“It didn’t bother me.”

That’s what Mayor Laura Cabott had to say following Monday’s committee meeting that saw 25 people criticize her for blocking a motion by Coun. Michelle Friesen last week to have the city call for a ceasefire in Gaza.

Speaker after speaker singled her out, as well as Coun. Kirk Cameron, for their roles in the defeat of the motion nine days ago.

Cabott admitted it wasn’t easy sitting there for 2 ½ hours listening to barbs being thrown, but simply said Tuesday, “it’s part of the job.”

She said she hadn’t seen anything quite like the large number of delegates, although the debate over climate change a few years ago also attracted a large turnout.

“My job is to listen to people,” Cabott said. “We like to engage the public. People have a right to come to council and speak.”

At no time did she consider limiting the number of speakers on the subject, she said. A committee meeting, she noted, operates on different rules than a council meeting. Delegates at council meetings, she explained, have to restrict themselves to the topics on the agenda. At committee meetings, the rules are flexible.

“It’s wide open,” she said.

Despite the barrage of scoldings from those in attendance, Cabott said she didn’t feel bullied. 

She didn’t offer an opinion as to whether she thought the large numbers of people were overkill, or possibly detrimental to their cause.

Cabott also said she wasn’t going to second-guess the decision she made on Friesen’s motion.

The majority of council supported her ruling that suggested the motion was out of order, she said, and that was good enough for her.

Cameron wasn’t as conciliatory about the situation as the mayor was.

Late in Monday’s commitee meeting, as the members were trying to figure out a way to resuscitate Friesen’s motion, he said he was unhappy with the way he was being portrayed by the speakers.

“It’s quite frustrating to have to go through a process like that,” he said. “I realize why it was important for us to listen to our community. But I think there was a misunderstanding of what was meant by the point of order that got us into tonight’s situation.”

It was Cameron’s point or order questioning whether Friesen’s motion was valid that was the basis of its failure.

He suggested the motion was beyond the scope of the municipal powers available to the city. People jumped to the conclusion that he was “against Palestine,” Cameron added.

“I’m not going to go there. That’s just not what I was doing,” he said.

“I was trying to avoid a situation that would split our community. That’s what I saw in that original motion. That’s clearly not what the community, or the people who came here tonight, thought I was saying.”

Finding a way to bring up the subject for more debate is presenting a bit of a conundrum for council. Under its operating rules, a defeated motion can’t be re-introduced for a year following its failure.

Municipal staff members have requested two weeks to find a solution to that problem.