La Broquerie council questions vote excusal

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 15/03/2019 (1860 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

La Broquerie council will give one of their own a chance to explain why he excused himself from a development plan vote two weeks ago, before they go searching for answers themselves.

At a meeting Wednesday, Councillor Darrell Unger asked why Councillor Larry Tetrault declared a conflict of interest and left the room for a Feb. 27 vote on the municipality’s controversial development plan.

The document’s implementation has been delayed by sustained opposition from the City of Steinbach, which want more regulations to guide development activity near the municipalities’ shared border.

“It shocked me when he left,” Unger said.

Tetrault and Councillor Ivan Normandeau were absent from the meeting, attending an out-of-province function with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.

Council speculated Tetrault or one of his relatives may own land affected by proposed revisions to the bylaw.

“I wasn’t aware of that,” Unger said. “I’d certainly like to see, on a map, where it is.”

He noted Tetrault was present for preliminary planning sessions for the new development plan.

Minutes do not indicate whether Tetrault participated in the first vote on the new development plan on June 27 of last year, but the Ward 2 councillor did ask questions during a related public hearing last August.

Tetrault is also a member of the Steinbach-La Broquerie joint action committee, which met to discuss the city’s objections to the development plan late last month.

Tetrault did not immediately respond Wednesday to a request for a phone interview.

With no firm answers at hand, council decided to table the discussion and allow Tetrault to explain his excusal upon his return.

Weiss suggested administration may need to begin circulating a list of each councillor’s local land holdings ahead of a development plan review.

Anne Burns, the municipality’s chief administrative officer, said provincial legislation puts the onus on councillors to disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

Section 10 of the Municipal Council Conflict of Interest Act stipulates councillors must annually disclose “assets and interests” to the clerk of a municipality, excluding a primary residence but including any land a councillor or their dependents have an interest in.

Tetrault’s land holdings came under scrutiny in March 2008, when a report by Manitoba’s auditor general concluded Tetrault “immediately placed himself in a perceived conflict of interest position” during council deliberations over land acquisitions for a lagoon expansion while he served as the municipality’s CAO.

In 2000, Tetrault and his brothers jointly purchased a 50-acre parcel near the lagoon for $50,000. Facing limited options in late 2003, the municipality purchased a 14-acre portion of the property for $77,660.

At the time, La Broquerie lacked a conflict of interest policy for employees, the report noted, though Tetrault conceded he knew as early as 1999 a lagoon expansion was required.