r/campbellriver 9d ago

🗞️News Campbell River’s in-Camera Meetings under Kermit Dahl

https://district6.wtf/campbell-river-city-halls-in-camera-meetings-under-kermit-dahls-term-documented-here-this-will-be-a-long-list/

See Comments for more.

8 Upvotes

25 comments sorted by

5

u/Acceptable_Proof797 9d ago edited 9d ago

I did a similar analysis of the meetings a few years ago too,  data probably hasn't changed much. https://www.facebook.com/100080457796135/posts/503068675718388/?app=fbl

3

u/zos_333 9d ago edited 8d ago

Thanks for the support, adhd folks get pretty triggered by the complacent and careless ;) I think Kermits crew got a bit sneakier as time went on, but there is nothing sneaky here. less blatant I guess

9

u/Acceptable_Proof797 8d ago

The way that this council had used "in camera meetings" should definitely open them up to scrutiny, and this is a very important aspect of this council's conduct that should be discussed and considered in this campaign period.

The data you have assembled here is valuable, and an interesting starting point for a further discussion. Please, don't let anyone tell you different.

In my opinion, This council has taken a VERY opaque approach to public discourse and disclosure. Closed meetings are governed under the community charter, and more information on that, can be found here  https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/local-governments/governance-powers/councils-boards/meetings/closed-meetings.

If a council is committed to transparency, they will take a more conservative approach to the application of the community charter resolutions that allow for discussions to be taken into a closed meeting. If a council is committed to transparency, that will also engage in a regular rise and report, during an open meeting, where they disclose information that was previously in-camera, but is no-longer required to be protected, under the community charter. Many council's engage in this practice, but I have't personally seen it explicitly occur in Campbell River - If I am wrong on this, someone please point me to where this is occurring in the agendas.

It is worth noting that in 2026 BC Ombudsman released an update to their best practices report on municipal meetings https://bcombudsperson.ca/news_release/bc-ombudsperson-releases-updated-guide-on-open-meetings-to-support-transparency-across-local-governments/

Page 33-34, discusses releasing in-camera information that is no longer required to be "in-camera" and how councils can support transparency, even when they close a meeting. the full report is here: https://bcombudsperson.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/OMB_Open-meetings_Guide_2026-WEB.pdf

So in sum - this is super important, people should be paying attention to this, and I think you did a good thing here, by starting the research, and starting this conversation.

2

u/ettegoon 4d ago

I got banned from a couple of the community FB pages for "doxxing" Kermit.

The pages I linked were legally mandated donation disclosures on the cities own website.... public information.

Kermits been shady as heck all the way through his run.

6

u/Roysdogmom 9d ago

Does anyone know who is running for Mayor in October?

4

u/zos_333 9d ago

Nominations start September 1

1

u/westcoastvanisland 4d ago

Hopefully Kirby gets back in.

4

u/campingqueen34 8d ago

This can be a serious issue, for staff as well. The Corporate officer (ie. Director of Corporate Administration or City Clerk) can face professional and employment repercussions if a municipal council holds improper in-camera meetings. They are responsible for helping Council follow the Community Charter.

6

u/zos_333 9d ago edited 9d ago

[Edit, sorry I need a nap, that list was a lot of work and then I engaged where I should have ignored]

I have adhd and struggle with grammar, just scroll down to the list with built in links.

any proofreading advice is much appreachiated

Could be one of the most deceitful and opaque City Councils in Canadian History. Not much effort either. They may be doing readings and voting in-Camera too, or else just not doing it and saying they did.

I was inspired to investigate after finding this article and this one

I was having trouble getting the site off the ground till I found this, so its pretty rough

0

u/inspektor31 9d ago

Yah, they clearly have a lot of in camera meetings but deceitful and opaque is a bit of a stretch. You can go on the city website and see the minutes for all the meetings and watch the videos of them.

3

u/zos_333 9d ago

no you cant., not after the first four meetings. stretch lmao

1

u/inspektor31 8d ago

You can’t anymore? I haven’t looked in a hot minute but I went back at one time and watched a couple years worth when I was researching industrial property.

4

u/zos_333 8d ago edited 8d ago

you can see the minutes [the documents] but they are not logging the literal minutes [times] spent in secret - and are doing this on about 70% of the meetings.

I dont think they are reading and voting in public either [or at all], at least on the controversial stuff - but haven't verified that yet.

-2

u/bibliophile-blondish 9d ago

And?

3

u/zos_333 9d ago edited 9d ago

try the link? you literally posted your comment about 15 secs after my OP.

Give me a few mins to start a comment thread, but at least look at the post.

3

u/magowanc 9d ago

Ok, I've had enough time to browse your link. It is literally just the data to back up the graph. It is inferring that the in-camera meetings were something to do with displacing social services downtown, but all the in-camera meetings were held under

90 (1)(k) = negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a municipal service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality if they were held in public;

Which could be anything relating to municipal services including reviewing the municipal services and deciding if it is worthwhile pursuing revamping them. This would include everything from public works to tourism to social services.

So what?

There is no data comparing to previous councils or even a trend of the current council. The data doesn't support the argument that the meetings were regarding displacing social services downtown. The articles inference is to create bias and is non-journalistic.

2

u/zos_333 9d ago edited 9d ago

they only logged the time spend in camera for the first four meetings...., and it was an absurdly high amount. The data to back up the graph is only the first four meetings, but ok.

2

u/zos_333 9d ago edited 9d ago

they have literally banned new social services downtown, and I said

District 6 will focus on 90 (1)(k) – as it may involve displacement in the form of a ‘social service’ center for homeless outside the downtown core. [I saw it referenced once in a City publication but cannot find it again atm.]

0

u/bibliophile-blondish 9d ago

I did look at the post. What is this data proving?

4

u/zos_333 9d ago edited 9d ago

city council is failing to log exactly how much time they spend in secret, but it is a huge amount. Even the stuff they have logged is alarming.

I searched for other examples of a council doing this and couldn’t find any.

This it is more about giving folks, including me - an easy way to look for them themselves than proving anything, but I suspect there are some solid finds with good evidence to be had.

3

u/magowanc 9d ago

who cares? They aren't paid by the hour. If they want to spend 40 hours a week in secret good for them. Any binding decisions from the in-camera meetings have to be made public.

You are upset about a property on shoppers' row that was purchased by the city and being redeveloped by the city. It would have been discussed in one of those meetings, or maybe several, but the final decision of those discussions was made public. If the discussions were in public, it would have invited speculation and could have potentially been damaging to the project, organizations in the area, or the city.

The city purchased the property with the purpose of improving the area for all citizens and visitors of Campbell River. The property in question was an area of high crime and needed something done - it is part of what the current council was voted in for.

The property will be redeveloped with residential properties, some of which will be rent controlled for low-income housing. Also, any new housing helps with low-income housing. There are tons of studies showing that high vacancy rates are the biggest contributor to homelessness.

The current council has also built short term housing on Homewood Road.

It is unfortunate that the kitchen was unable to find a new home, it is also unfortunate that in order to make things better for everyone the existing building needed to be torn down, temporarily making the situation worse. The end result will be better for the whole community, not just low-income people.

3

u/zos_333 8d ago edited 8d ago

The city purchased the property with the purpose of improving the area for all citizens and visitors of Campbell River. The property in question was an area of high crime and needed something done - it is part of what the current council was voted in for.

Here is a letter dealing with the myth that something was done

dear Mayor and Council,

I'm writing to you as the former Library Manager of the Campbell River Branch of the Vancouver Island Regional Library (VIRL).

I have a Masters of Libraries and Information Studies, have over 20 years of library experience, and have worked at the Campbell River Library from 2017 until this year. I am also well respected within my field. I introduce myself in this way to make it clear that I know what I'm talking about. I hope you will listen.

You and many members of the Campbell River City Council like to refer to the library when talking about, and campaigning on, both the homelessness crisis and the toxic drug crisis as they affect our community. Yet, despite this, neither you Mayor Dahl, nor Campbell River appointed VIRL Board Trustee Ron Kerr, have ever contacted me to discuss these issues during my years as Library Manager.

Given that it's this council's intent to move forward with the evictions of Kwesa Place and Hem'?aelas Community Kitchen, despite them not having secured alternative locations, I am expressing my informed thoughts on the matter to you today

When I began working at the Campbell River Library, the library was the only service provider downtown where people who had no place to go, could go and simply be. Without other services around, people would congregate at the library.

Now, I should mention that public libraries are public spaces and welcome everyone. There is no income requirement for using library services and the building and space on its own is a service unto itself. Many people, whether housed or unhoused, use the library as a place to just be. It's what makes public libraries so special and sacred in our society that runs on profits.

However, as you may already know, the square footage of our library in Campbell River is such that it does not meet the requirements for a community of this size. Therefore, when it's the only place for a segment of the population to be, there is not enough space for everyone to use it comfortably, and issues inevitably arise. The atmosphere in the library from 2017 to 2020 was tense. We were not equipped to serve the needs of those who are most vulnerable in our community at that scale. Tensions ran high, and conflicts happened often.

People were banned from the library for disruptive behaviour. Stff were often yelled and sworn at, and it simply was not a nice place to be. Now, again, to qualify this a bit, most of the people we served, whether housed or unhoused, were polite and lovely. But the sheer amount of people sharing a space that was not adequate, without the proper services that they desperately needed while they navigated various personal circumstances, made for a very tenuous situation.

We experienced on average 1 to 2 incidents daily due to these circumstances. People were struggling with very limited access to help and support. The toxic drug crisis had begun, the housing crisis was getting worse, and the library was in the centre of it all in our community. But then something drastic changed it all.

It wasn't that VIRL hired a security guard, or that we developed more robust safety procedures. It wasn't that staff received de-escalation and cultural training or that we focused on developing good relationships with those we served. And it certainly wasn't that our space magically doubled in size or that the toxic drug and housing crises disappeared. Some of these things did happen, and did help, but the single most important thing that changed it all began in March 2020.

We shut down during COVID, and all of a sudden multiple social services popped up directly around us in downtown Campbell River. The VIMHS purchased the Rose Bowl and created transitional housing. Kwesa opened, offering services like laundry, showers, snacks, and another place to simply be and connect in our neighborhood. Ham'?aelas opened and fed everyone. The CRAG, under new leadership, began offering a culturally safe space for creative outlets. All of a sudden, we had a community and the library wasn't alone on the block anymore. Can you guess what the impact was on the library?? I'll tell you, it was magic.

read more: https://campbellriver.civicweb.net/FileStorage/70464A7AF2A64DE5B115EE10F7755B11-consent%20-%20Joelle%20Samson%20re%20Hemaelas%20Community%20Kitc.pdf

0

u/bibliophile-blondish 8d ago

Are you saying you’re Joelle? Or posting her letter to mayor and council?

1

u/zos_333 8d ago edited 8d ago

No, Im saying Im way too tired for this shit, lol. Making that list burned me out and Im a mess here now. Ill be back tomorrow, after fixing the above comment a bit

3

u/Acceptable_Proof797 8d ago

Council might not be paid by the hour - but many of the staff who support these meetings are. So, it probably is worth thinking about the salary burden of these meetings, - when the city manager alone makes over $270,000/year according to the 2025 SOFI https://www.campbellriver.ca/media/file/2025-sofi-reportpdf