BEPPLE – One voice at a public hearing can make a difference to the outcome
Airport walking trail. (Image: Mel Rothenburger)
THERE ARE PEOPLE who come to almost every council meeting, but most people have never been to even one council meeting.
For someone to come, it has to be very important to them. One might think it doesn’t make a difference to show up at a council meeting or public hearing, but often it is that one voice who makes a difference.
At the City of Kamloops public hearing on Jan. 23, 2024, the Kamloops Airport Society put forward an application to rezone the Kamloops Airport lands to allow more development.
The society applied for the entire parcel surrounding the airport, from the north bordering the golf course and refinery, all the way to the south up to Thompson River, to be rezoned to allow development of various light industrial and commercial properties.
The parcel includes an area of land between the dike popular with dog walkers and bird watchers, and the lands between the dike and river south of the airport.
Being riparian, the area between the river and the dike would likely not be developable. Even so, there was no specific restrictions in the rezoning application on the river front area.
At the public hearing, a woman came to the podium. I had never seen her before. This could well have been the very first time she had been to a council meeting. She came out on a cold, dark, winter night to speak about the rezoning application.
She spoke of dog walkers. She talked about eagles. She listed the importance of the area along the dike to a wide range of species. You could tell she’d spent quite a bit of time out on the airport dike over the years.
The public hearing proceeded, with the Kamloops Airport board stating they would put restrictions on that part of the airport lands. Covenants for right of way on the dike and the area between the dike and river will be given.
The public hearing closed, and the woman left.
After the public hearing, the council took a vote and passed the rezoning application.
The woman wasn’t there to see that the council passed the rezoning application with the assurance that more protection has been given to the green space well loved by many out for a dog walk.
She wasn’t there to see that her words helped in council’s decision.
Very few people ever come to a City council meeting. When they do, it’s usually for something that means a lot to them.
I just hope that the woman has heard the news that her trip to City Hall made a difference.
Her words rang true, and she made a difference. Thanks.
Nancy Bepple is a Kamloops City councillor with a strong interest in community building projects.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
All rise. The Judge Dredd court in now in session.
Coun. Bepple has been accused of biased application of council rules. The agreed upon facts of this case are as follows:
1. Council has implemented a 5 minute speaking rule for all public speakers before council.
2 Coun. Bepple interjects “point of order, point of order, the speaker’s 5 minutes is up” for some speakers, but not others.
3. Evidence shows that speakers’ topics that are favourable to council, or Coun. Bepple, do not receive the warning, while speakers’ topics that are critical of council or projects supported by Coun. Bepple, receive the warning. This seems to be linked to Coun. Bill Sarai’s motion on restricting funding to only groups that are neutral or silent on criticism of council. The accusations against Coun. Bill Sarai have been dealt with in another trial.
3. No other person on council or the city administration has condemned this behaviour.
After carefully considering the evidence before me, I find the following:
On counts 1 and 2, implementation of an anti-democratic and arbitrary time limit for public input, I find council guilty.
On counts 3 and 4, biased application of council rules on public speakers, and aggravated use of council rules to suppress speech that is critical of council, I find Coun. Nancy Bepple guilty.
Council is sentenced to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion training. Council is further sentenced to read Animal Farm, paying close attention to the chapter where the pigs exclaim “some animals are more equal than others”. Council will also produce an essay on the hypocrisy of governments that proclaim the absolute equality of their citizens but give power and privileges to a small group.
Finally, for crimes against fairness and biased application of rules for some citizens and not others, I sentence Coun. Bepple to 90 days of Slurpee machine cleanup at the 7-11 on 6th and Victoria street.
LikeLike
As someone who falls into the category of people who have come to more than one council meeting, it’s nice to know council doesn’t meet the advent of every visitor with eye-rolls and head shakes. I always speak politely, but council seems to object to my questions around due process and due diligence anyway.
LikeLike
THKS Ms. Bepple for sharing a positive moment. With so much negativity out there, it is refreshing to have someone looking on the bright side of the street. Your mysterious woman can take satisfaction in knowing she made a difference without being obnoxious.
LikeLike
The irony of this column brings a chuckle to me, as recently I too went to council to speak on behalf of a couple of differing topics. The first had to do with the terribly ill-conceived $2.8 million bike lane along Lansdowne St., which councillor Bepple had been championing. In my presentation I made it clear that I believed the city needed more, significantly more bike lanes/paths, but by spending such an exorbitant amount on this particular project, among other reasons, it would hinder spending on badly needed additional lanes. At the 5 min. mark, as I was coming to a conclusion, I was interrupted with exclamatory pleas of “point of order, point of order, the speakers 5 min.s are up”. And whom were these solicitations coming from, none other than the aforementioned councillor Bepple. Incidentally, the following speaker was allowed to finish his presentation of longer than 8 mins without such an occurrence. As a footnote, the bike lane was later voted down during that meeting.
A couple of weeks later in Dec. I again visited council chambers and again I made a presentation and again at the 5 min. mark I was interrupted with the words of “point of order, point of order, the speakers 5 mins. are up” and again these words came from none other than councillor Bepple. Let me also note that the 5 min. speaker allotment not only is an arbitrary time limit but it was also brought in by this particular council last year after the mayor was allowing the public longer time periods to voice their concerns. Once again, what the mayor wants the gang of 8 doesn’t, so we are now allowed only 5 mins to make a presentation if council doesn’t approve of what you’re saying, if they do, well pardon my interruption, please continue.
LikeLike
So why is council operating under a double standard? That seems well documented at this stage. That isn’t professional and sends a poor message to the citizens of Kamloops.
I too had a laugh after reading this editorial. It’s as if this councillor doesn’t realize what she’s really saying. I understand the intent – a promotion of civic engagement. But in doing so, she has revealed that the city is at the mercy of a bad decision at any given moment, if not for a) the random arrival of a civilian champion and b) that the champion is able to speak either within the allotted time limit or c) the arbitrary time limit is not enforced for that particular champion due to one or more council members allowing their biased enforcement of speaking rules to take over.
I was in attendance at a recent meeting, and a business person with a number of established businesses in Sa-Hali gave an impassioned speech about the severe negative impacts that he is experiencing due to street problems. The poor man sounded at his wits end. Sounded as if he has tried and failed many times to have council do something to help him.
Would you care to wager that his “one voice” will result in any changes?
I grow weary of this assembly of do nothings for some issues, chicken littles for other issues, and overt bias in how they treat those that attempt engagement.
Could we perhaps replace the councillor with an automated video that begins a countdown from 5:00 minutes when a speaker begins presenting, and once 0:00 is reached, a sock puppet appears and exclaims “Point of order, point of order, the speaker’s 5 minutes is up”.
LikeLike
I have read this article a few times just to make sure I understand what is really being said.. The only conclusion I can come to is that without the seemingly serendipitous attendance of a member of the community, council would not have taken action to ensure that the preservation of public access at the site.
That is an odd thing to admit, but I appreciate the revelation of how close the community was to losing access, thanks to a bumbling group of council members that were not prepared, nor availed of the facts on hand to make an informed decision that upheld public use of that space.
If that is true, it is disappointing that council can’t or won’t do the requisite legwork to understand the issues that are out here in the community. Council should have been prepared to defend public use of that space. It’s not as if it’s an unknown area with little public activity. It is heavily used by the public.
This is not to say that public input isn’t important, but this article is saying that without this voice, public access to that well used space could/would have been quashed in favour of the airport development proposal.
I can’t say I’m surprised, but do appreciate a chance to read between the lines.
LikeLike
If you consider voices so important, why doesn’t the majority of council respond to public emails?
Of the (approx) 3760 emails I’ve sent, only 3-4 have ever received a reply. Topics include:
Gaza Strip
Israeli settler violence
Fighting in Democratic Republic of Congo
Ethiopian drought
Coup in Niger
Flooding in Somalia
Security crisis in Mali
Security crisis in Myanmar
Armed groups in Burkina Faso
Flatus on public busses
Instability in South Sudan
Food insecurity in the Horn of Africa
Pegasus spyware
Uncomfortable chairs at city hall chambers
LikeLike
What you have described may be the exception to the rule as far as rezoning meetings are concerned.
After the fire destroyed the old Hook ranch house, a developer finally stepped up to build something on the ghostly old property. (Some people believe it was haunted.)
The rezoning meeting took place on December 16, 2014.
https://kamloops.civicweb.net/document/31518/
A number of people from the neighbourhood showed up and we voiced our concerns. The developer was JLo Ventures and the developer’s name is in the minutes of the meeting.
Just about everything the neighbours had as concerns has happened. Zoned as RT-1 single family dwelling, we were assured there would be no rental suites and no parking issues and no extra traffic issues.
The latest bump in the road was a fire hydrant that was absolutely buried in snow. A call to civic operations resulted in the hydrant being cleared of snow by a city crew and a chat with the “tenants and owner” by a CSO who attended. He phoned me later the same day I reported the hydrant had been buried with snow. I let him know that there shouldn’t be tenants living there. He suggested that I contact a certain department and report my concerns.
Thankfully a photo I had taken during the construction of the two duplexes clearly showed just a “party wall” between the two halves of the duplex in question. Apparently duplexes with suites must have a proper firewall made of concrete or concrete blocks.
As it stands now, the photo and a similar description of a possible fire code violation have been forwarded to the Fire Chief, a Fire Inspector and ALL city council plus Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson. You should have received this email and photo, Nancy, as it was sent on January 22nd. As of today, Groundhog Day (February 2nd, 2024), there has been no response from anyone.
But, thanks for the info about the airport rezoning. I hope the woman isn’t disappointed in the long term outcome.
LikeLike
They are extremely selective in who/what they listen to. The premise of the article is somewhat silly, as council should already be taking into account public usage of that space, and advocate for protection of that space. It shouldn’t take a chance encounter of someone having the time to attend a meeting during regular work hours to sway council on such a simple and expected thing (advocating for the greater good of the community). It seems they can do that for some things, but if you were to attend and complain about an illegal encampment preventing you from enjoying green space or trails, nothing happens.
LikeLike
I would just hope that you knew all along, Ms. Bepple, of the importance of green space for the birds, the insects and the people. The way I see it, the role of each councillor is a very active one. A councillor needs to live life in the city to its fullest paying attention to all the details that makes a city function for all. And a good councillor should never take staff words as gospel.
LikeLike