KGHM Ajax opinion poll rates City council
By MIKE YOUDS
A KGHM International survey asking respondents to rate the City’s mayor and council was designed to obtain a better understanding of local issues, says company spokesman Yves Lacasse.
The survey struck Donna Buckley as odd for several reasons, not the least of which was the probing of opinions outside of the usual context for mine interests. The City of Kamloops has no authority over the mine, so why are they asking about city politicians, she wondered.
“I thought, wow, interesting connection they’re making,” Buckley said. “That got my curiosity up … It suddenly became clear that the two issues were related.”
Lacasse said the survey sought peoples’ opinions on a range of local issues and the rating of civic politicians was part of that line of questioning.
“The questions involved different topics: What are the current issues that we face in Kamloops?” Lacasse said.
“Certainly there are a number of issues alive in our city, Ajax being one of them … It’s about finding out about the issues in the community and where people are at.”
Buckley is a willing participant in phone surveys, but this one gave her pause when the surveyor asked for someone in the residence between ages 18 and 35.
She felt she was being screened out of the survey, since she’s a senior, but was surveyed in any case because no one was home in the preferred age range.
“It left me with something in the pit of my stomach. I just felt that this was not random opinion. I’m not naive enough to think that they don’t do that,” she added, referring to corporate surveys in general.
The survey sampled residents of all ages, Lacasse said. The surveyors were attempting to improve representation in the 18-35 age range, so they screened for that, he said.
Reasoning that the mine issue won’t affect November’s City election, Buckley identified downtown issues as her top priority for the civic vote. “It almost sounded like I disappointed them when I mentioned downtown issues (instead of the mine),” she said. “Ajax was the last thing on my mind.”
Coun. Ken Christian said he wasn’t aware of the survey and doesn’t know why KGHM would be interested in how civic representatives are viewed. “I can’t imagine why they’re doing it,” Christian said. “It’s not in the City of Kamloops and it’s not something that we have much to do with.”
Lacasse said they do not share the results of their opinion surveys as a matter of practice, but added that the recent survey indicated increased awareness of and support for the project in the community based on its revised site plan.
The new plan shifts the operation outside of municipal boundaries, however, even the company expects that the City would annex the mine for tax purposes.
“My gut feeling was that they’re going to lobby for who they want elected,” Buckley said. “What kind of lobbying are they going to do?”

I would like to challenge Mr. Lacasse’s comment that the company attempted to survey all ages, when in fact I have a friend who, also retired, was told she would not be surveyed since she was too old and not in the 18-35 year old demographic they were looking to question. I also must ask how many 18-35 year olds would be home during the day and have land lines – my experience is that most would be working and have cell phones as their primary mode of contact. Again, more questions asked than answered.
LikeLike
Maybe AJAX should survey the residents of Aberdeen and Pineview about their thoughts pertaining to the mine. It should be apparent to everyone that thoughts about the mine will differ in various areas of the city.
LikeLike
“Coun. Ken Christian said he wasn’t aware of the survey and doesn’t know why KGHM would be interested in how civic representatives are viewed. “I can’t imagine why they’re doing it,” Christian said. “It’s not in the City of Kamloops and it’s not something that we have much to do with.”
And, cop out of the year award goes to….Ken Christian! In my opinion, it is essential to the role of our council and community leaders to “have much to do” with this issue! Educate yourself and form some kind of opinion about your vision for our city. That is what people elected you to do. Your interests as mayor and councillors should not be narrowly defined by your unwillingness to get involved in the issues – it’s about our future, our vision and our health. Of course you should get involved!
Talk about unimaginative uninspired “beige” politicians! Geesh!
LikeLike
If I can play Devil’s advocate for a second. Since the mine is completely outside of city boundaries, technically the city has even less say in it than it did before. I’m not saying his comment was smart or trying to defend it it. But now the situation is now similar to New Gold. It’s outside of city limits so who cares about their opinion? At what distance outside the city do we comment on projects? 2km 10km? Although you are absolutely right that they could at least take some kind of stand in it. I’d respect them more if they actually came out in favor or in opposition to it.
LikeLike
I agree that city council members should take individual positions and/or group positions on important issues facing the city and should lobby the other levels of government on behalf of their current citizens/neighbourhoods. For example, the cities of Burnaby and Vancouver do not have jurisdiction over pipelines or tanker traffic, but they are not sitting on their hands and refusing to take a position with regards to the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion issue. They are pro-actively advocating for what they believe is right for their cities and their citizens.
A huge open pit mine and tailings pond right on our urban growth boundary definitely seems to fit the bill of something that requires city council input and advocacy on behalf of residents and taxpayers.
I respect politicians who are willing to research important issues (not just this project) and make their thoughts known to the public. We should be able to identify who best matches our beliefs and priorities before we cast our ballots. That should be how we decide who we want to represent us.
Also, If the city did come out strongly for or against the project, it is likely to have an impact on the review process. It would be an indication of social license and would enlighten the socioeconomic studies. It would also allow current and potential future citizens to decide if Kamloops is a place where they want to live, or if they would prefer to live in a city that more closely reflects their personal values.
There is a huge difference in the local character, feeling and “values” of different cities, and the city council largely sets the tone. Think Ashcroft vs Vancouver vs Nelson – and the way the leadership/vision has defined those cities over the years.
City leaders should be honest about what they want the city to become and how they want to change it. It shouldn’t even be scary to share this personal vision – it is just good policy to be honest and let people decide if they want you to represent them. That is how democracy is supposed to work!
LikeLike
Well put, Tyler. That singular comment by Mr. Christian has erased him from my ballot completely.
LikeLike
I wish all the waffling politicians like Ken Christian, who seem to want the company’s goodwill for some reason, would instead adopt the Precautionary Principle on the Ajax issue.
Instead of saying, “I support the project unless all the upcoming reports show it to be dangerous,” why can’t they say, “I don’t support the Ajax project unless all the upcoming reports show it to be benign”?
Since the company, to date, has not even publicly shared the complete assay results (which would show the amounts of cadmium, etc, that would be present in the dust), it is irresponsible to give the project de facto support by saying ‘I’m waiting for the reports to come in.”
Really? And are all these wafflers going to read the estimated 10-foot-high stack of said reports before making their decisions?
LikeLike
What a ridiculous bunch! Stick with your own problems Ajax and represent yourselves responsibly :(
LikeLike