Clark v City of Medicine Hat - The Decision

Medicine Hat, AB - The Honourable Justice R.E. Nation has released her decision on the judicial review initiated by Mayor Clark.

In short, Justice Nation upheld the fact that Clark did breach the code of conduct but the sanctions were not commensurate with the breach.

Regarding the sanctions she ruled that, "when I review the sanctions, they are on the face very severe. They appear disproportionate with the conduct. Sanctions that are aimed at limiting contact or assuring respectful communication with Mitchell are rationally connected with the breach of the Code. Thus, a letter of reprimand, the request for an apology, and a limit on how communication is done with Mitchell, or a requirement that Mitchell have some control over in person meetings are reasonable and appear connected with the concern. Having said that, the suspension of Clark’s presiding duties under section 154 of the MGA, that she no longer be the official spokesperson for Council, that she no longer can attend meetings of the administration committee or that her salary is reduced by 50% (with no limit in time, effectively a financial penalty of over $50,000) are hard to justify. There is no indication the issue was her inability to deal with other staff, or with governance issues. After the intervention of a Councillor at the August meeting, Clark continued to chair the meeting appropriately, to call for a vote on the question calmly and competently. There was no suggestion she was unable to chair the meeting or represent the City. Clark was elected Mayor of the City, these latter sanctions in essence strip her of a significant portion of her role as Mayor."

As far as remedy to the issue, Justice Nation states, "Generally, the remedy when a decision is impugned in judicial review is to send the matter back to the administrative body to reconsider the decision with directions. However, declining to remit a matter back may be appropriate in certain circumstances. Elements such as the efficient use of public resources may influence a court’s discretion in remitting a matter." She further states, "Remitting the matter back in this case would mean sending the issue of sanctions for the conduct back to Council, whose members appear to have no sense of proportionality in crafting sanctions and have imposed sanctions that have no rational connection with the breach of the Code. As a result, I will strike out sanction 2,3,5 and 6 as disproportionate and unreasonable. Sanction 1 is upheld as it is reasonable."

Clark will not be reimbursed for legal costs of the action but will receive backpay for the time her remuneration was reduced by council.

To read the complete decision you can find it here.