Calgary councilors approve changes to remote participation policy

Content of the article

The ability of Calgary city councilors to attend meetings remotely was put under the microscope on Tuesday.

After an hour of debate, executive committee members voted 12-1 to accept a staff proposal to change the council's code of conduct and procedural rules to limit the ability of council members to attend meetings with the 10th District virtually. André Chabot is the only one who votes in opposition.

Content of the article

Content of the article

However, the proposal included amendments from the 3rd Circuit. Jasmine Mian said a provision should be added to allow councilors to continue working remotely if their situation meets the protected grounds of the Alberta Human Rights Act.

They may have physical disabilities or family circumstances, such as Mian, who gave birth last summer and as a result regularly attends remote meetings.

“I appreciate that more fences are needed for council members to work remotely, but the writing of these rules is too restrictive — or at least the public interpretation of them is too limited,” he said.

“I can cite my situation as an example, but this is not the country. Branch Mian. It recognizes that there are many circumstances that allow for reasonable access to remote work.”

The amendment allows remote participation in “exceptional circumstances”.

The council's code of conduct and code of conduct has allowed elected officials to attend meetings remotely since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Amendments to the bylaws allow council members to participate virtually “on any occasion” and to participate in an appropriate and safe location that is distraction-free, camera-enabled, and background-free.

Content of the article

Content of the article

Under the amended law, remote attendance should only occur in “exceptional circumstances” when in-person attendance is not possible or impractical, city officials said.

Speaking to the committee Tuesday, city ethics consultant Dr. Emily Laidlaw said the changed language was not in response to any particular incident.

He said the amendments were “mainly logistical” and meant to clarify that remote participation in meetings should be the exception rather than the norm.

“The operational criteria here are based on best efforts,” he said, adding that the city's Office of Ethics and Integrity did not “take lightly” the decision to make changes to the code of conduct.

To level the property, you need to “show”: a consultant

Mian said his proposal, which was introduced after deliberations in council, was designed to cater to people who, given their personal circumstances, had not previously considered public service.

“I think we need to allow mothers, fathers, society and the future to have a little more fairness in the caregiving dynamic,” she said.

“For some reason, I'm the first woman in the office to have a baby. It's okay to be the first, but it's not okay to be the only one.”

Content of the article

Although he says he supports Mian's intentions, 9-Kun. Gian-Carlo Carra proposed sending the ordinance back to the ethics and integrity office for review, along with the city's internal and external anti-racism agencies and the community health advisory committee.

Those groups should have a chance to weigh in on whether the revised language is fair enough, Carrá said.

“I'm very concerned that not only are people not interested in the equity issues of the law as it's currently written, but we're not doing everything we can,” he said.

“Things are not as fair as we thought.”

Carr's motion failed 3-10, with him, Richard Putmans and Chabot voting in favor.

1st district. Sonia Sharp said she supports Mian's amendment, but not Carra's, saying the council needs to balance equity with the need to “show up” to serve Calgarians.

“I don't think that's a high bar to set,” he said. “What Calgarians are hearing now is that we're debating whether we should bother coming.”

This proposal needs to be approved at the next meeting of the city council.

Content of the article