New year, new policy?
By Jordan Press
Local News - Friday, December 29, 2006 Updated @ 10:03:51 PM
A new year could mean new conflict of interest guidelines for politicians at
city hall.
The city’s policy will get a full review over the next few months. It could eventually lead to new, Kingston-specific guidelines sometime later in the new year.
Councillor Bill Glover, who moved the motion, said there was a gap between the current legal standards and what the public expected from city hall.
New guidelines would make city hall more open and protect those who serve on city boards.
“I believe this motion is good for Kingston and good for this council,” he said at the last council meeting.
The motion, passed at the last council meeting on Dec. 12, states that the current legislation doesn’t meet the public’s expectation of full disclosure.
It adds that “in Kingston there has been concern about the openness and transparency of our municipal government.”
Under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, city councillors must declare a conflict in a matter where they could benefit financially. Councillors cannot partake in any debate, discussion, lobbying or vote on an issue in which they have a conflict.
City staff were asked to look at other city and provincial governments and see how their guidelines handle things such as property ownership and involvement with corporate boards. They were also instructed to look at who should be considered a family member.
Violating the law could lead to the politicians losing their seat, being banned from seeking election for seven years and require repayment of money
The issue with the current guidelines is that they lack certain definitions.
“It’s not a particularly easy piece of legislation to understand,” said director of legal services Hal Linscott. “It doesn’t have a definition of ‘pecuniary interest.’ ”
Court rulings have defined it as monetary interests of any kind, he said. In limited instances, councillors could apply for the city to cover some of their legal costs as long as they are found not guilty, Linscott said.
Only a voter can take a councillor to court over an alleged violation. The complainant has to bring forward a legal challenge within six weeks of finding out about the alleged violation.
There is a time limit, though, on decisions. Court challenges can’t be brought more than six years after a decision was made.
Council agreed the provincial law needed an overhaul. The motion passed earlier this month called for city staff to review the current guidelines and report back to council by March.
“I think the existing act is a particularly good guideline for starters,” Linscott said. “Council’s going to have to look at the staff report ... and make a determination of what they want to do.”
If council wanted new guidelines, writing them could take up to two months, he said.
jpress@thewhig.com