Kamloops mayor fails to get traction for motions on city employment, catered lunches

Mayor's motions shot down

Kamloops city councillors rejected a motion from Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson on Tuesday, saying his proposed ban on hiring immediate family members of people serving on council would have “significant” legal and human rights implications.

Hamer-Jackson put forward two motions for debate during Tuesday’s council meeting, both of which failed to get buy-in from council.

The mayor suggested a proposed policy to stop city hall from employing the immediate family members of people serving on council. His motion stated the policy would apply going forward, and wouldn’t affect existing employees.

Coun. Katie Neustaeter said such a policy “would not be legal.”

“This would have significant implications, and when we swore an oath to protect this corporation, it is from liability risks. So I'm deeply concerned with the mayor of Kamloops putting forward a notice of motion that exposes liability risks to the City of Kamloops yet again,” she said.

Neustaeter said the city is a major employer in the community, and such a policy could also affect who decides to run for council in the future.

“To say that no one around this table ever elected can have a family member would discriminate against people who want the opportunity to serve as an elected official,” she said. “That's problematic in a lot of ways.”

Coun. Bill Sarai said Hamer-Jackson's motion implied other municipalities had already enacted similar policies, which he said he found not to be true.

Sarai said he reached out to some of the cities cited by the mayor, and their policies are similar to those already in place at Kamloops city hall — like requirements for councillors to step out during potential conflicts.

Coun. Nancy Bepple said with regards to human rights legislation, once someone is hired they have rights in connection with their employment — including the right to equal treatment without discrimination based on their family status.

“We must start from that perspective in terms of how we govern,” she said.

Hamer-Jackson said he was concerned council wouldn’t be able to achieve quorum on some personnel decisions if elected officials were related to city staff and had to recuse themselves due to a conflict of interest.

However, the city’s corporate officer, Maria Mazzotta, said there are provincial procedures specifically to handle circumstances when quorum on councils or local government boards can’t be achieved.

'Not an expert' on human rights

Byron McCorkell, City of Kamloops CAO, told Castanet Kamloops in an email it would be “nearly impossible” to execute the mayor's motion because the city can’t limit a person’s career or political aspirations due to their family members.

He said there are operational policies and detailed legislative rules in place to navigate this type of situation.

Hamer-Jackson’s motion was rejected 4-1. Hamer-Jackson was the only vote in support, with councillors Katie Neustaeter, Bill Sarai, Nancy Bepple and Kelly Hall opposed.

Councillors Stephen Karpuk, Mike O’Reilly and Margot Middleton recused themselves from the vote as they have family members who work for the city. Coun. Dale Bass was not part of the discussion as she is on vacation.

Hamer-Jackson told Castanet Kamloops following the meeting that he didn’t think council gave staff enough time to investigate the matter.

“If you work for the city, for instance, and let's say one of the family members wanted to run for council, well, they would have to resign. So I don't know if that's a human rights issue or not — I'm not an expert on that,” he said.

Meal motion stalls

Hamer-Jackson also put forward a motion suggesting the city stop paying for catered lunches for staff and elected officials — the second time this term he’s tried to get council support for this idea.

The motion was not seconded and failed to move ahead.

“I guess they need these meals,” Hamer-Jackson said.

McCorkell told Castanet that food is only provided for full-day meetings, which means participants don't need to worry about getting lunch or even having a set time for a break. He said he believes there is about a $10,000 annual budget for this type of expense.

He noted previous councils have believed the cost is legitimate as it ensures focused, smoothly-run meetings.