District of North 麻豆传媒映画Coun. Betty Forbes says she did nothing wrong when council passed a bylaw that would force her neighbour to give up his pet pigeons.
In December, 11 residents filed a petition in B.C. Supreme Court seeking to have both Forbes and Coun. Lisa Muri disqualified from holding office, alleging they violated conflict of interest laws when passing a bylaw that prohibited the keeping of pigeons.
Forbes recused herself from the votes, but the petitioners allege she pushed for the pigeon bylaw because she believed the pigeons were hurting property value and that she enlisted Muri鈥檚 help behind the scenes to introduce the bylaw.
Forbes has since filed her response and is now asking the courts to toss the petition.
鈥淭he allegations against Coun. Forbes are unfounded,鈥� the response states. 鈥淎fter becoming a district councillor, on Nov. 5, 2018, Coun. Forbes worked hard trying to bring about positive changes for the benefit of the entire community. She has always put the public interest first.鈥�
The petition calling for her to be disqualified should be tossed, she argues, because at least two of the people who signed it are in fact residents of the City of North Vancouver. The law specifies that such petitions must be signed by 鈥渆lectors鈥� in the same municipality. The District of North 麻豆传媒映画made the same argument in its response to the petition last month.
Forbes also says the petitioners failed to serve her with the documents within seven days of them being filed in court, which is mandatory under the Community Charter, and they failed to file their documents within the statutory 45 days of it coming to their attention.
In her defence, Forbes also addresses the allegation that she used the power of her office for her own benefit.
鈥淎lthough unnecessary in light of the irreparable defects in the petition, Councillor Forbes denies the allegation that she had a direct or indirect pecuniary interest in the passage of the Pigeon Bylaw and denies that she acted in any way contrary to the provisions of the Community Charter,鈥� her court documents state.
And the petitions failed to bring any evidence that she 鈥渁ttempted to influence district council respecting the pigeon bylaw,鈥� Forbes argues.
鈥淭he petitioners cannot be permitted to make serious allegations of conflict of interest and seek to disqualify a sitting councillor for misconduct without any admissible evidence,鈥� the response states. 鈥淓qually, the petitioners cannot be permitted to subject an elected councillor to a cross-examination on a public bylaw, based on nothing but speculation in the vain hope that they will be able to support the facts they allege. Such a process would seriously undermine democratic institutions and interfere with the proper functioning of council in a manner that is not authorized under Canadian law.鈥�
Even if she had a direct or indirect pecuniary interest, Forbes argues she was acting in good faith and 鈥渁ny impermissible actions were inadvertent or because of an error in judgment made in good faith.鈥�
On Jan 31. Forbes filed an application asking for the courts to toss out the petition. Muri filed hers on Jan. 22. Both will attempt to have their applications heard in B.C. Supreme Court next week, although the petitioners鈥� lawyer is seeking to have the court date adjourned.
