May 5, 2011
Townships face
stalemate over returns
by Vance Gutzman
Head, Clara and Maria is no closer to solving its dilemma of how to
deal with two council members who failed to file their financial
disclosure forms on time.
For the second time in as many weeks, the municipality held a special
council meeting this week to deal with the matter.
This latest one, held Tuesday, May 3, saw the municipal hall full of
people who came out to watch the proceedings, including three Ontario
Provincial Police officers, who were more interested in what to do if
the proceedings got out of hand.
Like the first special council meeting, held April 25, this latest one
was held to deal with a resolution which would authorize the
municipality's solicitor to seek legal remedy for Councillors Jim
Gibson and Ed Aiston by asking the courts to retroactively extend the
filing date for the forms they failed to file on time.
Under auspices of the Municipal Elections Act, candidates who do not
file their financial disclosure forms by the March 25 deadline forfeit
their council seats.
That resolution was voted down by Reeve Tammy Lea Stewart and
Councillor Robert Reid, with only Councillor Dave Foote supporting the
motion.
Unlike the first special council meeting, however, this latest
resolution came with the additional request that the solicitor petition
the courts to retroactively extend the filing date for all five members
of council "as their forms were filed with errors".
But the main issue on the table and in the hall last week was how to
deal with the situation facing Gibson and Aiston.
Although the two men did not take part in the meeting as members of
council (nor did they take part in the first one), they were in
attendance at the hall, where Gibson presented the three sitting
members with a petition he and Aiston had canvassed throughout the
municipality.
That petition contains the names of 110 people, asking council "to have
this matter placed before a judge by council with a view to extending
the amount of time given for filing the expense reports" for
Gibson and Aiston.
"I don't believe the people of this community have ever spoken more
clearly on any issue," Gibson informed council in a written statement.
"Did I break a rule? Yes I did. Does that rule make any sense
whatsoever in these circumstances? I believe it does not," he stated,
reiterating the view of both councillors that, since they were
acclaimed and had no election expenses apart from their nomination
filing fees, failing to file their forms by the March 25 deadline
should not automatically preclude them from retaining their council
seats.
"It has been suggested by some that Councillor Aiston and I should take
this matter to a judge for a ruling," Gibson's statement continued.
"I am not about to put myself in front of a judge without proof of the
support of this community through its council. I urge Reeve Stewart and
Councillor Reid to listen to the people of the community and put an end
to this embarrassing situation and support the resolution presented at
this meeting."
Aiston addressed the people in the municipal hall before the meeting
started, and said much the same thing aloud.
"We hope council will do the right thing and follow the solicitor's
advice," he said,
The solicitor, Bill Instance, has been giving a lot of legal advice to
the municipality, and to a variety of people within the municipal
offices proper, as of late.
On April 26, the day after the first special meeting, he sent a letter
to the townships in response to a request from clerk Melinda Reith and
treasurer Ruth Morin.
Reith, acting without a resolution from council, had written to
Instance, stating that she had the authority to ask the lawyer to
proceed with an application for legal redress for Gibson and Aiston
through the courts.
The solicitor, in his reply to Reith, was not of the same opinion.
"The (April 25) resolution which you have sent to me clearly indicates
that the municipality is not in favour of the municipality commencing
this court proceeding and I must abide by that decision," Instance
stated in his letter.
"It is obviously in the municipality's best interests to have this
matter resolved, and if the two councillors in question are unwilling
to commence the court proceeding to be reinstated, I believe council
should do so.
“I would reiterate my opinion that, until such time as an Order is made
(by the court), the two councillors in question no longer are members
of council as their seats have been forfeited."
Instance gave a similar opinion to the reeve the very next day.
"The clerk is a municipal employee and takes direction from council,"
he stated on April 27.
"In my opinion, council presently consists of three members. Council
must direct the clerk what to do."
Instance went on, in his letter to Stewart, to express a certain amount
of frustration with the stalemate.
"In light of the obvious disagreements between council members and
certain (other) council members and the clerk, Melinda Reith, I believe
I should receive further instructions in writing from the council, as
at the moment I have been put in a bit of a bad position in an effort
to answer questions from all interested parties," he stated.
Resume the positions
After last week's meeting was called to order, it quickly became
obvious that the three sitting members had not changed their opinion on
the matter since the April 25 meeting.
Foote took a moment to even wax poetic, quoting the poet WH Auden in
his summation of the situation the municipality is in.
"We would rather be ruined that changed.
We would rather die in our dread
Than climb the cross of the moment
And let our illusions die," Auden once said.
Foote took the poet's statement and ran with it.
"We're ruined in the sense that we've spent a lot of money so far," he
said.
"I think the credibility of this council has been damaged. The public
wants us to move ahead and resolve this issue."
"I think it is the way to go," Foote continued, expressing his support
of the latest resolution.
"It will cost $2,000, but it will provide a legal, binding position for
this council to act on."
Reid, however, also stuck to his position that the onus is on Gibson
and Aiston themselves to seek legal redress.
"Why is the township expected to pay the $2,000?" he asked.
"It's up to them to hire counsel and to fight it."
Nor did Reid like the wording of Reith's latest resolution.
"The five of us have been lumped together," he argued, adding that he
had asked Reith to check his financial disclosure form when he filed it
with her at the municipal offices prior to the March 25 deadline.
"I don't remember... it's your responsibility," Reith interjected.
It would not be the first time the clerk would interject her opinion
into the proceedings.
"Unfortunately, the council is speaking at the moment," Reid told her
at one point, but Reith carried on speaking anyway.
"The clerk's job is to give advice to council," she said, adding that
precedent has already been set in the matter by Athens Township in
eastern Ontario, where all council members failed to file their
financial disclosure forms, but were reinstated by a Superior Court
justice.
"I haven't had any work done in the past month because of this issue,"
an exasperated Reith continued.
The clerk's interjections failed to away Reeve Stewart, who maintained
her stance that Gibson and Aiston had forfeited their seats.
"Everybody knows my position, whether you like it or not," Stewart said.
"I'm not going to do any different."
Walking away
So, with the three sitting members of council not budging from their
positions, Foote threatened to let his feet do the talking instead.
"We are just wasting these people's time," he told Stewart and Reid.
"The vote would be a sham. I am not going to allow this vote to
continue. We're becoming clowns to these people. I'm taking the side of
the constituents who want this thing to be settled."
Foote pleaded with his two counterparts that, unless they reconsidered
their opinions, he would walk away from the table, but his plea went
unheeded.
"You know what my position is, and it's not going to change," Reid said.
Stewart said much the same thing, and at that point Foote stood up and
walked away from the table, at which point Reith stood up and declared
the meeting was over due to a lack of quorum.
That statement in itself may be debatable, in that it seems to
contradict the legal opinion from the municipality's solicitor.
As was stated earlier, Instance had stated to the reeve that, in his
opinion, "council presently consists of three members."
So, even though Foote left the table, a quorum still existed at the
table under auspices of the solicitor's opinion.
Regardless, the meeting disbanded and everyone went their separate ways.
"I think we should get rid of yous all," one lady said as she prepared
to exit the hall.
What happens from here is anyone's guess. A phone call to the municipal
office the day after the meeting brought word that the regular council
meeting, scheduled for Friday, May 6 had been cancelled.
|
