OLDS - A town councillor’s job as the executive director of Olds Institute (OI) continues to elicit discussion on conflict of interest and pecuniary interest around the council table.
Coun. Mitch Thomson recused himself from an in-camera discussion related to OI during the April 2 council meeting, declaring a pecuniary interest due to his employment with the organization.
Pecuniary interest is a matter which could monetarily benefit the councillor or an employer of the councillor, or the councillor’s family.
“It does come up on occasion just because of Olds Institute’s long standing history with the town,” said the town’s CAO Michael Merritt. “It will happen because there will be many discussions in regards to what they’re involved with which the town may be involved with as well and therefore decisions have to made which could impact one way or the other.”
Within minutes of the April 2 council meeting being called to order and before the meeting agenda was adopted, Thomson questioned mayor Michael Muzychka on what the in-camera items listed on the agenda pertained to.
Muzychka replied both items were covered under Section 25 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP). One related to an OI update, he said.
In addition to questioning whether the topic actually needed to be discussed in-camera, Thompson said he needed further information to determine whether he needed to declare a pecuniary interest.
“Pretty much anything we discuss about the Olds Institute is something you should probably recuse yourself from,” Muzychka said at one point.
Muzychka re-iterated the assertion later in the discussion but not before Coun. Mary Jane Harper broached the issue of conflict of interest.
“Perhaps one of the things I’m asking councillor Thomson, is if he has in fact a legal opinion regarding his conflict of interest,” she queried.
Thomson responded by saying it is prudent for every council member to seek legal opinion in such matters.
“I have done some research in this space that is privileged information and is not in council’s interest,” Thomson added.
Conflict of interest is a situation in which the concerns or aims of two different parties are incompatible or a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity, according to Municipal Affairs.
The Municipal Government Act provides the definition and application of pecuniary interest and the municipality’s code of conduct for elected officials bylaw deals with conflict of interest.
Thomson recused himself from the April 2 in-camera discussion relating to OI and also did not take part in the discussion or vote on a subsequent motion dealing with the matter when council resumed the open portion of the meeting.
Council approved a motion "to direct administration to prepare a letter to Olds Institute in regards to the CARE funding."
In an interview after the meeting, Merritt said its not extraordinary that members of council declare a pecuniary interest.
“It’s just that with Olds Institute…being fairly involved in the community, there’s going to be more occasions that this could lead to councillor Thomson having to make that decision as opposed to other councillors,” he said.
Merritt said he couldn’t say how many times the issue has come up since Thomson was first elected to council in January’s byelection, adding it is up to each councillor to make the decision.
“But in every case that was basically a situation, he has recused himself…reflecting what he would see as a pecuniary interest,” Merritt said.
