LETTERS – ‘Safety limits restrict public access to City council meetings’
In the past, standing-room only crowds were allowed in City council chambers, as in this meeting from several years ago (Image: Mel Rothenburger).
In the ongoing back and forth between Kamloops Citizens United and City Hall about lack of space for the public at a recent public hearing, Deputy Mayor for January Kelly Hall has responded again, and so has corporate officer Maria Mazzotta:
From: Kelly Hall <khall@kamloops.ca>
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2026 2:51 PM
To: KCU Info ; Councillors
Subject: Re: Public hearing
Thank you for your email . I’m sorry you feel that I did not answer your questions. We all must move forward with the understanding that at times we will have to disagree. This is one of those moments.
Hope your weekend is well . We had a fabulous opening to Riverside Skating facility. If you’re a skater get out and enjoy what ever in Kamloops is celebrating.
Thank DM K Hall
From: Maria Mazzotta <mmazzotta@kamloops.ca>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2026 11:28 AM
To: KCU Info; cao
Cc: (Various staff members)
Subject: RE: Public access to meetings
Kathrine and Coley – I’m responding on behalf of City Administration.
Unfortunately, there are occupancy and safety limits that must be adhered to; people standing in aisles or sitting on stairs does not comply and is not safe if an emergency occurred and evacuation was required. The City is bound to the same code requirements as any other occupancy.
As to overflow, we do not have any additional area in which to place people on a regular basis that could be used for the public and which is not part of staff work areas already used for staff operations. This is why we are looking at another location for Council Chambers that can accommodate a larger public presence.
Until that occurs, we are restricted by what we have unless Council chooses to move Chambers to another venue going forward. We are not aware of a requirement that forces a City to move their facilities due to an increase in attendance; it would be more of a gesture or part of a growth discussion.
As noted in the BC Ombudsperson’s 2026 update to their Open Meetings Guide, “Local governments should consider other ways of hearing from the public. It is important for local governments to apply an equity lens in considering whether their meetings are truly accessible – in other words, to consider on an ongoing basis who in their community is, and is not, able to attend and participate in open meetings and to address any identified barriers. Barriers can be addressed in many ways: for example, through technology, changes to the meeting space or flexibility in the application of participation rules.”
As is standard for opportunities for Council to receive formal input from members of the public, the range of options for the public to be heard at the Jan 13 Public Hearing was articulated on the notice for that hearing, and this notice was published in accordance with the City’s Public Notice Bylaw well in advance of the hearing.
As we note you’ve copied Minister Boyle, as always we welcome any additional guidance the Province may wish to provide.
Regarding the other matter you emailed me about on the weekend, I am consulting with City staff who may have knowledge of such matters.
Kukwstsétsemc/Thank you,
Maria
Maria Mazzotta, MPA (she/her)
Corporate Officer | City of Kamloops
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2026 7:03 PM
To: Maria Mazzotta <mmazzotta@kamloops.ca>; cao <cao@kamloops.ca>
Cc: (Various staff)Subject: Re: Public access to meetings
Dear Corporate Officer Mazzotta,
Thank you for your response and for outlining the City’s position with respect to occupancy and safety requirements. Our concern is not with occupancy limits, but with how public access is ensured when those limits are reached.
For the most part, the current Council Chambers appear adequate for regular Council meetings; however, once attendance exceeds Chamber capacity, accommodation is required to ensure that meetings and hearings open to the public remain accessible to those wishing to attend in person.
We note your reference to the BC Ombudsperson’s Open Meetings Guide and agree with the guidance cited, particularly the emphasis on applying an equity lens on an ongoing basis and addressing barriers to accessibility. In that context, we remain concerned that opportunities for online or written participation are being relied upon as a substitute for in-person public access. The ability to make a submission does not replace or limit the public’s right to attend meetings in person as observers.
Respectfully, your response does not address how in-person access to meetings or hearings will be ensured when Chamber capacity is exceeded, prior to any relocation of Council Chambers. We also seek clarification on how attendance will be anticipated in advance. By way of example, the meeting addressing the proposed changes to public enquiries was clearly foreseeable as a high-interest item, yet members of the public were turned away due to capacity constraints.
Thank you as well for advising that you are consulting with City staff regarding the other matter referenced in your email.
Sincerely,
Coley Ecker and Kathrine Wunderlich
Kamloops Citizens United
ArmchairMayor.ca 
Councillor Kelly Hall sounds like a small man who feels he is more important that he really is. He works for (and is elected by) the voting citizens of Kamloops, so he should not come out with what I feel are condescending responses to questions that he might not like, but were asked, again, by citizens who voted for or against him.
From the response from Maria Mazzotta, I feel that the way is being paved for another AAP for the construction of a new City Hall which will be another huge cost to taxpayers. If it happens, I wonder when this it will happen. I suspect that it will be another of those summer procedures when people are on holiday and not able to or likely to be able to discuss the amounts until it is too late.
Of course, what do I know? However, my growing distrust of the current Mayor and Council doesn’t give me a good feeling about whether something like this will go to a referendum where voters can actually vote for or against the costs of this type of project. We certainly seem to have a very dysfunctional civic government.
LikeLike