Councillors found not in conflict of interest

Miriam Ostermann
Times Associate Editor

 

Feelings of resentment rose at the regular council meeting on Feb. 3, when Councillor Rocky Blokland brought forward citizens concerns, alleging three council members to be involved in a conflict of interest.
Mayor Michael Ell, Councillor Denise Peterson, and Councillor Brad Walls are all members on the board of the Western District Historical Society – with Councillor Walls resigning from his position on the board in February. The action by the council members to cast a vote in the motion to implement a 120-day freeze to prevent any actions being taken to alter the St. Michaels and All Angels Anglican Church and its property, as requested by the WDHS on Jan. 13, and to notify the property owner of the intent to designate, resulted in outcry from the community. After having been approached by various members of the community regarding the issue Councillor Blokland addressed the issue at the council meeting last week.
“I have a few points here of concern that I’m bringing forward on behalf of a lot of citizens, some of my statements are not meant to be accusatory against anybody, they were brought to me and I was prepared to bring them forward,” said Councillor Blokland. “Conflict of interest is a big one with a lot of people out there. It seems to be questionable. The historical society board was incorporated in January 2015 with five to six people, three of them being sitting members of this council, although one of them has resigned.
“I might add in the past, as a councillor, I have seen councillors remove themselves from council chambers on lesser matters instead of engaging in a debate and subsequent vote. Even though I realize there is no personal financial gain to councillors involved it is questionable with major financial decisions at the public hearing and bylaw stage moving forward.”
Concerned about his role as a former member of the board Councillor Walls requested input from administration regarding the matter. After a lengthy explanation referring to the Municipal Government Act (MGA), Deputy CAO Linda Nelson assured council that in her opinion and according to the act, the councillors were not in violation of their duties or raised an issue with conflict of interest.
“This is something I hold very near and dear to my heart,” said Councillor Brad Walls. “I have sat here as a councillor and I’ve declared conflict or bias because I’ve sat on other committees and I take offense to being accused of conflict of interest.
The MGA sets out a number of acts, regulations, and statues governing a municipality. Nelson emphasized section 153 of the act states a councillor’s duties are to consider and promote the welfare and interest of the municipality as a whole and to bring to council’s attention that which would promote the welfare or interest of the municipality. Furthermore it states for council members to participate in council meetings and meetings of council committees, or other bodies that council’s appointed to.
“It is true that I am both an elected councillor for the Town of Strathmore and I am a board member for the WDHS, but as you’ve heard, this is not a conflict under the Municipal Government Act which does not only allow but encourages me to do both,” said Councillor Peterson at the Feb. 3 regular council meeting.
“I clearly understand my mandate as a councillor for the Town of Strathmore. It is to represent the best interests of this community in its entirety. I sought a role on the WDHS board with conviction that their goals of communicating and preserving Strathmore’s history aligned closely with the goals of the downtown revitalization, the downtown overlay, and the municipal development plan, who all have as a goal the preservation of the town’s historic sites and the oft-stated desire of many community members to preserve their history.
“I’ve advocated for the legislative process to be followed at all times. I am committed to ensuring that every person, every group, or organization with an interest will have a voice.”
In regards to the WDHS, a non-profit organization, the Act also states in section 173, that a councillor is not in violation of conflict of interest as there is no pecuniary interest directly affecting the councillor or their family members.
“It is also important to note that the vote to send a letter of intent to the diocese was simply to start the legislative process,” said Nelson. “It is council’s obligation to follow legislative processes and to solicit the public in an effort to gather feeback in an entire community. Council must hear both sides. This is the democratic process and it is a fair process.”
While the explanation was reassuring to council members, some were offended by the accusation. In turn, Councillor Rocky Blokland, who previously stated his intentions were not to accuse anyone on council and who was speaking on behalf of the public who raised the concern with the councillor, publicly apologized for any misconceptions.
With an open house coming up on March 1 at the civic centre, some councillors are hoping the public input will help put the issue to rest.
“When we’re elected as councillors, we are supposed to speak up and make decisions on what we think is the best on the whole of the community,” said Councillor Fule.
“We’re not trying to serve any one particular group and we all have an open mind. That’s one of the reasons why we’re looking to hear from the public regarding this church. I myself have not made up my mind.”