Tantramar Mayor Debbie Wiggins-Colwell
Tantramar Mayor Debbie Wiggins-Colwell’s controversial statement about the 500 MW gas/diesel plant near Centre Village continues to generate code of conduct complaints against her that a sharply divided council has been unable to resolve.
At a special meeting on Monday, an evenly split council could not decide whether to dismiss or proceed with the latest complaints, so they will be forwarded to the Local Governance Commission that the province created as part of municipal reform.
Earlier this month, council summarily dismissed a code of conduct complaint against the mayor filed by Dorchester resident Bill Steele.
It concerned her statement that was posted on the town’s Facebook page shortly after the province announced its approval of the NB Power gas plant on August 28th.
Among other things, her statement called on the town to move forward in the expectation that the 45 conditions the province had imposed on the project would address all public concerns about its potential health, safety and environment effects.
Dorchester resident Bill Steele
Steele’s complaint pointed out that even though Wiggins-Colwell wrote that she spoke on behalf of council, she had not consulted its members and that this council and the previous one had each voted to oppose the gas plant.
In a 6-2 vote on September 8th, council voted to dismiss Steele’s complaint without discussing or debating its merits.
The town’s new code of conduct bylaw prohibits any discussion on the merits of a complaint until council decides whether to dismiss or proceed with it.
Yesterday, in a tied 4-4 vote, council was unable to decide whether to dismiss or proceed with Steele’s latest complaint about the mayor’s participation and vote in a council discussion on whether to remove her Facebook statement.
Steele’s complaint says Wiggins-Colwell should have excused herself from the discussion and it points out that the mayor’s vote resulted in a tie that then allowed her statement to stand, even though it did not represent the town’s official position against the gas plant.
Councillor Barry Hicks said council should dismiss this latest complaint calling it frivolous.
“The mayor didn’t even write that report,” he said. “Somebody else wrote that press release.”
Councillors Haidee Robertson, Alyssa Greene and Wayne Wells voted with Hicks to dismiss the complaint, while Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen and Councillors Tori Weldon, Kristen LeBlanc and Allison Butcher voted to proceed.
Centre Village resident Terry Jones
Assistant Clerk Chris Hill said the tied vote meant that the complaint would have to be referred to the Local Governance Commission.
Council also tied 4-4 in a vote on whether to dismiss or proceed with a complaint from Centre Village resident Terry Jones.
It was similar to the one initially filed by Bill Steele accusing the mayor of speaking on behalf of council without consulting its members first.
It too will now be sent to the Local Governance Commission which has the power to investigate code of conduct complaints, rule on them and impose penalties.
To read Bill Steele’s latest complaint, click here.
To read the one submitted by Terry Jones, click here.
For CHMA coverage, click here.
For previous Warktimes coverage, click here and here.
Great, just what we need. More con-sultants.
I wonder how much this one will cost?
Here is an additional comment I posted on my Facebook page to help clarify my reporting of this story while adding additional details:
I tried my best to explain the content of these complaints and the ways in which council has been required to deal with them under the newly amended Code of Conduct bylaw. I would say the whole process is deeply flawed. First of all, it’s important to note that there are valid issues here. The previous council and the present one both voted to register their official opposition to the gas plant, but then the mayor came out with a statement that she said was on behalf of council. Her statement suggested the plant will be OK as PROENERGY will be required to follow the 45 conditions that the province imposed on it. She wrote that she spoke on behalf of council, but had not consulted its members.
The Code of Conduct does not give the mayor the power to do that in controversial cases like this.
The Code is also deeply flawed in the sense that it requires council to vote on either dismissing the complaint or proceeding with it, but prohibits any discussion of its merits. This would be similar, for example, to requiring a judge to decide whether a case should go forward without being allowed to hear any evidence or arguments from the defence lawyers or the prosecution.
In dismissing the first complaint, council violated its own code of conduct bylaw because it did not afford the person who made the complaint or the mayor any opportunity to make a brief written submission on the jurisdictional or procedural issues. That’s worded in obscure legal language that only trained lawyers can fully understand, but it does say that the parties involved do have the right to make some sort of written submission before a complaint is dismissed. Council ignored that in summarily dismissing Bill Steele’s first complaint.
I’m not blaming council for any of this. The new Code of Conduct is designed to prevent open discussion of complaints. Under the old bylaw, complaints were discussed behind closed doors, but then, the Local Governance Commission ruled that they must be heard in public because members of council are not town employees and these complaints cannot therefore be classified as private, personnel matters.
Bill Steele’s second complaint deals with a separate issue. When council debated and voted on whether the mayor’s statement on the gas plant should be removed from the town’s Facebook page, the mayor herself participated in the debate and her vote was crucial in keeping her statement on the page even though it did not represent the town’s official position. This would be like giving defendants in a court proceeding the right to sit on the jury and vote on their cases.
The Local Governance Commission is a newly created body, so we don’t know yet how it will sort these issues out. Council wasn’t able to do that because it was forced to work with a flawed bylaw laced with obscure legal language.
Finally, I think there are real concerns about whether these Codes of Conduct do more harm than good. My own feeling is that they are not needed as they tend to inhibit members of council from speaking freely. I think it would be better to change the system so that members of council serve shorter three year terms giving voters the chance to judge their conduct at the ballot box. The current four year terms are too long.