The following article appeared in the February 28 edition of the Guelph Mercury:
Conflict of interest allegations continue to hover over members of city council
Councillor Mike Salisbury has resigned from the city’s transit committee over allegations he’s in a conflict of interest.
He said the allegations were made by the transit union because his wife is a bus driver.
They aren’t the first allegations levelled against Salisbury. Some residents have criticized him for not sitting out council votes on transit issues, saying he stands to benefit.
Salisbury said he’s just passionate about transit, and doesn’t stand to benefit except when it comes to negotiating contracts for bus drivers — an issue he said he would sit out.
Salisbury said he stepped down from the committee so that it wouldn’t get mired in issues of conflict.
“The work that committee is doing is far more important than my involvement. If my being the chair in any way detracts from the committee, I’m gone,” he said. “Especially when your motivation is to make things better and somebody says you’re being a crook, you go ‘wow, that’s unfortunate.’ ”
He said he is seeking formal legal advice on the issue.
It’s the second time a potential councillor conflict has been raised this week. After years of being involved in the proposed development on the former Lafarge lands, Coun. June Hofland said Monday that she won’t talk about the issue anymore.
Hofland lives near the proposed development, so it could affect her property value. That’s why she declared a so-called pecuniary interest, meaning she won’t vote on the issue or discuss it in council or with constituents — she’ll have to direct them to other resources.
Before she was elected to council in 2006, she was known in the community for lobbying for certain kinds of development on those lands.
“I struggled with declaring the conflict because I assume some people would have voted for me because I was a voice for the (former) Lafarge property,” she said.
But in the end, she decided that sitting out on any discussion was the most prudent option.
“If someone challenges me with a conflict it’s very severe consequences,” she said. If a councillor is proven to have an undeclared conflict, that person could be required to step down.
Ward 2 Coun. Ian Findlay also declared pecuniary interest last year, saying he would sit out of discussions on the location of the new main branch of the public library, because he owns a video rental shop on Baker Street, which was eventually chosen as the preferred location.
The act governing pecuniary interest for councillors is vague, so it’s hard to determine what constitutes a conflict, said Robert Mullin, Hofland’s legal counsel.
“There’s no definition of pecuniary interest in the act. . . . The act and case law is somewhat grey, so we should err on the side of caution,” he said.
And it’s up to councillors to determine whether or not they have a conflict, city solicitor Lois Payne said.
“The question members of council have to ask themselves . . . is whether a decision can affect their financial position, affect the value of their land or other asset, or result in payment of money or lead to a contract,” she said.
Someone who believes a councillor isn’t declaring a conflict that exists can take that councillor to court.