Here is a link to some photos of various ads placed in the Summerland Review during October and November 2008. Some of these ads also appeared in the Penticton Herald and the Penticton Western. http://picasaweb.google.com/Kerrisfordphotos/ElectionAds2008?authkey=Gv1sRgCODqsZGXoPKfQA&feat=directlink
Friday, November 20, 2009
Why have rule? - James Millar
| Why have a rule? Wednesday, November 18, 2009 |
What‘s the point in having a rule if there‘s nobody to enforce it? This is the question I need answered as it pertains to the section on municipal elections in the Local Government Act.
As reported exhaustively in the Vancouver print media, there are several discrepancies on election expenses throughout the province. Many candidates are in clear violation of the Local Government Act while others appear - at least on the surface - to be trivial or honest mistakes.
Violation of the act can carry some stiff punishments ranging from a verbal reprimand to jail time. Forcing a new election is even a possibility.
The problem is that the province won‘t react unless there‘s a formal complaint made by an individual or group of citizens. This would obviously be a tremendous time and financial commitment for anyone wishing to pursue this.
Who‘s going to go to this extent?
A few have on the Lower Mainland and the
Island.
This would be like posting additional signage in school zones and if there wasn‘t someone to monitor this, a fine or driving suspension would never be issued. Many would respect the law but others would ignore the rules knowing they‘d never be held accountable.
There are extremely strict guidelines in place for federal and provincial elections. Some of the regulations seem a tad ridiculous but they‘re all in place to assure a fair election. Yet, here in B.C., things are loosey-goosey at the one level where politicians have the most
power - the local level. This needs to change immediately.
The entire Local Government Act should be reviewed.
When candidates are allowed to run for different positions in the same election, it‘s ridiculous. Perennial candidate Kevin Andrews ran for both mayor of Keremeos and the Okanagan Skaha school board in the 2008 election. While Mr. Andrews certainly wasn‘t violating any rules and is certainly keen to be part of the process, a rule change is needed on this one.
It‘s also puzzling how an individual who doesn‘t own a home, piece of property or business in the community where he or she is seeking office is still allowed to run in that jurisdiction. Again, this needs to be examined.
(These are, of course, separate issues to the ones on election spending and declarations.)
To Premier Gordon Campbell‘s credit, his government is looking at some changes in the sections pertaining to elections in the Local Government Act. The problem is he hasn‘t
given any terms of reference and has yet to establish any funding.
With all that‘s gone on in the world over the past 18 months, this might not seem like a high priority but protecting democracy must be done at any price.
-James Miller, managing editor
http://www.pentictonherald.ca/stories.php?i=225347&a=41745&d=12445&k=74076e7af313a7a999d2f92636ec898d
Audit should be ordered by mayor - James Millar
| Audit should be ordered by mayor Penticton Herald Friday, November 13, 2009 |
Although the issue of the election expenditures in Summerland may seem trivial on the surface, it is incredibly important when viewed through a wider lens.
After hearing rumblings that some citizens might file an official complaint to the provincial government about the strange declarations made during the 2008 municipal election, our news team conducted exhaustive research. It‘s obvious after reviewing the Local Government Act as well as the candidate‘s
expense forms that several procedures were broken. At the very least, clarrification must be provided.
After probing the declarations in neighbouring Penticton, we found everything was above board. One school board candidate in Penticton was fined for filing 48 hours late. We checked the statements of Summerland‘s two successful school board candidates. Again, everything was properly presented.
While many of our discoveries could be considered nit-picking or harmless oversights, something as important as following the Elections Act shouldn‘t be taken trivially.
This is especially disturbing considering Summerland has mostly experienced people on its council. They should know proper procedure. If they didn‘t, Summerland Town Hall has a competent staff which is trained and could answer questions.
Among the issues is the Smart Governance group. All of the councillors in attendance at Monday night‘s meeting said they are definitely not part of this organization. Many said they knew very little about this group.
I‘ll take everybody at their word but most people who run for office would inquire as to who was behind an organization giving such glowing references in print.
The whole slate thing stunk.
The councillors elected have all made extremely notable contributions to their community prior to the election. They all could have won on their own merit. There appears to be a person or persons in the community who definitely wanted to see these seven individuals elected.
I also wonder why a group that‘s so concerned about the well-being of its community wouldn‘t offer suggestions on who to vote for the school board. After all, isn‘t the education and safety of our children and grandchildren equally as important as to who determines water rates and policies on sewage treatment?
Anonymous donations are fine up to a certain point. However, when the citizens are not given the entire list of contributors to the dime, it strikes at the very heart of democracy.
I‘ll make a comparison to business.
Let‘s say a restaurant owner discovers his best teenage employee failed to wash his hands after going to the bathroom. Do you fire the kid even though he‘s your greatest asset? Maybe not, but you‘d certainly issue a week‘s suspension or, at the very least, a harsh disciplinary letter. Perhaps keep him around if he voluntarily apologizes.
Once Mayor Janice Perrino returns to her job (she‘s recovering from surgery), the best thing she could do is call for an immediate and independent audit of election expenses.
This would either put an immediate end to false assumptions and allow council to get on with its business, or, it could expose those who made a mockery out of the process our veterans fought and died for.
-James Miller, managing editor
Questions asked about Summerland election
Questions asked about Summerland election |
By Susan McIver
Special to the Herald
Summerland--Careful scrutiny of campaign financials led to questions for Summerland council and casts a shadow over the 2008 municipal elections.
The consistent theme of the questions Penticton Herald editor James Miller asked councillors Monday evening concerned their relationship to the group calling itself Citizens for Smart Governance.
"I identified myself with that group as did a number of others to take a position during that election," acting mayor Gordon Clark said, when Miller asked about his standing was with the group.
Earlier Clark said "It doesn‘t raise a signal for me" when asked if he was aware of the group.
After Miller reminded him of the series of ads sponsored by the Smart Governance group which endorsed everyone at the council table Clark said, "Yes, I am aware of it (the group)."
During the 2008 campaign, the Smart Governance group ran ads in the Penticton Herald, Summerland Review and Penticton Western News in support of the successful mayoralty candidate and winning slate of councillors.
Miller noted that $3,000 was a conservative estimate for the total amount spent on newspaper ads by the group.
An ad sponsored by Smart Governance in the Penticton Herald on Nov. 14, 2008, the day before the municipal election, cost just over $1,000.
Any person or group spending $500 or more is legally required to register with the chief electoral officer as either a campaign organizer or an elector organization and file financial statements within four months of the elections. Neither Good Governance nor any other group or individual registered with Summerland‘s chief electoral officer.
Failure to register can carry a maximum penalty of a jail sentence and disqualification of elected officials who benefited.
In his campaign financial disclosure statement, Clark reported receipt of an anonymous donation of $207.89 for payment of an ad in the Herald on Nov. 14, 2008.
He also noted that this was one-seventh of the total cost.
There are six seats for councillors at the Summerland council table plus one for the mayor.
A stand-alone ad for Clark did not appear in the November 14 issue of the Herald which prompted Miller to ask, "Is it safe to assume that it (the $207.89) was a contribution to the Smart Governance ad."
"I presume it was," Clark replied.
Clark also noted in his statement having received five other anonymous donations, all over $50 and all noted as one-seventh of the total cost, for ads in the Summerland Review and expenses associated with printing and mailing of cards and flyers.
Coun. Sam Elia declared a cash contribution of $207.85 from Mark Ziebarth on Nov.14, 2008.
"No, I don‘t think it is a safe assumption," Elia responded when Miller asked if it would be safe to assume that the $207.85 was a contribution to the Smart Governance ad.
When Miller said there was no stand alone ad for Elia in the Nov. 14 Herald and again asked if the $207.85 was a contribution to the joint Good Governance ad, Elia replied, "I am not sure I have an answer to that question."
Elia denied being a member of the Smart Governance group as Clark did a few minutes earlier.
According to Clark, the group is not a ‘body corporate‘ and therefore membership is irrelevant.
Clark also said he did not recall knowing of any formally appointed chair or president of the group.
"I am not sure what that term endorsement means," Elia replied to Miller‘s question if he was aware that he was being endorsed by the group.
Mayor Janice Perrino declared a contribution of $207.85 from an anonymous source for an ad on Nov. 14 ad in the Herald.
There was a stand alone ad for Perrino in that issue with no indication of it being sponsored by Smart Governance.
This ad would have cost slightly over $400.
Interestingly, the cost of the ad sponsored by Smart Governance plus that of the Perrino ad equals within a few dollars seven times $207 or $1,442.
Listing cash contributions as in-kind donations, often as from anonymous sources, is a common thread in the financial disclosure statements by the current councillors and mayor.
"This ad paid for by a generous donation" appeared at the bottom of a full page ad in support of Perrino which was published in the Summerland Review on Nov. 13. 2008.
Perrino declared a cash donation of $842.09, the cost of a full page ad in the Review, from a B. Friesen on Lakeshore Drive as an in-kind donation.
In total Perrino declared $2,109 worth of cash contributions from four named donors, including Friesen, and nine anonymous sources as in-kind donations for expenses associated with newspaper ads, flyers and cards.
Such cash transactions are not permitted to be designated as in-kind donations in Penticton municipal elections.
An in-kind donation is a donation paid or given in goods, commodity or services instead of money, as defined by dictionary.com.
The six councillors declared a total of in-kind and/or anonymous donations totalling just over $3,000.
Neither the unsuccessful mayoralty candidate nor any of the seven defeated candidates for council reported any in-kind or anonymous donations.
The Local Government Act limits each anonymous donation to $50.
Perrino and her council members, however, listed numerous cash donations of over $50 from anonymous sources as in-kind donations.
Intended or not, this gives the appearance of attempting to thwart the public‘s right to know who paid for their campaigns.
Rather than providing the details of amount, date and other information required by the Local Government Act, four councillors gave only a total amount for their anonymous contributions.
Councillors Bruce Hallquist, Jim Kyluik and Lloyd Christopherson each reported having a received a total $506.72 in anonymous donations during the months of October and November 2008 for newspaper ads, cards and flyers.
Coun. Ken Roberge declared an estimated amount of $650 in anonymous donations without stating any time period for donation of the funds or their use.
Adherence to the provisions of the Local Government Act, especially as related to sources of campaign financing is crucial to the credibility of elected municipal officials.
Perrino was unavailable for comment. Clark has been appointed acting mayor in her absence as she‘s presently recovering from surgery.
Campaign financing disclosure statements are available for public viewing at the Municipal Hall on Henry Avenue.
The November 9, 2009 council meeting can be seen on Shaw TV Friday, November 13 at 11 am. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVP349ZoNXY You Tube video
Special to the Herald
Summerland--Careful scrutiny of campaign financials led to questions for Summerland council and casts a shadow over the 2008 municipal elections.
The consistent theme of the questions Penticton Herald editor James Miller asked councillors Monday evening concerned their relationship to the group calling itself Citizens for Smart Governance.
"I identified myself with that group as did a number of others to take a position during that election," acting mayor Gordon Clark said, when Miller asked about his standing was with the group.
Earlier Clark said "It doesn‘t raise a signal for me" when asked if he was aware of the group.
After Miller reminded him of the series of ads sponsored by the Smart Governance group which endorsed everyone at the council table Clark said, "Yes, I am aware of it (the group)."
During the 2008 campaign, the Smart Governance group ran ads in the Penticton Herald, Summerland Review and Penticton Western News in support of the successful mayoralty candidate and winning slate of councillors.
Miller noted that $3,000 was a conservative estimate for the total amount spent on newspaper ads by the group.
An ad sponsored by Smart Governance in the Penticton Herald on Nov. 14, 2008, the day before the municipal election, cost just over $1,000.
Any person or group spending $500 or more is legally required to register with the chief electoral officer as either a campaign organizer or an elector organization and file financial statements within four months of the elections. Neither Good Governance nor any other group or individual registered with Summerland‘s chief electoral officer.
Failure to register can carry a maximum penalty of a jail sentence and disqualification of elected officials who benefited.
In his campaign financial disclosure statement, Clark reported receipt of an anonymous donation of $207.89 for payment of an ad in the Herald on Nov. 14, 2008.
He also noted that this was one-seventh of the total cost.
There are six seats for councillors at the Summerland council table plus one for the mayor.
A stand-alone ad for Clark did not appear in the November 14 issue of the Herald which prompted Miller to ask, "Is it safe to assume that it (the $207.89) was a contribution to the Smart Governance ad."
"I presume it was," Clark replied.
Clark also noted in his statement having received five other anonymous donations, all over $50 and all noted as one-seventh of the total cost, for ads in the Summerland Review and expenses associated with printing and mailing of cards and flyers.
Coun. Sam Elia declared a cash contribution of $207.85 from Mark Ziebarth on Nov.14, 2008.
"No, I don‘t think it is a safe assumption," Elia responded when Miller asked if it would be safe to assume that the $207.85 was a contribution to the Smart Governance ad.
When Miller said there was no stand alone ad for Elia in the Nov. 14 Herald and again asked if the $207.85 was a contribution to the joint Good Governance ad, Elia replied, "I am not sure I have an answer to that question."
Elia denied being a member of the Smart Governance group as Clark did a few minutes earlier.
According to Clark, the group is not a ‘body corporate‘ and therefore membership is irrelevant.
Clark also said he did not recall knowing of any formally appointed chair or president of the group.
"I am not sure what that term endorsement means," Elia replied to Miller‘s question if he was aware that he was being endorsed by the group.
Mayor Janice Perrino declared a contribution of $207.85 from an anonymous source for an ad on Nov. 14 ad in the Herald.
There was a stand alone ad for Perrino in that issue with no indication of it being sponsored by Smart Governance.
This ad would have cost slightly over $400.
Interestingly, the cost of the ad sponsored by Smart Governance plus that of the Perrino ad equals within a few dollars seven times $207 or $1,442.
Listing cash contributions as in-kind donations, often as from anonymous sources, is a common thread in the financial disclosure statements by the current councillors and mayor.
"This ad paid for by a generous donation" appeared at the bottom of a full page ad in support of Perrino which was published in the Summerland Review on Nov. 13. 2008.
Perrino declared a cash donation of $842.09, the cost of a full page ad in the Review, from a B. Friesen on Lakeshore Drive as an in-kind donation.
In total Perrino declared $2,109 worth of cash contributions from four named donors, including Friesen, and nine anonymous sources as in-kind donations for expenses associated with newspaper ads, flyers and cards.
Such cash transactions are not permitted to be designated as in-kind donations in Penticton municipal elections.
An in-kind donation is a donation paid or given in goods, commodity or services instead of money, as defined by dictionary.com.
The six councillors declared a total of in-kind and/or anonymous donations totalling just over $3,000.
Neither the unsuccessful mayoralty candidate nor any of the seven defeated candidates for council reported any in-kind or anonymous donations.
The Local Government Act limits each anonymous donation to $50.
Perrino and her council members, however, listed numerous cash donations of over $50 from anonymous sources as in-kind donations.
Intended or not, this gives the appearance of attempting to thwart the public‘s right to know who paid for their campaigns.
Rather than providing the details of amount, date and other information required by the Local Government Act, four councillors gave only a total amount for their anonymous contributions.
Councillors Bruce Hallquist, Jim Kyluik and Lloyd Christopherson each reported having a received a total $506.72 in anonymous donations during the months of October and November 2008 for newspaper ads, cards and flyers.
Coun. Ken Roberge declared an estimated amount of $650 in anonymous donations without stating any time period for donation of the funds or their use.
Adherence to the provisions of the Local Government Act, especially as related to sources of campaign financing is crucial to the credibility of elected municipal officials.
Perrino was unavailable for comment. Clark has been appointed acting mayor in her absence as she‘s presently recovering from surgery.
Campaign financing disclosure statements are available for public viewing at the Municipal Hall on Henry Avenue.
The November 9, 2009 council meeting can be seen on Shaw TV Friday, November 13 at 11 am. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVP349ZoNXY You Tube video
http://www.pentictonherald.ca/stories.php?i=223734&a=53591&d=12619&k=86684b621da93a1e4500c2c8b2c8b6ec
Summerland Council on the hot-seat - Susan McIver
| Summerland council on the hot-seat SUSAN McIver, Special to The Penticton Herald October 26, 2009 | |
| |
Summerland council will meet this evening in the spacious confines of Centre Stage Theatre because of the high-level of public interest in proposed changes to the official community plan.
The question before council is whether to adopt the proposed changes or to seek additional public consultation.
The most controversial issue yet faced by this council, the changes would allow lands on the eastern side of Garnet Valley, known as Rattlesnake Mountain, to be designated as an urban growth area.
An overflow crowd and inadequate sound system at the last council meeting necessitated holding the required public hearing at Centre Stage Theatre.
A full house of close to 300 attended the rescheduled hearing on October 15.
At that time council listened while members of the public spoke.
“This is the public‘s opportunity to tell us what they think. We are here to listen,” Mayor Janice Perrino said at the hearing.
This evening council will respond to the issues raised and consider the recommendations from municipal staff on how to proceed with the proposed bylaw.
“I‘ll be giving a power point presentation,” Perrino said in a telephone interview Saturday.
The two-part bylaw would alter the requirements to amend the urban growth area in the OCP and would change the designation of roughly 69 hectares on Rattlesnake Mountain from future growth area to urban growth area.
Key to council‘s deliberations this evening is whether or not it considers appropriate public consultation has occurred and whether further consultation with other organizations and authorities is required.
“Slow down, seek input and make the process as transparent and open as possible\", Khati Hendry advised council at the public hearing.
Underlying the proposed bylaw is whether a council has the legal authority to change the OCP before the mandated time for changes to be considered.
The OCP was adopted in April 2008 by the previous council, only 16 months before the current council initiated steps to change it.
“The lawyers gave you the opinion you wanted but there is a cautionary note at the end of their letter. I see this closing paragraph as urging council to a higher standard than simply moving forward with what may be legally possible,” John Kingsmill, an experienced corporate lawyer, said at the public hearing.
Subsequently, other community members said that it was the council‘s moral responsibility to uphold the OCP even though they may have the legal right to change it.
“I do not share his (Kingsmill‘s) opinion,” Perrino said Saturday.
Perrino also questions Kingsmill‘s motives for raising this and other serious concerns at the hearing.
“It is deeply discouraging when the purpose is to ’get them‘ (meaning the council) rather than looking at the issues,” she said.
Kingsmill could not be reached for comment.
On a more positive note Perrino said, “There were so many helpful intelligent comments made at the hearing.”
The opinion of the municipal lawyers was first circulated to council members in September as a summary provided by staff.
“I kicked up a fuss because I wanted a copy of the original letter rather than staff‘s interpretation,” said Coun. Gordon Clark.
Subsequently, copies were distributed to all members of council.
The issues of urban growth, capacity of municipal services, sustainability and environmental impact were also raised at the hearing.
These issues have been addressed by letters to the editor in local newspapers and by municipal staff in a memorandum to council.
The latter is available on the municipal website.
In his recent letter, Summerland resident Brian Adams wrote,” Unfortunately, the handling of this matter, leads people to speculation. One perception is that payback is involved.”
Adams readily admits his comments are speculation only.
However, the question of electoral irregularities in civic elections in the province, including Summerland, was raised in an article in the Vancouver Sun last March.
“There was a quarter-page ad endorsing the Perrino slate that included the names of 90 supporters, including a number of realtors and developers. Some of those supporters‘ names were also among a longer list of names on a pamphlet endorsing the Perrino slate. The entire slate was elected,” Daphne Bramham wrote in the article.
Bramham questions the ads in support of Perrino and the successful slate which gave no indication of who the concerned residents or business owners were or who paid for the ad.
She also questions the amount of money spent on ads in local newspapers in support of Perrino by a group calling itself Citizens for Smart Governance.
Any person or group spending $500 or more is legally required to register with the chief electoral officer as either a campaign organizer or an elector organization and file financial statements within four months of the election.
Neither such an organizer nor organization was registered in Summerland although the cost of the ads totalled above the $500 threshold.
Tonight\’s meeting begins at 7 p.m.
http://www.pentictonherald.ca/top_story.php?id=219927&type=Local
Municipal election reform long overdue - Daphne Bramham
Municipal election reform long overdue, but timely change unlikely
BY DAPHNE BRAMHAM, VANCOUVER SUN
More than a month after Premier Gordon Campbell announced that a task force would be formed to make recommendations for modernizing and improving municipal election rules by May 30, 2010, nothing has been done.
There are no terms of reference. There is no budget.
Only two members have been appointed -- Harry Nyce, president of the Union of B.C. Municipalities, and Bill Bennett, minister of community and rural development. It's not even clear whether the task force reports to Bennett or the premier.
The task force's scope is wide, according to the premier's press release. It is supposed to "consider opportunities to adapt the principles of the provincial Election Act to local elections such as disclosure requirements and changes that will improve fairness, accountability, transparency and public participation."
It may also consider the frequency of elections and whether voting rights ought to be extended to business and companies that pay taxes.
It's a writhing can of worms that Campbell wants the task force to subdue in less than five months -- five months that are interrupted by Christmas and the Olympics.
What's clear is that reform is long overdue since the unprecedented spending during the 2008 provincewide vote was followed by an unusually large number of citizens complaints and police investigations into election malfeasance.
(No charges have been laid even though in Central Saanich RCMP recommended 19 charges be laid. In Langley, RCMP found one example of where disclosure regulations were broken, but recommended against charges because investigators decided the group hadn't intended to break the law.)
Candidates' election spending in 15 Metro Vancouver municipalities alone was $7.9 million -- $1.6 million more than the New Democrats spent in the last provincial election.
The reason there's so much money sloshing about is that no other level of government provides as big a bang-for-your-buck.
It takes only six votes on city council to get property rezoned, which can be a windfall worth millions of dollars for developers; six votes to approve lucrative union contracts.
With no serious opponents, Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie, for example, spent more than any other Metro mayoralty candidate. He raised $244,836 (much of it from the development industry) and he had $135,790 left over from the previous election.
But that unprecedented $7.9 million doesn't account for spending on nomination bids, only the contributions and spending within the election period. Raymond Louie, for example, spent $244,000 in his unsuccessful bid to be Vision Vancouver's mayoralty candidate.
Determining what kind of limits might be appropriate is difficult since B.C. is unique in maintaining the municipal at-large system. So, there are few working models to draw on.
Seattle -- the only other large city in North America without a ward system -- limits donations by individuals, corporations, unions and groups to no more than $700 over four years. By limiting the size of donations and specifying the time period, it ensures contributors can't secretly fill up political coffers in off-election years.
The Canadian government limits contributions to individuals. According to a recent Yale University study, in some jurisdictions that strategy has the added benefit of increasing voter turnout.
Still, there's the question of whether all individuals are eligible to contribute. Vision Vancouver had a number of large American donors in 2008. Should non-residents be allowed to contribute? And if the task force is looking at residency requirements for donors, shouldn't it also consider whether it's right that candidates don't have to live in the municipalities they want to run?
The task force may also consider extending voting rights to tax-paying corporations and businesses. If it does, is it fair that multinational corporations might be able to vote, but not donate to campaigns?
Then, there's the transparency question.
Candidates are required to file financial disclosure statements, but public access to those filings varies widely.
Langley District forbids photocopying and allows people to view the documents for only an hour at a time. Vancouver's disclosure forms are on the city's website. Surrey put the disclosures on its website, but only for a limited time. Port Coquitlam destroyed all of its disclosures prior to 2008.
Another gaping legislative hole is that the disclosure rules do not apply to referendum votes even though campaigns can cost tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars because a lot can be at stake -- the Olympics, for example. Or, as Cranbrook voters will decide later this month, the annexation of land that will more than double the city's current footprint and massively enrich the property owners.
If the task force can agree on election finance reform, it will be useless without better oversight, enforcement and stiffer penalties.
The premier says Elections BC will take that on. But that too requires legislation. And Elections BC can't do the work without more money and, likely, more staff. Yet, there's been no hint that the money is available.
It will be near miraculous if the task force can deal with all of those issues and it will still have only scratched the surface of electoral reform. Still it would be a good start. But time's short, premier. You need to get this task force going.
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
The banana republics of B.C. politics - Daphne Bramham
The banana republics of B.C. politics
Citizens are left on their own to guard against electoral irregularities in municipal elections
BY DAPHNE BRAMHAM, VANCOUVER SUN March 21, 2009
Even the provincial minister responsible for municipal legislation did not believe that citizens would have to spend their own money to overturn an unfair election but he learned he was misinformed.
Photograph by: Glenn Baglo, Vancouver Sun, Files, Vancouver Sun
The B.C. Liberal government has gone far beyond convention in silencing opposition during the May election campaign with its gag law on third-party advertising. Yet the same Liberal government allows a virtual free-for-all during municipal elections.
Civic elections are "the Wild West," says Simon Fraser University political scientist Patrick Smith, who has concluded that more than four times as much money per voter is spent than in provincial or federal elections.
Yet, it's left up to citizens to enforce the electoral rules. There is no independent oversight, which gives municipal elections in British Columbia some of the hallmarks of voting in banana republics.
The Liberals did amend the Local Government Act a few months before the November civic elections. For the first time, groups and individuals supporting candidates or slates of candidates were required to register. But the legislation has no enforcement mechanism. No one is responsible for policing it. If citizens believe there are electoral irregularities, they have to spend their own money to ensure that unfair elections are overturned and transgressors either lose their seats or are banned from participating in the next election.
It's a serious oversight that renders the legislation so lame that even former community development minister Blair Lekstrom couldn't believe it.
In an interview the day before the Nov. 15 provincewide elections, Lekstrom assured me that his department had it wrong. Lekstrom, a former mayor, said it couldn't possibly be that it would be left up to citizens to police and prosecute any election irregularities. He said that is the role of the police.
Over in West Vancouver, Kash Heed, who recently resigned as chief constable, agreed. Police are continuing their investigation into complaints of election irregularities including the failure of at least one lobby group -- Low Taxes, Low Growth Association -- to register as a campaign organizer even though it spent thousands of dollars attempting to get a slate of candidates elected. It also didn't file a financial disclosure by the March 16 deadline.
However, mayoral candidate Vivian Vaughan noted on her financial disclosure form that the association donated $1,000 to her campaign.
Another group, Preserve West Vancouver, filed a financial disclosure claiming to have raised $3,550. Vaughan is listed as having contributed $1,200 to it and two council candidates -- Carolanne Reynolds and Danielle Charlton -- donated $500 and $300 respectively.
But Preserve West Vancouver's listed expenditures do not include a $3,200 donation to Charlton that she lists on her financial disclosure.
Apparently, Lekstrom -- who has since moved on to become the energy minister -- was set straight by his staff after the elections were over. In an e-mail to David Wilson, a Central Saanich resident who alleges irregularities in that municipality's election, Lekstrom said Wilson should take his concerns to court.
But there may be no better illustration of the ramifications of this electoral regulatory gap than Central Saanich. The local co-op was heavily involved in endorsing and stumping for council candidates, who would look favourably on a rezoning needed for its new store.
During the election, Peninsula Co-op sent out letters to all of the candidates asking if they would support a rezoning of four residential lots to allow construction of a 27,000-square-foot grocery store adjacent to its gas centre. It told the candidates that their responses would be distributed to its membership.
Without seeking the permission of its membership, the co-op sent out letters to some, if not all, of its 28,000 members urging them to vote for the candidates who would support the rezoning. It had posters printed and prominently displayed in its grocery store listing the candidates who supported and those who opposed it.
Formal investigation sought
Peninsula Co-op registered as campaign organizer on Nov. 6, only nine days before the election, even though its campaign began weeks earlier and even though Central Saanich chief electoral officer Sara Ribeiro says that groups and individuals must register as soon as they have spent $500.
The Co-op spent a total of $16,488 endorsing and stumping for council candidates.
David Wilson, the resident whom Lekstrom corresponded with, recently wrote to Attorney-General Wally Oppal and Solicitor-General John van Dongen, asking for an formal investigation into the co-op to determine whether it acted improperly both under the Local Government Act, the B.C. Co-operatives Act and the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by spending more than $500 and using the co-op's membership list to try to influence the election's outcome -- all without ever having sought the approval of the members.
"Normally, I would officially file this complaint with the local police department in Central Saanich," Wilson wrote. "But unfortunately, Chief Constable Paul Hames is a member of the Peninsula Co-operative's board . . . . How can the chief constable investigate a local organization's action, when he is part of that organization's executive board? If I ask Chief Hames to investigate, there is a potential for a conflict of interest."
Hames is on the co-op's finance, membership and community relations committees. Cathie Ounstad, one of the members of the police board, is also on the co-op board.
Wilson goes on to say that he's concerned about his safety and that of his family, having raised his concerns with the mayor, the municipality's chief electoral officer, the co-op's general manager and the police chief. Other concerned citizens, he alleges, have been threatened with lawsuits.
He then goes on to state what seems to be obvious: "If the law has been broken, it needs to be investigated by unbiased law enforcement officials and our democratic rights as citizens should be protected without threat of persecution."
The concerns don't end with Central Saanich and West Vancouver where the police investigation is continuing.
Not a single campaign organizer or elector organization registered in Summerland. Yet, there were at least 15, quarter- and half-page ads that ran in the Summerland Review. Similar ads also ran in the Penticton Herald and the Western News.
"Some concerned residents and business owners of Summerland urge you to please get involved and support candidates who are not against some growth in this town . . . . Please get out and support those whose politics will not result in anti-business, anti-family and anti-Summerland by way of their anti-growth, one perspective politics!" says one ad, which gives no indication of who the concerned residents or business owners are or who paid for the ad.
Citizens for Smart Governance ran ads in support of mayoral candidate Janice Perrino. Only two days before the election, there was a full-page ad for Perrino that was paid for "by a generous donation" as well as two quarter-page ads opposing smart growth that had no indication of who had paid for them.
There was also a quarter-page ad endorsing the Perrino slate that included the names of 90 supporters, including a number of realtors and developers.
Some of those supporters' names were also among a longer list of names on a pamphlet endorsing the Perrino slate. The entire slate was elected.
A full-page ad in the Review is $856.52 plus GST; a half-page is $459.62 and a quarter-page is $225.12 plus GST.
So, even in smaller municipalities, it doesn't take long to run up a $500 tab. And $500 is the threshold amount. Any person or group spending $500 or more is legally required to register with the chief electoral officer as either a campaign organizer or an elector organization and file financial statements within four months of the election.
But no one is responsible or legally required to check up on them. Except citizens. And, as Wilson noted, in small communities standing up and complaining can be an uncomfortable, lonely and even frightening proposition.
'Mistakes were made'
Brian Sadler is one of those citizens. Sadler and another unsuccessful candidate for Gibsons' town council, along with two other residents did go to B.C. Supreme Court after last November's municipal election, asking for the election to be declared invalid.
They alleged all kinds of irregularities in the vote-counting -- the most serious of which was that 327 votes suddenly appeared two days after the election during a recount that was done without scrutineers and without the knowledge of any of the candidates.
Even though Justice Bruce Cohen disagreed with the complainants, he did note in his written judgment, "It is far from clear who opened the ballot boxes" when the deputy chief electoral officer did a "review" of the ballots two days after the election.
He even wrote, "Certainly mistakes were made in tabulating and calculating the election results. However . . . there is no evidence of bad faith, only inadvertence and the errors made were discovered and corrected before the official election results were declared."
Cohen concluded that rather than asking for the election to be declared invalid, the complainants should have asked for a judicial recount.
But Sadler contends that a judicial recount wouldn't have solved the mystery of where those extra 327 votes came from. It wouldn't change the fact that there was no voters' list and volunteers at polling stations weren't even given electoral maps to determine whether voters' addresses fell within the municipal boundaries.
The court case cost close to $20,000 and, for the citizens' trouble, Sadler says they have been "bad-mouthed around town."
They considered an appeal. Not only was the cost prohibitive, Sadler says it would have paralyzed the town council for most of this year and as a taxpayer and resident he didn't want to do that.
Still, the case did result in some positives. In exchange for Sadler and the others dropping their appeal, the town agreed not to sue them for costs. Plus, the council unanimously agreed at its March 3 meeting to do a complete electoral process review.
It's a step. But as Sadler says, it's up to the provincial government to fill the vacuum that exists because of no formal monitoring of the due process required in elections.
"This is crap. We have a banana republic going on right here," Sadler says. He knows a thing or two about that. He spent five years in Bosnia as a political officer for the United Nations and election oversight was included in his duties.
dbramham@vancouversun.com
- - -
Online: Visit The Vancouver Sun's database of municipal campaign spending to find out how much money each mayoral and council candidate spent on the 2008 municipal election for 15 Lower Mainland municipalities. www.vancouversun.com/campaignfinance
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
Citizens are left on their own to guard against electoral irregularities in municipal elections
BY DAPHNE BRAMHAM, VANCOUVER SUN March 21, 2009
Even the provincial minister responsible for municipal legislation did not believe that citizens would have to spend their own money to overturn an unfair election but he learned he was misinformed.
Photograph by: Glenn Baglo, Vancouver Sun, Files, Vancouver Sun
The B.C. Liberal government has gone far beyond convention in silencing opposition during the May election campaign with its gag law on third-party advertising. Yet the same Liberal government allows a virtual free-for-all during municipal elections.
Civic elections are "the Wild West," says Simon Fraser University political scientist Patrick Smith, who has concluded that more than four times as much money per voter is spent than in provincial or federal elections.
Yet, it's left up to citizens to enforce the electoral rules. There is no independent oversight, which gives municipal elections in British Columbia some of the hallmarks of voting in banana republics.
The Liberals did amend the Local Government Act a few months before the November civic elections. For the first time, groups and individuals supporting candidates or slates of candidates were required to register. But the legislation has no enforcement mechanism. No one is responsible for policing it. If citizens believe there are electoral irregularities, they have to spend their own money to ensure that unfair elections are overturned and transgressors either lose their seats or are banned from participating in the next election.
It's a serious oversight that renders the legislation so lame that even former community development minister Blair Lekstrom couldn't believe it.
In an interview the day before the Nov. 15 provincewide elections, Lekstrom assured me that his department had it wrong. Lekstrom, a former mayor, said it couldn't possibly be that it would be left up to citizens to police and prosecute any election irregularities. He said that is the role of the police.
Over in West Vancouver, Kash Heed, who recently resigned as chief constable, agreed. Police are continuing their investigation into complaints of election irregularities including the failure of at least one lobby group -- Low Taxes, Low Growth Association -- to register as a campaign organizer even though it spent thousands of dollars attempting to get a slate of candidates elected. It also didn't file a financial disclosure by the March 16 deadline.
However, mayoral candidate Vivian Vaughan noted on her financial disclosure form that the association donated $1,000 to her campaign.
Another group, Preserve West Vancouver, filed a financial disclosure claiming to have raised $3,550. Vaughan is listed as having contributed $1,200 to it and two council candidates -- Carolanne Reynolds and Danielle Charlton -- donated $500 and $300 respectively.
But Preserve West Vancouver's listed expenditures do not include a $3,200 donation to Charlton that she lists on her financial disclosure.
Apparently, Lekstrom -- who has since moved on to become the energy minister -- was set straight by his staff after the elections were over. In an e-mail to David Wilson, a Central Saanich resident who alleges irregularities in that municipality's election, Lekstrom said Wilson should take his concerns to court.
But there may be no better illustration of the ramifications of this electoral regulatory gap than Central Saanich. The local co-op was heavily involved in endorsing and stumping for council candidates, who would look favourably on a rezoning needed for its new store.
During the election, Peninsula Co-op sent out letters to all of the candidates asking if they would support a rezoning of four residential lots to allow construction of a 27,000-square-foot grocery store adjacent to its gas centre. It told the candidates that their responses would be distributed to its membership.
Without seeking the permission of its membership, the co-op sent out letters to some, if not all, of its 28,000 members urging them to vote for the candidates who would support the rezoning. It had posters printed and prominently displayed in its grocery store listing the candidates who supported and those who opposed it.
Formal investigation sought
Peninsula Co-op registered as campaign organizer on Nov. 6, only nine days before the election, even though its campaign began weeks earlier and even though Central Saanich chief electoral officer Sara Ribeiro says that groups and individuals must register as soon as they have spent $500.
The Co-op spent a total of $16,488 endorsing and stumping for council candidates.
David Wilson, the resident whom Lekstrom corresponded with, recently wrote to Attorney-General Wally Oppal and Solicitor-General John van Dongen, asking for an formal investigation into the co-op to determine whether it acted improperly both under the Local Government Act, the B.C. Co-operatives Act and the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by spending more than $500 and using the co-op's membership list to try to influence the election's outcome -- all without ever having sought the approval of the members.
"Normally, I would officially file this complaint with the local police department in Central Saanich," Wilson wrote. "But unfortunately, Chief Constable Paul Hames is a member of the Peninsula Co-operative's board . . . . How can the chief constable investigate a local organization's action, when he is part of that organization's executive board? If I ask Chief Hames to investigate, there is a potential for a conflict of interest."
Hames is on the co-op's finance, membership and community relations committees. Cathie Ounstad, one of the members of the police board, is also on the co-op board.
Wilson goes on to say that he's concerned about his safety and that of his family, having raised his concerns with the mayor, the municipality's chief electoral officer, the co-op's general manager and the police chief. Other concerned citizens, he alleges, have been threatened with lawsuits.
He then goes on to state what seems to be obvious: "If the law has been broken, it needs to be investigated by unbiased law enforcement officials and our democratic rights as citizens should be protected without threat of persecution."
The concerns don't end with Central Saanich and West Vancouver where the police investigation is continuing.
Not a single campaign organizer or elector organization registered in Summerland. Yet, there were at least 15, quarter- and half-page ads that ran in the Summerland Review. Similar ads also ran in the Penticton Herald and the Western News.
"Some concerned residents and business owners of Summerland urge you to please get involved and support candidates who are not against some growth in this town . . . . Please get out and support those whose politics will not result in anti-business, anti-family and anti-Summerland by way of their anti-growth, one perspective politics!" says one ad, which gives no indication of who the concerned residents or business owners are or who paid for the ad.
Citizens for Smart Governance ran ads in support of mayoral candidate Janice Perrino. Only two days before the election, there was a full-page ad for Perrino that was paid for "by a generous donation" as well as two quarter-page ads opposing smart growth that had no indication of who had paid for them.
There was also a quarter-page ad endorsing the Perrino slate that included the names of 90 supporters, including a number of realtors and developers.
Some of those supporters' names were also among a longer list of names on a pamphlet endorsing the Perrino slate. The entire slate was elected.
A full-page ad in the Review is $856.52 plus GST; a half-page is $459.62 and a quarter-page is $225.12 plus GST.
So, even in smaller municipalities, it doesn't take long to run up a $500 tab. And $500 is the threshold amount. Any person or group spending $500 or more is legally required to register with the chief electoral officer as either a campaign organizer or an elector organization and file financial statements within four months of the election.
But no one is responsible or legally required to check up on them. Except citizens. And, as Wilson noted, in small communities standing up and complaining can be an uncomfortable, lonely and even frightening proposition.
'Mistakes were made'
Brian Sadler is one of those citizens. Sadler and another unsuccessful candidate for Gibsons' town council, along with two other residents did go to B.C. Supreme Court after last November's municipal election, asking for the election to be declared invalid.
They alleged all kinds of irregularities in the vote-counting -- the most serious of which was that 327 votes suddenly appeared two days after the election during a recount that was done without scrutineers and without the knowledge of any of the candidates.
Even though Justice Bruce Cohen disagreed with the complainants, he did note in his written judgment, "It is far from clear who opened the ballot boxes" when the deputy chief electoral officer did a "review" of the ballots two days after the election.
He even wrote, "Certainly mistakes were made in tabulating and calculating the election results. However . . . there is no evidence of bad faith, only inadvertence and the errors made were discovered and corrected before the official election results were declared."
Cohen concluded that rather than asking for the election to be declared invalid, the complainants should have asked for a judicial recount.
But Sadler contends that a judicial recount wouldn't have solved the mystery of where those extra 327 votes came from. It wouldn't change the fact that there was no voters' list and volunteers at polling stations weren't even given electoral maps to determine whether voters' addresses fell within the municipal boundaries.
The court case cost close to $20,000 and, for the citizens' trouble, Sadler says they have been "bad-mouthed around town."
They considered an appeal. Not only was the cost prohibitive, Sadler says it would have paralyzed the town council for most of this year and as a taxpayer and resident he didn't want to do that.
Still, the case did result in some positives. In exchange for Sadler and the others dropping their appeal, the town agreed not to sue them for costs. Plus, the council unanimously agreed at its March 3 meeting to do a complete electoral process review.
It's a step. But as Sadler says, it's up to the provincial government to fill the vacuum that exists because of no formal monitoring of the due process required in elections.
"This is crap. We have a banana republic going on right here," Sadler says. He knows a thing or two about that. He spent five years in Bosnia as a political officer for the United Nations and election oversight was included in his duties.
dbramham@vancouversun.com
- - -
Online: Visit The Vancouver Sun's database of municipal campaign spending to find out how much money each mayoral and council candidate spent on the 2008 municipal election for 15 Lower Mainland municipalities. www.vancouversun.com/campaignfinance
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)