City council voted on three bylaws recently to advance the joint-use school project, but confusion has arisen about whether those bylaws actually passed because of how the mayor voted — or didn’t vote, in this case.
The bylaws that city administration presented during the Feb. 13 regular meeting included Bylaw No. 5680 Street and Lane Closure bylaw, Bylaw No. 5681 Exchange of Dedicated Lands bylaw and Bylaw No. 5682 Zoning Bylaw amendment.
In attendance were Mayor Clive Tolley and councillors Jamey Logan, Kim Robinson, Crystal Froese, Doug Blanc and Dawn Luhning, while Coun. Heather Eby was absent.
Council gave three readings to each motion and appeared to pass each motion by votes of 4-2, with Tolley, Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and Robinson and Luhning opposed. These are the results that the media — including the Moose Jaw Express — initially reported.
However, a closer review of the video shows of the 18 votes taken during the three readings, Mayor Tolley appeared to abstain 16 times since his hand did not rise either for or against the motions.
Voting guidelines
The “Council Member’s Handbook for Municipalities” that the province produced in March 2020 has a section entitled “All Members Must Vote.”
The handbook says legislation requires all council members — including the mayor — to vote on every question. A motion is defeated if a tie occurs, while a passed one must have consent from most council members.
“You cannot abstain from voting unless you have a conflict of interest,” the document says. “If you abstain from voting for any other reason, legislation deems your vote as a vote in the negative.”
That section cites subsection 99(3) of The Municipalities Act, subsection 72(3) of The Cities Act and subsection 114(3) of The Northern Municipalities Act as evidence for these requirements.
The document also lists “Robert’s Rules of Order” as a resource councils can use.
City hall’s explanation
An email from the city clerk explained that “Robert’s Rules of Order” and “Bourinot’s Rules of Order” suggest there are different methods of voting, including by voice and show of hands.
With voice voting, the chair asks for either “aye” or “nay” and declares the motion either carried or lost. With hands — the more common voting method — the chair can identify who is in favour or opposed.
“Unless the rules state otherwise, the Chair (Mayor) has the same voting rights as any other member. The Mayor does not need to show his hand, but upon casting his vote, determines if the motion is passed or lost,” the city clerk said.
“To clarify, the rules do not state whether all members must all shows hands or all declare their vote by voice. It can be a combination.”
The rules are clear on a vote’s clarity because members may call “division” if they believe there was no clear majority, while members may ask for votes to be counted, the email continued. The chair then retakes the vote but counts the votes for or against the motion.
“It was clear to Council that the majority of (votes) were in favour of the motions as a 4-2 vote (one abstained and one was negative),” the city clerk said.
The city clerk also noted that section 72 of The Cities Act speaks to abstentions. Those four clauses include:
- (1) A member of council has one vote each time a vote is held at a council meeting at which the member is present
- (2) A member of council attending a council meeting shall vote at the meeting on a matter before council unless the member is required to abstain from voting under this or any other Act
- (3) If a member is not required to abstain from voting on a matter before council and abstains from voting, the member is deemed to have voted in the negative
- (4) The clerk shall record each abstention in the meeting minutes.
The Express contacted Mayor Tolley several times for comment but was unsuccessful in reaching him.
Video evidence
During the first reading vote on Bylaw No. 5680, the video’s time stamp at 1:26:02 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and at 1:26:04, Robinson is opposed. This resulted in three in-favour votes, one opposition vote and two abstentions by Tolley and Luhning since they never raised their hands.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie — and thus a defeat of the entire bylaw right there — but the mayor as chair says “carried.”
During the second reading vote, the video’s time stamp at 1:26:26 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour, while at 1:26:27, the video shows Robinson and Luhning opposing the motion. This resulted in three in-favour votes, two opposed votes and one abstention by Tolley.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie, but the mayor said “carried.”
During the third and final reading vote, the video’s time stamp at 1:29:21 shows Logan, Froese, Blanc and Tolley in favour and at 1:29:23, Robinson and Luhning opposed. While this results in a 4-2 vote and passes “forthwith,” the second and third readings shouldn’t have occurred because of the tie vote on the first reading.
This is the first time where Tolley’s hand is up.
During the first reading vote on Bylaw No. 5681, the video’s time stamp at 1:31:08 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and at 1:31:10, Robinson and Luhning opposed. This results in three in favour, two opposed and one abstention by Tolley.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie — and thus a defeat of the entire bylaw right there — but the mayor says “carried.”
During the second reading vote, the video’s time stamp at 1:31:36 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and at 1:31:37, Robinson and Luhning opposed. This results in three in favour, two opposed and one abstention by Tolley.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie, but the mayor said “carried.”
During the third and final reading vote, the video’s time stamp at 1:39:28 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and at 1:39:29, Robinson and Luhning opposed. This results in three in favour, two opposed and one abstention by Tolley.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie, but the mayor says the motion is “carried” forthwith.
During the first reading vote on Bylaw No. 5682, the video’s time stamp at 1:40:46 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and at 1:40:47, Robinson and Luhning opposed.
This results in three in favour, two opposed and one abstention by Tolley.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie — and thus a defeat of the entire bylaw right there — but the mayor says “carried.”
During the second reading vote, the video’s time stamp at 1:41:06 shows Logan, Froese and Blanc in favour and at 1:41:08, Robinson and Luhning opposed.
This results in three in favour, two opposed and one abstention by Tolley.
This should have resulted in a 3-3 tie, but the mayor said “carried.”
During the third and final reading vote, the video’s time stamp at 1:46:35 shows Logan, Froese, Blanc and Tolley in favour and at 1:46:37, Robinson and Luhning opposed. While this results in a 4-2 vote and passes “forthwith,” the second and third readings shouldn’t have occurred because of the tie vote on the first reading.
This is only the second time in the video when Tolley’s hand is up.
