Roger Varley has been in the news business almost 40 years with The Canadian Press/Broadcast News, Uxbnridge Times-Journal, Richmond Hill Liberal and Uxbridge Cosmos. Co-winner with two others of CCNA national feature writing award. In Scout movement over 30 years, almost 25 as a leader. Took Uxbridge youths to World Jamboree in Holland. Involved in community theatre for 20 years as actor, director, playwright, stage manager etc. Born in England, came to Canada at 16, lived most of life north and east of Toronto with a five-year period in B.C.
Who wants to be a councillor
Someone suggested to me a few weeks ago that I should think about running for council. Yeah, right! As if anyone would vote for me!
But I was thinking about the idea a couple of nights ago and decided to look at the relevant provincial legislation covering municipal elections. I wanted to see what the criteria were for being a candidate, and what is expected of each candidate.
In doing so, I gained new respect for those who decide to toss their hats in the ring, assuming, of course, that they also have read the legislation. Because, when it comes down to election campaign expenses, it gets rather frightening.
The criteria for being a candidate are fairly simple. You have to be 18 years or older, a Canadian citizen and a resident or property owner in the municipality in which you want to run. I think you also have to be breathing.
But, being aware that there are strict rules covering expenses, I went into the section of the Municipal Elections Act 1996 - later amended by the Good Government Act of 2009 - that covers such things. My lord, it's a minefield. And if you can figure out the language and the whereases and heretofores, I reckon you're ready to take on anything that will be thrown at you at council.
Just as an example, try the following: “Currently, the cost of holding fund-raising functions is not included in the spending limit. Amendments specify that the cost of holding fund-raising functions does not include costs related to events or activities at which the soliciting of funds is incidental, or costs related to promotional materials in which the soliciting of contributions is incidental.” Huh?
The list of steps each candidate has to take to record donations - whether it be in cash or in terms of goods or services - is such that a candidate would likely need to hire an accountant. Oh, would that be a campaign expense? Better check.
The act also describes how long a campaign runs. Try and figure this one out. “if the candidate has a deficit at the time the election campaign period would otherwise end and the candidate notifies the clerk in writing on or before December 31 in the case of a regular election and 45 days after voting day in the case of a by-election, the campaign period is extended and is deemed to have run continuously from the date of nomination until the earliest of (I've omitted a big chunk here but it ends this way) iv. the day A equals the total of B and C, where, A= any further contributions, B= the expenses incurred during the extension of the election campaign period, C= the amount of the candidate's deficit at the start of the extension of the election campaign period.”
I know that's a rather long extract to read, but that's just a miniscule fraction of what is contained in the Act. And if you can figure out what in tarnation they're talking about, I guess you're qualified to be a councillor.
By golly, you'd better be able to figure it out, because there are severe penalties for those who run afoul of the Act: “An individual who is convicted of an offence under this Act is liable to the following penalties in addition to any other penalty provided for in this Act: 1. For any offence, a fine of not more than $25,000.”
And, apparently, it's not hard to foul up. Three or four veteran members of Vaughan council are currently embroiled in investigations into their campaign expenses from the last election.
Of course, in a municipality with the population of Vaughan, candidates can spend megabucks to get elected, because candidates are given a base rate plus a certain amount for every voter in the ward they are seeking to represent. In Uxbridge, the amounts are far less. Candidates for ward councillors are allowed a base amount of $5,000, with an extra 85 cents allowed for each voter in the ward. Based on 2006 figures, candidates in Ward 2, with the lowest number of electors, can spend up to $7,017.05 (mustn't overlook the five cents) on their campaigns. Those seeking office in Ward 4, with the highest number of voters, can spend up to $8,571.70. Don't forget, that includes the value of goods and services received, not just cash, so you'd better be able to figure out what those goods and services are worth.
It seems to me that anyone who has read the Elections Act and still decides to run for office in this election is deserving of our respect and admiration, if not necessarily our vote.
Tell me, am I wrong?
