Councillors reject bid to tighten conflict of interest policy

Posted September 12, 2012

Ward 4 councillor Fran Sainsbury found herself isolated Monday night after suggesting a policy be drafted to take effect after the 2014 municipal elections that would prohibit a member of council from entering into a for-profit service contract with New Tecumseth.

Ms. Sainsbury added the item to the posted agenda acknowledging it was spurred by the developing situation that has the Town negotiating a contract buy-out with one of its councillors, Richard Norcross. News of the proposed lease revision broke Friday afternoon following the posting of Monday night's committee of council agenda, on the Town's web site.

"Its been an interesting weekend to say the least," said Ms. Sainsbury in her preamble. She called it a "public perception" problem, and argued that drafting new guidelines would prevent a similar scenario in the future.

"Only during your term of council, just if you're sitting, then that's it you're working in the best public interest, you're working for the taxpayers and you don't have to be declaring on certain contracts, more monetary within the business of the town," she said. "I think that's somewhat different than being a member of the Masons, or being a member of the Gibson Centre."

Ward 1 councillor Bob Marrs asked if the proposed policy would prohibit someone who works for the Town from running for council.

"The councillor now is not an employee, he's running a business in a facility that we provide," she replied. "In this instance it's a lot more complicated and a more serious conflict in the eyes of the public than some of the other conflicts which are declared on a regular basis. And they're not earth shaking and they don't involve purchases or exchanges of funds, or whatever."

CAO Terri Caron, who would be tasked with drafting such guidelines, sought clarification as to its potential parameters.

"If staff were to look at this, we require some clarification whether it's all business," said Ms. Caron. "For example, we have a member of council (Ward 8 Jim Stone) that operates a service station in town. Staff may from time to time find it the most efficient to have gas purchased from there. Is it your request the policy prohibit all business dealings. Or is it somehow more limited."

Ms. Sainsbury suggested there was a difference in what she was proposing.

"We're going to them instead of us having someone in our facility. It's our choice for us to go to that service station, we could go to another service station," she said. "It was basically I think having a contract as long as the one we have seen tonight. It's very complicated, it's very legalese, and that's different than what you've suggested regarding gas stations."

Mayor Mike MacEachern, whose full-time employer, Focus rents space at the Tottenham Community Centre, told the Ward 4 councillor "I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve."

"I'm not sure where we're going with this," he said. "Its been moved to have staff draft a policy with regards to prohibiting members of council from contracting services to the municipality. Is that what you're asking for?"

"It's basically putting anyone who wishes to run in the future on notice that this is the Town policy, and if you want to be on council during that four year term then you don't get into any kind of contracts, you don't do anything during that time frame, that's all," replied Ms. Sainsbury. "Just during the term of council. In other words, if they run and they win, this policy would be in effect. And they should know that before they run. So then they can get their ducks in a row and decide what's more important, sitting on the council doing the business of the Town or doing business with the Town."

Mayor MacEachern noted that a conflict of interest policy, and a code of conduct already exist.

"So it assumes that people can't make that separation is what you're saying.".

"(Mr. Norcross's NTRC contract) may have been a good idea five years ago, but when you see how it's now shaping up and coming out, and trying to be worked out, it's difficult when it's one of your fellow members," replied Ms. Sainsbury.

Ward councillor Jamie Smith suggested the Ward 4 councillor was contradicting herself by being in favour of carrying on the contract with councillor Norcross in place if Alliston Memorial Arena remains open.

"It's not for anybody during this term of council," she replied, suggesting Ms. Smith was misunderstanding her position. "You don't change the rules in the middle of the game. We can't change what is the contract."

Mr. Marrs, who noted earlier in the discussion that during his previous stint on council, he won a bid for "half the price"... "to occassionally rent out my PA system for town meetings in town facilities, so this would say I couldn't do that."

"Obviously, I'm very opposed to it," he said. "Basically what this means is, we have a present councillor who has this and this is kind of the target we're talking about, so he can't run for council if we pass this in the next term because he has to honour the contract that we've just approved, or we are going to approve."

In the end, Ms. Sainsbury's proposal failed to find a second on the motion. (Rick Milne and Jim Stone were absent. Mr. Norcross attended the meeting, then left for his conflict of interest on the Hornets Nest lease debate, he did not return).

Click here to send a Letter to the Editor.