Regina city council is prolonging a decision on any disciplinary action against 2 of its councillors

Council prolongs disciplinary decision WATCH: City council has prolonged its decision on disciplinary action against two of its councillors. Allison Bamford reports.

Council discussed a report on Wednesday by integrity commissioner Angela Kruk that says Coun. Dan LeBlanc and Coun. Andrew Stevens violated the city’s code of ethics bylaw with an attempted lawsuit in 2022. The group then voted to send the report back to executive committee for it to be discussed in private.

Last year LeBlanc and Stevens took legal action against city manager Niki Anderson in an effort to get funding for homelessness into the city’s budget.

The lawsuit was dismissed and now Kruk has determined that the two councillors failed to serve their constituents in a diligent manner and also did not inspire public confidence in council.

“I’ll stand by what I did but no going to court over an issue is not something I ever want to do ever again,” Stevens said.

Both councillors made their final arguments to their colleagues on Wednesday.

“It would be inconsistent with my beliefs to have not done what I did to uphold democracy,” LeBlanc said.

However, it was Anderson who got the last word.

“This pictorial of we did it for democracy, I don’t buy it,” she told council.

The other councillors must now decide what, if any, repercussions LeBlanc and Stevens will face.

Two recommendations were made by Kruk for council to review on Wednesday.

The first is that, “both Stevens and LeBlanc provide a written apology to city manager Niki Anderson for the negative impact their December 2022 lawsuit had on her professionally and personally.

Both Stevens and LeBlanc have expressed hesitation in writing an apology. Anderson said she does not want to read it if it is forced. Instead, she suggested the two councillors owe residents a public apology.

“I did not instigate any of this. I did not instigate the lawsuit. I did not instigate anything with the integrity committee because I knew it really didn’t matter,” she said.

“There was nothing that actually could be done for the way that they treated me.”

The second recommendation states that council, “reprimand Stevens and LeBlanc for their actions, noting however that a motion passed by council on Dec. 7, 2022 expressing disappointment over the negative impact on city council’s operational integrity and oversight that the lawsuit created would be deemed a sufficient reprimand.”

Anderson herself has said the lawsuit made her feel personally attacked and used.

In February, Anderson also said she would not meet alone with the two councillors moving forward.

“Councillor LeBlanc has been dishonest in the things that he had said. He’s been dishonest in conversations that have happened so I will not ever be alone with the councillors that sued me because I need to have another presence there to make certain that things aren’t distorted,” she said.

Councillors will discuss reprimanding LeBlanc and Stevens in private at next week’s executive committee meeting. The report will have to come back to a future city council meeting for them to vote on any repercussions.

According to Kruk, it took 50.3 hours to investigate, review and draft a report for this complaint.

Between Anderson’s legal fees and the costs associated with the integrity commissioner’s report, this lawsuit cost the city more than $80,000.

“What is the cost frankly of taking away our focus from the work that we should actually be doing?” Anderson said.

LeBlanc said the costs were worth it to push the conversations of homelessness to the forefront for the last 11 months.

“The toll has not come near the toll on people who die of overdoses on our streets,” LeBlanc said.

REVISING THE CODE OF ETHICS

In the 2022 annual integrity commissioner’s report, Kruk recommended a number of amendments should be made to the code of ethics bylaw that came into place in 2017.

“2022 was the first year since the inception of the code in 2017 that a member of council was found to be in contravention of the code,” Kruk said in her report.

She said the “first-generation” code of ethics has never been amended.

“Many other municipalities have since modernized their code of ethics for council and it is recommended that council do the same to keep up with the ethical obligations expected of elected officials,” Kruk said.

She encouraged council to authorize the integrity commissioner to review and investigate complaints related to councillors’ conduct during council and committee meetings. Currently, the mayor or chair has the ability to deal with misconduct during a meeting under the procedures bylaw. However, the issue cannot be dealt with after the meeting has concluded.

Kruk said accountability of councillors should not stop when the meeting ends.

She also recommended that council amends the code to always allow the integrity commissioner to supply an anonymous copy of the complaint to the councillor in question. Currently, councillors only receive the report if an investigation occurs.

“There is still a learning opportunity for members and possibly an opportunity to correct behaviour to prevent future complaints, even when no investigation is conducted,” Kruk said, adding it could be useful for councillor to see how the commissioner interprets and applies the code during the intake process.

Kruk suggested that council review its code of ethics as soon as possible. She said a good starting point would be for all councillors to read the bylaw and then implement mandatory ethical training.

Council received and filed Kruk’s report.