A member of the public will be banned from attending Langford council meetings in person for a three-month period, effective immediately, a city spokesperson said Tuesday.
The measure was approved in a unanimous vote by Langford council at the in-camera — or non-public — portion of Monday’s council meeting. The person who is banned was not named.
Council considered options presented in a staff report, which the city said was drafted in consultation with external legal counsel.
The ban notice was delivered to the individual’s residence, the city said, adding the decision was based on “more than one incident and was deemed concerning enough for council to have to take this action.”
“Going forward, council will take all steps deemed necessary to ensure city staff have a safe place to work, and the public have a welcoming and safe environment for public participation.”
The move comes after the city requested that two RCMP officers attend Monday’s council meeting, which some Langford residents are calling “over the top and unnecessary.”
Longtime Langford resident Sandy Sifert, whose mother, Winnie, served 27 years on council, called it an “intimidation tactic.”
Dianna Seaton, wife of long-time Langford councillor Lanny Seaton, who lost his seat in the last civic election, agreed, saying some of those who planned to attend the council meeting chose not to.
“These are regular normal people who have opinions … but they just decided it might be best to stay home because they didn’t want any trouble,” she said. “That’s not right.”
Langford announced Monday afternoon, just hours before the meeting, that two RCMP officers would be in the chambers in response to “unacceptable behaviour” by some members of the public at past meetings.
A city statement said the measure was taken out of an abundance of caution, saying local governments are being compelled to take proactive measure “to protect staff and members of the public from physical threats and verbal assaults, which can hinder the expression of all voices during council meetings.”
The city did not immediately respond Tuesday for further information on its reasoning.
Monday’s meeting proceeded without major disruptions. Council gave three readings to a park dedication bylaw for a mobile home park it purchased late last week, which will require park residents to leave by 2030.
Critics, however, believe the police presence was initiated because of news last week that councillors and staff breached privacy laws by sharing a resident’s personal information.
A complaint by Ed Court in 2021 alleged that Coun. Lillian Szpak had “illegally obtained” his private information from Langford’s bylaw enforcement department and shared it with councillors and city staff.
Court was embroiled in a parking dispute with his neighbour, Szpak’s son, who Court said was parking his truck in front of Court’s home for days and weeks at a time while his neighbour was building a driveway.
Court has a disabled son and needed the space for easy access in front of his home. It was eventually designated as a pickup spot for handyDART services.
In a letter to Court dated Dec. 10, which was shared with the Times 91原创, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia said it reviewed 422 pages of correspondence between Court and the city. An investigator said there were instances where personal information was shared with those in the city that had a “personal rather than work-based interest in your bylaw complaint.”
Court, who alleges the city was “covering everything up,” obtained all of the documents, including communications between departments and councillors, through freedom of information requests.
The city agreed it had disclosed Court’s personal information in contravention of the privacy law.
Langford has since initiated training for its staff and council about freedom of information and protection of privacy requirements.
In a statement Tuesday, Szpak said the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner “has indicated its satisfaction with the proactive measures taken by the city, and as a result, have closed the file on this matter, to which I have no further comment.”
B.C. ombudsperson investigators looked into Court’s allegations that Szpak used her influence as chair of council’s protective services committee, which is in charge of bylaw officers, and made an inquiry to the RCMP in regard to her son’s parking dispute.
While the report said Szpak asked senior city staff to find a solution to the dispute, creating a perception of bias, it concluded there was no administrative unfairness by Szpak or city staff.
The ombudsperson did, however, recommend that the city’s code of conduct — passed several months before and limited to members of council making complaints — be amended to allow complaints to be made by municipal staff and committee members.
Szpak resigned as chair of the protective services committee in mid-2022 as the investigations were underway. Last year, council amended its code of conduct for council surrounding conflict-of-interest issues. The changes came during a raucous meeting on Sept. 7, 2023, when proceedings halted for nearly 20 minutes after a man charged the podium and began yelling, pointing a finger at Szpak.
Court said Szpak should resign as councillor, adding he is planning legal action against both the councillor and the city.
Court said he has never met or spoken with Szpak and has never attended a council meeting, but several people in the community are upset about what happened.
He believes the RCMP were called in Monday in case the topic was brought up.
Sifert, Seaton and others joined a protest outside city hall on Monday night calling for Szpak’s resignation.
There have been cases of heckling from the gallery and bylaw officers standing by to ensure order, but both Sifert and Seaton believe Monday was the first time on-duty RCMP were posted to council chambers to keep order
“They say there’s unacceptable behaviour from a small group, but the only one with unacceptable behaviour is Lillian Szpak,” said Sifert, who is starting a petition to have Szpak removed from council.
Seaton said she’s been cut off at the mic nearly every time she has spoken at council. The new council has kept public comment to strict time limits, with discussion limited to items on the agenda.
“I feel there is a real lack of an ability for people to express their opinions in a stress-free welcoming manner,” said Seaton. “The body language of the councillors at times is disrespectful. You have eyes rolling, glares. It’s very intimidating and that’s just not right.
“When people get frustrated they push back and say and do things they wouldn’t necessarily do.”
Nanaimo has dealt with its own problems with raucous behaviour at council meetings. Two people were arrested after refusing to leave Nanaimo council chambers last May.
Mayor Leonard Krog said Tuesday that things have since settled down, noting a local resident was barred in December by the Supreme Court of B.C. from publishing defamatory statements about a city employee.
“That seems to have had an effect on tempering people,” said Krog.
Last year there was a great deal of interest around Nanaimo’s alternative proposal process staged by the city to win funding for a major public works facility upgrade, he said.
Since that process has ended, unsuccessfully for the city, the number of people coming to council meetings has dropped, Krog said.
As well, the number of anti-vaxxers and other conspiracy theorists attending meetings has diminished, he said.
Surrey also had to call in police and temporarily halt in-person meetings last year due to a protester sit-in calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.
— with files from Carla Wilson
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
