Interview: Catherine MacKenzie on Mayor Clark and the Petition

The Sentinel reached out to Catherine MacKenzie to find out in more detail about her mission to reinstate Mayor Clark to full duties and her reasons behind the petition do so. The responses are the position of Catherine MacKenzie and are her perspective on the situation occurring between council and Ms. Clark

What drove you to start the petition to remove sanctions placed upon Mayor Clark?

I watched the August 21/23 meeting of the City Council. I watched as Mayor Clark was asking fair questions to the City Manager. I saw the blatant disregard of following procedure by council and the City Manager. I watched Counselor Sharps interruption and accusations towards the Mayor, than the CM sit down without answering the Mayor’s questions. All along all of this the rest of the Council had nothing to say, they were all sitting on their hands. It was shameful.

When I heard of the guilty accusation from the law firm hired to investigate the complaint of code of conduct and then the sanctions that council had come back with I felt strongly that fundamentally it was wrong.

Do you feel the petition will have an impact on the council or will it steel their resolve?

Yes and no. There are eight different personalities on Council so I expect they will feel differently. Some will recognize that their constituents are unhappy with some of their decisions and the others will probably dig in deeper because they can’t be proven wrong.

What was it about the sanctions that made you so upset?

They are revengeful. They are intended to punish Mayor Clark because she did her job. There was nothing she did wrong whether the council likes it or not. This is retribution because the Mayor not only called the CM out but the rest of council as well.

Do you feel there is more to the story than just the Aug 21/23 interaction between the Mayor and CM Mitchell, if so how would you want to see that dealt with?

Yes, should there be no. I believe there are some of the council members who are working this complaint to their advantage. They don’t like Linnsie. They think she is too much a lawyer and not a leader. What does that mean? She is a lawyer.
She needs to collaborate better. With these guys who take as much power as they can from the Mayor’s office and award it to themselves? Power that has been the Mayor’s prerogative for years. 
1. The Mayor no longer works with the City Clerk to set the Agenda
2. The Mayor no longer establishes who sits on what committees, boards or commissions
3. The mayor no longer signs the city cheques the CM does or whomever the CM might delegate it too. Would you want to collaborate with these guys?
Council feels the Mayor doesn’t show enough humility. How much is enough says who? Council is the judge?

How would I like to see this dealt with?

Sanction as much as you can on all eight councilors. Don’t elect any of them next time around.

Why do you think eight of her peers voted the way they did when many were her supporters early in the current council term?

I don’t believe councilors are the peers of the Mayor. I think some of the councilors were influenced by the councilors who earlier told them it was precedent. Precedent to ignore the rules of the MGA and to approve, the restructuring done by a CM who had the position for merely months when she started firing and hiring personnel, without council’s approval, retroactively? The councilors bought into that, even after hearing the questions asked by the Mayor to the CM. Eight councilors voted to pass a motion retroactively. Where is the Minister?

I also believe that the seven councilor’s that deliberated about the guilty verdict and the sanctions had to have a majority vote or there would be a weakness within the group. They had to stand as one and keep their mouths silent. Peer pressure won the day.

Why don’t you trust the decision that the eight councilors made as far as sanctions was the right one?

First, there were only seven counselors because Councilor Sharps did not attend the meeting or the discussion, in which she had started by filing the complaint in the first place.

No, I don't trust the councilor's decision. The sanctions are above and beyond anything the reasonable man would inflict.

If staff at city hall were being mistreated by any member of council, how would you expect council to deal with that issue if an elected official can’t be fired?

Where did this question come from? There are no accusations of mistreated staff by anyone. If this is the case, this is a personnel issue not this code of conduct complaint. Further you should not be implying it may be.

If council is found to be right, after a potential judicial review, will you accept the will of council or keep protesting?

Council will not be found right after the judicial review. Their decisions do not pass the reasonable man test. The Mayor’s questions asked to the CM were not malicious nor inappropriately asked. The Mayor, who is democratically elected by the electors of Medicine Hat, was doing her job. If the CM or the council members didn’t like it, that is their problem. 

Do you think Mayor Clark is in the wrong on this issue?

No.

Any other comments you would like to make on the issue?

Sure. The code of conduct that was filed pertains only to the exchange between Mayor Clark and CM Mitchell on Aug 21/23 and nothing more. No feelings the council may have towards the Mayor or expectations from the Mayor. No secret conspiracies behind closed doors. Anything outside of these parameters are irrelevant.

“In a democracy, the highest office is the office of citizen”

We the people elected Mayor Clark, we are the highest office of citizens. So, council stop this foolishness, drop the sanctions and start working within the MGA and with our mayor.

The Sentinel has confirmed with Councilor Sharps that a judicial review of the sanctions has yet to be filed by Clark.