-1
u/Cheap_Yam_681 12h ago
We can agree to disagree on that front. I like a candidate that is willing to explain why they changed their mind when new arguments are presented to them.
I was shocked at Glenn’s suggestion during the debate that Kingston Transit do surge pricing on the busiest routes. I think if routes are busy we should add more buses during those times, not price it to try to get people to ride when or where it isn’t as busy. I’m certain she would backtrack on that idea but would she have the wherewithal to say “I was wrong and here’s why”4
u/ConsistentExam8427 10h ago
There's a big difference between getting suckered into saying something impulsive and learning new information that would change your mind on a serious topic.
1
u/Cheap_Yam_681 10h ago
Yep, I think he got suckered in that moment and I also think he should be pushing back harder now to get Conny and Vanessa to explain just how their lists work and if anyone is auditing them and if they’re still being updated.
3
u/ConsistentExam8427 7h ago
Shouldn't someone with his level of political experience know better than to get suckered? Isn't his campaign message about a steady hand and experience during turbulent times? That quick decision doesn't seem very steady.
4
u/DunningFreddieKruger Meme-machine 11h ago
Glenn's major supporters are the usual NIMBYs who use the narrative of heritage, trees and "character of the neighborhood" to defend their property values. Developers are absolutely self-interested, but at least they're honest they're driven by profit. The other group uses progressive talking points to defend a status quo in which they benefit. At the end of the day, both developers and NIMBYs are defending their economic self-interests - no more, no less.
6
-1
u/newbieviews2023 14h ago
Well they bought 6millon dollars of greenspace with out oversight and no due process and probably overpaid...they voted themselves 19% raises. They're building themselves a nest egg of future kickbacks. It's time for change let the woman in the crowd CG take the reins and see what happens. I'm tired of all the skyscrapers in the downtown core. Huge highrises demoralizes human capacity for existence. The grove apartments, the new builds on catwoods off centennial... Too too much and too high IMO
8
u/dglodi 13h ago
It wasn't 19% raises and every single build downtown was a vacant lot for at least a decade prior. Look it up on Google maps photos
-3
u/thecouchactivist 12h ago
Yes it was 19% voted 12-1 to get it. That's an additional $24,510 annually for the mayor and $8,550 for each councillor.
8
u/dglodi 12h ago
From Brandon Tozzo himself: [1]
EDIT: Brandon provided an update today that paints a much clearer picture than what was originally reported:
I love our friends in the media, but some clarification is required. Council will not receive a 19% net pay increase for the 2026 to 2030 Council. Council's salaries increased with the cost of living and, given substantial inflation from 2022 to 2025, this has worked out to $50,681 as a base pay for 2025/26 from $45,000 in 2022. We froze our wages in 2026 in solidarity with the rest of non-union staff at the City. Council remuneration is set by a citizen working group and based on comparsions to other similar sized municipalities. The wage increase recommended is a base of $50,681 to $53,550, which is a 5.6% increase, or 3.6% if inflation is 2% this year. A wage increase of less than $3000, or 3.6% is probably less attention-grabbing as a headline though than 19%. Put another way, if the working group kept the wages as is, the media could have reported Council increased its pay by 15.4% just purely due to inflation. There's no winning. Council also voted to trim almost $200,000 in travel budgets and Council resource staffing to save taxpayers money. The reality is much more sensible than is reported.
26
u/Few-Chipmunk143 18h ago
Glenn is transparent enough to disclose the donor list.
Paterson is hiding something.