GUEST COLUMN – Some suggestions for ‘another direction’ in fixing City council

By BRONWEN SCOTT
Guest Columnist

OVER A MONTH AGO, the provincial government cancelled its former appointee’s investigation in favour of “going in another direction” to help us fix our ongoing and disruptive City governance issues.

So, what is this direction and when will we get it?

I’ve lived, worked, owned businesses and raised my family in Kamloops since 1962. We’ve had a few controversial mayors in the past but to my recollection their terms were not marked by confidentiality leaks and uncertain due process.

I’m not picking sides. In my view, mayor, councillors and administrators — as well as many in the media — have all played a part in the current chaos at city hall.

Conflict started almost immediately. People said low voter turnout meant Mayor Hamer-Jackson didn’t have a legitimate mandate, while accepting councillors elected under the same conditions. Leaked documents showed ASK Wellness, CMHA and BC Housing doing a little sabre-rattling.

Another City Hall leak hinting the mayor was influencing where security vehicles park on West Victoria Street had its heyday in the news before it was declared unfounded by the City’s chief administrative officer (CAO).

Whatever went on behind the scenes between the mayor and others, by council’s January 31/23 meeting, Coun. Neustaeter apparently felt comfortable publicly warning the mayor that only 10 signatures were required to start a process to oust him.

The councillors’ March 17/23 public denunciation of the mayor without explaining, then or later, what they meant by “crossing personal boundaries,” seems to have been of no value to the community and in fact is costing the taxpayer.

At least six leaks of confidential information have caused “significant harm,” “humiliation” and “damage to reputation or relationship” to the mayor as defined by BC’s Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act (FOIPPA). Regardless of possible feelings at City Hall or elsewhere, Mr. Hamer-Jackson is entitled to the same privacy protection as anyone else.

To date though, the city seems not to have engaged in a “thorough investigation” as required by FOIPPA.  In fact, the CAO publicly stated, “We can do audits on computers and it’s up to council to decide whether they want to do the investigation, but there’s only so much you can do.” Kamloops mayor rebuked for trying to find shelter for disabled homeless man | iNFOnews | Thompson-Okanagan’s News Source (infotel.ca)

FOIPPA is clear that it’s not up to council to decide an individual’s privacy rights. Further, if City Hall isn’t capable of investigating, it can ask the police. Failing this, the City can call on the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) to “investigate and attempt to resolve complaints when a duty imposed by FOIPPA or the regulations, including an adequate search, has not been performed.”

Maybe the provincial government’s “other direction” could include having the OIPC and B.C. Ombudsperson give City administrators and council refreshers on interpreting and enforcing the Privacy Act, Robert’s Rules of Order and B.C. Community Charter.

For instance, the Charter doesn’t allow unadvertised, unrecorded gatherings of a quorum of councillors to discuss matters of City business, as when the mayor was shut out of a December 6/22 closed meeting which had not been advertised or publicly approved by council as required. The councillors’ electronic discussion to draft, and their assembly in City Hall to present their March 17 statement are both suspect too.

Maybe B.C. Municipal Affairs could rule on whether the City’s acting  corporate officer correctly interpreted the B.C. Community Charter when she advised councillors they can refuse to serve if they don’t like the standing committees the mayor appoints, thereby hamstringing those committees.

Yet the B.C. Community Charter requires councillors to “participate in council meetings, committee meetings and meetings of other bodies to which the member is appointed.” Is this a “must” or a “may”?

And did the City’s corporate officer (CO) misinterpret Robert’s Rules of Order by allowing an amendment that put the mayor into conflict with his own motion, to “authorize staff to prepare a report for councillors’ consideration regarding a review and potential relocation of the services” at the 48 West Victoria facility?

This forced the mayor to leave the debate. After many more attempted amendments, council sent the motion to committee, where it still seems to languish. Kamloops Aboriginal Friendship Society on board with proposed review of West Victoria mini-storage | CFJC Today Kamloops; Conflict of interest questions dog mayor as council discusses West Victoria Street – Kamloops News – CastanetKamloops.net.

It is beyond belief that this happened after the CAO previously ruled the mayor’s motion was not in conflict with his ownership of property farther along the street. In fact, regarding conflict of interest, should the CO have recused herself from the debate since her brother heads the office that sited the 48 West Vic street-storage facility?

Can the “other direction” also include a mediator to mitigate seemingly unwarranted defeats of mayoral motions that could help our city? For example, the councillors quashed the mayor’s February 28/23 motion to hire more outreach workers so that instead of limited security 16 hours a day, specialized staff would be on the street 24/7  Sparks fly when Kamloops mayor gets pushback from fellow council members | iNFOnews | Thompson-Okanagan’s News Source (infotel.ca).

Why? Kamloops needs more street support and mitigation. It’s better than people dying in tent fires. The councillors’ weak excuse that the mayor didn’t consult enough beforehand isn’t a valid reason for defeating a useful motion — it just seems petty and detrimental.

The very fact that I refer to “the councillors” and “the mayor” as separate factions instead of “council” as a whole shows we have a serious problem.

The province must help us find a way forward, and soon.

Bronwen Scott is a community activist who lives in the region.