SOUND OFF: Kamloops councillors should back up Hamer-Jackson allegations or resign
-
Share on Facebook
-
Share on Twitter
- Copy Link
BACK IN DECEMBER (Sound Off, December 28), I questioned the actions taken, and statements made, by the City of Kamloops’ CAO David Trawin, its lawyer Denise McCabe and its eight city councillors. Collectively, they accused the mayor of having said or done things that had placed the city in serious legal jeopardy, and of holding personal legal interests that were averse to the interests of the city. They held a closed, unlawfully convened council meeting on December 6 for the purpose of receiving and reviewing a lengthy legal opinion, excluded the mayor from the meeting, and refused to provide a copy of the opinion to him. No evidence was ever provided, either to the mayor or to the public, in support of their allegations, and council announced that they would not be commenting further on either the lawsuits or the conduct that led to them. Of course, no such lawsuits were ever commenced or even contemplated. Much ado about nothing, I wrote — except for the appalling lack of transparency and accountability from senior city officials choosing to spread false innuendo in place of honest dialogue.
Fast forward to March 16, 2023. The mayor sent a list of proposed standing committee appointees to members of council in an email expressly intended for the recipients only and not to be distributed without consent. Within minutes, the list was leaked to the local media. Members of council were outraged that the mayor would decide on who to appoint to standing committees without prior consultation with them and were miffed that three of them were being replaced as committee chairpersons. Instead of communicating their views to the mayor, they staged a media event the next day.
On March 17, 2023, Councillor Neustaeter read aloud a prepared statement on behalf of all eight councillors. Not content with just complaining about the committee appointments, council accused the mayor of lying about his reasons for reshaping the standing committees, and of belittling and treating all of them with disrespect. Of course, anyone who has actually witnessed the conduct of these city councillors during council meetings — the snickering, sneering and condescension that they direct at the mayor — would recognize the sheer hypocrisy of such statements. But the most troublesome allegation went far beyond the ambit of petty bickering. Councillor Neustaeter stated that Mayor Hamer-Jackson had “violated the personal and professional boundaries” of one or more members of council, an accusation endorsed by the other seven. All eight councillors have refused to justify this most scandalous allegation, either to the mayor personally or to the public. Their reasons for withholding the basis for this statement are as disingenuous and cowardly as is the statement itself.
An allegation that one’s “personal boundaries” have been violated can mean many different things. It can suggest a wide range of misconduct, from cyber-bullying to verbal intimidation, from workplace harassment all the way to physical assault and, yes, even to sexual harassment and/or assault. The use of such language in the context of city council business, and the refusal to support an allegation as heavily laced with innuendo as this, is irresponsible to an extreme degree. It is also defamatory, and obviously damaging to the mayor and to his family.
