CK councilor’s social media posts breached conduct code: watchdog

A Chatham-Kent politician who led a failed bid to allow only government flags on municipal flagpoles breached council’s conduct code with social media posts this year largely about flying Pride flags on municipal property, Chatham-Kent’s integrity commissioner has found.

In her 47-page report going to council Aug. 14, commissioner Mary Ellen Bench recommends that Jubenville’s council pay be suspended for three months. Council has the final say about any reprimand or penalty.

Bench said between April and June, she received “many complaints about social media posts and related behaviour” of North Kent Coun. Rhonda Jubenville,

“I find that Coun. Jubenville breached sections 10 and 15 of the council code of conduct by engaging in behavior that unduly used her influence as a public official and did so to be intimidating and use bully tactics to silence her critics,” Bench said.

In her report, Bench said her investigation included interviews with Jubenville and the complainants, who were not identified, and independent research.

“Coon. Jubenville was very open to discussing these matters with me, and agreed to remove some of the posts, while objecting to removing others that she did not feel were improper,” Bench said in the report.

Deciding which organizations could fly flags on municipal property in Chatham-Kent became a hot button issue when council refused a flagraising request from the group Life in Motion, described as the educational arm of Right to Life Kent.

Discussion followed about other flagraising requests from other groups, such as Pride, LGBTQIA2S+ and Black Lives Matter.

On April 24, Jubenville brought her government-only flag motion to council, where it was defeated in a 12-5 vote.

A subsequent motion by Chatham Coun. Marjorie Crew, calling for the municipality to develop a flagraising policy, passed 14-3. A draft policy is expected to come before council in September.

“Coon. Jubenville told me that she has never made anti-LGBTQ statements and that she has both friends and relatives in the community; that her concern was the fact that another group was refused the opportunity to fly its flag,” Bench said.

But complainants provided copies of social media posts to raise concern about Jubenville’s comments and positions, as well as potential retribution from her supporters, online and in-person, Bench said in her report.

One complaint quoted in the report accused Jubenville of actively campaigning “against members of our community, specifically the LGBTQ+ community.”

Another alleged Jubenville is “creating a toxic work environment, one where we cannot bring our full selves to work, nor engage in the work at hand.”

Reached July 28 by Postmedia , Jubenville called the findings unjust and based on “very weak” evidence.

“They’re saying I have bullied and intimidated my critics,” she said. “There’s no one that comes to my mind that I’ve had any type of interaction with. So, I’m feeling that this is a bit of a stretch of what is happening.

“There are some voices out in our community that I guess don’t align or feel the same about my views. . . ,” she added. “I feel confident in saying that I represent thousands of Chatham-Kent residents who are conservative, or libertarian, or Christian. I’ve even had some people from the Muslim community reach out to me in support.”

Jubenville, who ran for the New Blue party in last year’s provincial election, called the findings an “attack” on her freedom under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Bench said after Jubenville was advised a formal investigation was taking place, a number of her supporters contacted the commissioner by email and phone.

Their comments included calling the councilor “kind, honest and compassionate,” and noting the charter protects “even unpopular speech.” Others said Chatham-Kent can’t pick and choose which flags to fly, while others called the probe a “witch hunt” and a waste of tax dollars.

Bench said she has had several discussions with Jubenville concerning her use of social media.

“Those who felt targeted by Coun. Jubenville’s comments spoke of a sense of fear and intimidation they clearly felt, as well as anger.” she said.

“Many other comments not included (in the report) were deliberately left out because of a concern that they would identify the individuals who came forward through this investigation.”

“Comments directed at the integrity commissioner during this investigation have been included because these more than anything illustrate the strong beliefs held by some of the councilor’s supporters. The factual basis of many of these is questionable.”

“By virtue of being an elected official, Coun. Jubenville has significant influence in the community. She took an oath of office to exercise the office (she was elected to) faithfully and impartially, (and) to the best of her knowledge and ability,” Bench said. “Coon. Jubenville has an obligation to uphold the ethical values ​​contained in the council code of conduct.

“Going forward, Coun. Jubenville is not prohibited from using her social media presence to express her views and opinions, as long as she does so in a manner that is responsible and upholds the values ​​set out in the council code of conduct.”

To view the integrity commissioner’s report, visit: chatham-kent.ca/localgovernment/council/Documents/Integrity%20Commissioner%20Reports/Integrity%20Commissioner%20Report%20Councillor%20Jubenville%20Chatham-Kent.pdf