ROTHENBURGER: What the mayor’s lawsuit means to the functioning of City Hall

Public response has been surprising. Or maybe not. It’s been mostly about taking sides with one party or the other rather than what the lawsuit is actually about. I’ll wager that few have actually read the statement of claim.

Every citizen has a right to seek redress if that person believes their reputation has been besmirched. (By the way, “defamation” takes two forms. One is libel, which is printed defamation; the other is slander, which is spoken defamation. Defamation itself is the making of false statements that damage someone’s reputation.)

Maybe we’ll know more when a defence is filed but the case may never make it into a courtroom. Defamation lawsuits are often settled without reaching that point. Practical considerations sometimes come into play — the high cost of pursuing or defending such lawsuits, for example.

The process usually begins with a letter from the lawyer acting on behalf of the individual who feels aggrieved, or from the individual directly, to the person who allegedly committed the defamation.

In the letter, a request might be made for an apology. If an apology is offered in the manner demanded, and a retraction made, that’s often the end of it, though not always. It could be a resolution in this case but since no apology has so far been tendered, we don’t know how it will play out.

There’s much hair pulling and teeth gnashing — especially in the media — over what this means to the city’s reputation and to the machinery of City Hall. How can Hamer-Jackson and Neustaeter possibly continue to sit beside each other and conduct business, people ask. (A bit of trivia: at one time mayors chose where councillors sat in council chambers; in recent years, it’s become tradition that seat assignments are based on their finish in the election.)

Fact is, defamation lawsuits have a way of calming rhetoric and focusing the mind, as they say. Kind of like a cold compress.

Who will pay for the legal proceedings? We know the mayor has previously paid his own legal bills and indicates it will be the same with this case. The City’s bylaw on providing indemnification for legal actions refers to claims made against city officials, not claims by city officials.

It’s not uncommon in B.C. for City council members to have legal bills paid for them if they’re sued by an outside party for something involving their performance of public duties. A lawsuit by one member of council against another, though, is unusual, to say the least.

The City of Kamloops bylaw provides for “the indemnification of its municipal officials against claims for damages and costs incurred in a legal proceeding arising out of such claim pursuant to the performance of their duties and the conduct of municipal business.”

In other words, it’s possible Neustaeter’s costs could be paid. The bylaw leaves it up to the corporate officer to decide if the municipal official in question is eligible for indemnification.

If it does reach court, a judge could decide on the awarding of costs. Normally, the losing party pays the costs of the winning party.

Meanwhile, there’s the matter of the City’s new policy on the handling of confidential personnel records. The policy, GGL-30, was approved 8-1 (with Hamer-Jackson opposed) at a closed door meeting May 30 and released at Tuesday’s regular council session.

City council hires only two positions: chief administrative officer and executive assistant to mayor and council. Policy GGL-30 was drafted after Hamer-Jackson took some personnel records, which were left in the mayor’s City Hall office when he took over, home to look at.

The general issue of confidentiality is already well covered off in a number of existing laws and policies. For example, Community Charter section 117 is all about confidentiality. Council’s own code of conduct says council members must not contravene the law, including privacy law.

The confidentiality matter will be gone from the public’s mind by next week. The lawsuit will hold our attention a while longer. But staff will continue to churn out weekly reports for council to chew on, and council will vote on them as always.

And maybe it will happen with less drama.

Mel Rothenburger is a regular contributor to CFJC Today, publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, and is a recipient of the Jack Webster Foundation Lifetime Achievement Award. He has served as mayor of Kamloops, school board chair and TNRD director, and is a retired daily newspaper editor. 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 Pattison Media.

by Mel Rothenburger

ROTHENBURGER: What the mayor’s lawsuit means to the functioning of City Hall

Our Community