LATEST

LETTER – Mayor Milobar needs to withdraw from Ajax procedures

Mayor Peter Milobar.

Mayor Peter Milobar.

Which hat is the mayor wearing when he presides over Ajax matters on behalf of the City, that of the Mayor of Kamloops, or that of a favoured candidate to become the new Liberal MLA for Kamloops South Thompson?

 

Recent actions by Mayor Peter Milobar relating to the City’s position on the proposed Ajax mine raise serious questions about whether the mayor who would rather be an MLA is legitimately and fairly able to preside over and vote on council activities related to KGHM Ajax mine. 

 

Milobar himself understands that there is a problem, one that he wishes to avoid until he has the nomination in hand, as he earlier stated to the media that he “would be speaking to council about whether to continue as the City’s negotiator with KGHM Ajax if he becomes the party’s nominee.”

 

However, Milobar is in a perceived conflict of interest right now when he has obligations and loyalties to the extremely pro-mine-development-oriented BC Liberal government even as he continues to cling to being mayor of a city that needs to contend with all the ramifications of having this same government allow a massive open pit mine right on our doorstep.

 

To understand the concern with mine politics of the BC Liberals, we need only remember several relevant facts: 1.) That the controlling shareholder of Imperial Metals Corp. which owns the Mount Polley mine, N. Murray Edwards, helped organize a $1-million private fundraiser in Calgary in support of Christy Clark’s re-election campaign and, 2.) That KGHM has contributed $55,450 to the BC Liberal party over the past three years.

 

It is quite obvious Milobar should “do the right thing” by removing himself from any further discussions or votes related to Ajax until his political status and loyalties become absolutely clear.  If he does not, any votes on Ajax that he participates in may be subject to a possible legal challenge afterwards.

 

Questions also arise from Milobar’s unwillingness to handle Ajax matters in an open, fair, and balanced way.  In a way that has respect for all councillors and all community members, and for positions that are not necessarily in agreement with his own personal agenda for Ajax.

 

It is an embarrassment that Mines Minister Bill Bennett was the one to inform Kamloops residents that our city had already submitted a draft proposal to KGHM Ajax late this summer, before asking residents or Council for their input.

 

And, it is troubling that this community mitigation/compensation draft Milobar presided over still remains concealed from the public even after the “confidential” financial compensation amount under consideration was unceremoniously trumpeted out to the press by Bennett. We strongly feel that residents need to be fully involved in this agreement process. 

 

Coun. Denis Walsh, doing the job the taxpayers are paying him to do, recently introduced to Council a proposal for Five Conditions that our city needs to have in place before it can consider Ajax, which will be openly debated and voted on at the next Council meeting. It is refreshing to see this important issue finally having a serious discussion at City Hall in order to set a high-level direction.


Mayor Milobar has demonstrated bias and distorted judgment by improperly attempting in a recent local radio interview  to discredit this very carefully thought-through proposal, which has widespread community support after months of consultation.

While the mayor says he doesn’t “frankly understand the point of” Walsh’s proposed conditions, this does not seem to be the case with other key players in the process. We refer to a media report following the initial publication of these proposed conditions, which said “KGHM spokesman Yves Lacasse thanked Walsh for his suggestions, (adding) we look forward to further conversations about next steps and the way forward.” Also, according to the same report, “In a statement, SSN (Stk’emlúpsemc te Secwepemc Nation) said it appreciated Walsh’s references to the ongoing land claim case over lands owned by KGHM at the mine site.”

This all clearly raises the spectre of a conflicted agenda on Milobar’s part which is not fair to the residents of Kamloops. We therefore feel it is reasonable and proper to ask that the mayor immediately excuse himself from any discussions and votes on all Ajax matters until, at the very least, he clearly has one job, and one job only, that of being the Mayor of Kamloops.

 

JOHN McNAMER

Dr. SUSAN MANN

Kamloops 

Mel Rothenburger's avatar
About Mel Rothenburger (11730 Articles)
ArmchairMayor.ca is a forum about Kamloops and the world. It has more than one million views. Mel Rothenburger is the former Editor of The Daily News in Kamloops, B.C. (retiring in 2012), and past mayor of Kamloops (1999-2005). At ArmchairMayor.ca he is the publisher, editor, news editor, city editor, reporter, webmaster, and just about anything else you can think of. He is grateful for the contributions of several local columnists. This blog doesn't require a subscription but gratefully accepts donations to help defray costs.

11 Comments on LETTER – Mayor Milobar needs to withdraw from Ajax procedures

  1. The Ajax proposal is the biggest issue ever to hit Kamloops and Mayor Milobar has chosen not to disclose the City’s requests to KGHM Ajax Mining Inc. with the citizens of Kamloops, and apparently not even with City Council. This strikes me as backroom elitism, something that the American President-elect successfully campaigned against. Perhaps it is time to ‘drain the swamp’ at Kamloops City Hall. And why haven’t the Kamloops media been asking that Milobar’s proposals to KGHM be made pubic?

    Like

  2. As I read the only Mike Grenier has proposed he will do anything for his pay check. We need to make the changes happen in our community, not react to the changes that happen. We should be the hub of BC for business, let’s choose someone who has a proven track record of getting things done!

    Like

  3. Unknown's avatar Lori Maloney // November 15, 2016 at 9:56 AM // Reply

    I really appreciate this letter and I hope it puts the needed pressure for Milobar to do the right thing. I am guessing, he is going to leverage his position in the city to win the vote in the liberal party. This is something we need to see for what it is…is he doing what is best for Kamloops or the Liberal Party?

    Like

  4. -Maybe I’m missing something here, yet I have been wondering why the City of Kamloops has never had an outright referendum vote (by the entire populace of the Kamloops area) on whether it does or doesn’t want this mine above it’s City?

    For whether one party is receiving money or a candidate looks to be in conflict, these are issues obscuring the matter that: if the actual living residence -even though they may not (as per regulatory matters pertaining to mining) have any say as to ‘outcome,’ they would, at least, be on record as indicating -as a population- if this _is_ or isn’t the direction the people themselves want to take for City growth over the next decade, or so, etc.

    Proving what interests the candidates have (because some of them do have insights not readily known to the public) is the cart before the horse…’As to whether or not the growth indication of the City either needs or even wants this type of pursuit for economic input; taxation and the like -making up City coffers and culture over time.’

    Like

    • Unknown's avatar tony brumell // November 15, 2016 at 2:20 PM // Reply

      The main reason that the city has not and should not hold a public referendum is that it would not be binding on anyone. The city can yell and scream all it wants about the mine and it will not have any authority with the EAO.Literally the city was omitted from the players list on the Env. Assement. and as such were left with out influence on the EA.The other reason that a referendum should not be held is simply the fact that the proponent could literally “buy ” the outcome it wants ,by pouring it’s huge economic resources into the “NO” side.of the question.

      Like

      • Unknown's avatar Mel Rothenburger // November 15, 2016 at 2:49 PM //

        A plebiscite could be binding on council if it so chose. In other words, council could say, ‘we will take an official position on Ajax based on the outcome of the plebiscite.’ In turn that position could have a lot of influence on the eventual political outcome at the provincial level (for better or worse). As for proponents ‘buying’ plebiscites, don’t forget Kitimat residents voted against Enbridge Northern Gateway.

        Like

  5. Hey Marg, well who is it ?

    Like

  6. This guy Milobar is unfortunately a real piece of work. Not only should he step aside of Ajax/KGHM, he should resign his position unconditionally with the City, now. Should he fail to advance, well then, go get a job somewhere else.

    Like

  7. Thank you for articulating so well my feelings on this matter. Thank you for this well written and researched letter!

    Like

  8. I really honestly believe that it is in his best interest to keep the job he has now?
    This only adds to my personal opinion, that he is a very ‘nice guy’ but a bit of a waffler.
    As a member of the BC Liberal party I had the opportunity to read the letters submitted by each candidate. I said letter as only one actually had a platform with any kind of ideas. The two other ‘favoured’ candidates gave a bit of a resume and reminded everyone what nice guys they are!?! Please take time to read the candidate statements and make an informed decision, we need ‘fresh ideas’ from someone who has the patience, knowledge and determination to get things done and bring new commerce to our city! Where else would you be able to keep such a high profile job all the while trying to find a new one? In the world of finance if it was thought you were even ‘shopping’ you were on the other side of the door!
    It is time to shake things up, they are all ‘nice guys’ but sorry people it’s time to vote for someone who can get things done.
    Respectfully
    Marg

    Like

  9. Thank you for informing us —

    Like

Leave a reply to Marg Cancel reply