• The Register/Advertiser
  • The Vanguard
  • The Sou'Wester
  • The Digby Courier
  • The Coastguard
  • The Advance
  • The Hants Journal
  • The Spectator
  • Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (0)
  •  

Municipality to return campaign deposits

Kings County News

Kings County News

Published on January 29, 2013
The Register/Advertiser
Published on January 26, 2013

By Kirk Starratt

kstarratt@kingscountynews.ca

Kingscountynews.ca

 

The County of Kings won’t be keeping campaign deposits paid by two candidates in the October election that the Supreme Court has ruled were not disqualified.

The county announced Jan. 23 that the $200 campaign deposits paid by Rick Ackland and Jim Winsor would be returned and that the two would likely be notified of that decision that day. The municipality wasn’t legally obliged to return the deposits as part of the court decision.

Following the announcement, Winsor said he had received notification by e-mail his deposit would be reimbursed. Prior to the news, he said he didn’t want the refund issue to become a distraction, but he’d suggest the county should have considered refunding the money when the returning officer ruled them disqualified.

“It’s $200,” he said. “That’s significant for me. You’d think they automatically would have said they would.”

Winsor said he has set a campaign budget around $5,800 for the upcoming March 16 special election. He spent a little over $5,000 on his October campaign and recognizes pretty much all those costs would be there again. For example, he handed out most of his brochures in October, but couldn’t use those left over anyway because dates and other information has changed.

Prior to the county’s announcement that the deposits would be returned, Ackland said the municipality isn’t appealing the court decision, but those affected by the municipality’s actions in October haven’t received an apology either. He wondered why, if he and Winsor did nothing wrong, the municipality hadn’t automatically returned their $200 campaign deposits from October,

He recognized he didn’t seek damages or expenses as part of the legal challenge, but said it would be a show of good faith to return the money.

Ackland said he asked the county’s lawyer to ask his client to return his deposit.

“If you think I’ll allow them to improperly keep the $200, I won’t,” Ackland said. “They have money they shouldn’t have.”

Submit a comment

Submit a comment (we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

More

  • No available services

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts

Advertising