ABSTRACT
In the aftermath of the protest that occurred at the RancheHouse on February 9th for the mayor’s State of Cochrane address, Mayor Jeff Genung and two councillors, Susan Flowers and Alex Reed, painted a very negative picture of the protest, presumably intended to denigrate the protest and the protesters in order to sway public opinion towards support and sympathy for them as victims. In that light, however, the most damning issue, was highlighted in the mayor’s account of “outright nastiness” to his family which culminated with someone supposedly “spitting in (his) wife’s face” as she entered the building that evening.
Despite efforts to get to the bottom of this matter, including contacting the local RCMP to investigate the matter, it remains a mystery as to who did it or, for that matter, did it really happen.
FULL BLOG
One local media account of the protest that occurred in advance of the mayor’s State of Cochrane address, at the RancheHouse on February 9th, described it overall as a peaceful protest concerned with “Preserving freedom, gov’t overreach at heart of protest“. However, at the conclusion of a Town Council Meeting four days later, Mayor Genung (from 1:32:56 to 1:38:00 minutes in the video from the Council meeting) along with a few other councillors made, as reported by the local media here and here, highly disparaging remarks (transcript) about the protest, presumably to discredit and vilify the protest and the protestors as a whole, and, thereby, draw sympathy to themselves.
Through their comments three individuals in particular, Mayor Genung and Councillors Susan Flowers and Alex Reed, crafted a very negative view of the protest. The mayor set the tone in his report at the February 13th Council Meeting offering his opinion that the protest wasn’t “a friendly protest or peaceful in any means and turned to a hostile environment”, and that there’s no room in our community for such behaviour by “these people”.
Although basing her comments primarily upon what she had “heard”, and not what she personally witnessed, Councillor Flowers claimed to “know” a lot about what had occurred that evening from her vantage point deep inside the RancheHouse for the mayor’s address. To describe the protest, Flowers trotted out phrases and words like “cause(d) harm”, “laws (were) broken”, “assault charges should be considered”, “council members were grabbed by the main organizer at the event”, “insults and obscenities were screamed, intimidation was used”. She offered up really nothing more than her biased opinions based upon little or no evidence in order to create the desired negative narrative about the protest and the 150 or so protesters. Surely a determination as to whether or not this was a peaceful protest is not to be determined by the comments of one biased individual.
Councillor Flowers was sent two emails (Comments on February 9th Protest), one on February 14th and the second on February 22nd, requesting that she provide some evidence for her defamatory claims and asking if she had such evidence in her possession, had it been shared with the RCMP. At the February 13th Council Meeting, Councillor Flowers spoke of some of the communication tools available to dialogue with the Council members, and laughably ended with “And, of course, email any of us at any time”. And, of course, no reply to my emails was received from Councillor Flowers, which from past experience is not that unusual for her and any of the other town councillors as reported here and here. So that door to get to the bottom of the matter was closed.
Councillor Alex Reed followed up claiming that he was one of victims cited by Flowers who were supposedly “grabbed” by Deborah Murphy, whereby she supposedly put her “arms” on him and tried to block his entrance to the meeting. With Councillor Flowers claiming that “there is video of this accosting of the people…evidence available that it happened”, Mr. Reed was sent an email (Where’s the Evidence) on February 22nd challenging him to produce such evidence to show “that it happened”. Thus, far, only crickets from Mr. Reed! So, that door to get to the bottom of the matter was closed.
The biased perspectives of Genung, Flowers and Reed, were intended, in my view, to denigrate the protest and the protesters in order to sway public opinion towards support and sympathy for them as victims. In that light, however, the most damning issue, was highlighted in the mayor’s account of “outright nastiness” to his family which culminated with someone supposedly “spitting in (his) wife’s face” as she entered the building, a despicable act; certainly not something one would expect to be condoned by those who were present that evening as protesters.
As Mitchell Hamm, the Town’s Director, Community Services, led Ms. Genung and family into the RancheHouse, which appeared to be his assigned function for that evening, he was contacted by email (Spitting Incident) on February 14th to determine if he had witnessed anybody spitting in her face. His response a week later on February 21st, “The incidents occurring on February 9th between 5 pm and 6:30 pm at the Cochrane Ranchehouse have been shared with the appropriate authority”, was ambiguous as to who exactly was meant by the “appropriate authority”. I replied as follows to his email, “With respect to the incidents occurring on February 9th having been shared with the appropriate authority, I sincerely hope the appropriate authority is a reference to the local RCMP detachment, and that they have been requested to investigate this serious matter. I understand from a Cochrane Now report that plain clothes officers were also present on that day and hopefully observed what occurred. I would suggest that it’s time to get to the bottom of this”. He did not reply to my email.
Subsequently, Deborah Murphy sent an email (Deborah Murphy Contacts Mitchell Hamm) to Mr. Hamm on February 25th, pointing out that his reference to “appropriate authority” could not mean the RCMP and asking to receive “a clear answer to the question that Ron raised as I don’t believe that anything should be hidden on this serious matter”. Deborah received a reply (Deborah Murphy Contacts Mitchell Hamm) instead from his direct supervisor, Stacey Loe, Executive Director, Protective and Community Services, who advised Deborah, “As Mr. Hamm noted, any information related to the events has been reported as appropriate. In Mr. Hamm’s case this means within our organization, which included me as his direct supervisor and in my role as Executive Director responsible for Protective and Community Services. At no point did Mr. Hamm indicate he contacted the RCMP, nor was the intention to infer such a connection. Town Administration has nothing further to offer on this matter; we consider it to be concluded, unless we are formally contacted by the RCMP in response to any complainant coming forward, over which we have no control”. So, that door to get to the bottom of the matter was closed.
Spitting in somebody’s face is an assault, a criminal offence according to Canada’s criminal code. Accordingly, in an effort to get to the bottom of this, Deborah and I requested to meet with members of the local RCMP detachment. From our discussion with two members of the local RCMP detachment at our meeting on Friday, February 24th we came to understand that the RCMP only became aware of the spitting incident through the local media’s report of the announcement made by the mayor at the February 13th Town Council Meeting, and, thereby, we conclude they had not been contacted to pursue an investigation of this incident so as to press charges. They agreed that spitting on someone, a despicable action, is a criminal offence in Canada. Accordingly, we made a request that the RCMP undertake an investigation of this crime. Disappointingly and frustratingly, we were advised that such a request could only come from the victim in this case, namely, the mayor’s wife in order for them to proceed with an investigation. So, without her request, this crime would not be investigated by the RCMP. I questioned if there was something in the RCMP protocol documents that would confirm that an investigation would only be conducted if requested by the supposed victim. I have a personal experience of being assaulted at a meeting in Red Deer in July 2022. Someone else at that meeting asked the Red Deer RCMP to press charges. As a result, even though I as the victim had not requested it, I was contacted by an officer with the Red Deer detachment. In that case, I chose not to press charges. Perhaps different RCMP detachments have different discretionary policies on enforcement. So, disappointingly, that door to get to the bottom of the matter was closed.
In his report at the February 13th Town Council Meeting, Mayor Genung declared, “I think it’s important that all of Cochrane residents understand fully what happened that evening”. We couldn’t agree more! The mayor has repeatedly expressed how outraged he is by this incident in various forums, but, surprisingly, he waited four days to announce its occurrence and didn’t take any initiative to press charges. Unless his wife makes a request to have this matter investigated, unfortunately the door appears to be closed as far as the local RCMP getting involved.
If the RCMP had agreed to initiate an investigation into the matter, we were prepared to offer some suggestions to aid the investigation, such as:
- The provision of names of possible witnesses to what happened that evening.
- A suggestion to contact Mitchell Hamm, Director of Community Services, who was ushering the mayor’s wife and children into the building that evening, and, thereby, would be a key witness.
- Get a copy of Cochrane Now’s video footage from that evening.
- As Cochrane Now in its report on the protest noted, “There was an RCMP presence, including plain clothes, that kept a low profile”, one would hope that they were a witness to any incident that occurred that evening.
- Contact Councillor Flowers as she has claimed “there is video of this accosting of the people…evidence available that it happened”.
- What appears to be a video camera located above the entrance to the RancheHouse building, presumably could reveal what occurred that evening as the mayor’s wife entered the building.
With respect to the latter, Deborah sent a request on February 24th to the Town’s Chief Administrative Office (CAO), Michael Derricott, requesting that video footage for the period 5:00 to 6:30 PM on February 9th at that location be retained and kept secure. He simply acknowledged receipt of the email.
Unfortunately, our efforts to get to the bottom of this mystery have been thwarted. So, it remains a mystery Mr. Mayor, as to who did it or, for that matter, did it really happen. On March 20th, Ron Voss’ appearance as a delegation to the Town Council, requesting an amendment to the town’s code of conduct bylaw, was prompted by the mayor having spun a story with respect to the wording of a rule in the town’s procedural bylaw in order to escape his obligation to comply with it.