Strong Towns, Stephen Campbell, Restraining Orders and Drama

There are a number of misconceptions Mr. Campbell is putting out there.

Strong Towns

Yes I am currently the co-chair of the Strong Towns Local Conversations group. Our most recent meeting discussed removing the reference to Strong Towns. It no longer serves us and has a negative connotation in this city; it would be a barrier to people being receptive to any of our proposals. We have gained enough knowledge that we can continue without them, we know where to look for innovative ideas. We are currently mulling over a new name.

No we are not responsible for what the City did on Division Avenue. We have no special influence on the city as to how they design individual infrastructure projects.

Check out the awful things we have done here

One of our most nefarious ideas was to advocate for colourful crosswalks which

- adds vibrancy, 

- does not cost much, and

- makes the roads safer by increasing visibility of the crosswalk.

(I know, I know, the horror!)

A local resident veteran beat us to the punch on colourful crosswalks with his vision for a Veterans Crosswalk to go from City Hall to Riverside Veterans Memorial Park.

Our little group was very happy to see it approved by Council on Sept 15 2025

Yes we started off with reading about the Strong Towns philosophies; we discussed ideas on how to make our city a better place by making “small bets”. 

Spend a little money and see if it works. If it doesn’t, you haven’t lost much; if it does work, you can spend more next time.

Yes we promoted the microgrants made available by the City. Look, I'm still doing it!

No we have not received any money from the city, not even in a grant. We did apply for one, but were unsuccessful. I applied for an event I personally held but was also unsuccessful.

Stephen Campbell

It is common knowledge that Strong Towns is not popular in this city. Mr Campbell’s private message to Greg Bueckert contained a lie. It only needs to be communicated to a third party to be considered defamation - I believe when Campbell shared this information with Mr Bueckert, he in effect published it. IMO, when Mr Bueckert shared that communication on social media, it did not matter that it was not Mr Campbell that posted it. Campbell then commented on the post saying “Truth!” with a thumbs up.

Mr Bueckert has since removed the following post and has apologized. I will let Elections Alberta know that he has done so, they can proceed against Campbell alone for any infractions of the Elections Act.

The Elections Act states

False statements about candidate

160   A person who, before or during an election and for the purpose of affecting the voting for a candidate at that election, makes or publishes any false statement in relation to the character or conduct of that candidate or of the withdrawal of that candidate, is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine of not more than $50 000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than one year or to both fine and imprisonment.

I believe this was meant to discredit me. Normally I do not care what people say about me but this is 3 weeks before an election. Mr Campbell has not provided any receipts to prove that either I or our Local Conversations group received any money at all from the City.

Campbell cannot because they don't exist.

This is not the first time Mr Campbell has falsely accused someone of receiving City funds. 

November 21 2023 Campbell shared a post on social media of a communication he had sent to the City alleging Community TV, aka ComTV (now Owl News) of receiving money from the city for broadcasting the council, committee and commission meetings. Mr Campbell tried to suppress the free press by recommending to the City that they stop us from broadcasting their meetings as well as reviewing our permit to operate our business license. 

NB - anybody with the proper video equipment can do the same, we did not and do not get special access. The committee meetings are not recorded by the City of Medicine Hat for the public to view later, the public could only watch it live. The Community TV YouTube broadcasts of these meetings made sure the public could watch them later at their leisure, even local media took advantage of it.

Campbell accused us at Community TV of

• starting the mayoral recall petition

• speaking on the City’s behalf

• seeking to cause division by putting out false information…

It goes on and on; I have included the receipts. So much of it is false that it would probably be easier to state what is actually factual.

Much of what Campbell sent to the City is libelous. Since it is unlikely that a successful defamation claim against Campbell would result in us being able to collect any awarded monetary damages, we decided that it was not worth the trouble to pursue it at that point in time.

Dec 21 2023 Campbell filed a Statement of Claim for defamation. I was mentioned in these documents, it is proof he has been trying to silence Fougere and I for years. Campbell said:

This is only for one issue, to stop the slander/defamation and harassment so I can continue to live in this city without false scrutiny from Thomas using his independent media credentials. And to stop allowing Kelly Allard from contributing to Community TV using slander/defamation to hurt my reputation using her independent media credentials. I have decided to leave Kelly out of this lawsuit in hopes that a good outcome here will deter her from continuing these attacks on her own merit moving forward but her posts are relevant to this case as she is approved to post on Community TV which is Thomas's platform.

Dec 22 2023 (On or About) I arrived at Fougere’s residence for a preplanned editorial meeting. Campbell had been there to try to personally serve Fougere with the papers; Fougere refused to open his door to him. Campbell was leaving when he saw me pull in, he stopped his vehicle in the middle of the street and left it running. When I opened my car door, he was right there. Campbell tried to get me to accept the documents on Fougere's behalf but I did not live there so I could not legally accept the paperwork. When I refused to accept them Campbell chased me around the yard. I did tell him to f–-k off numerous times in an attempt to get away; I ultimately had to get back in my car and drive away. Fougere was on the phone with the police because first Campbell had refused to get off Fougere's property, then he was chasing me.

Fougere eventually accepted service by email. Nearly 2 years later, Court File 2308 00497 has yet to proceed.

The above event took place a few hours after an encounter I had with Campbell at the courthouse. Mr Campbell was there to file paperwork, I was there in the course of my employment. After I checked the court docket I was waiting for my turn at the counter when Campbell turned around, saw me and immediately started raising his voice, so much so that the sheriffs moved quickly to be ready in case they were needed. Campbell actually accused me of taking his photo. As a court accredited reporter, I know that nobody is permitted to record audio, video or take photos inside a courthouse. I normally would have told the sheriff "hell no" when he asked to see my phone but the women behind the counter were looking a little concerned. To help defuse the situation, I showed the sheriff the photos on my phone to prove that I had taken no photos inside the courthouse.

Restraining Orders

February 19 2024 Mr Campbell obtained a Restraining Order Without Notice against Fougere and myself. This is the sort of thing you ask for when you believe you are in danger. The page below tells you "how to file a restraining order against someone who has made you fear for your safety".

Alberta - Get a Restraining Order Without Notice Mr Campbell tried to serve me personally at my home - I was not there at the time. He also tried to personally serve Fougere. Campbell later expressed his frustration that the police would not serve the Restraining Order for him.

March 5 2025  We went to court for the review of the extension of the Restraining Order Without Notice (ROWN). The judge seemed incredulous that Campbell would attempt to serve the order personally - that is not the sort of thing you do when you say you are in such fear of someone that you require an ROWN.

Paragraph 9 of the order states that Campbell was NOT to personally serve either one of us with any papers, that he was to get professional process servers to do it.

March 2025 When Mr Campbell applied to renew the Restraining Order, he served us by e-mail. Again, he was not allowed to do as per paragraph 9. Fougere and I agreed to the renewal, it had been a very peaceful year when it was in place. I also did not want Campbell anywhere near my property - I have seen how quickly he could get angry, in my opinion he seems to be unable to control his emotions.

I told the judge that I was a registered council candidate and that Campbell had stated his intention to run but had not yet filed his nomination papers.

The judge included in the order that

• Campbell and I could both participate in candidate events without violating the R/O.

• Fougere and I could not cover any event that involved only Campbell but we could send someone else to do so.

• Any service of papers by either side in regards to this R/O or the defamation action 2308 0049 had to be done by a professional process server.

I am publishing the redacted document because we are in the middle of an election - there are misconceptions out there and the public is entitled to know what the terms are.

By the way, while these are not necessarily public documents, they are not necessarily privileged either. There is no publication ban in the R/O.

Complaints

Yes Fougere and I are not permitted to contact Mr Campbell directly or indirectly. Contrary to Mr Campbell’s belief, the reverse is also true. The Applicant of an R/O can be charged with criminal harassment if they contact the Respondent.

Yes I did call the police yesterday, stating that I did not know if the recent social media activity was a breach or not. All I wanted was for the police to call him and tell him to stop addressing me directly. I have reason to fear for my own safety - I have seen how quickly Campbell can go into a rage. If Mr Campbell thinks it is okay to violate the order in a small way, what is to stop him from coming to my home? The R/O is only a piece of paper.

Yes I have filed a complaint with Elections Alberta about the falsehood Campbell shared with Mr Bueckert and then ended up on social media, with Mr Campbell asserting that it was the truth.

Mr Campbell told me during the last election that he filed a complaint against me with Elections Alberta. Nothing ever came of that complaint.

Drama

If it is drama to defend oneself against lies, then go ahead and call me dramatic.

If it is drama to protect oneself from a person they deem to be a danger to themselves, then again, go ahead and call me dramatic.

We’ve had enough litigious people in City Hall. Outside of divorce papers and the required paperwork for child support (I’ve been married twice), I have not filed any legal paperwork at any time. Mr Campbell has filed 3 times in the past 2 years just against Fougere and myself. Mr Campbell seems to have a grudge against me and the company I work for. If we are both elected, the R/O will either have to be altered or revoked.