What I meant by "shady business" is that in exchange for the charity contribution, he did favours to the contributors. We don't have evidence of that but only that violated rules meant perclude such a possibility.

You are right, the question is whether he knowingly violated the conflict of interest rules. I would argue that he did not knowingly violate the rules, he was careless. He did this in the open, in front of witnesses - 43 or so councillors, city staff, reporters, etc. None of them at that time made an objection that a serious ethics violation was happening - all the necessary information was right there in front of them.

If you go by the letter of the law, he should be removed from office. But I don't think that was the intention of the law. There is currently a witch hunt against Councillor Pam McConnell conducted by the Toronto Sun for buying a condo in the Regent Park. There is no evidence she did something improper, but those who are against her want to believe the worst. What if an investigation finds that she did not dot every i and cross every t? I know Rob Ford take incomptence to whole new level, but others make mistakes too even if they should have known better. Do they deseve to lose their seats, or should the punishment fit the consequence of their action? Do we want a culture where our leaders are afraid to take risks and need to consult their lawyers before they say or do something?