qathet Regional District (qRD) directors have reviewed a new code of conduct and will send it to legal council for a review.
At the February 9 qRD committee of the whole meeting, regional directors heard from consultant Al Siebring, who provided a synopsis of the document.
Siebring said the province rewrote the Community Charter last year to mandate that all local governments in BC have to make a decision on reviewing codes of conduct, or to consider adopting a code if they didn’t have one.
“Further to that, there was a ministerial order written last June that said any review or creation of a new code had to be undertaken within the context considering four principles,” said Siebring.
They include integrity, accountability, respect, and leadership and collaboration, he added.
“Your previous code was pretty bare-bones,” said Siebring. “It was a two-pager that outlined both positive and negative behavioural expectations of members for things that were expected in terms of behaviour and things that were frowned upon.
"The thing that struck me most about it was there was no clear path in the code with respect to how to file complaints, how the complaints would be dealt with, or what the sanctions would be in the event that the code was violated.”
Siebring said during his facilitation, there was a robust discussion with the board, where the history of the requirements was reviewed, best practices were examined, and the old code was reviewed with an eye to making improvements.
“The document that is in your agenda package is the end result of those discussions,” said Siebring. “I tried to base it as much as possible on the input received at the board session.”
Siebring said the policy sets out behavioural expectations for both board and committee commission members. He said those expectations are primarily around how those people and staff act with one another.
Defined principals
“We’ve included and defined the four principles I talked about,” said Siebring. “The overriding principle is respect for process, respect for decisions taken by the majority, and respect for colleagues. If you as a board member disagree with a decision taken by your colleagues, you are certainly allowed to say that, but you are committing to expressing that disagreement without rancor, without calling out board colleagues, and if you disagree with a recommendation from staff, you are also free to express that, but again, you’re bound to do so respectfully.”
Siebring said when a vote has been taken, the majority has spoken, and it’s up to board members to acknowledge that and respect the will and decision of the majority, without casting aspersions on the competence or motivation of those who didn’t vote the way they did. He said the code also touches on how directors discuss matters on social media or in the media.
Siebring said a concern about these codes is that they can be politicized or weaponized to make someone look bad. He said the qRD code addresses that by saying that any complaint that is found by a third-party investigator to have been filed maliciously or frivolously, is a violation of the code.
Siebring said complaints or disputes should be settled informally as a first initiative. He said if the board goes down the road of hiring a third-party investigator, the cost to the taxpayers can easily hit $25,000 or higher.
“This whole code is about prevention,” said Siebring. “The fact you have a code of conduct acts as a deterrent to bad behaviour."
Options available
“If a third-party investigator is called in and finds there is a breach, there’s a whole list of options available to that investigator as recommended sanctions," he added. "It can involve censure, removal from committees, restricting qRD-sponsored travel and restricting access to staff. This code is unique in the province in that the qRD has chosen to make the recommendations of a third-party investigator binding and mandatory.”
Siebring said the policy also has the provision to dock a director’s pay. If there are repeat offences, the pay cuts are compounded, according to Siebring.
“A chronic offender could be sitting at the board table with no remuneration at all,” said Siebring.
Electoral Area C director and board chair Clay Brander made a motion that the committee recommend the regional board endorse the new proposed code of conduct policy and bring it forward to a future committee of the whole meeting after legal review.
City director George Doubt said the code had gone from two pages to 14 pages and he was glad for the expansion.
“It’s much fuller and much more detailed about the processes,” said Doubt. “I really like, if we get to the point of engaging an investigator, that they will have the power to come to a conclusion and that won’t be up to political interpretation.”
Electoral Area B director Mark Gisborne said when the original code of conduct was endorsed, he was the only dissenting voice.
“I found the old code of conduct to be challenging to interpret,” said Gisborne. “This document that has been put before us goes into a great deal of detail about what the principles mean to help get people back on track.”
The committee voted unanimously in favour of Brander’s motion.
