GUEST COLUMN – Council committees – a look around and a look back

By DAVID McMILLAN
Guest Columnist

ALL AROUND BRITISH COLUMBIA, cities and towns recognize the value and importance of having public participation on their select and standing committees.

On its website, the City of Kelowna states “Council committees are created under the Community Charter and provide an opportunity for members of the public to work collaboratively and provide advice on matters referred to them by Council through their Terms of Reference.”

The City of Victoria states, “Advisory committees and Boards create meaningful opportunities for public participation in specific issues in the city of Victoria,” and are “intended to improve Council decision-making.”

White Rock agrees, stating that “Committees and Boards are formed by dedicated volunteers from the community who work together to support City Council and provide input on municipal matters.”

Vernon’s policy stresses diversity, and provides that membership of committees will be diverse, and broadly reflective of the community”…with emphasis on members’ “experience, knowledge/education, expertise and geographic location in the community.”

The City of Nanaimo chooses its select committees “to allow Council to receive advice, ideas and feedback from persons other than Council members and staff. The use of select committees provides opportunities for residents to get involved in municipal affairs and influence public policy.”

So too does the City of Prince George, and every other city in the province, except one – Kamloops.

Back on March 21, at a hastily-convened Special Meeting, our City Council voted 8 -1 to suspend all five of the standing committees that had been created by former mayor Ken Christian and renewed by the current mayor.

Our eight city councillors were enraged by the mayor’s proposal to add nine members of the community to the rosters of these committees, and (omg) to replace three of them as committee chairs. Over three months later, Kamloops is the only major city in the province that functions (sort of) without standing committees.

To be sure, the terms of reference for these committees needed to be updated before the new nominees could take their seats, since the existing terms of reference restricted membership to three only — all of them council members.

As well, Kamloops lacks any form of application process under which members of the public could submit expressions of interest in serving on committees and provide statements of qualifications, expertise, etc. But the clearly stated goal of our City council was to eviscerate any standing committee comprised of members appointed under the sole authority of the mayor under section 141, and replace them with select committees controlled by themselves — and, incredibly, to appoint only themselves as members. This is precisely what they have done.

Our City council also pursued a recommendation advanced by Coun. O’Reilly to ban any member of the public from ever serving on any council committee, whether standing or select. To their credit, City staff quietly kiboshed that idea, pointing out that any such policy would be in clear violation of provincial legislation.

Nonetheless, it is troubling to realize that our City council is determined to defeat the very positive policy objectives and advantages of having experienced, qualified members of the public who volunteer their time and expertise to serve on these committees.

What is the upshot of all of this? Let me offer an example. The City of Chilliwack established a Public Safety Advisory Committee to address current and emerging public safety issues. Its appointees include two members from the RCMP, one member from the Fire Department, one member from the school district, one member from Crown Counsel, one member from the BIA, one member from BC Ambulance Service, one member from ICBC, one member from First Nations, one member from the Chamber of Commerce, one member from the family law bar, one member representing homelessness, one member from corrections, two other members from the community, and two members of City Council.

Among other things, they address bylaw issues, downtown concerns, fire regulations, safety issues and proceeds of crime. The two councillors chair the meetings and report back to City council.

By contrast, the City of Kamloops has just unveiled its newest select committee to look into developing recreational and civic facilities. The committee will be comprised of five members, all of them city councillors. The three remaining councillors will each serve as liaisons for “working groups,” reporting to the five committee members.

Collectively, the eight of them will formulate recommendations that they will then bring before City council, i.e. themselves (plus the mayor, of course). They will then vote to approve their own recommendations.

Recently, our City council shot down a motion tabled by the mayor, in which he had sought to organize a town hall meeting. The motion was soundly defeated, on the basis that arranging town hall meetings was part of the mandate of one of the standing committees that they had kneecapped back on March 17. Coun. Sarai vowed. “My committee, when it’s re-formed, it will have a town hall meeting done properly…”, apparently believing that he is still the chairperson of a committee that no longer exists.

Public participation on council committees is mandated in sections 141 and 142 of the Community Charter, for very sound policy reasons. People including officials and consultants from the construction industry, a respected First Nations elder, experts in business and, yes, the former Attorney General of B.C., would all be serving on council committees in Kamloops today, but for the petty egoism and jealousy displayed by our current city council.

Again, Kamloops deserves better.

David McMillan is a Kamloops lawyer who has acted on behalf of Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson.