A blog post scrutinizing one candidate鈥檚 campaign contribution from a previous election has sparked an online discussion in Squamish about donations and conflicts of interest.
In a blog post published Oct. 9, Squamish's Toby Foord-Kelcey said that mayoral candidate Karen Elliott should have recused herself from voting on a controversial project approved in 2016 because she accepted a campaign contribution from the proponent鈥檚 wife in 2014.
Mario Gomes was behind the Rope Runner Squamish aerial park behind the Adventure Centre. In the last election, his partner, Ananda Gomes, volunteered her time to develop Elliott鈥檚 website, recorded as a contribution of $2,745.
Foord-Kelcey, as a representative for the Squamish Access Society, opposed the park鈥檚 location when it came before council in 2016.
He now says Elliott should have stepped away from the vote, which passed 6 to 1, because of the connection between her and the Gomes.
Elliott referred The Chief to a response posted to her website, where she said she will consider Foord-Kelcey鈥檚 feedback in future situations, but noted that the in-kind donation does not represent any legal conflict of interest.
鈥淚 take my role in local government very seriously and hold a high bar in terms of transparency and integrity for myself and for others and I believe I have conducted myself accordingly,鈥� she wrote.
In an email, elections officer Robin Arthurs confirmed that the Community Charter does not consider campaign contributions to be a 鈥済ift鈥� and they are exempted from conflicts.
鈥淭his is supported by the Courts in the King v Nanaimo case where the Court upheld that campaign donations alone do not create a situation of conflict,鈥� said Arthurs.
Arthurs said that 鈥渋n-kind contributions,鈥� such as graphic design or photography services, must be assigned a dollar value and reported like all other contributions.
Foord-Kelcey said he understands the contribution was legal, but said in his post听 that 鈥渃ouncillor Elliott had a moral, though not legal conflict of interest, but did not recuse herself.
To be fair, the Chief also examined the voting records and campaign donations of other sitting councillors, and has compiled an easily viewed online spreadsheet so readers can do their own analysis. Scroll to the end of the story to see the chart.
While it is difficult to determine all personal connections between campaign donors and council business 鈥� particularly in a small town 鈥� a few donors have come before council in the past four years.
None of the campaign contributions constitute a legal conflict of interest, and under the Community Charter, they do not require councillors to step down from votes. The analysis does not suggest councillors were influenced by contributions.
Carney鈥檚 Waste Systems [Now Green For Life Environmental] has a $1.9-million contract with the District of Squamish, according to the 2017 Statement of Financial Information. In 2014, former owner Owen Carney donated $200 to candidate Susan Chapelle.
Developer Doug Day, who often comments on council business but has no current development applications before council, donated $1,000 to Patricia Heintzman鈥檚 mayoral campaign and $500 to Susan Chapelle. He did appear on Feb. 6, 2018, to pitch a general concept for a 250-unit rental development.
Edith Tobe, who has come before council as the executive director of the Squamish River Watershed Society, donated $500 to Heintzman鈥檚 mayoral campaign in 2014.
Finally, candidate Jason Blackman-Wulff received $1,000 from CUPE Local 2269, which represents District of Squamish workers. CUPE negotiated a new collective agreement in May, 2016.
Union and corporate donations are no longer allowed, and individual contributions are limited to $1,200 per year.
Campaign contributions disclosures are released post-election and must be submitted within 120 days after voting day. They then become public documents.
听
The Chief's compilation of 2014 campaign contributions to the current council can be viewed here:
