Cochrane Town Council is considering taking steps towards more transparency in the way councillors have declare their financial interests, but not all of them are as eager as their colleagues to see the initiative go through.
The purpose of the proposed bylaw is to require council members to proactively disclose any interest where personal financial interests may conflict with council duties.
The introductory report states “The intent of this bylaw will align with governance best practices and build trust in our democratic processes.”
At the Nov. 27 meeting Mayor Jeff Genung and Coun. Alex Reed voted against the motion to create a statement of disclosure bylaw for town council members, questioning the motivation behind it, and the need.
But in the end lost the argument and the vote, by a 4-2 margin, when town council agreed to have a draft of the bylaw prepared by the end of February 2024, when it will be debated further.
"I'm not sure why there seems to be a rush. Is there some kind of agenda here? I'm being transparent, can we be clear about what the purpose is?" asked Reed, who voted against the motion.
Genung also didn’t see the purpose or the urgency.
“I don’t understand the problem we’re trying to solve with this motion – I just don’t,” he said.
“If we had nothing better to do, then sure.”
Coun. Tara McFadden, who introduced the idea, said she believes the bylaw helps to build trust in our democratic processes. She says several other municipalities have adopted statement of disclosure bylaws.
"In this current atmosphere that we're dealing with right now with distrust for governments at whatever level, it behooves us to be as transparent as possible," said McFadden in defending her motion. "And this was all really bringing us up to the highest transparency I know of."
The new bylaw would require council members to file a disclosure statement detailing the names of people, corporations, or partnerships in which they have an interest, and be updated annually. That would be in addition to requirements already in place, under the Municipal Government Act.
She also believes it's as much an educational piece as anything else, so council clearly understands what is considered a pecuniary interest by the Municipal Government Act (MGA).
Genung voted against the motion, believing it's not a pressing priority, nor an issue that is raised with him by residents. He said it’s never been raised to him in his conversations with residents.
"I'm not trying to hide anything here, but I just don't understand why this, why now, and what problem are we going to solve with this."
Coun. Marni Fedeyko, who is also a real estate agent, said she had been recused from council discussions in the past and found out later that according to Municipal Affairs rules it was inappropriate.
"You can take it any way you want, but I've been asked to recuse by our CAO as well as from our mayor. None of them have been appropriate. They've (Municipal Affairs officials) clearly stated that there is no pecuniary interest as to why you need to recuse, but we can carry on and that conversation is still to be had in the future."
