FEATURED COMMENT – Why was Sarai allowed to retract his vote when in conflict of interest?
(Image: Mel Rothenburger)
The following has been raised in the Comments section regarding ‘CITY HALL – Mayor faces more pay cuts after conflict of interest investigation’:
Within the last month, I don’t recall which meeting exactly, a Councillor voted on a motion. The motion passed I believe. Afterwards, the Councillor declared that they are actually in a conflict and shouldn’t have voted.
By this measure, even with a retraction, shouldn’t this Councillor also face a similar investigation and fine, as by the report, it doesn’t matter what the intention was with voting.
The hipocrasy from this council is so hard to keep track of because it happens constantly.
PAUL WALKER
Mel Rothenburger’s response:
You raise an interesting point. At City council’s Aug. 12 meeting, a number of matters were brought forward from the Safety and Security Select Committee, including one involving Community Service levels.
The motion on the matter was seconded by Coun. Bill Sarai. Later in the meeting, the acting corporate services officer noted that Coun. Sarai had earlier declared a conflict of interest on the subject, presumably because his son is a CSO. “My apologies,” he said, “I didn’t catch that so… I will step out and let you guys vote on it again.”
He left chambers and a motion was then passed to rescind the original motion, which was then approved with a new vote. The question arises whether a council member can, in effect, be allowed to retract their vote.
This requires a Parliamentary expert to sort out but my reading of Robert’s Rules of orders is that a motion can be rescinded either in the same meeting or in a later meeting, but I can find no reference to doing so because a member has voted in a conflict of interest.
There are some parallels with the Hamer-Jackson case, in which the mayor originally declare a conflict in an earlier rezoning and then said in a later Temporary Use Permit application involving the same person that he didn’t have a conflict.
So, if the mayor were to now ask council to rescind the motion and discussion for which he has been ruled to have a conflict, then recuse himself, could council rightfully refuse, having allowed Sarai to do it?
ArmchairMayor.ca 
Will any of the other media outlets in town be digging into this event and supplying their own coverage??????
LikeLike
You wrote “This requires a Parliamentary expert to sort out but my reading of Robert’s Rules of orders is that a motion can be rescinded either in the same meeting or in a later meeting, but I can find no reference to doing so because a member has voted in a conflict of interest.”
I am a parliamentary expert (a Professional Registered Parliamentarian and a Certified Professional Parliamentarian – Teacher). You won’t find much about conflict of interest in Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised because there is no prohibition on voting at all; Robert uses a very narrow definition of what we’d call conflict of interest. So there is no need, in Robert’s, to rescind a motion “because a member has voted in a conflict of interest.”
Rather, you will mostly likely need to look at the municipality’s own rules or the province’s to see what they say about how to define and deal with a conflict of interest.
LikeLike
Very interesting. If I understand your reading of the situation correctly, what matters is council’s own rules on conflict, and taking that a step further, councils own report results and past actions on conflict (precedent).
Thusly, the Harding report clearly states that the intent, meaning, or any other attribute one may seek to attach to a vote (I didn’t realize I was in conflict, or I was advised I was not in conflict, I’m so sorry, for example) does not matter.
The Mayor was sanctioned for casting a vote while in a deemed conflict. Bill Sarai did the very same thing. In fact, he needed to be reminded of that conflict by a third party (sort of like needing the RCMP to ask you questions before you to tell the truth after lying to the public). Had the reminder (or the RCMP) not happened, Bill would have said nothing.
“Innocent mistake” seems to be an attribute deemed as immaterial by Harding in his latest report, as it is only the act of voting while in conflict that is the pertinent issue. Harding is saying effectively that you voted, you were in conflict, and now you have to pay the price.
So where does this leave Bill? Cool as a cucumber under the protectio of the clique.
LikeLike
Thanks for this, Paul.
George Orwell was right. All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.
LikeLike
A pleasure, John. Always happy to point out the hipocracy from this council.
LikeLike
I suspected it was Bill Sarai when I wrote my initial comment, but wasn’t able to review the council meeting when I made the comment. Mel is correct, this is the meeting when it occured and it was Bill Sarai exactly as you described. Thank you for verifying.
Of course Bill Sarai gets the free lunch because he’s a member of the clique. But according to the latest Harding report that sanctioned the Mayor for what is a similar issue, Bill should face a conduct investigation and presumably fines and demands for apologies. This would not be the first offense for Bill Sarai, so it would stand that we’re now into remediation and pay cuts to stop his continued behaviour.
What matters is that Bill voted, the motion passed, and Bill was in a conflict of interest when he voted. If Bill can rescind his vote and face no consequence, so should any other council member. But if running this logic through the Hateful 8 decombobulator, it reads thusly:
“Be it resolves that members of council will be fined and reprimanded for voting on motions if found to be in conflict. Other members of council who are down with the clique will not face investigations, pay cuts, apology demands or further training, at the sole discretion of the council clique”.
Is the Mayor taking code of conduct complaints on behalf of the public? If so, I will submit one if needed. Because that is the only way Bill will face a sanction for this. If someone on council is reading this and wishes to file a complaint, please do.
LikeLike