Chilliwack – The Chilliwack DPAC Executive is aware of the concerns raised regarding previous statements made on social media by Cary Moore, which have come to public attention this past week following his decision to run for trustee. Mr. Moore resigned from the Chilliwack DPAC Executive in March 2026.
At that time, DPAC raised concerns with Mr. Moore regarding the expectations and
responsibilities outlined in our Code of Ethics, including our duty to respect the diversity of our
school community and to keep student well-being at the center of our work. These expectations
reflect our Mission, Values, and Purpose, and our broader duty to serve all families and learners
within School District 33.
Mr. Moore’s personal views and public statements do not represent the views or position of
Chilliwack DPAC, or the Chilliwack DPAC Executive, either during his time on DPAC or since his
resignation.
Chilliwack DPAC remains firmly committed to representing the diverse families and students of
School District 33 with respect, equity, and inclusion, and expects that same commitment from
anyone who serves or has served on our Executive.
Cary Moore issued a response on Social Media: A response to the Chilliwack DPAC Executive’s September 1, 2026 statement
The Chilliwack DPAC Executive issued a statement on September 1 that they know is incomplete, and the timing — six months after this matter was closed, and days after I announced my run for trustee — speaks for itself.
Let’s be clear about what actually happened. A single screenshot, taken from a much longer online discussion about resisting extremism — including forced child marriage, FGM, and the criminalization of homosexuality — was stripped of its context and circulated by an activist with an obvious agenda. In that discussion, “radical” was used at the outset and dropped as the thread went on, which is how casual online conversations work. That’s not a mystery to anyone who read the whole exchange, and DPAC did.
I’ve never hidden from the fact that some of my wording — “breeding” specifically — was poorly chosen, even though it echoed language extremist leaders themselves use openly. I apologized for it. I took the post down. I did the work.
I explained all of this to the DPAC Executive directly, with documentation, at the time. I have serious doubts anyone reviewed it before deciding I was guilty. That’s not a process — it’s a verdict dressed up as one.
This was resolved when I resigned from the Executive in March 2026. I considered it closed. DPAC considered it closed. The activist who circulated the screenshot was told how it ended and chose to sit on it until it could do maximum damage to my candidacy.
You know me. I’ve served on the DPAC Executive for years, in various roles. My wife and I have been foster parents for 33 years and have parented 64 children. And now, all of a sudden, one activist with an axe to grind has single-handedly decided I’m not fit to be around kids? That’s not a serious judgment — it’s a smear. Malicious with intent.
DPAC’s statement leans on its “Code of Ethics” and its commitment to “respect” and “inclusion.” I’d ask DPAC to apply that same standard to me. This is the same Executive that backed me when Trustee Bondar discriminated against me over my Métis heritage — I had every right to pursue formal censure against her and chose not to, because she made a mistake and I believe people deserve a second chance. I extended that grace. I’m still waiting for DPAC to extend the same fairness to me.
This collapse into tribalism is unfortunate. What our community needs isn’t trial by screenshot — it’s open dialogue, good faith, and a willingness to hear people out before rendering a verdict. I won’t be defined by one out-of-context screenshot, recycled on cue by someone chasing clicks and timed to an election. I stand by my record, and I’m asking DPAC to correct the one they just put out.
