Voting Records

Trustee Maria Rizzo

Toronto Catholic District School Board, ON
Electoral District: Ward 05


Maria Rizzo
Not Supportable
Not Supportable
CLC rating: Pro-LGBT ideology
Rating Comments: On May 6, 2021, Trustee Maria Rizzo shamefully voted in favour of three anti-Catholic motions, advanced by lgbt activists within the board, to use the TCDSB as a vehicle to promote the acceptance and celebration of homosexual lifestyles and LGBT ideologies to impressionable students. The motions, which ultimately passed, sought to proclaim June as gay "Pride Month" and to fly homosexual Pride flag at every Catholic school throughout June.

Dissident Catholic trustee Rizzo was re-elected during the 2018 election cycle. She has repeatedly voted in a manner that had the effect of undermining Catholic doctrine and moral teaching. Click the VOTES tab to view her anti-Catholic voting record.

During the 2018 election campaign, she expressed support for the radical, child abusive sex curriculum developed under the direction of Kathleen Wynne's convicted pedophile, former Deputy Education Minister, Benjamin Levin.

In September 2019, Rizzo supported efforts by a dissident teacher to force the the TCDSB to accept and affirm radical transgender ideology by adding the unscientific, anti-Catholic theories of "Gender Identity" and "Gender Expression" into the board's Code of Conduct as "non-discrimination" categories.

Few people have done more than Rizzo to destroy the religious beliefs of thousands - perhaps tens of thousands - of young Catholics, and lead them into non-belief, secular atheism and hatred for the Catholic Church. Rizzo must be removed from office in the next election scheduled for the fall of 2022, or earlier should the opportunity present itself. Catholic ratepayers in TCDSB Ward 05 interested in helping CLC achieve this electoral change should contact Campaign Life Coalition at [email protected].

First elected ( 2003
Previous Occupation: North York city councillor
Percentage in last election: 39.05% ; 45.2% (2022)
Victory margin last election: 12.48% ; 8.7% (2022)
Religion / Faith: dissenting Catholic


Maria Rizzo
Parliamentary Office
Catholic Education Centre
80 Sheppard Avenue East
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6E8
Tel: 416-512-3405
Fax: 416-512-3214
Constituency Offices
43 Finchurst Drive
Toronto, Ontario
M2R 1K8
Tel: C:416-419-9913
Maria Rizzo

Here is Maria Rizzo's voting record relating to life and family issues:

Votes, Surveys and Policy Decision Vote Score
Motion to scrap Gr. 4 & 7 standardized testing for Catholic religious knowledge [2014]
The policy of religious knowledge testing had been previously moved by Trustee John Del Grande and successfully passed. The test was to be given to Grade 4 & 7 students. Standardized religious knowledge testing should be a given in Catholic schools, and supported by all trustees if they believe that a primary purpose of the Catholic school is to pass on the Catholic faith to students. How can a board know if it's doing a good job of that if it doesn't measure the knowledge of students? At best, a vote to scrap religious knowledge testing reflects an attitude that knowledge of one's faith isn't very important. At worst, it may reflect an attitude that knowledge of one's Catholic faith is undesirable. Tragically, this motion to scrap the testing was put forth by Trustee Piccininni and passed on August 21, 2014 by a vote of 6 to 3, with one abstention.
Yes bad
Sex-Ed curriculum: Motions to protect parental rights in education against the Wynne government's sex-ed over-reach.
Trustees from various school boards made motions to curtail the Wynne government's imposition of its graphic sex-ed curriculum. The curriculum infringes on parental rights in education by forcing children at very young ages to be exposed to anti-Catholic LGBTQ ideology, unhealthy sexual practices, and disordered gender concepts. Motions include those to delay implementation of the sex-ed curriculum to allow time for meaningful parental consultation, as well as a more detailed evaluation of the inadequate and evasive government-run consultation process.
Opposed bad
To add transgender ideology to the Code of Conduct, 1st reading
In total opposition to Catholic doctrine, this motion sought to add the anti-Christian terms ‘Gender Identity’ and ‘Gender Expression’ to the Code of Conduct, along with ‘Marital Status’ and ‘Family Status’ which are also problematic terms for different reasons. Adding Gender Ideology to the Code of Conduct will give rise to male teachers and students having permission to come to school dressed up as the opposite sex and demanding that everyone else refer to them with personal pronouns that do not match their biological reality. This anti-Catholic motion was passed 8 to 4 [November 7, 2019].
Supported bad
Motion to declare June as Gay Pride Month, annually
In total opposition to Catholic doctrine, this motion sought to formally and officially proclaim that Gay Pride Month is to be hailed in the School Board from June 1 to June 30 each and every year.
Supported bad
To make the Code of Conduct harmonious with Catholic moral teaching
In accordance with Catholic teaching, this motion sought to block the injection of transgender ideology into the school board’s Code of Conduct, which would in turn give rise to male teachers and students having permission to come to school dressed as the opposite sex and demanding they be referred to with personal pronouns that do not match their biological reality. The motion by Nancy Crawford would replace specific characteristics of non-discrimination (e.g. gender identity, sexual orientation) with: ‘That all members of the TCDSB community shall respect and treat others fairly, as children of God, created in the image and likeness of God, of infinite dignity and worth’. The motion was passed by a subcommittee by 4 votes to 1 [October 30, 2019].
Opposed bad
Vote on declaring June as Gay Pride Month throughout the Toronto Catholic District School Board (2020)
The homosexualist/transsexualist pride parade and its attendant month-long "celebration" throughout June totally contradict both Catholic Church teaching and human biology in relation to marriage, sexuality, and the nature of human beings. It celebrates "gay" sex-acts, transvestitism and other fetishes, and transsexual mutilation, promoting these abuses and perversions - even to children - as normal, natural, healthy and perfectly moral. The parade includes mock sex acts, sexual bondage and sadomasochism. It is a scandal for any Catholic to be seen supporting it, much less Catholic school trustees and teachers, who work as agents of the Church, promoting "Pride Month" and the prolongation of these obscenities. The proposal was defeated on a 6-6 tie vote. (May 7, 2020)
Yes bad
Motion to fly the Gay Pride flag at school board headquarters
In total opposition to Catholic doctrine, this motion sought to ensure that the Gay Pride flag would be flown at School Board Headquarters.
Supported bad
Motion to fly the Gay Pride flag at every Catholic school in the board
In total opposition to Catholic doctrine, this motion sought to ensure that the Gay Pride flag would be flown at every single Catholic school in the board.
Supported bad
Motion to investigate a remedy for teachers who act against the Catholic faith [2014]
This important motion was moved by Trustee John Del Grande and sought to establish a procedure for disciplining or removing teachers who publicly act against the Catholic faith, thus scandalizing students, other teachers and parents with their poor example. Tragically, the motion lost on a tie during an August 21, 2014 vote. The text of the motion was as follows: WHEREAS: Religious schools have a legal right to insist that their teachers be practicing adherents of the school's faith in the classroom and in a public setting.
WHEREAS: The Supreme Court of Canada, in the 1984 case of Caldwell v. Stuart, upheld the decision of a Catholic School to terminate a teacher's employment because she openly and publicly repudiated Catholic teaching about marriage and sexuality through her conduct outside the classroom.
WHEREAS: The Magisterium of the Catholic Church is broadly defined as the teaching office of the Church. It consists of the Pope and Bishops as the authority in such matters.
WHEREAS: Catholic educators are called to educate and provide an example to catholic students thru their own conduct and consistent with the teachings of the Church as part of their
conditions of employment in a Catholic school board.
Supported ok
Motion to prohibit homosexual-activist clubs in Catholic schools [2013]
Gay-straight alliance clubs (GSAs) are a type of gay pride club under the clever guise of being an "anti-bullying support group." GSAs typically work within schools to normalize romantic homosexual relations, homosexual 'marriage' and generally, to undermine biblical teaching about human sexuality. No legitimate Catholic can be faithful to their religion and also endorse or accept these gay pride clubs within the walls of a Catholic institution. This motion by Trustee Tanuan sought to reject the anti-Catholic gay pride clubs mandated by the Liberal government's Bill 13, and instead, adopt the wonderful anti-bullying framework that was written by Ontario's Catholic Bishops. That anti-bullying framework was called Respecting Difference.
No bad
Policy making teachers reference the Catholic Catechism as an authoritative statement of the Church's faith & doctrine [2011]
This proposed amendment was designed to overcome the anti-Catholic 'time bombs' embedded within the government mandated Equity & Inclusive Education (EIE) policy. Those sections of the Wynne/McGuinty government's EIE policy sought to undermine Catholic moral doctrine and cause children to reject the Church's teaching on marriage and human sexuality. If the amendment had passed, teachers would have been more likely to reference the Catechism of the Catholic Church when planning any lessons or handling impromptu discussions on these sensitive issues. Without a requirement to reference the Catechism, it is unlikely that authentic Catholic teaching will be given to children in any of these areas. Unfortunately, the amendment was defeated in a 7 to 4 vote that took place August 31, 2011.
No bad
Policy enshrining the right to express Catholic moral principles on sexuality & marriage, without fear of recrimination [2011]
This amendment was designed to overcome a poison pill embedded within the government mandated Equity & Inclusive Education Policy. This EIE policy would create a poisoned work environment for faithful Catholic teachers if they should dare to teach Catholic doctrine on marriage, human sexuality and homosexual acts. The same poisoned environment would be set up for students who might dare speak up when they hear error and false teaching in class. Essentially, under this EIE policy, teachers and students who oppose gay-activism or who publicly express Catholic doctrine on human sexuality would be labeled with the pejorative anti-Catholic slur of 'homophobe', 'bigot', or accused of 'bullying' under the definitions provided within the EIE policy. This amendment sought to enshrine a positive right for Catholic teachers/staff to continue teaching Catholic doctrine without fear of recrimination or reprisals, and to protect students who defend the faith. Tragically, this common sense amendment was defeated 8 to 3 on August 31, 2011. Why would trustees vote to leave Catholic teachers and students open to persecution for the Faith?
No bad
Policy to prohibit the establishment of homosexual-activist clubs in the schools, whether called GSAs or some other name [2011]
This was an amendment to the board's draft Equity & Inclusive Education policy, a trojan horse government mandate whose true objective was to undermine Christian teaching on marriage and human sexuality, under the guise of anti-bullying. The EIE policy sought to normalize the homosexual lifestyle in the minds of the next generation, using several euphemisms as a clever ruse to overcome Catholic resistance. This amendment, written by one of the faithful Catholic trustees on the board, would have prohibited the gay-activist clubs that were 'recommended' under the government 'Equity' mandate. Tragically, this pro-Catholic amendment was defeated Aug 31, 2011 in a 6 to 5 vote.
No bad
Policy to clarify that schools must reject any demand by gay-activists to 'see their lifestyle reflected in the curriculum' [2011]
The Liberal government's euphemistically named Equity & Inclusive Education policy telegraphed that under this policy, curriculum would need to be re-written so as to include homosexualist propaganda in every subject and every grade. The poison pill was written into a section of the EIE policy which described that 'all students must see themselves reflected in the curriculum and throughout the school environment'. Given the EIE policy's laser-like focus on homosexuality, this clearly intended to establish a framework for incorporating the normalization of homosexuality throughout the curriculum, in every subject, and every grade level. Unfortunately, this pro-Catholic amendment to protect the integrity of the Catholic system against the EIE policy was defeated by a vote of 7 to 4 on August 31, 2011.
No bad
Not Supportable
Life & family issues voting score: 7%
Maria Rizzo

There are no quotes for Maria Rizzo at this time.

Maria Rizzo

Here are the answers for the questionnaire as provided by Maria Rizzo on 2022.

Question Response
Will you work to ensure that Catholic schools do not invite guest speakers who have publicly expressed positions that contradict the morality and teaching of the Church, no matter how great their achievements in politics, business, sports, science or the arts? *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Will you work to ensure that educational materials that enter the premises of Catholic schools (e.g., library resources, curriculum texts, awareness campaigns, flyers) and all approved school activities are consistent with and do not undermine the morality and teachings of the Church? *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Will you actively promote and defend the teaching of Catholic doctrine, the importance of prayer and a regular sacramental life? *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Will you work to ensure that your Catholic school board enacts a policy requiring all agents and employees of the board to uphold the rights of custodial parents to direct and control the education of, and any medical treatment provided to, their dependent children attending its schools? *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Are there any circumstances under which you believe a woman should have access to abortion*? (*Note: a surgical or medical intervention designed to prevent the death of the mother but which results in the unintended and undesired death of the pre-born child, is not an abortion) --
Will you work to ensure that your Board publicly promotes total fidelity to the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church? (Current examples include the illicitness of abortion, contraception and homosexual practice) *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Will you oppose sex-ed programs which are contrary to Church teaching? *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Given that the Gay Pride flag is a controversial political symbol which contradicts Church teaching on marriage & human sexuality, will you oppose any and all proposals to fly the Gay Pride flag at Catholic schools, at the board office, or to acknowledge and celebrate June as Pride month? *Note: See her terrible voting record which had the effect of undermining Catholic faith & moral teachings.
Maria Rizzo

There are no videos available for Maria Rizzo.

  • Legend for Light Rating System
  • Green Light
    GREEN light means the person supports CLC principles and is rated as SUPPORTABLE
  • Red Light
    RED light means the person is NOT SUPPORTABLE
  • Amber Light
    AMBER light means voters should be cautious about the candidate. CLC is still evaluating this individual, does not have enough data, or their record is mixed. View their quotes & voting history to help you decide.