CITY OF VANCOUVER

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

 

Date:

February 28, 2005

 

Author:

Marg Coulson

 

Phone No.:

604.871.6586

 

RTS No.:

04805

 

CC File No.:

1102

 

Meeting Date:

March 15, 2005

TO:

Vancouver City Council

FROM:

City Clerk

SUBJECT:

Recommendations to Improve Civic Democracy

   

CONSIDERATION

CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The City Manager presents the foregoing for Council's CONSIDERATION.

COUNCIL POLICY

At the June 24, 2004 meeting of the Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets, Council passed the following resolution in response to the June 8, 2004 report of the Vancouver Electoral Reform Commission (VERC):

The required report was presented at the November 30, 2004 regular meeting of Council. At that meeting, four motions were postponed pending further information from the City Clerk. The postponed motions are the subject of this report.

BACKGROUND

At the November 30, 2004 regular meeting of Council, the City Clerk was asked to provide further information on the following motions related to improvement of civic democracy:

DISCUSSION

At the November 30, 2004 regular meeting Council discussed recommendations to improve civic democracy. During that discussion it was observed that the sections of the Vancouver Charter governing election activities in Vancouver are paralleled by sections of the Local Government Act, which governs election activities in all other municipalities of the province. As amendments to the Vancouver Charter are considered, impacts on the Local Government Act must also be considered, and consultation with other municipalities should be anticipated. Council articulated numerous broad principles representing the areas in which change is desired. The reworded motions presented in this report are based on the principles expressed by Council.

The first postponed motion was Consideration B from the November 30 meeting "THAT City Council request the Government of British Columbia to amend the Vancouver Charter to permit, at City Council's choice, a system of proportional representation." Two amendments had been moved before the motion was postponed:

The following revised wording is recommended to capture the principles conveyed by Council:

CONSIDERATION A (Revised November 30/04 CONSIDERATION B)

The revised wording allows Council the choice of whether to adopt such a system, thereby making the amendment more easily incorporated into the Local Government Act. The wording has been changed to reflect that a single transferable vote system is a type of proportional representation system (though it is not a pure proportional system). Council's desired principle of making such a system subject to assent of the electors has been captured in new Consideration H (revised November 30/04 Consideration N) below.

The second postponed motion was CONSIDERATION G, "THAT City Council request the Government of British Columbia to amend the Vancouver Charter to require that electoral organizations and independent candidates report all contributions on an annual basis, similar to federal and provincial reporting requirements." Two amendments had been moved before the motion was postponed:

The intent of this consideration, as originally put by Electoral Reform Commissioner Berger (Commission report page 119), was to improve transparency around campaign contributions. Commissioner Berger recommended "...if a party goes into debt in the course of a campaign, every contribution to that party made until the debt is fully retired must be reported as a campaign contribution."

The principles expressed by Council go beyond the intent of the Commissioner's recommendation. The amendment to the motion above expands the scope of inclusion from elector organizations (defined by the Vancouver Charter as "...an organization that endorses a candidate...") to political organizations (an organization with a lifespan beyond an election campaign and currently undefined in the Vancouver Charter). The amendments also suggest a desire by Council to voluntarily make any increased campaign disclosure requirements retroactive to include the 2002 civic election and any other voting opportunities in the interim (which would require that "pro" and "con" groups be considered elector organizations).

The Vancouver Charter currently states that contributions related to a campaign or campaign expense must be disclosed (VC sec 62). The disclosure scenarios that are subject to interpretation, and that spawned the original recommendation from the Commissioner, relate to the requirement for disclosure of contributions that do not directly relate to a campaign/expense or that fall outside the allowable campaign expense period (the calendar year of the election).

The following revised wording is intended to reflect the original recommendation from Commissioner Berger, and to capture the principles subsequently conveyed by Council:

CONSIDERATION B (Revised November 30/04 CONSIDERATION G)

Should Council wish to expand the intent of Consideration B above to include both elector organizations and political parties, the following motion could be adopted:

CONSIDERATION C (New)

With respect to Council's wish that "pro" and "con" organizations be required to complete campaign contribution disclosure forms (in Other Voting matters for elector opinion), this proposal would be very difficult to establish and administer.

"Pro" and "con" groups are currently undefined in the Vancouver Charter, and the definitions of campaign contributions and election expenses relate specifically to candidates and civic elections. Addition of the definitions to statutes may have a limiting result. Anecdotal information from past votes indicates that several parties may represent each side of the issue, ranging from organized groups operating with significant formal contributions to individual or anonymous citizens wishing to personally advocate their view (with or without related expense). Imposing a requirement for all parties and persons to be identified and file disclosure statements could provide a disincentive for interested citizens to state their opinion or become involved in civic issues. A further consideration is that adding these definitions to Part II of the Charter "Other Voting", may impact not only matters for elector opinion but matters for elector assent, such as capital borrowing questions on civic election ballots.

Should Council wish to have legislation developed that requires "pro" and "con" groups to be identified and file campaign financing disclosure forms, the following motion is proposed. However, for the reasons stated above, it is recommended that Consideration D not be approved by Council.

CONSIDERATION D (New)

Should Council wish to request, on a voluntary basis, fuller disclosure of campaign finances for the 2002 civic election (as proposed in Consideration B, above) and disclosure of campaign financing for the interest groups involved in the October 16, 2004 plebiscite, the following motion is suggested:

CONSIDERATION E (New)

As it is optional whether candidates use their own Financial Agent or that of the elector organization, it is necessary to include both elector organizations and candidates in the above motion to ensure equitable application of the instruction. Adoption of this motion would require notification of all candidates and elector organizations from the 2002 civic election and any known interest groups from the October 16, 2004 plebiscite.

The third postponed motion "M" pertains to accessibility of civic information, specifically:

"THAT City Council direct the City Clerk to investigate and report back on the following measures to make information at City Hall more open and accessible to the public:

The measures described in points one through three above, which would allow campaign and financial disclosure information on the City's website and make photocopies of the documents available to citizens, could be implemented for future filings provided that third-party personal information is obscured from the documents. Without explicit consent from third-parties named in the documents, the City would be in violation of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy (FOIPOP) Act. Attempting to secure the third-party consent would not only be resource-intensive but could expose the City to undue risk related to challenges and complaints under the FOIPOP Act. Further, it is not recommended that the practice be implemented for documents already filed. Filed documents were made with the understanding that the information could only be viewed in-person (and for nomination documents and Campaign Financing Disclosure Statements, only with a signed statement of inspection limiting use of the information). With disclosure consent clauses added to each document, the expanded access could be implemented commencing with 2005 election nomination papers and financial disclosures, 2005 campaign financing disclosures and 2006 annual financial disclosures.

Addressing the final point in the original motion above, "4) establishing a lobbyist registry modeled on federal and provincial requirements.", the following consideration is proposed:

CONSIDERATION G (Revised November 30/04 Motion M, point 4)

If instituted, the local administration of a lobbyist registry could be costly to the City.

The fourth postponed motion was Motion M, regarding citizen approval of proposed changes to electoral systems "THAT Council request the government of British Columbia to amend the Vancouver Charter so that only citizens can approve a change to the form of government, by a vote of 50% plus 1, and where a certain minimum of eligible electors vote." The following revised motion captures the principles identified by Council during discussion at the November 30 meeting:

CONSIDERATION H (Revised November 30/04 Motion M, point 4)

It is noted that Council expressed a wish to adopt this motion in conjunction with Consideration D above (financial reporting requirements for "pro" and "con" groups), as well as campaign contribution and spending restrictions as resolved by Council in Considerations H and I on November 30, 2004. For the reasons outlined above (re: defining "pro" and "con" organizations), however, it may not be possible to request that prospective legislation imposing campaign contribution limits and campaign spending limits apply to Other Voting.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications at this time. Should Consideration G re: a Lobbyist Registry be adopted and instituted, there could be substantial costs to the City for administration of the registry.

CONCLUSION

The City of Vancouver continues to seek ways of improving local democracy. The changes put forward for consideration in this report support that goal by requesting new and amended legislation from the Government of British Columbia.

* * * * *


ag20050315.htm