36 replies to this topic

[VicHockeyFan]

Remember, this is the municipality where cops were called after the mayor's husband showed up to have a word with another councillor, that was part of removing her from a CRD position.

 

http://www.sookenews.../374668171.html

 

 

 

Sooke politicians feel the heat, strike back with lawsuit threats.

 

 

MORE: http://sooke.pocketn...t-constructive/

 

[Mike K.]

http://sooke.pocketn...t-constructive/

 

Questioning the actions of Sooke politicians and staff is now considered "harassment, defamation and bullying."

Once upon a time, Sooke PocketNews questioned one District of Sooke Committee’s decision. Due to a now-filled binder of verifiable, cross-referenced, and multiple-sourced facts, we felt that the Committee’s decision merited questioning.

 

After several unsuccessful attempts to meet with someone at the District, I aka Sooke PocketNews, put my cards on the table. I emailed the acting mayor and two Councillors (to ensure accountability and a response); I detailed some of my findings, presented possible perceptions, and asked questions.

 

That email resulted in a legal letter from one staffer, issued to me on March 30. This letter accused me of defaming said staff. It demanded that I stop asking questions, which caused “undue embarrassment.”

 

[Baro]

Small town politics are often the most vicious and corrupt politics.  There's a real tendency for small town mayors and officials, specially when sitting for a long time, to eventually think them selves (and behave like) dictators.

[spanky123]

^ In a small town you get paid next to nothing to be Mayor or councilor. As a result, you get people who have broader interests in the roles. Not to say that anything wrong is happening, but you wind up with people who have intertwining interests in personal, business and political roles and things can get very heated.

[VicHockeyFan]

Quite frankly that's a lot of thin skin at Sooke City Hall.

 

The last paragraph is particularly poor in my eyes.  In the future, do not speak out, just send us a confidential letter.  That's sad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[VicHockeyFan]

freedom of expression is subject to the statements being true and constructive

 

 

 

That's total BS too.  Who threw in the "constructive" part?

 

Every day of the week I can proclaim, write, say, and publish the opinion that "every decision Mayor Tait makes is the absolute wrong one".  Or that "Mayor Tait is absolutely incompetent".  Or that "Sooke is run by a bunch of idiots".

 

That's all acceptable. 

 

 

 

 

.

[Rob Randall]

Isn't "constructive" in the eye of the beholder? I'm sure some municipal staffers find David Broadland's feature investigations to be destructive.

[VicHockeyFan]

Isn't "constructive" in the eye of the beholder? 

 

Absolutely.

 

Google the phrase:   freedom of expression is subject to the statements being true and constructive

 

Lo and behold, it's only ever been seen on the internet in that letter from the Sooke Mayor.  Somebody is making stuff up as they go along.

[VicHockeyFan]

More from Gail Hall:

 

Sooke residents can get questions answered and learn about the issues at a town hall meeting this fall hosted by district council.

 

A decision to hold a town hall came after council-watcher Gail Hall made a presentation at last week’s district council meeting.

 

“All your comments from the election, including inclusiveness, transparency and the like have long since disappeared,” Hall told council. “Virtually every word spoken by a member of the public in this room is governed by a dictate by council or staff.”

 

Hall and others have complained about the inability to talk directly to council for months.

 

Those wishing to address a council meeting are allowed two minutes to speak, but only on items on the night’s agenda. Councillors are also available by email and telephone.

 

Municipal staff is in the process of reworking council’s procedural bylaw with the goal of providing a better question and answer periods. The bylaw has been sent back to staff several times.

 

Council’s strategic plan calls for at least two public forums on an annual basis, but Mayor Maja Tait admits that hasn’t been done.

 

http://www.sookenews.../383286511.html

[Rob Randall]

Absolutely.

 

Google the phrase:   freedom of expression is subject to the statements being true and constructive

 

Lo and behold, it's only ever been seen on the internet in that letter from the Sooke Mayor.  Somebody is making stuff up as they go along.

 

The only caveat has only been "freedom of speech, but not freedom from the consequences". Whether its constructive or destructive doesn't matter but you may be subject to unwanted legal or other troubles.

 

Is the alleged bullying regarding the Mayor's CRD appointment?

[LJ]

we have concluded some of these are not true

 

What about the ones that are true?

[VicHockeyFan]

It's amateur hour in Sooke:

 

http://sooke.pocketn...pression-sooke/

 

 

–Mayor Maja Tait

 

Consternation has been expressed by a number of people this week in response to statements made by Britt Santowski about freedom of expression in Sooke. Some have directed criticism to the municipality, and in particular to me, but all of the comment is directed at things published by Ms. Santowski and not by the District or me. Ms. Santowski has sadly misconstrued and misrepresented the content of the only letter that I did write and the only statement that I did make.

 

To be clear, the District and I have at no time written to any newspaper or citizen to stifle comment. What I did write to one citizen in one letter was that we do not welcome or condone statements that subject municipal officials to defamation, harassment and bullying. That was it. In the same letter, I expressly stated that the District welcomes feedback regarding governance, environmental, financial and all other matters. In the letter, I also encouraged the writer to send me any complaints or criticisms about municipal officials.

 

 

In sum, ALL I said, and ALL the District has said, is that we do not welcome defamation, harassment or bullying. At no time did the District or I threaten a law suit or any legal action (despite the allegations of Ms. Santowski). It is frankly absurd for her or the letter recipient to jump to the conclusion that somehow the letter prohibits any sort of expression or any articulation of interests – my point was simply that we welcome this, but we do not welcome defamation or bullying.

 

The reason for my polite letter that did NOT stifle freedom of expression or threaten legal action: the Province and District Council have created binding legal obligations on the municipality to protect municipal officials from bullying and harassment. The District received two formal complaints from staff in regard to bullying and harassing statements made in public by a citizen, so I followed through under the duty imposed by me under the law by writing to the citizen to advise that the District does not welcome defamation, harassment or bullying. This is my duty under the law. However, I did not threaten any legal action whatsoever. SLAPP suits? Ms. Santowski knows that a municipality cannot sue for defamation or threaten an action for defamation, and at no time did I remotely threaten any legal action.

 

That is it. The other two letters that Ms. Santowski complained about were not sent by the District or me. They were private letters sent to her on behalf of municipal officials, but not by the municipality. Accordingly, it is clear that the municipality is not stifling any freedom of expression. In fact, the District’s Council meeting procedures are the most democratic in the region – we welcome and encourage public discussion, debate, and input on all topics, at Council, committee and commission meetings, and at public hearings and open houses.

 

Let me share with you how my actual comments and actual letter were twisted in the July 4, 2016, SPN article to create this controversy:

 

The SPN said that it received a letter from a staffer demanding that the SPN stop asking questions. Disturbingly, this was NOT from a municipal employee and NOT from the municipality. The letter did NOT say the employee was going to sue. It asked the SPN to stop defaming. Council was not aware of this letter. It was sent by the employee’s lawyer at the sole request of the employee as a result of the employee being defamed by the SPN.

 

The SPN said that it received a second letter accusing SPN of defaming a Council member. This was not from the municipality. It was from the Council member’s lawyer at the sole request of the councillor as a result of the member being defamed by SPN, with the defamatory article showing up at the top of google searches. This could very well hamper future employment opportunities.

 

The SPN said the articles complained of were not defamatory, because they were true. Actually, the statements complained of were NOT true, and were in fact incorrect, and damaged the reputations of the employee and councillor respectively. In Canada, if you are defamed, you have a right to complain to the defamer.

 

This was NOT the municipality writing to the SPN. Council and the rest of the District were not aware of the two letters.

 

The SPN, after laying this false foundation about the municipality chilling public comment, then went into a discussion of SLAPP suits. This is also very disturbing to me. The SPN stated that a “ … (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.” SLAPP suits “load defendants with costs of responding”. Note that the Mayor and Council and the municipality did not send the two letters complaining of defamation – they were sent without the knowledge of the Mayor and Council, and sent privately on behalf of the individual employee and councillor. It is simply wrong to tie the two letters to the notion that somehow the District itself is censoring or silencing critics.

 

In fact, I can say that after considering legal advice received by the District over time, all of Council has safely concluded that a municipality cannot sue for defamation or threaten defamation due to freedom of expression. This has been drilled into us by a number of lawyers over time, and in fact, neither I nor my fellow Council members have issued any threats of suing for defamation.

 

The SPN says that the one letter that I did write “holds the public to an in-house anti-harassment policy”. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing in the letter whatsoever even hints that the public is held to the policy. In fact, the Mayor, Council, and staff are all subject to the policy and subject to potential sanctions further to the policy. In fact, the policy does not impose any duty or sanctions on citizens who are not Council members or employees. What it does do, is it says that a municipal official can lay a complaint if the bullying comes from a member of the public. While a Council member can be censured or removed from appointments if in contravention, and while an employee can be disciplined, a member of the public cannot be sanctioned under the policy. That is why my response on behalf of the two complainants was simply to write a letter to the public citizen saying we do not condone bullying or defamation. So the SPN was dead wrong on this point as well.

The SPN stated that I made a public statement that if a staff member is bullied, “any offending member of the public will be dealt with further to the policy and applicable laws.” This is discussed in point #7 above.

 

The SPN ends its comments by saying it will “…cease to question” for fear of a SLAPP suit. This is drama that is not based on fact or law. As I stated, a municipality cannot sue or threaten a suit for defamation, so why stop questioning the municipality? The municipality welcomes public comment, criticism, and all other input. In light of the provincial legislation on bullying in the workplace, however, I am not in a position to welcome bullying.

 

 

[Mike K.]

Why are we talking in tongues here? Either you bring forward the accusations/assertions or everyone goes home.

[VicHockeyFan]

Why are we talking in tongues here? Either you bring forward the accusations/assertions or everyone goes home.

 

A Mayor that feels the need to write a new two-page ^ letter, after sending a registered letter to a constituent, is not a confident person.

[lanforod]

A Mayor that feels the need to write a new two-page ^ letter, after sending a registered letter to a constituent, is not a confident person.

 

Hey, would you rather have that, or would you rather have 'mums the word' Helps?

[Jill]

^I'd rather have "mum's the word" Helps. Sounds like Maja Tait might be going full Atwell.

[VicHockeyFan]

Hey, would you rather have that, or would you rather have 'mums the word' Helps?

 

I'd have rather that the Mayor did not send the original letter to Gail Hall.

 

Yup, Gail Hall is an agitator at council, but so be it.  When you are a politician you have to accept that your feet are held to the fire.

 

But these are Gail Hall initiatives, not too bad:..

 

http://www.sookenews.../383286511.html

 

Sooke residents can get questions answered and learn about the issues at a town hall meeting this fall hosted by district council.

A decision to hold a town hall came after council-watcher Gail Hall made a presentation at last week’s district council meeting.

“All your comments from the election, including inclusiveness, transparency and the like have long since disappeared,” Hall told council. “Virtually every word spoken by a member of the public in this room is governed by a dictate by council or staff.”

Hall and others have complained about the inability to talk directly to council for months.

Those wishing to address a council meeting are allowed two minutes to speak, but only on items on the night’s agenda. Councillors are also available by email and telephone.

Municipal staff is in the process of reworking council’s procedural bylaw with the goal of providing a better question and answer periods. The bylaw has been sent back to staff several times.

Council’s strategic plan calls for at least two public forums on an annual basis, but Mayor Maja Tait admits that hasn’t been done.

Hall would like to see a town hall meeting at least once a month or more often depending on developing issues.

“We need to gather from time to time in a less formal atmosphere than [council chambers] to have opportunities to ask questions that have no other venue,” she said.

Tait defended the lack of town hall meeting, citing new senior management, her own four-month maternity leave, and council’s work on an ambitious strategic plan.

“I don’t think it was an intent by council to not do certain things,” she said. “It’s a case that everyone is busy and focused and we’re trying to do things and perhaps we’re just not communicating out what we’re trying to accomplish and what we’re doing.”

 

 

 

http://www.canada.co...3f7a19&sponsor=

Sooke Coun. Rick Kasper has asked the municipality's auditor to examine use of the municipal Visa cards by Mayor Janet Evans and some former and current senior municipal employees.

 

Kasper said he first wondered about municipal credit card use some months ago when he and another Sooke councillor were taken for lunch in Sooke by former chief administrative officer Peter Jmaeff who apparently paid for the lunch with a municipal credit card.

It struck him as unusual.

 

"I've never claimed an expense for lunch in Sooke ever. So if I would go out and have a talk with the former CAO or whoever I would just pay my own freight," Kasper said.

 

Kasper's request came in the wake of a Freedom Of Information request about credit card expenditures made by Sooke resident Gail Hall.

 

 

Kasper said Hall's findings made him question what guidelines the municipality has over credit card use, under what policy municipal credit cards are issued and under what authority certain expenditures were made.

 

He said there are entries like a $494.61 dinner expense in 2005 by a senior staff member paid by for by credit card but explained by a cryptic notation like: "Dinner after golf tournament." "Well, which golf tournament? I didn't know the District of Sooke was in the business of using taxpayer money to either pay for councillors and/or staff to go to golf tournaments in Sooke. I've never heard of that," Kasper said.

 

Kasper cited Evans's participation in two charity auctions, one for Sooke Rotary and one for the chamber of commerce in which she ended up spending $430 and $425 respectively for advertising in the Sooke News Mirror.

 

[John M.]

Sounds like Rick Kasper is one of the only ones without his hand in the cookie jar. That seems pretty consistent with my experiences with him in the past. He tends to call it like it is.

[spanky123]

^ Taking co-workers to lunch has always been a grey area in both the public and private sector. These are best dealt with through policy measures rather than internal squabbling.

 

My question here however would be why a FORMER CAO would still have a municipal credit card.

[VicHockeyFan]

http://www.cheknews....omments-195738/

 

Is Sooke Council trying to muzzle negative comments?

WATCH: ‘Warning letters’ sent to Sooke Pocket News and Sooke resident raise concerns over whether Sooke Council is trying to muzzle negative comments. Tess van Straaten reports.

 

 

 

Classic Streisand Effect.

 

 

Sooke Pocket News wants confirmation from District that no lawsuits are coming

 

 

The operator of an online news publication in Sooke says she wants confirmation from the District itself that no lawsuits are coming.

“I would also like to have agreement with the CAO and the councillor that they will not pursue legal action.”

Sooke Pocket News Operator Britt Santowski says she can't afford legal proceedings after she received two threatening letters following her story questioning the hiring process of the District's new CAO.

 

http://www.cfax1070....trict?feed=News

 

 

 

Anyway, wrong approach by the Pocket News, they already are on the defensive.

 

But the point has been made.