Comment 123199

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted July 03, 2018 at 15:34:06 in reply to Comment 123181

My understanding is that Councillors Jackson and Whitehead have not yet been sharing Ward 7 duties, which are not formally assigned to anyone.

If they do begin to represent Ward 7 through any official or unofficial action by the City, they would immediately vacate the Ward 6 and Ward 8 council seats respectively, under paragraph 259(1)(e) of the Municipal Act. A declaration of the vacancy would then follow by the Council on or before the next meeting, and the various legal steps would follow from that including the mandatory naming of a vacancy appointment for that Ward.

This might apply only to the first of the two Councillors to be formally assigned the duties of the Ward 7 Councillor, since it is arguable (indeed, persuasive) that only one person can be so named, meaning that only they would lose their existing seat. (Arguably lacking the power to nominate a second person to that office, the second Councillor so named might therefore not vacate his existing seat.)

The clear Municipal Act provisions specifying the legal repercussions of appointing an sitting councillor to fill a vacancy are what make it very surprising that Council continue to explore this idea.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools