Secret meetings: abuse of power

Dear Editor: The City of Penticton had the opportunity for $1.95 million to expand Kings Park. That’s 6,000 square metres that could have been added to this very busy park (Herald, Oct. 3).

It is a question of priorities isn’t it? And we all know that council’s priorities are for the downtown. When council continually holds secret meetings the public is never given the opportunity for input. Too late now. I call them secret meetings because when there is no valid basis for an in camera meeting and/or other items are discussed, it doesn’t deserve the statutory importance given to an in camera meeting. The public should rightfully consider it to be a nefarious attempt to circumvent their right to know and be involved in the political process. Mayor and council are not rulers; they are servants. A secret meeting is abuse of the rights of the taxpayer.

It should be the responsibility of the corporate officer to oversee whether an item is an in camera subject or whether it belongs in the public forum. This of course is overseen by the CAO who has the responsibility to ensure that the employees under him perform in a satisfactory manner. The corporate officer is considered the expert on the Community Charter. He or she is responsible for interpretation of the document and ensuring that the public’s right to know is preserved.

The mayor claims there was no time for consultation yet it appears the present developer of that property is only now finalizing the purchase deal on that land. I am sure the owner would have likely allowed time for public consultation. More smoke and mirrors! Maybe we need the RCMP to oversee all in camera meetings to ensure that taxpayer rights are not abused.

In general, the B.C. Community Charter states councils “may” meet behind closed doors to discuss land, legal and labour issues. That does not mean that every issue should be discussed behind closed doors.

The charter requires council pass a resolution in public beforehand explaining on what basis they’re going in camera, but the charter does not require them to report out afterwards (Herald , Oct. 1).

This should not include blanket statements by the corporate officer with the same list of issues before each in camera meeting. It should be specific to that particular meeting and afterwards should give a very clear picture of exactly why that in camera meeting was held.

Elvena Slump Penticton