In a surprise move by council, Safe 性视界传媒 Coalition agreed Dec. 20 to rescind a bylaw it created in September that banned seven residents from attending council meetings.
However, Mayor Doug McCallum鈥檚 slate stopped short of apologizing to the individuals and council will not, at this stage, reimburse them for their legal fees.
During the Sept. 13 council meeting, the Safe 性视界传媒 Coalition majority passed a motion to 鈥減rotect the democratic process,鈥� by banning seven speakers from attending public hearings.
RELATED:
RELATED:
The individuals banned are members of the Keep the RCMP in 性视界传媒 campaign, which is in strong opposition of the city starting its own 性视界传媒 Police Service.
During the council meeting, Coun. Jack Hundial pressed the city鈥檚 legal department to name the individuals who are no longer banned.
They include Annie Kaps, Debbie Johnstone, Colin Pronger, Ivan Scott, Merle Scott, Marilyn Smith and Linda Ypenburg.
On Dec. 14, the group filed a petition in BC Supreme Court seeking to overturn the ban.
鈥淚 was surprised by this because there it was, it was in the Supreme Court, and all of a sudden they come up with this,鈥� Ivan Scott said Tuesday morning. 鈥淎ll of the councillors were completely caught off guard as well. Nobody knew this was coming.鈥�
During Monday鈥檚 council meeting, Couns. Mandeep Nagra, Hundial, Brenda Locke, Steven Pettigrew and Laurie Guerra spoke in support of McCallum鈥檚 motion.
Guerra and Nagra said they hope the formerly banned individuals will keep their comments respectful.
鈥淚 will definitely support this but similar to what my colleague Councillor Nagra said, I really hope this is an opportunity to have, I would say, more of a respectful discourse. And people have a right to their opinion as long as it鈥檚 maintained respectfully on both sides,鈥� Guerra said.
In addition to rescinding the ban, the motion includes a clause that the individuals can speak during meetings with the expectation that they refrain from 鈥渉arassing鈥� council members and staff, and that they keep all comments relevant to the bylaw that鈥檚 being discussed.
RELATED:
During discussion, Pettigrew and Locke suggested that an apology to the individuals is warranted.
鈥淚 think that an apology to the seven people in question is appropriate. They were maligned in the media, people know who they are, and I think that it would be appropriate that some apology is extended to them,鈥� Locke said to council.
McCallum did not agree to adding an an apology to his motion.
鈥淚 think at this stage, it doesn鈥檛 include (an apology),鈥� McCallum said to council. 鈥淚 think we need to stay with what鈥檚 in the courts. I鈥檓 going to leave it with the motion that鈥檚 on the table right now.鈥�
Scott, however, said the group 鈥渞equires鈥� an apology.
鈥淏ecause we don鈥檛 quite understand why it was allowed鈥� in the first place,鈥� Scott said. 鈥淲e鈥檝e been maligned by this whole thing. At least an apology should come from the mayor, which he refused to do last night,鈥� Scott said.
Scott said the legal challenge his group brought against the city was 鈥渞obust鈥� and cost thousands of dollars.
鈥淲e stood up to (McCallum) and he backed down,鈥� Scott said. 鈥淭hey鈥檝e spent thousands of dollars against us and we鈥檝e spent thousands of dollars fighting this thing. If it was illegal in the beginning, or he agrees that it shouldn鈥檛 have been done, then he should be paying our legal fees.鈥�
aaron.hinks@peacearchnews.com
Like us on and follow Aaron Hinks on
