Setting the record straight: goes both ways

Setting the Record Straight: Context, Comments, and Accountability in Public Discourse

Over the past number of weeks, several posts and comment threads have circulated on a private Facebook group regarding me in my role as an elected Town Councillor.

As someone who values transparency, respectful dialogue, and accurate information, I believe it is important to document what has been said publicly and clarify the sequence of events.

Statements and Commentary Circulating Online

From the screenshots and posts shared publicly, a number of statements were made about me, including:

• That I am “fine with doling out negative” and that my behaviour is “on the verge of a threat.”

• That I am “irrelevant,” “a whiner,” and motivated by “political gain.”

• That I am creating a “pity party” and “milking it for every ounce of political gain.”

• That I should be ignored because I “will be out in a few months.”

• That my actions represent a failure to represent constituents.

• That I am engaging in “low-value social media spats with private citizens.”

• That my integrity and adherence to conflict-of-interest and disclosure rules are questioned.

• That I allowed “lies” to circulate and “did nothing” to correct them.

• That I am “mentioned in every second post” and responsible for drawing attention to myself.

Some members on the page have also compared me to Donald Trump in the sense that I respond throwing “hissy fits” to false claims, suggesting I should hire a public relations professional who would tell me to stop engaging altogether.

My Response to That Characterization

I am not a career politician.

I am a daughter, a mother, and a long-time resident of Niagara-on-the-Lake. I chose to run for council to help update policies and bylaws and to serve this community with care and responsibility.

Most importantly, I ran because I saw a growing divide in our town — a level of negativity and personal targeting that did not exist here in the past. I believed then, and still believe now, that respectful dialogue and factual clarity are essential to restoring trust in local government.

When misinformation is circulated publicly, choosing to correct it is not about ego or politics. It is about protecting the integrity of the office and ensuring residents are not left with false impressions.

Silence is sometimes interpreted as agreement.

That is not something I am prepared to accept when my integrity or the integrity of council decisions is questioned.

The Administrator’s Request to Me

The group administrator asked that I remove screenshots from my own social media and issue a rebuttal stating that I was not “banned,” but rather “suspended” — described as a “time out” or “penalty box.”

For clarity:

• I was restricted from participating in the group.

• I was asked to remove documentation of that restriction.

• I was asked to publicly reframe the situation using specific wording.

My Request to the Administrator

In response, I made a reasonable and balanced request that certain comments about me be removed from the Facebook page.

The following were flagged:

“Do we know anyone on council who might benefit from this gratuity?”

“Conflicted council members who benefit…”

“well funded likes of Mavridis and her ilk behind the ordeal”

These can reasonably be interpreted as:

• Alleging undisclosed conflicts of interest

• Suggesting financial gain or improper influence

• Damaging to professional reputation

Additional comments included:

“When was that large property next to the airport purchased by Mavridis?”

“Why was it listed for sale shortly after approval?”

“How does it help the community?”

These imply:

• Insider benefit

• Misuse of office

• Undisclosed interest

A legal professional could reasonably argue that such statements create a false narrative of misconduct.

For that reason, I formally requested that these comments be deleted or retracted.

To date, I have not received a response to that request.

The comments remain visible, and posts about me have continued on the page.

Additional Communication from the Administrator

I was also messaged by the administrator stating that there has been a smear campaign against him and the NOTL Residents Association, and this was used to justify the treatment I have been receiving on his page.

If they believes that I have anything to do with a smear campaign, then they have not read what I have posted or what I stand for.

I have consistently spoken about respectful dialogue, transparency, and community unity.

I was also “warned” to distance myself from certain “friends,” with the suggestion that associations could cost me the next election should I choose to run again.

Let me be clear:

I am not a career politician, and I do not play those kinds of games.

If residents choose not to vote for me in the future after taking the time to educate themselves on what I have accomplished during this term — rather than relying on what has been written or posted online — that is their choice.

That is democracy.

The Question of a Private Page Discussing Public Issues

I also asked why the page would not consider becoming public, given that it regularly discusses:

• Public policy

• Public officials

• Public issues affecting the community

The response I received was that keeping the page private makes residents more comfortable engaging in discussion, and that membership is vetted to ensure users live in Niagara-on-the-Lake.

However, the reality within the page raises concerns about that rationale.

“Comfortable to engage” appears, at times, to mean:

• Individuals feel free to use derogatory language toward others, including calling another resident a “bitch”

• False or misleading information can circulate without broader public accountability

• Commentary can escalate without the same level of scrutiny that exists in open public forums

Regarding “vetted members,” I personally know of several individuals in the group using aliases.

At least three live outside Niagara-on-the-Lake, including in St. Catharines, yet were approved by simply selecting a NOTL location when signing up.

I raised this concern with the administrator and was told that this was false.

If we are going to speak about transparency, then transparency must go both ways.

Why This Matters

This is not about disagreement.

Healthy disagreement is part of democracy.

This is about:

• Accuracy

• Fairness

• Consistency

• Respectful public discourse

When one individual is asked to remove documentation or reframe events, while ongoing negative commentary about that same individual remains, it raises questions about balance and accountability.

As an elected official, I expect scrutiny.

I welcome questions about policy decisions, voting records, and governance.

What I will not normalize is:

• Personal attacks

• Misrepresentation of facts

• Selective moderation

• Or the expectation that an elected official remain silent when false or harmful narratives circulate

A Personal Note

So while many have advised me to stop engaging or stop responding — suggesting it will eventually be seen as “woe is me” — I won’t. I can’t.

Because although there is a saying that silence is best, I teach my daughter something different:

We use our voice.

We stand up for what is right.

We defend our community and the people we love.

We do not get intimidated when we are verbally attacked.

And most of all, we choose to spread love in the face of hate.

That is the example I want to set — not just as a councillor, but as a mother and member of this community.

My Commitment

I remain committed to:

• Serving all residents of Niagara-on-the-Lake

• Focusing on policy, governance, and community outcomes

• Correcting misinformation when necessary

• Maintaining respectful and transparent communication

Public discourse should be rooted in facts and respectful disagreement — not personal targeting.

I will continue to do my job with integrity and openness.

And I will continue to correct the record when needed.

I cannot publicly share the screenshots to verify facts in this blog (as that would be breaking the FB Private Page rules) but do have them readily available should you question my honesty.

Councillor Maria Mavridis