Complaint could lead to byelection in Municipality of Barrington

By Kathy Johnson

THE COAST GUARD

NovaNewsNow.com

Residents of District 5 in the Municipality of Barrington could be headed back to the polls because councillor elect Shaun Hatfield may have been a disqualified candidate.

The problem stems from the fact that Hatfield was and is chair of the municipality’s continuing care steering committee- struck to oversee the expansion of Bayside Home.

According to the Municipal Election Act, “No person is qualified to be nominated or to serve as councillor who… accepts or holds office or employment in the service of the municipality, or any utility, board, commission, committee or official thereof, to which any salary, fee, wages, allowance, emolument, profit or other remuneration of any kind is attached… unless the person is on a leave of absence.” While apparently there was “some question” about the validity of Hatfield’s candidacy prior to the election, no complaint was officially filed until Nov. 5, said Barrington clerk/treasurer Brian Holland.

That’s when retired lawyer Clyde Nickerson, who was a District 4 candidate in the Oct. 18 election, delivered a letter to the municipal office stating he believed Hatfield to be a disqualified candidate, and requesting the municipality to investigate the matter.

At an emergency session of council that evening, municipal solicitor Don Harding advised council that it appears Hatfield is a disqualified candidate. Council acted on Harding’s advice to make application to the court to have the election results declared void. The earliest the court will deal with the matter is Dec. 4. In the meantime the District 5 council seat will remain vacant.

As for Hatfield, while he accepts the fact that he may have unknowingly been a disqualified candidate, he is upset that no one pointed out the discrepancy until after the election. “Basically I failed to take a leave of absence from a committee that hasn’t met since February and that I have received no remuneration ($25) for since March,” he said in an interview.

As was confirmed by Holland, there were some people in authority who were aware of the problem with Hatfield’s candidacy, but didn’t say anything. “It’s like being guilty of a penalty in the first period and nobody blows the whistle until the third period,” said Hatfield.

For Hatfield, his biggest concerns are that the residents of District 5 will not have a voice at the council table in the immediate future, and if the election is declared void, there will be a cost to the taxpayer to hold a by-election.

If the District 5 election results are voided by the court, Hatfield said he will re-offer for the District 5 seat as long as there are no reasons to prevent him from doing so.