Councillor in Conflict of Interest
Municipal governments include several oversight mechanisms designed to protect public trust. Integrity Commissioners are one of those tools, providing independent reviews when questions arise about conflicts of interest or ethical council conduct.
In South Algonquin, those rules were examined in a report prepared by Integrity Commissioner Tony Fleming of Cunningham Swan Lawyers. The report was presented to council as part of the October 4, 2023 council agenda.
Integrity Commissioners are independent municipal officials appointed to investigate complaints about whether members of council have followed the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA) and the municipality’s Code of Conduct.
The report summarized an investigation into a complaint regarding Councillor Joe Florent and his participation in a council discussion earlier in 2023.
The Complaint
The complaint focused on a March 1, 2023 council meeting where council was discussing funding for a local organization.
According to the complaint, Councillor Florent acknowledged a pecuniary or financial connection to the organization. He served as the group’s secretary-treasurer and also provided snowplowing services to the organization.
Under Ontario’s Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, councillors who have a pecuniary interest in a matter must:
- declare the conflict
- avoid participating in discussion
- avoid voting on the issue
The complaint asked whether this councillor, with a declared pecuniary interest, was permitted to participate in the discussion of that interest at the meeting.
How the Investigation Worked
The Integrity Commissioner reviewed several types of evidence as part of the investigation.
According to the report, the process included:
- reviewing the written complaint and responses
- reviewing video from the March 1 council meeting
- interviewing witnesses
- examining the relevant legislation and municipal policies
What the Commissioner Found
The report confirmed that Councillor Florent had properly declared a pecuniary interest at the meeting. However, the investigation found that it was improper to participate in the discussion of the matter after declaring that interest.
The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act states that a council member who has a pecuniary interest must not take part in discussion or vote on the issue being considered.
The report concluded that this participation meant the councillor breached Section 5(1)(b) of the MCIA. Because the municipal Code of Conduct requires councillors to follow the MCIA, the Integrity Commissioner also concluded that the councillor breached the Code of Conduct.
The report also determined that the councillor’s relationship with the organization would be considered a “disqualifying interest” under the Code of Conduct. This means a reasonable person could conclude the councillor might not be able to participate impartially in the decision.
Context Considered in the Decision
Although the report found that a breach occurred, it also considered several factors that influenced the recommendation.
The investigation confirmed that:
- the councillor declared the conflict
- he did not vote on the matter
- he was advised by staff that he could participate in the discussion
According to the report, that advice from staff was incorrect. Even answering questions or providing factual clarification is considered participation under the legislation.
Because of that conflicting advice, the Integrity Commissioner considered the circumstances a mitigating factor.
Recommendation
The report recommended that Councillor Florent issue a public apology for participating in the discussion after declaring the conflict.
The Commissioner did not recommend imposing additional penalties, which can sometimes occur under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.
Under the Municipal Act, council cannot change the findings of an Integrity Commissioner report. Council can only decide whether to adopt any recommendations and determine how the report will be made public.
Why This Matters
Conflict of interest rules exist to protect the integrity of municipal decision-making. When councillors declare a financial interest but continue participating in discussion, even unintentionally or under bad advice, it can create uncertainty about whether decisions are being made fairly. Integrity Commissioner investigations help clarify what happened and provide guidance so that council members understand their legal responsibilities.
In this case, the report confirmed that a breach occurred. It also recognized the role that incorrect procedural advice from staff played in the situation.
Municipal government works best when people are paying attention. If councillors are permitted to bend the public purse to their best interest, government is no longer working for the people. Any member of the public with questions about accountability can ask for an independent investigation if the issue relates to the operation of council.
