(Image credit: Mel Rothenburger)

By Mel Rothenburger

ARMCHAIR MAYOR

ROTHENBURGER: Documents reveal behind-the-scenes tension among City councillors

Mar 7, 2020 | 6:41 AM

WHEN CITY COUNCILLORS DISAGREE with each other in public, it’s usually pretty benign. They have different opinions during debates at their meetings, for example, but there are seldom open quarrels.

Away from the public’s watchful eye, however, it can be a different story. Such was the case with a recent notice of motion by Coun. Denis Walsh asking council to support a request to the Canada Energy Regulator that the oil pipeline through Westsyde be shut down and rerouted.

His concern was that the pipeline might break at some point and pose a risk to residents.

Documents obtained by the Armchair Mayor through a Freedom of Information application — though heavily censored — reveal a behind-the-scenes squabble among councillors leading up to the Jan. 14 vote.

Some councillors took offense to the fact Walsh presented his Dec. 17 notice of motion without speaking to them first, claiming he’d blindsided them. By early January, the situation had broken into a sparring match between Walsh and rookie councillors.

Boogie The Bridge

Boogie The Bridge Event Information

Apr 19, 2024

ARMCHAIR MAYOR

ROTHENBURGER: Board may as well not have asked public about school's name

3h ago

The Tattle of Hastings

THE TATTLE OF HASTINGS: Goodbye, Toledo

14h ago

Coun. Bill Sarai wanted to know why Walsh hadn’t brought the issue up with previous councils. “I find it troubling that you put us new councillors in a tough spot when you missed the opportunity to address this issue years ago,” he wrote in one email, noting several delegations had been to council about the pipeline in previous years.

Walsh, on the other hand, was put out that City staff had begun investigating the implications of his motion without telling him about it. He emailed CAO Dave Trawin about it Jan. 9.

“A few Councillors have told me that City staff had apparently told them in an early morning meeting Dec. 17 that they don’t believe a process or mechanism exists for my NoM request,” he wrote, insisting a new process had been put in place.

One testy exchange between Walsh and Coun. Kathy Sinclair involved the use of capital letters.

In distributing a copy of a press release he wrote on his proposal, Walsh included a covering comment, “WISHING YOU A HAPPY NEW YEAR!”

Sinclair responded, “Wow, Denis, I’m hoping your all-caps wish for a happy new year is sincere.”

That prompted Walsh to reply, “Wow, interesting viewpoint. I didn’t intend to cause any uncertainty by my apparent unfortunate choice of using caps while expressing my good wishes. Thanks for expressing your concern out loud, as I think this mistrust is worthy of a cautious and respectful response.”

He continued, “My intention was simply to include my sincere wishes for a happy new year to you and others, while also giving you a heads-up on the press release to the media, in case media (are) interested in your reaction.

“Thanks for bringing your caps apprehensiveness to my attention, as I am now suddenly aware of how even best wishes could be misconstrued, if one or both parties are somewhat personally disconnected.

“I do think the mainstream assumptions regarding use of capitalization are overblown and in many cases can be misinterpreted. Some make use of caps to make a strong point, others to emphasize some specific thing, others just like how it looks on the page. I simply do not over analyze the use of caps and simply read the words and trust my gut, to get at the essence of the communication.

“I’m thinking if I sent my wishes attached to a cute cat story or video there may have been a slightly different interpretation. In hindsight, in the future I will consciously avoid sending best wishes attached to a somewhat controversial subject matter, to avoid any possible misinterpretation.”

Walsh then commented, “I do think my intentions are often misunderstood by you. I feel our disconnect is much more complex and layered than just a simple Venus & Mars thing, ageism or my audaciousness. It’s is (sic) mystifying and maybe that is something we could explore further, in this New Year, to give us both more clarity.”

Coun. Arjun Singh stepped in, attempting to mediate. “I hope we don’t really go too far down the road of conflict between new councillors and re-elected councillors,” he wrote.

While seeing “many reasons to oppose the motion,” he committed to keeping an open mind.

“I always reserve the right myself to change my mind and/or learn new information that would cause me to think differently than I did before. Even if we have been through many prior delegations, I am not sure that I would want to critique someone for bringing up something they haven’t previously. On the flip side, flip flopping all over the place has not been successful either.”

But he said, “I also don’t think Denis has framed this so far in the most helpful ways….” He told Walsh, “I am frankly not sure you trust council and our senior staff. I hope we can remedy this and I offer my support in this effort.” Singh hoped council would not get into “negative conflict.”

Sarai responded, thanking Singh for his input, but adding, “The the (sic) issue remains the same, why did Dennis (sic) not raise this issue about the reroute of the TMX twinning come up and be addressed in past councils…. Please stand by your previous votes. Unless I have new relevant information I won’t and will not change my vote.”

Again, he criticized Walsh for not bringing it up before he filed his notice of motion. “To be a councillor that wants to be a so called champion of a certain issue before discussing it it (sic) with his fellow councillors is troubling to me. Being a newly elected councillor, I’d appreciate it if you discuss with me before you speak for me.”

A few days before the vote, Walsh again emailed fellow councillors, offering to delay his motion “so we can stay focused on the importance of the issue in the motion.”

On Jan. 13, Walsh sent out a lengthy memo, almost all of which has been censored before release of the records, but he points out that objections to his motion based on the CER’s authority were unfounded.

“It is also a fact that I have clearly demonstrated in my Notice of Motion that there is such a process available with CER. It is my considered opinion as an elected official that this is the key consideration councillors need to have validated by the administration so that we all are clear on this before the matter comes to a vote. In this light I now state that if administration is willing to validate to Council that there is a process to make this relocation request to CER, I am willing to retract my formal objection lodged earlier today.”

The nature of Walsh’s formal objection is not included in the documents released under FOI.

On Jan. 14, Walsh’s notice of motion came up for consideration, and was defeated by a vote of 7-1 with little discussion.

Did anything positive come out of all this? Well, Walsh quietly offered an apology to the rest of council for offending them. “I am realizing I need to do a much better job of communicating. It

is clear I have not being (sic) effectively communicating with Council…. I want to say I completely respect each and every individual on Council.”

Let’s hope the split over the pipeline route isn’t typical of what goes on behind the scenes at City Hall.

Mel Rothenburger is a former mayor of Kamloops and newspaper editor. He writes five commentaries a week for CFJC Today, publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, and is a director on the Thompson-Nicola Regional District board. He can be reached at mrothenburger@armchairmayor.ca.

—

Editor’s Note: This opinion piece reflects the views of its author, and does not necessarily represent the views of CFJC Today or the Jim Pattison Broadcast Group.