UBI CONCORDIA IBI VICTORIA

Jeannot Alix was not in conflict of interest, says the CMQ

jeannot-alix-pas-commis-manquement(Rougemont) Councillor Jeannot Alix committed no breach of the Code of Ethics and Conduct for elected from the municipality of Rougemont, administrative judges concluded Sylvie and Thierry Pierard Usclat Municipal Commission of Quebec (CMQ).

This decision, made last Thursday by the administrative court, was in response to two days of hearings held last March in Montreal. In May 2015, the CMQ had before it a request for investigation against Mr. Alix, because of its presence and alleged vote at the council meeting of October 15, 2012. This vote was linked with an agreement occurred during the same period between the municipality and the company of which Mr. Alix is ​​a joint shareholder alongside former adviser Mario Côté and Francis Lavoie. This agreement includes municipal works as part of phase two of the development of Jean-Baptiste-Jodoin Street. The first phase of the project was the subject of a similar contract in 2010.

Exception provided by law

While acknowledging the personal interest of the elected in the agreement relating to the business, the Committee recalls that Article 305 of the Act respecting elections and referendums in municipalities tag conflicts of interest, citing except for “the contract (with) for the supply of services or goods that the person is obliged to make in favor of the municipality or municipal body under any law or regulation.”

“To hold otherwise would create an unfair situation that would go against the objectives of the (law),” write the commissioners, for whom “the company of Mr. Alix had no choice but to enter into an agreement with the municipality if it wished obtain a subdivision permit or construction and achieve his housing project. ” In doing so, commissioners and Piérard Usclat ranged themselves on the side of the arguments of counsel for the elected, Mr. Nicolas Matte.

In addition, although the various witnesses could not agree on whether or not Mr. Alix during the vote of the meeting of 15 October, the court ruled that “the preponderance of evidence established a clear, precise, serious, severe and unequivocally that Mr. Alix withdrew for deliberations and voting 12-10-1911, notwithstanding that the minutes do not make mention. ”

Through his lawyer, Mr. Alix was satisfied with the decision of the commission. “This is consistent with the evidence that we have presented, it gives reason to all the arguments and objections of Mr. Alix”, said Mr. Matte, saying they were not surprised by the verdict.

The decision will be formally submitted to the City Council at the meeting on 4 July. The Mr. Alix defense costs incurred by the municipality, amount to 42 $ 794.39.

Share Button