Iqaluit city council picks Amber Aglukark to fill vacancy

Councillors use secret-ballot, ranked vote to replace Jack Anawak, who resigned days after being sworn in

Amber Aglukark speaks during a Dec. 6, 2023 event marking the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. She will fill a vacancy on Iqaluit city council following a vote at Tuesday’s council meeting.(File photo by Jeff Pelletier)

By Jeff Pelletier - Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

Iqaluit city councillors voted Tuesday night to appoint Amber Aglukark to council, filling a nearly three-month-old vacancy.

“I am humbled to be chosen,” Aglukark said in a written message after the meeting.

“I am prepared to sit at the working table alongside the other councillors.”

Aglukark was one of eight people who responded to a call for candidates to fill the vacancy created by Jack Anawak’s exit from council.

Anawak resigned Nov. 6 after being charged with impaired driving, days after being sworn in.

As part of the application process, candidates were asked to answer three questions relating to their experience on council, what they would contribute if appointed, and what they think are the most important qualities of a councillor.

Responses were published in the council meeting package, and provided to councillors to review.

There were no speeches. Only three candidates — Colin Allooloo, Lewis Falkiner MacKay and Lili Weemen — were present at Tuesday’s meeting when the vacancy was filled.

In her two-and-a-half-page application, Aglukark listed her experience as a leader with the Iqaluit Qimussiqtiit Katimajingit dog team society and Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women Council.

“I can guarantee my background and experience in policy and education will be brought to the working table,” Aglukark wrote in her application.

Councillors cast their votes in secret ballots, ranking their choices.

After a 10-minute break, Aglukark’s victory was announced. The rankings of the other seven were not announced.

Filling municipal council vacancies can be done in one of two ways in Nunavut. Councils can choose the runner-up from the previous municipal election or put out a call for nominees and vote based on who applies.

In January, council backed the public call for nominees after two months of working with city administration on a policy for filling vacancies.

Council asked administration in late November to come up with a policy. Administration came back with a proposal in late November that essentially parroted the Nunavut Elections Act.

Coun. Romeyn Stevenson criticized the proposal during council’s Dec. 12 meeting, calling it a “shell” of what he’d like to see. He indicated that he wanted to see a directive to only put out a call for candidates and a set timeline for the process.

A revised policy came back to council in January that preserved the option to appoint the runner-up and included a more specific timeline. Council opted at that meeting to put out a call for candidates and sent the proposed policy back to administration again for tweaking, this time criticizing it for being too prescriptive.

MacKay, who finished ninth in the 2023 election and would have been eligible for appointment had council opted to go that route, emphasized “community support and legitimacy” as the most important qualities of a councillor in his application.

His application also included an endorsement from former mayor Mary Wilman calling for his appointment, and past quotes from Mayor Solomon Awa and Coun. Simon Nattaq that expressed support for appointing the runner-up.

Those comments are dated Oct. 27, 2020, when council was debating how to fill a vacancy.

Despite not being selected Tuesday, MacKay said he’s going to keep engaging in city politics just as he has been since the election. He has attended every meeting this term, sitting in the gallery.

“I think there’s room for council to improve the transparency of this decision process in the future,” he said in an interview after the meeting.

“I wish Amber all the best on council, I’ve had the pleasure of working with her and I think she’ll do well.”

Aglukark is scheduled to be sworn in at the next council meeting, according to city spokesperson Aleksey Cameron.

“I look forward to putting my experience and knowledge at the forefront,” Aglukark said in her message.

“I know I can be a voice for Iqalummiut at all levels.”

Share This Story

(81) Comments:

  1. Posted by This decision is on

    Totally weak…

    56
    14
  2. Posted by Name Withheld on

    I encourage LFM to contact Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal to look into this as it is not right how council members of City of Iqaluit treated this man!!

    53
    27
    • Posted by NHRT is defunct on

      The Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal has not held any hearings or rendered any decisions in years.
      .
      Their website last shows activity around 2012-2013, but nothing recently.

  3. Posted by Tired on

    Wasted our time, ignored our wishes, voted in secret and chose a candidate that received no votes over many who did.

    I’m sure she’s competent and capable but this is borderline disrespectful to the residents of Iqaluit. Shame on this, now illegitimate Council.

    110
    13
  4. Posted by Big Surprise. on

    Called it. Put a comment in the article with the candidates, but Nunatsiaq moderator decided not to allow it.

    36
    6
    • Posted by Enemy of the people on

      Nunatsiaq news pollutes the information ecosphere.

      31
      9
  5. Posted by S on

    Iqaluit council has neither the ethics, capability nor the mandate to appoint fellow councillors.

    That is the task of the electorate or in extreme circumstances the role of CGS perhaps if the ministry and legislature deem the hamlet Council to be dysfunctional.

    58
    11
  6. Posted by Maq-Pat on

    15 people willing to serve on council put their names forward.
    The community ranked them from 1 to 15.
    The top 8 were put on council.

    Two weeks later we needed a ninth.

    Council waited three months then held there own secret vote. OVERRULING the community’s ranking.

    Council did not break the law, but they definitely ignored the voters.

    98
    4
  7. Posted by Policy Puzzles and Council Quirks on

    While there may be dissatisfaction expressed here, it’s important to reference the specific language of the Act, which grants the council the authority to either appoint the next runner-up or select from a pool of publicly solicited candidates.

    For Lewis and anyone else voicing concerns in this comment section, the most effective route for seeking reform lies in engaging with their Member of the Legislative Assembly and the Minister responsible for Community Government Services to advocate for legislative amendments.

    As someone with expertise in policy, Lewis should recognize that attending council meetings, although informative, is not the direct method to enact change.

    Additionally, it’s noteworthy that there’s no mention of Councilor Smith’s participation in the vote on this matter in the article . Given the potential for a conflict of interest, this omission raises many questions!

    14
    32
    • Posted by MARS on

      “Lewis should recognize that attending council meetings, although informative, is not the direct method to enact change”

      A direct method to enact change would be to put his name forward in the council election, or subsequently in the open call for candidates would it not? He has done both these things.. Why the slight?

      “Additionally, it’s noteworthy that there’s no mention of Councilor Smith’s participation in the vote on this matter in the article . Given the potential for a conflict of interest, this omission raises many questions!”

      From Jan 24 article on this same publication “Deputy Mayor Kim Smith declared a conflict of interest and left the council chambers while the matter was discussed.”
      https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/article/iqaluit-city-council-opts-to-put-out-call-for-candidates-to-fill-vacant-seat/

      24
      2
      • Posted by Need to Clarify on

        Yes, she declared conflict of interest and left the chambers for the decision to put out a call for candidates. Did she do the same for this matter?

        4
        10
        • Posted by John K on

          Are you familiar with the phrase “it stands to reason?”

          12
          6
          • Posted by Need to Clarify on

            It would stand to reason, but a below commentor has said that she did not declare a conflict or abstain. Hence the need to clarify.

            5
            3
      • Posted by Policy Puzzles and Council Quirks on

        When I mentioned that “Lewis should understand that participating in council meetings, while insightful, does not constitute a direct avenue for effecting change,” my focus was on the process and the council’s prerogative to choose from a designated pool as per the legislation. Lewis sitting in the room lurking for the last 3 months was not changing this legislation.

        This council was elected, and their decision to proceed in this manner is within their rights. Those dissatisfied with this approach should address their concerns to the Minister of CGS and their MLA to advocate for changes to the legislation, and not vote for those council members next election.

        Regarding your point about Smith, it’s clear from last night’s vote—which it seems you didn’t observe—that she neither declared a conflict of interest nor abstained from participating in the voting process.

        10
        17
        • Posted by Reality of the North on

          A conflict on one item does not mean a conflict on the other.

          We have small interconnected communities. Take any 8 resident (say the current council) and any other 8 residents (say the eight that put their names in). There are bound to be some close connections.

          Stevenson is a senior executive in the organisation that owns Flaherty’s employer. Flaherty’s many business bank accounts are with Shepard. Shepard is the banker for a number of other councilors and candidates. Kunuk is a deacon for a number of councilors and candidates. Nattaq is an ancestor of at least one candidate. Sam has awarded public contracts to a number of Flaherty’s businesses. Stevenson taught many of the councilors and candidates. I’m sure there are many, many more.

          32
          3
          • Posted by Then and Now on

            Logically it is true that a conflict on one item does not equal a conflict on another. But I find it hard to see in this scenario how there could be a conflict in the first instance but no conflict for this vote.

            4
            8
            • Posted by anon on

              I would guess that it would have been a conflict for Smith to vote on the method that would be usedby council to select the person to fill the vacancy (e.g. next runner up or application process), but once the application process was selected her votes on a ranked ballot as one of a group of councillors would have much less direct impact on the result.

              1
              1
          • Posted by A Lesson in Conflict on

            The concern regarding interconnectedness in our community leading to conflicts of interest requires a nuanced understanding, especially when considering specific relationships, such as that between Councilor Smith and LFM. It’s crucial to differentiate between potential conflicts arising from personal relationships and the broader network of professional and personal connections within a small community.

            Councilor Smith is in a relationship with LFM, her involvement in voting on matters that directly affect LFM, such as appointments to council or its committees, would constitute a clear conflict of interest. In such cases, the ethical course of action is for Councilor Smith to recuse herself from voting or decision-making processes that could directly benefit LFM. This is a standard practice to ensure that personal relationships do not improperly influence official duties.

            However, the scenario where LFM was elected by the general public (instead of Jack Anawak), rather than being appointed by a vote that includes Councilor Smith, underscores a crucial point: the power of the community’s vote is distinct from the influence of individual councilors. An election outcome determined by the general public reflects the collective will of the community, not the undue influence of any single councilor’s personal connections.

            17
            2
    • Posted by anon on

      The act also says a vacancy should be filled ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ and lists picking from the candidates who also ran in the election as the first of two methods to to do so. If the drafters of the legislation had intended for the application process to be the preferred method it would have been first in the list.

      The legislation does not need amending; council needed to not ignore the results of an election which had *just* happened.

      34
      8
  8. Posted by Northerner on

    Chosen she said. Not elected.

    42
  9. Posted by Think About It on

    Not the candidate that the people voted for, not the candidate that even showed up for the council meeting, but she checks the boxes required. Wish her the best of luck.

    Good on LFM for his maturity and his outlook.

    45
    10
  10. Posted by come on on

    Poor butthurt people. LOL

    Congrats Amber! From a true iqalunmmuit, I am happy.

    15
    62
    • Posted by Got Nuance? on

      It is possible to simultaneously a) think that council’s performance on this matter is nothing short of execrable, and b) not harbour any ill will towards Amber.

      Hopefully she will resist any pressure from her colleagues to be a pliable stooge.

      33
      3
  11. Posted by Uviluk on

    You got your way Stevenson and Cronies, Trump of the North. I mean embarrassment of the north.

    36
    6
    • Posted by Close observer on

      Stevenson has always been clear on his desire to ballance democracy with the need to put young woman, especially young inuit women, on council. You can agree or disagree, but he has been very upfront. Listen to him speak during the Fawcett appointment in 2020.

      It is the rest of council that needs to answer to the electorate for their motivations for ignoring the voters.

      16
      32
      • Posted by Not the Way to Do It on

        A good enough idea, but this isn’t the way to do it. There is no ‘balance’ of democracy in this. This is the perversion of it, even if legal.

        Sadly, Amber, no matter how good she may turn out to be, will always have an asterix beside her name. She will be seen as the council equivalent of an affirmative action hire, and there will always be questions.

        36
        4
        • Posted by Iqaluungmiu on

          For most of us Inuit this is a good choice and we don’t see it that way, democracy was still there as the people we voted for cast their own vote and it is in line with the election act.
          I am glad they picked Amber and a plus she is a Inuk from Nunavut, maybe a lot of you wanted someone who is just visiting Iqaluit for a few years and that control and power you are used to having here doesn’t mean much and are upset over that, or it’s something else, but this council is the strongest I have seen in almost 30 years and much more representative of Iqaluit.

          7
          44
          • Posted by Devil’s Avocado on

            By your logic we could just elect one councillor and that person can choose the rest of the council.

            19
            1
          • Posted by No Moniker on

            In other words, you don’t know what the word democracy means. You don’t get to pretend this was democratic because it sounds better than the alternative, an admission the process was oligarchic.

            Inuit who want political power should do it legitimately through the electoral system, as many have done, not through distorted processes that give advantages they have not earned. Granted, that is a feature of modern Inuit culture bequeathed through the Land Claims agreement, isn’t it? The expectation and entitlement that you should always receive things the easy way through embedded and unearned advantage.

            No one respects that.

            26
            5
          • Posted by Tired on

            “maybe a lot of you wanted someone who is just visiting Iqaluit for a few years and that control and power you are used to having here doesn’t mean much and are upset over that”

            What a typical Nunavut response. You deserve the garbage governance we get in this Territory.

            23
            5
          • Posted by Kivaluungmiu on

            Not that it should matter, but I don’t think Amber has lived more of her life in Iqaluit than Lewis has.

            28
            4
            • Posted by Tables turned eh on

              She is inuk, lived in Nunavut for the majority of her life

              How the tables have turned when commenters went after ex Mayor Kenny Bell for not being “from here” yet he was born in NWT (which Nunavut was apart of) and lived his entire life here

              Not that it matters…

              4
              7
              • Posted by Nunavumiuq on

                Yes, she is an Inuk who cannot speak her own language so therefore, that will require an Interpreter and cost the City Tax dollars. On top of this, she is the sister in-law of last Major Kenny Bell hmmm.

                Name withheld please and Thank you.

                14
                4
      • Posted by Moral Superiority For Everybody Else on

        Perhaps Stevenson should put in his resignation on council to make way for another young Inuk woman? This is eerily similar to the Dennis Patterson grandstanding, “I am the best person for this job and I have good work to do, but when I am done here I must be replaced by somebody ethnically different from me because they will be the best fit for the job!”

        23
        2
  12. Posted by come on on

    Congrats Amber.

    I am happy with the turn out with all people on council. Yay!

    17
    53
  13. Posted by White Knight on

    Putting the balls back into ballance since 2020!

    Maybe one of the legislative changes needed is for the Act to say that if council is going to use this mechanism it must be a recorded vote (as opposed to secret) and each councillor who chooses to cast a vote must make a short statement explaining the rationale for their choice. That would at least add a little transparency and accountability.

    32
    2
  14. Posted by B Aglukark on

    Ahuilaa!

    5
    20
  15. Posted by alex on

    Very sad day for the City of Iqaluit. The very people we chose to represent us have completely shut us out of what was likely an abuse of power to the legislation. Shame on the city of iqaluit council. We should seek to overturn the election and vote in a new council.

    42
    3
  16. Posted by Hunter on

    Council has done an injustice to the electoral system by selecting someone who did not even run in the election. If she really wanted to be on Council she would have ran in the last municipal election.

    This smells fishy honestly which top ranking city employee advised council to go this route and why?

    39
    3
    • Posted by Council Made the Decision on

      While I do not support much if what the admin does at the city its was pretty clear all leading up to this, that this was 100% council a decision. Admin advised them to follow the legislation and make a choice to either appoint the runner up or go to open call. This was totally an elected council decision, don’t try to pass the buck to the admin on this one!

      14
      4
  17. Posted by Umingmak on

    Outrageous. Someone who nobody voted for got the position over Faulkner-MacKay, who should have been automatically appointed after finishing as the top non-winning candidate in the election.

    Shameful decision, highlighted by Sheppard’s never-ending ego.

    60
    4
  18. Posted by 867 on

    People love to complain about the process which I agree doesn’t seem fair but thankfully they picked a good candidate and we should all be wishing her success unlike her predecessor

    15
    35
  19. Posted by Real reasons on

    She looks young and much easier to control than the obvious choice was

    26
    9
    • Posted by Don’t judge by looks on

      “Looks young” She is the same age as LFM. In fact they graduated high school the same year

      “Easy to control” you obviously know nothing of Amber.

      She works very hard as a provider for her child. She is an advocate for womans rights, and President of Qulliit Nunavut status of women council. Assist in raising and running Inuit sled dog team, and not to mention the President of the Iqaluit Qimussqtiit Katimajingit

      She is an advocate that this city is needs

      21
      20
      • Posted by northerner on

        I am sure Amber is a great person professionally. But she didn’t run and no one voted. Council cherry-picked her, and we all know why. She can be super amazing at her job on council but it will be extra hard for her to prove herself as the public already has a view on the appointment. If she is the same age as LFM, then he would be a great candidate as well. We need a young person view on council, not the old boys club of “cough” cough” Romeyn and Kyle. Swany, the next candidate after LFM is a woman of colour from a minority group, why didn’t they pick her? I guess she didn’t tick all the boxes for council.

        29
        3
        • Posted by Cherry picked? on

          Amber was not cherry picked.

          The city put the call out for interest. Amber and all others that put themselves forward had an application and questionnaire to file for the city’s vacancy

          Maybe, just maybe Amber’s answers to the city’s questionnaire was the deciding factor to her getting the seat?, but no, some people see a Trump fake news conspiracy witch hunt happening here

          5
          36
      • Posted by No mandate from the public on

        She has no mandate from the public, as the above poster noted, cherry picked for superficial qualities that are obvious to all. Unfortunately for her that is her ‘identity’ now as a councilor.

        29
        3
        • Posted by Your identity on

          The identity you and other commenters are putting on her is yours, and not the majority view of others.

          What are these superficial qualities that you mentioned? Because she is a woman, inuk, etc?

          No one here in any of these comments have recognized that council lost an inuk councillor (JA).
          So council put out a call, got interested parties, and voted in another inuk

          Oh the slippage of white colonial power in Nunavut

          6
          27
          • Posted by alex on

            wow, if that white supremacist comment at the end makes it through, what doesn’t?

            3
            3
            • Posted by Clown Car on

              The comment is the truth alex, just because it bothers you doesn’t make it ‘wHiTe SuPrEmAcIsT’ 🤡

              • Posted by alex on

                “ we, white people, are here to stay, this is our country now and you can not change that.” Canada belongs to to white people? And that can’t be changed? That is white supremacy ideology

  20. Posted by Robert Bourassa on

    There is a reason why this person was selected and others weren’t. LFM hasn’t been wronged by any means, he wasn’t elected by the general public, he wasnt chosen by council. It’s not run for election and lose until a spot opens up, it’s a loss and that’s it. Opportunity comes up again, and still doesn’t get in. If the members of this community (including council members) don’t want you in, you aren’t getting in. Sounds a lot like democracy to me.

    Council choosing from a call out might not be the best approach, but putting someone in when they lost isn’t any better. Take the L, be humble

    14
    34
    • Posted by alex on

      I agree in one sense, you’re right, in saying that LFM loss the election, I agree with that point. But with the council’s action, all Iqaluit lost the right to vote on the next council member, that is a loss for every single voting citizen in the democracy of the City of Iqaluit. Do the math, that’s a lot of L’s.

      21
      3
    • Posted by anon on

      Literally the first option in the legislation for filling vacant seats is to appoint the next runner-up from the election, or as you put it “lose until a spot opens up”.

      The community voted for the candidates they wanted which produced 16 or so results. Council took the option of soliciting applications and then used a secret ballot to select their choice of applicant, who did not run for election. What about that is democratic?

      20
      1
      • Posted by Robert on

        Those 2 options aren’t ranked, they are two options in the act and the council decides. As mentioned in my original comment, it might not be the best approach, but it sure is a better one than someone going in when they lost, are you used to participation awards?

        A byelection would have been the best option if it were an option. We elect these people to represent us, and make decisions for us like this…for the best interest of the community, just giving it to someone who the people didn’t vote for is not the best option.

        4
        15
        • Posted by John K on

          A byelection would be unduly expensive and time consuming for community so small and with an immediate remedy already in place and statutorily authorized.

          6
          1
        • Posted by Bluffy St. Marie on

          A by-election is an expensive, superfluous and idiotic idea. You would propose this days after an actual election? The results of the election should have been honoured and LFM, despite your delusional recitation of “he lost” was the next candidate in line and should have been appointed immediately. Instead we get a self serving donkey show, driven by a cabal by insecure councilors who are afraid of serious competition, along with their stooges who repeat tripe in the NN comments section.

          7
          1
  21. Posted by Peter on

    Wow! Some of these comments on here are out to lunch, it’s obvious a lot of you do not know or understand the election act.
    So many entitled commentators, way too many complainers.

    10
    25
    • Posted by Illegitimate councilor on

      Entitled to expect a ‘democratic’ result to an election. Yes, we are entitled indeed. Enjoy your oligarchy.

      24
      3
      • Posted by Robert on

        So you think putting someone in that lost is a democratic result? Lili Weeman is just waiting for her chance still then right?

        An opportunity was given to those that put there name in, some from the last election some not. Those from the last election still didn’t get in, that opportunity to get the most votes was still there…the first time around the people spoke and didn’t vote them in. This is democracy right?

        3
        17
        • Posted by Pangloss on

          Go touch snow, Robert. Come back when your mind is clear enough to write a coherent response. I have no clue what you are trying to say.

          10
          1
          • Posted by Robert on

            It is pretty basic english if you ask me, and it is my second language.

            The community spoke, they don’t want certain people in, council spoke and we still get the same results. Isn’t this called democracy?

            The entitlement is blowing my mind

            2
            18
  22. Posted by alex on

    Ya its a good point, the Election Act stipulates what council did, therefore are within their right as per the act. But the questionable action is that they wanted a specific set of instructions that would negate one part of the act. That is what makes this highly questionable.

    21
    1
    • Posted by Maq-Pat on

      The city council doesn’t have “Rights”. The city council has “Powers” & “Obligations”.

      “Sulitsiarniq” and “Pijitsirniq” not “Pijunnautit”

      The public is fair to question why council used this “Power” in the way they did.

      19
      2
  23. Posted by Threatened Testicles. on

    So. Much. Misogyny.

    A bunch of these comments show how persistently Inuit women in positions of leadership are constantly denigrated by mediocre bozos.

    6
    26
    • Posted by Threatened Testicles takes two forms on

      While I would not be surprised if some comments here were fueled by misogyny, I would not be fooled into thinking that the old boys club on current council is feminist or even simply respectful of women. The current council has good politicians; they won both ways with their choice; they avoided the democratic choice that would have led to a new councillor they did not want (maybe he threatened them with his critical mind?)
      AND they look like they are supportive of Inuit and women in politics. Very clever but not fooling me. I am sure either candidate would have and will do well as councillor and I think we need more women everywhere in politics (and I think women avoid it because of misogyny in that world). But I do not think that an ethical principle was at play here. It was purely self serving politics on the part of councillors.

      13
      1
    • Posted by Mediocrities on

      Conversely, your comment shows how easy it is for mid-wits to latch onto simple, cartoonish narratives that offer no explanatory power.

      11
      4
    • Posted by Disliking Affirmative Action =/= Misogyny on

      The only misogyny I see here is one comment who said Amber looks like she could be easily controlled. Every other complainant is pretty much saying they don’t like how council elected not to go with somebody who was involved in the election process and received 525 votes* just two weeks prior to the vacancy in order to pick somebody based on their gender and ethnicity. And that can be (and is) true, even if Amber is a person that could be qualified for the job.
      .
      * Fun Fact: Quassa became Nunavut’s Premier with just 106 votes in his riding.

      14
      1
  24. Posted by Polique on

    “The community spoke, they don’t want certain people in, council spoke and we still get the same results. Isn’t this called democracy?”

    This framing is self serving, inaccurate and absurd.

    11
    1
    • Posted by Maq-Pat on

      MacKay got more of the vote then now 11 of the last 26 people appointed or elected to city council.

      12
      • Posted by Polique on

        Yes, I agree with you. The above comment was a response to Robert. It’s ended up down here as Nunatsiaq has new and quirky comment platform that can’t place things where they belong.

  25. Posted by Pain In The Groen on

    It is possible in this result to support both Lewis and Amber. Amber is a competent and skilled individual with a wealth of experience to bring to the table. A good person and worthy recipient of this appointment.

    The same can be said of Lewis Falkiner-MacKay who hustled and had a great campaign. Much better than the first attempt. There is a reason Lewis was runner up this time.

    There is a problem here and it’s not to do with Amber or Lewis. It has to do with process. By having a secret ballot on this, the voters have no idea where the councillors loyalties and interests lie. This is important to constituents. The fact that council chose this option over appointing the runner up is why it should be a transparent process, otherwise why do it? It doesn’t build the public trust by holding secret votes, it’s undemocratic.

    They could have avoided all this controversy by appointing the runner up. We wouldn’t be talking about Councillor Smith’s perceived conflict of interest right now, not because her partner was appointed but because he was appointed because as runner up in the election and not chosen by a secret vote.

    18
    3
  26. Posted by Nah on

    she won’t. very likely why lewis was tossed out and she was voted in

    1
    1
  27. Posted by Problems on

    literally nobody has a problem with Amber personally.
    they have a problem because of the process.
    9 people over road the will of over 500, because they wanted a different person
    they chose someone who didn’t even run and that is WILDLY undemocratic.

    27
    1
  28. Posted by lol on

    A lot of comments over a council that doesn’t have a lot of authority. Like the other guy who quit, don’t worry so much – people will quit and there will be more opportunities to get on it. This is the same council that Kenny Bell served on, it isn’t about qualifications lol. Iqaluit gets what it deserves, not what it needs.

  29. Posted by Anon on

    Politics and representation when directed well allows for the growth of its electorate the constituents individually in a community; It is something often ignored as we gripe on and on without reason and real cause. Meanwhile in perspective we are not living in a war-torn or apartheid state (thank the creator).

    1
    4
  30. Posted by Iqaluit on

    So many commenters here don’t have a clue how little informed nor understanding of their own power, council exhibits. Amber is solid and will work hard, I don’t care how council came to the decision. They are asked to vote on things they have little to no experience in. Someone should ATIP the construction/maintenance costs of the sewage treatment Center. Or shutdowns.
    Real concerns. How council elects is pretty low in the priority list in my eyes.

    1
    9
  31. Posted by Huh? on

    Great article Jeff.

    We can all agree the process was not democratic but Amber should be fine.

    I wonder about this “ Councillors cast their votes in secret ballots, ranking their choices.”

    How did council vote in secret ballot during a public meeting?

    Why did they use a secret ballot?

    What were they scared of?

    Jeff please look into this, the council is not allowed to do business in secret at a public meeting.

    1
    0
    • Posted by Maq-Pat on

      Good point, a secret ballot does not appear to be a meeting held in public.

      CITIES, TOWNS AND VILLAGES ACT

      Public meetings
      21. Subject to section 22, every council shall hold its regular, special and committee meetings in public.

      Exclusion from meetings
      22. (1) No person shall be excluded from any meeting of a council or a committee of council except for improper conduct.

      Private meetings
      (2) A council or a committee of council may, by resolution, authorize its meeting to be closed to the public where
      (a) it is of the opinion that to do so is in the public interest; and
      (b) the resolution is made by at least 2/3 of the council members present.

      Limitation on power
      (3) A council has no power, at a meeting that is closed to the public, to make a by-law or a resolution other than a resolution to revert to a public meeting.

  32. Posted by John WP Murphy on

    And now you have a newly hired ethics commissioner living in your hamlet. Does he have any authority in this if one of you files a complaint?

  33. Posted by Mesher Z on

    A tempest in a teapot in da capital Chartown…

Comments are closed.