Tensions erupted at the City of Grand Forks Committee of the Whole (COTW) meeting on Monday over threatened funding for the Boundary Country Regional Chamber of Commerce (BCRCC).
The Downtown Business Association (DBA), which is a subcommittee of the chamber, appeared before council to request direct funding from the city in lieu of funding from the Chamber. DBA chair Melissa Ganzeveld was not present, however former chair and DBA member Lynn Relph was on hand to read a letter prepared by Ganzeveld and take questions from council.
Prior to the adoption of the meeting agenda, Coun. Julia Butler made a motion to have the DBA delegation removed from the agenda, citing a policy that allows no more than three delegations at COTW. The DBA was the fourth and final delegation listed on the COTW agenda.
Coun. Christine Thompson said she would be in favour of allowing the DBA to present at the meeting.
Relph presented the information from Ganzeveld, which asked that the city fund the DBA directly because the association is “concerned” about continued funding from the Chamber and the current day-to-day running of the chamber.
“Based on the Chambers [sic] performance over the last few years we are worried it will not survive as an entity in the community and we would like to continue our great work with local businesses,” reads the delegation request provided to council.
“As the Downtown Business Association we are appearing before you today to discuss the possibility of working directly with the city to promote enhanced opportunities for businesses in the downtown area,” Relph read from the letter.
Relph elaborated that a main concern for the organization was the lack of communication from the new board and the chamber president.
In response to the presentation, Butler said she was not prepared to consider the request given that DBA did not have the Chamber’s “permission” to attend the meeting as a subcommittee of the chamber.
Butler also said during discussion she believed aiding the DBA directly would single out a small group of businesses, contravening the Community Charter’s rule against assisting business.
“We need to support Grand Forks as a whole with our funding and not give preferential treatment to a small group of businesses, under the Community Charter we are not allowed to,” Butler said.
Thompson questioned whether the DBA had its own bylaws in place, to which Relph replied the association was in the process of revising its terms of reference.
“My comment is that council as a whole is in the fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers of the city. It is my understanding the chamber did not follow its constitution and bylaws regarding the [annual general meeting.] My concern is if we as a city fund an organization that does not follow its bylaws, it may put in jeopardy the funding the DBA receives through the chamber,” Thompson said.
“If the city did the same with its bylaws we would be hauled over the coals,” Grand Forks mayor Frank Konrad added.
In response, Butler said the chamber held a second meeting, in accordance with its bylaws, that state if a disagreement about the legitimacy of the election should occur, a special meeting of the outgoing board will be called to decide on the standing of the newly elected board. Butler said such a meeting took place and the election allowed, and therefore she considered the matter settled.
Konrad suggested at this point that the city’s funding to the Chamber, which is set to be $20,000 for 2017, be held in abeyance “until further notice.” Thompson made this motion and referred it to the evening meeting for a vote.
Coun. Bev Tripp made a motion amend the motion on the table to stipulate that funding will be held until the Chamber appears before council; this amendment was supported by Butler but failed.
During the discussion, Tripp’s status as a member of the Chamber was questioned, with Thompson calling on Tripp to “reconsider her participation” on the grounds of her current membership. Tripp declined on the grounds that she is not a director on the board, just a member.
“This is a small town. There are no pecuniary interest, and certainly Coun. Hammett on the DBA has made many comments while at council table on funding issues. If I choose not to vote on something that is my prerogative, but … there is no issue with me being a member of an organization where I receive not one red cent from them or would benefit in any way,” she said. Tripp later added that she did not feel herself to be in a perceived conflict of interest, despite her financial commitment to the chamber in the way of membership fees.
At this point, Butler and Tripp abruptly left council chambers without comment. Having lost quorum for the meeting (Couns. Neil Krog and Chris Hammett were absent from the meeting, leaving Butler, Tripp, Thompson, Konrad and Coun. Colleen Ross at the table) Konrad called a recess.
“I guess that is how they recuse themselves, very unprofessional but so be it,” he said. “Can I have that recorded, that two councillors left the meeting without announcing reasoning why.”
Following the recess and the return of Tripp and Butler, the question was called on referring the motion to the evening meeting for decision. Butler and Tripp voted against and the motion passed.
Ganzeveld later said in an email interview with the Gazette that the DBA’s long-term goal is the formation of a business improvement area separate from the chamber.
“Many cities have formed their own DBA society, called the Business Improvement Association, and yes this is our long term goal. What we need to do before this though is continue to show the Downtown core how we can help their businesses through partnering, conferences and sales driven events,” Ganzeveld said in an email.
At the meeting that night, council again debated whether to hold the funding in abeyance. Early in the meeting council voted on adding the motion to the meeting agenda; Tripp and Butler voted against the agenda as amended.
Chamber president Dean Engen was on hand at the evening meeting as was another chamber board member; however during discussion on the motion it was noted that council would need a unanimous resolution to allow Engen to speak. Konrad and Engen had a brief conversation before Konrad said he would not allow Engen to speak.
“I would not be sitting here having this discussion if it was in any way resolved,” Konrad said. “But I will not have any discussion with you sir until we have a unanimous vote, and I vote against it.”
Butler spoke against holding the funding, noting she believed the chamber had “never” followed its bylaws.
“According to them they have never actually followed procedures, of their bylaws for the AGM,” Butler said. She later said she received that information from executive director Kathy Wright, who has given her notice and will be leaving the chamber later this month.
In response, several councillors expressed shock at that allegation.
“That is much more concerning,” Konrad said. “The constitution and bylaws I have in front of me and not worth the paper they are printed on if they are not going to follow them.” He later noted council had not been previously aware the chamber had not been following bylaws.
Butler said in response that every organization makes mistakes in following their policies and bylaws, and cited several council policies which she said were not followed that day and have not been followed in the past.
During question period, interim Chief Administrative Officer Diane Heinrich said she believed the funding for the chamber could total as much as $80,000 over the past five years — $10,000 per year for the first two years of the chamber’s existence, and $20,000 for the last three years. It remained unclear when the chamber is due to receive its funding for this year.
As part of the discussion, Konrad highlighted two key passages of the chamber’s bylaws which he said were not followed in the last election. One states that anyone seeking to be elected to the board must be in good standing for 90 days before the chamber’s annual general meeting; the second states that members must be in good standing for 30 days before they are able to vote.
“Those are really important elements, the 90 days to be elected and 30 days to vote. It protects the integrity of an organization and stops a group from showing up, taking membership and taking over the board and having friends vote for them,” Ross said. “[Those bylaws are] just so foundationally important for protecting the organization. I would not like to see those changed retroactively. I would find it disturbing if someone showed up that day…and got a board position. If that happened I am concerned. Those are details I would like to know. It is co-opting an organization.”
In response to a question from the Gazette, Konrad said he was made aware of infractions against these portions of the bylaw in a written complaint; Thompson said she was also made aware of the complaints, though not in writing.
Engen said he would be happy to address any concerns at the current meeting, but having been denied the floor Thompson said she felt it was best for both the chamber and council to “come back fresh.”
Butler put forward an amendment to Thompson’s motion. After several revisions and much discussion, her amendment stated that funding be held in abeyance until an amicable resolution with the chamber beginning with a special meeting on May 29. The amendment to the motion passed and the special meeting set for May 29 at 2 p.m.
Butler then noted that while she had amended the motion, she would be voting against the amended motion on the table.
“I don’t want to confuse you with voting against my amended motion, but I am voting against the premise of the motion,” she said. Tripp also voted against the amended motion, noting she believed the funding should never have been up for debate to begin with.
Engen said in an interview with the Gazette that the chamber will address the concerns around bylaws at the coming meeting, and said there had “absolutely” been issues with bylaws not being followed in the past.
“They’re not wrong and there are defintely some issues</
