WESTLOCK – Details of a proposed neutrality bylaw petition, including an overview, questions about the motivation behind it was presented to councillors at the Aug. 14 Town of Westlock regular council meeting.
Petition creator, Stephanie Bakker, who was also one of two people who spoke against the rainbow crosswalk at the June 12 town council meeting, stating at the time that displaying Pride symbols in public spaces could potentially be seen as “endorsing a particular viewpoint, potentially excluding or alienating individuals who may hold different perspectives or beliefs,” made the presentation which councillors voted 6-0 to accept as information. Coun. Murtaza Jamaly was absent.
“The Westlock neutrality bylaw team is a group of concerned citizens that have banded together due to a mutual belief in the importance of neutrality in public spaces when a political, social or religious movement is elevated or discriminated against by the government,” said Bakker. “When the government has the power to promote, it inherently has the power to discriminate.”
She said the petition was “not triggered by animosity towards anyone “but by” council’s decision to ignore equality and neutrality in public spaces.”
Bakker, who was joined by several supporters in the gallery, read a letter outlining details of a potential bylaw that would include “ensuring crosswalks and flags on public property remain neutral” and adhere to the standard white stripe pattern for crosswalks, while only the national flag of Canada, provincial flag of Alberta and the Town of Westlock flags would be (raised) on public property or on public facilities.
During her six-minute presentation, Bakker shared three questions they heard from residents regarding the neutrality bylaw and petition and responded to each one. Those questions asked whether names will go on a government list, whether it was just about the crosswalk and whether the petition was the product of a Westlock church.
“People are afraid to sign the petition and to me, that’s something to think about in Canada that people are afraid to ask for government neutrality in Canada,” she said. “There can be no greater indication that this bylaw is urgently needed.”
Bakker noted multiple examples of phone calls and door-to-door responses where people seemed to agree with the petition but did not want to sign it out of fear of reprisal.
“We’ve had people say they’ll sign but they don’t want to let any of their friends or family know that they’ve signed and we’ve had people say that they want to sign but they’re afraid they’ll lose their job if they sign,” said Bakker.
She said previously that she “assumed that council would fairly and calmly listen to people speak from both sides of the issue, would debate the merits of both sides and then render a decision based on logic, law and the best interests of democracy.”
Bakker said the neutrality team is not for or against any specific group and stressed that the petition signatures are from Westlock residents from all different walks of life and beliefs.
“As of today (Aug. 14) we are 23 days into our 60-day deadline. We have consistently received more yes’s than no’s as we’ve canvassed the town and we’ve collected a little over 70 per cent of the required signatures,” she said.
Mayor Ralph Leriger asked CAO Simone Wiley to address some of the concerns Bakker mentioned.
“The Municipal Government Act (MGA) does in a very specific way, limit the availability of those signing the petition to the CAO’s viewing only,” said Wiley. “It is up to the CAO to validate all of the signatures that are collected to ensure that they are indeed residents of Town of Westlock and all of the required information is obtained from those that have signed it as well,” explained Wiley, adding that the fear Bakker spoke about was “unfounded because the list or the petition does not leave the CAO’s office.”
Leriger addressed the allegation that there was no debate or discussion about the crosswalk at the June 12 meeting and that council came with “prepared statements.”
“Town council received a letter of request from the Thunder Alliance (GSA) and that letter went on our regular council meeting of May 8, where we did have debate and discussion and put forward a motion to paint the crosswalk, which was passed unanimously,” he said. “There was debate and discussion and to suggest otherwise, it’s simply inaccurate.”
Coun. Jon Kramer pointed out that those who spoke against the crosswalk also sent their comments ahead of the June 12 meeting for council to consider.
“I can say honestly I read through all the correspondence, listened to the full messages and considered (them) over those weeks,” said Kramer, noting the delegation wasn’t a public hearing or opportunity for debate. “We had done the work ahead of time just like we did for this meeting and every other meeting. We came prepared.”
In a follow-up comment Kramer noted that he is aware that everyone in the community is “fighting for the truth as they see it” and added that while the petition is a reasonable approach as outlined in the MGA, he felt it is “not just a genuine concern for the idea of neutrality, it’s an angle.”
“I respect the process. I think this is reasonable, how you folks have handled yourself and how you’re going about things and we’ll see where things go,” said Kramer.
