For two decades now the Community Charter has been the guiding legislation for B.C. municipal politicians as a strict framework to deal with conflicts of interest.
At times, though, politicians frame the conflicts more generously for their circumstances. For instance, West Van Mayor Mark Sager and Coun. Christine Cassidy seem intent on playing through the many deliberations and decisions on the vast and ambitious Ambleside local area plan. This, despite the fact each own properties within the area about to undertake commercial and residential rezoning.
The Charter requires council members to disclose their conflicts of interest and says they are “not entitled to participate in the discussion of a matter, or to vote on a question in respect of a matter” if they might have a “direct or indirect pecuniary interest” at stake.
When you think of it, the Charter’s tough-mindedness imposes quite the guardrails, particularly by including “indirect” benefits in its scope. With good reason, it seems to preclude council members who are property owners from sharing their perspectives on specific zoning issues that might directly affect their holdings. But with less justification, it appears to restrict them in a broader way on many of the central issues of urban planning. Those issues are, after all, a formidable part of municipal stewardship. In West Van they’re of great significance today as it grapples with challenges for population growth.
Still, provincial legislators viewed the law’s framework as a necessary restriction to maintain public trust, avoid perceptions of impropriety, prevent unfair advantage and mitigate possible legal consequences.
It backed up the framework with heavy-duty consequences: a breach of the Charter results in a disqualification from office. And the process to pursue this is rather simple: only 10 electors are needed to petition the Supreme Court of British Columbia within 45 days of a discussion or decision for a hearing. For all we know, Sager and Cassidy might be heading down that road.
The two were obviously ready to discuss these concerns when the plan came to council July 24. They pounced on Maggie Pappas, the former West Vancouver Chamber of Commerce president, when she identified the issue in speaking to the plan. Her three-minute window was more like half her, half them. (As an aside, these interruptions are increasingly common at council and quite dispiriting to watch, considering the time for public representations has shrunk over the years.)
Sager argues that his building on Marine Drive is not the subject of any rezoning, so he is free to involve himself. Pappas said it was hard to imagine how he would not benefit from the area’s uplift, even if his building doesn’t specifically appreciate.
As for Cassidy, she argued her home was across the street from the plan’s boundary – again, Pappas said it was hard to imagine how living across the street from properties with an increased value wouldn’t benefit her. The entire plan is one gigantic uplift. As it turned out, Cassidy was wrong about the boundary; she later conceded after the meeting that, indeed, her Fulton Avenue home is within the plan’s borders.
(Neither was available when I asked if anything has changed since the meeting. It’s holiday time.)
Only the courts can decide on whether their continued involvement in the Ambleside plan would violate the law, so this isn’t the place to wag the finger. But the other court – the court of public opinion – has an acute importance in politics, and the insistence from Sager and Cassidy strikes me as not only questionable but unnecessary. One hopes it isn’t indicative of an emerging style of governance that pushes beyond the envelope.
It’s not as if this council is deeply divided on the merits of the Ambleside plan. They’re pretty much tripping over each other to salute the staff work to date. The two votes from Sager and Cassidy aren’t needed when the other five are onside.
What’s obvious is that they want to participate in some control over the plan as it evolves later this year. Like most of the bolder ideas for change, it has its detractors. But at least for the time being, there are more votes to gain in leading than in recusing.
Kirk LaPointe is publisher and executive editor of Business in Vancouver as well as vice-president, editorial, Glacier Media Group, the North Shore News’ parent company. He is also a West Vancouverite.
