There were a few unhappy councillors at the end of Monday鈥檚 (Apr.22) meeting following a failed attempt to reconsider pay raises voted on and passed a week ago.
Councillor Ron Cannan made the motion to reconsider which was supported by Coun. Mohini Singh.
鈥淐an we ask for greater clarity on why, we make so many decisions day in and day out, we need to reconsider this decision?鈥� asked Mayor Tom Dyas.
Cannan pointed out that he made a request at the end of last week鈥檚 (Apr. 15) meeting that he wanted to be on the record as opposed to adopting the remuneration bylaw.
Dyas asked Cannan why he had a change of heart.
鈥淭here wasn鈥檛,鈥� Cannan replied. 鈥淚 missed the vote it was my mistake. I waited until the end of the meeting so as not to disrupt proceedings鈥 asked to be on the record as being opposed. I was told I can鈥檛 because our council procedure bylaws require it to come back for reconsideration.鈥�
City clerk Laura Bentley confirmed that 鈥渃ouncil may put forward a motion to reconsider a decision already made.鈥�
READ MORE: 琉璃神社 council still divided over pay increase
During the Apr. 15 meeting, an item before the remuneration bylaw was removed from the agenda, which appeared to confuse some councillors as to which matter they were voting on.
鈥淚 made a mistake,鈥� admitted Coun. Rick Webber regarding the deleted item. 鈥淚t had been taken off the agenda kind of on the fly and I hadn鈥檛 caught on to that, I was distracted.鈥�
Webber said by the end of that meeting he wondered if council actually voted on remuneration. 鈥淚 had to go back and look at the tapes and saw indeed we did vote, and we all voted yes. It was later I realized I voted on the wrong thing.鈥�
Although, Webber added he did not see a need to reconsider the matter as the result is not likely to change.
Councillors Singh and Gord Lovegrove said they made similar mistakes. Singh said previously that she is not opposed to a raise, just the amount.
鈥淚 would like to see my vote documented as being against it, but I don鈥檛 have a big problem with it.鈥�
Lovegrove said he and his colleagues voted on something they missed.
鈥淲e were distracted, whatever words you want to use. Reconsideration could overturn that bylaw and that鈥檚 not where I鈥檓 going with supporting this motion.鈥�
Coun. Loyal Wooldridge said that revisiting the decision would set a dangerous precedent.
鈥淚t is incumbent on us to be paying attention to the agenda and the clerk does a great job of ensuring where we are at in the agenda.鈥�
Lovegrove attempted to make a motion, citing a parliamentary rule that would allow council (with 75 per cent support) to amend the minutes of the Apr. 15 meeting to reflect the non-support of the four councillors.
Dyas didn鈥檛 allow that, prompting Cannan to call for a point of order and ask the city clerk if that was a possibility. Bentley noted that the minutes had already been adopted by council.
鈥淭he minutes reflect what transpired in the meeting鈥t鈥檚 not practice to amend them after the fact.鈥�
Dyas said in reviewing the video of the Apr. 15 meeting it was clear to him how councillors voted.
鈥淚 do not want to get into a practice of turning around and revisiting decisions especially when we鈥檙e dealing with major developments and if something gets into a 5-4 vote and want to change our vote at the end of a meeting I don鈥檛 want to set that precedent.鈥�
Council voted down Cannan鈥檚 motion.
READ MORE: Evacuated apartments residents demand solutions from UBC, City of 琉璃神社
READ MORE: Dead man found near Big White investigated as homicide: RCMP
