District fires back at ex-manager

New details about a bizarre incident last summer in downtown Summerland that led to the firing of a top municipal manager are contained in the district’s reply to its ex-employee’s lawsuit.

Maarten Stam in December 2022 filed a notice of claim in B.C. Supreme Court seeking compensation from the District of Summerland for what he alleges constituted wrongful dismissal when he was let go in June 2022.

Stam, who started working for the district in 2009 and rose to the rank of public works manager, claims he put up for years with a crushing workload that severely affected his personal life.

It all came to a head June 21, 2022, when Stam claims he visited a downtown café to check on an outdoor patio setup with which he had some safety concerns. While there, Stam claims he gave a large planter a “gentle nudge,” which tipped over the planter and another beside it.

Stam claims he was too busy to immediately report his findings, but did so three days later in an email to his bosses and the café.

In its reply, the district agrees with some of the timelines contained in Stam’s claim but denies the majority of the rest — most notably Stam’s retelling of the patio incident.

According to the district, Stam was driving one of its vehicles when he arrived at the café before it opened for business.

“He exited the vehicle and vandalized the temporary patio by pulling on a solid wood patio table and attached heavy planter with such force that they were moved from their original position and another heavy planter was knocked over,” states the reply.

“Multiple cars drove by as well as a member of the public who walked by and saw the plaintiff interfering with the patio table and planters. This member of the public, who was a tourist, stopped to speak with the plaintiff and later raised concerns with the district about the plaintiff’s conduct, including the plaintiff’s use of foul language and threats to close down the establishment.”

And when Stam finally sent an email three days later to alert his bosses and the café to what had transpired, Stam punched in an incorrect email address for the café — meaning its owner didn’t get it — and “did not admit that he was the one responsible” for the damage.

The district subsequently “conducted a fair investigation in good faith over a number of days,” which included giving Stam “a meaningful opportunity to respond.”

The decision to fire Stam was delivered June 30, 2022, “because of his conduct in relation to the establishment including the email, and his dishonesty during the Investigation.”

“As a local government employee in a management position and who issues permits, the plaintiff was required to perform his duties in a manner that upholds the public trust,” adds the district’s reply.

It also pours cold water on Stam’s other allegations about his overwhelming workload, which he claims affected his family and even prevented him from attending his father’s 2020 funeral in Holland.

The district alleges Stam asked for some of his additional responsibilities and chose to put his energy into other projects that weren’t directly related to his portfolio.

“The workload for the position was appropriate and the plaintiff had the authority and ability to schedule his work and manage priorities. However, the plaintiff often chose to focus on tasks that were outside of his areas of responsibility which resulted in him not completing his own responsibilities,” alleges the district.

“Any issues in the plaintiff’s personal life or with his well-being were not related to his workload, but rather personal decisions and activities unrelated to his job duties.”

Finally, the district is calling for Stam’s lawsuit to be tossed because Stam allegedly failed to give notice of his claim within two months as required under the Local Government Act.

The matter will now be set down for trial.