With just over six weeks remaining until the Oct. 27 municipal election, a Puslinch resident is urging council to rescind two township election guideline bulletins, calling them “insulting” and “ridiculous.”
Glenna Smith appeared before council on Sept. 3 to question the township’s handling of its “Election Bulletins,” which are intended as guidelines for prospective candidates and posted on the township’s website (www.twp.puslinch.on.ca/candidate-information.aspx).
Prior to the discussion, Mayor Dennis Lever advised councillors that since they are all candidates in the upcoming municipal election, “govern yourselves accordingly in your response.”
Sitting beside her husband Doug and reading from a prepared statement, Smith said, “I would like to tell you that neither of us take an election lightly. We have been residents of this great township for 51 years and have participated in more elections on all levels than any of you sitting around the council table.
“We have never in our life seen such an insulting piece of work as Election Bulletin 3A,” Smith said.
Bulletin 3A outlines the use of township facilities and lands for election campaigns.
The document states, “Section 70 of the Municipal Elections Act prohibits a municipality or local board from contributing to a candidate’s campaign.
“As a result, the township requests the cooperation of all candidates to ensure that campaigning and the distribution of campaign material does not occur in township facilities or on township lands. This includes campaigning at special events that occur on township lands such as the Farmers’ Market and the Aberfoyle Fall Fair.”
The bulletin concludes, “The Township appreciates your cooperation in adhering to the legislative rules in support of a level playing field for all candidates.”
Smith suggested that since the letter was written on behalf of council, it had a part to play in the wording of the bulletin. Otherwise, “Who is the township?” she asked.
Smith explained she voted to elect a council and a mayor to represent the township, “but if council did not have a say in this, who is running the township?”
She went on to state, “Our freedom of speech is being taken away, because if this ridiculous bulletin was enforced how and where would we have the opportunity to hear all candidates answer our questions, therefore making it a level playing field, since this would not allow for a meet-the-candidates meeting.”
Smith also believed the bulletin contradicted a recently passed township sign bylaw. As such she recommended the township rescind Election Bulletin 3A.
Smith also challenged how her initial request was responded to on Aug. 22.
“We were surprised to get a response from the clerk,” she said.
Smith thanked Karen Landry for her reply, but she does not believe Landry has the authority as a CAO/clerk to reply to a letter addressed to council.
“We find it very disconcerting when a reply is sent without council input,” said Smith. She agreed the Municipal Act indicates the municipal clerk is responsible for conducting an election.
However, “we see no power being given to the clerk to answer questions addressed to council.”
Smith contended if the bulletin were enacted as outlined there could be no meet-the-candidates night and no election signs placed anywhere in Puslinch except on county roads.
She asked why two specific events such as the Farmer’s Market and Aberfoyle Fall Fair were mentioned.
She stated the only bulletin needed would have been, “The Municipal Election Act will be strictly adhered to, as clerk responsible for conducting the election I would encourage all candidates to read Section 70.”
She added the Farmers’ Market pays rent, “therefore what happens there is of no concern to the township.”
A subsequent Election Bulletin, 3B, provides clarification on the rental of township facilities for election purposes.
Smith also said that as a member of Election Compliance Audit Committee for the last election and never having had a complaint to deal with on expenses, “we can’t help but feel insulted that Bulletin 3B would ever be allowed to be published.”
That bulletin states, “Section 70 of the Municipal Elections Act prohibits a municipality or local board from contributing to a candidate’s campaign. Further, the Act also prohibits a candidate, or someone acting on the candidate’s behalf, from accepting a contribution from a person who is not entitled to make a contribution.
“The complimentary use of a township facility or its lands would be considered a contribution to a candidate’s campaign and would be contrary to the rules set out in the Municipal Elections Act.”
Bulletin 3B continues, “A township facility may be rented by a candidate for his or her campaign, provided the candidate pays the required fee in accordance with the township’s fee bylaw.
“A candidate renting a township facility should be mindful of the campaign finance expense and accounting rules set out in the Municipal Elections Act.”
In the case of the Farmers Market, that group pays rent to the township, and if candidates wished to rent from that group, there would be no issue.
Smith stressed there had never been an issue of the wrongful declaration of expenses in Puslinch.
She urged council to withdraw the two bulletins and instead state the Municipal Election Act be strictly adhered to “and that it become a clean honest election here in Puslinch.”
Landry said the election bulletins are there to provide candidates general information relating to the election “… so all candidates receive the same information.”
Landry said Bulletins 3A and 3B came about following an enquiry from a candidate about whether there could be campaigning at the market and fair.
“In accordance to the Municipal Elections Act, a municipality cannot contribute to any candidate’s campaign,” said Landry. She added there is also a policy regulating the use of township property by members of township council.
She noted there is a difference between rental and use; rentals deal with paying full market value, so there is no contravention when that amount is paid.
Landry said she’d also received an enquiry whether the farmers’ market is a private venture. At that point, the market board would have the option of opening it up to all candidates should they wish.
Councillors did not comment or make a decision on the issue. The bulletins remain posted online.
