Reports, Cases and Submissions

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about an interview panel convened by the Mayor of the City of Hamilton to advise her on the selection of a new City Manager.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about a closed meeting held by the City of Hamilton’s Selection Committee for Agencies, Boards and Sub-Committees on October 24, 2023.

The Ombudsman reviewed complaints about a closed special meeting of council for Norfolk County on January 9, 2024, as well as closed meetings held by council-in-committee on February 14, 2023, November 15, 2023, and January 16, 2024. The Ombudsman found that at its January 9, 2024 meeting, council did not provide sufficient detail in its resolution to proceed in camera and discussed a matter in camera that did not fit within the open meeting exception cited in its resolution. The Ombudsman also found that council-in-committee did not contravene the Act during its February 14, 2023 closed meeting, but did contravene the Act during its meetings on November 15, 2023 and January 16, 2024 by discussing some issues in camera that did not come within any of the exceptions to the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that alleged council for the Township of McGarry contravened the open meeting rules during an emergency meeting of council on September 1, 2023. The Ombudsman found that portions of council’s closed session discussion concerning the former Mayor’s resignation and potential appointees to fill the resulting vacancies fit within the open meeting exceptions. Although the remaining portions of the discussion about what method council would use to fill the vacancies did not fit within any exceptions to the open meeting rules, requiring council to have parsed those parts of the discussion would have detracted from free, open, and uninterrupted discussion. The Ombudsman further determined that the Township provided notice for the emergency meeting in accordance with its procedure by-law and did not hold votes contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman reviewed complaints about a special meeting held by council for the Township of Black River-Matheson on February 20, 2024 and about alleged gatherings of a quorum of councillors held prior to that meeting.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint regarding a closed meeting held by council for the City of London on April 2, 2024.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that the Board of Directors for Saugeen Mobility and Regional Transit (SMART) does not hold meetings that are open to the public. The Ombudsman found that SMART is a shared local board of 10 member municipalities that is subject to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001.
 

The Ombudsman received complaints that a joint meeting held by the councils for the Town of Grimsby, the Town of Lincoln and the Township of West Lincoln did not adhere to the open meeting rules. The Ombudsman found that the first part of the closed session discussion fit within the closed meeting exception for education or training. However, small-group discussions that occurred during the second part of the closed session did not fit within any of the exceptions.

 

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee for the City of Elliot Lake on December 18, 2023. The complaint alleged that council’s closed session discussion about procurement practices did not fall within any of the prescribed exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman found that the Finance and Administration Committee for the City of Elliot Lake contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it received a presentation on proposed changes to the City’s procurement by-law in closed session on December 18, 2023. The Ombudsman found that the Committee’s discussion did not fit within any of the Act’s closed meeting exceptions.

The Ombudsman reviewed complaints about a meeting of the City of Oshawa’s Corporate and Finance Services Committee which raised concerns about the public notice – which was temporarily unavailable on the City’s website due to a technical issue – and about the failure of the audio during the meeting webcast.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a meeting held by council for the Town of Iroquois Falls on November 28, 2022.

The Ombudsman investigated closed meetings held by council for the Township of Jocelyn on January 10 and 13, February 7, April 4, and October 10, 2023 and found that the discussions at each of these meetings fit within various closed meeting exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001. However, the Ombudsman also found that the Township contravened the Act at its October 10 meeting by failing to pass a resolution to enter into closed session, failing to take closed meeting minutes, and by improperly closing the beginning of the meeting to the public. Although no illegal votes occurred at the meetings, the Ombudsman nevertheless recommended as a best practice that council clearly identify any specific directions given in closed session, formally vote on them, and record that vote in the closed meeting minutes.
 

The Ombudsman received complaints that meetings held by council for the Municipality of Whitestone did not adhere to the open meeting rules. The Ombudsman also received a complaint about a meeting held by the Municipality’s Wah Wash Kesh Landings Task Force and its open meeting practices.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding a meeting of council for the Town of Halton Hills held on August 28, 2023. The complaint alleged that council’s closed session discussion of recent provincial policy announcements about municipalities did not fit within the closed meeting exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001. The complaint also alleged that council did not pass a resolution stating that this matter would be discussed in closed session.

The Ombudsman found that the discussion did not fit within any exceptions to the open meeting rules, and that council failed to include a general description of this topic in its resolution to proceed into closed session. Council accordingly contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on August 28, 2023. The Ombudsman also noted that council’s minutes incorrectly suggested that council had included this topic of discussion in its resolution when it had not.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding two closed meetings held by council for the Municipality of Callander on December 12, 2023 and January 9, 2024.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that the Committee of the Whole for the Township of Lanark Highlands contravened the open meeting rules on June 27, 2023 when it discussed a management letter regarding draft financial statements with an auditor during a closed session.

The Ombudsman found that the discussion about the management letter fit within the exception for security of the property of the municipality because the information discussed related to an ongoing threat to the security of the municipality’s property. However, the Ombudsman found that the Township contravened the requirements of section 239(7) of the Municipal Act, 2001 on June 27, 2023 by failing to keep an adequate record of what was discussed in camera. As a best practice, the Ombudsman recommended that the Township make audio or video recordings of its closed sessions.

The Ombudsman received complaints about the meeting practices of the Township of Tiny Administrative Centre Committee.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ontarians turned to the provincial government for important information on protecting their health and that of their families and communities.

Ombudsman's Message - Focusing on rights – and the future

It is an honour to present my ninth Annual Report as Ombudsman as this Office prepares to mark its 49th anniversary. The time is ripe for both reflection and forward thinking – and this report, fittingly, does both.

 

A transgender inmate contacted our Office after she was involved in an altercation with correctional officers.

We received complaints from a group of 10 inmates, all women, that they were strip searched by correctional officers in their unit, in view of one another.

We received complaints from two inmates at the same facility, alleging they had been sexually assaulted.

A business owner complained to us after his municipality informed him that a set of stairs on the back of his building encroached on municipal property.

We were contacted by the leaseholder of Crown land that included ski trails and a drainage system that had previously been installed by his municipality.

A homeowner reached out to us when the land around her home was rezoned from agricultural to industrial.

A woman who could not pay her property taxes due to financial hardship sought our help after her municipality refused her request to cancel her debt.

A group of 50 students at a university reached out to our Office for help after they all failed the same course.

A student sought our help after his college told him he would have to retake a trade course he had already effectively completed, which would delay his graduation and the full-time employment he had arranged.

An international student at a college of applied arts and technology requested a tuition refund when he decided to leave his program and return home to India.

A woman who had been living outside of Canada for 15 years sought our help in obtaining more than $25,000 in child support through the Family Responsibility Office (FRO).

A woman sought our help because she hadn’t received Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) payments or drug benefits from August 2020 to October 2021.

A woman had her ODSP application denied after a year of waiting.

A father in crisis sought our help to find services and supported living for his son, a 15-year-old with complex special needs.

After giving a presentation at a group home, our staff were conducting private conversations with the residents, as we normally do.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Group home; Quality of care; Rights (Good care)

A young person in a youth justice centre complained to us that he was being routinely strip-searched by staff after every visit he had with his lawyer.

Issues: Youth justice facility; Rights (Safety)

Three months after he turned 18, a young man told us he had been forced to rely on social assistance because he had never been registered for “Ready, Set, Go” funding, which supports young people transitioning out of care.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA)

A staff member from a youth residence contacted us, concerned that a youth with special needs and physical disabilities wasn’t receiving adequate support, such as grab bars in the shower and railings on porch stairs.

Issues: Duty to report; Disability; Rights (Identity)

A woman contacted us in frustration over delays and a lack of communication from the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee (OPGT) regarding a deceased relative who had been an OPGT client.

A woman complained to us that her friend, who was a client of the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee (OPGT), was struggling to pay for her day-to-day expenses with the weekly $50 the OPGT provided.

A landlord who claimed her tenant was threatening to kill her and her children asked for an urgent hearing with the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB).

A woman called us for help on the morning that she, her partner and three children were being evicted.

A transgender woman who changed the name and sex designation on her driver’s licence contacted us in frustration after being told that her car insurance would now cost more.

A senior sought our help when his driver’s licence was suspended, just seven months after he had gone through an extensive process with the Driver Medical Review Office to get it reinstated.

A man noticed that the driver’s licence he’d had for four years did not indicate that he was also qualified to drive a motorcycle.

A man had been waiting to receive a new wallet card from Skilled Trades Ontario – proof of his skilled trade credentials – for more than a year.

A man sought our help in obtaining his Joint Health and Safety Committee Certification through the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development.

A man lost his house when his Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) benefits were cut off.

A woman reached out to us after contacting the Ministry of Long-Term Care’s Action Line with concerns about her mother’s death in a long-term care home.

A woman whose daughter had to have an emergency root canal procedure – at a cost of $700 – sought our help in obtaining coverage through Healthy Smiles Ontario, a provincial program that covers dental care for eligible children and youth who are 17 and under.

A low-income senior complained that her utility provider had been incorrectly applying her Ontario Electricity Support Program credit to her water bill for more than five years.

A woman whose medical condition makes her reliant on an electric wheelchair, bed and lift was facing having her hydro disconnected because of an outstanding bill of $15,000.

A landlord complained to us that his municipality had put his tenant’s unpaid water and wastewater charges on his property tax bill, without notifying him in advance.

A man came to us for help when a problem with his birth certificate prevented him from applying for federal employment insurance (EI).

We heard from a man who was waiting for a new long-form birth certificate for his son.

A bride whose name was misspelled on her marriage certificate sought our help after waiting in vain for ServiceOntario to send her a form to request a correction.

The Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services has requested comments on a regulatory proposal related to amendments to Policy Directive: CW 003-23 — Preparing Youth for Successful Transition from the Care of Children’s Aid Societies.

The Ombudsman received complaints regarding a special meeting held by council for the Township of Springwater on May 3, 2023. The complaints collectively alleged that council’s discussions in closed session did not fit within the closed meeting exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman found that that discussions regarding a rainbow crosswalk project and an employment matter related to the local public library fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual. While a discussion about the completed hiring process for a specific position did not fit within the cited exception for labour relations and employee negotiations, a portion of that discussion came within the personal matters exception, and the remainder of that discussion could not be parsed. Accordingly, the Ombudsman found that council did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 at its special meeting on May 3, 2023.

The Standing Committee on Social Policy is currently considering Bill 188, An Act to amend the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 and various other Acts, also known as the Supporting Children’s Futures Act, 2024.

The Ombudsman investigated closed meetings held by council for the Township of McMurrich/Monteith on September 5 and September 14, 2023, during which Council discussed a potential disposal of municipally owned property. The Ombudsman found that council did not contravene the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001. The first portion of the closed meeting discussion on September 5 discussion fit within the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, and the second portion fit within the exception for the acquisition or disposition of land. The closed meeting discussion on September 14 fit within the exception for the acquisition or disposition of land.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about meetings held by council for the Township of Lanark Highlands.

The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by council for the Municipality of Temagami on June 20, 2023, during which council discussed previously owned property, a request to sell property, and issues related to a local long-term care home.

The Ombudsman found that council did not contravene the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 as these discussions fit within the exceptions for personal matters about an identifiable individual, acquisition or disposition of land, and litigation or potential litigation.

The Ombudsman also reviewed whether public notice was provided for the June 20, 2023 meeting, and found that the municipality had provided notice several days prior. The Ombudsman noted as a best practice that meeting minutes should be made available publicly available to improve accountability and transparency.

In the fall of 2019, 16-year-old “Mia” had at least two critical concerns: Finding somewhere to sleep from one day to the next and a way to finish high school.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding several meetings held by council for the Town of Amherstburg in 2022 and 2023. The complaint alleged that council contravened the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to provide sufficient information about the topics of discussion in resolutions to proceed into closed session on August 8, 2022, February 13, 2023, and March 27, 2023. The complaint also alleged that council held meetings on November 29 and 30, 2022, which were not livestreamed and were not open to the public, and that council failed to provide public notice of its February 14, 2023 training session.

The Ombudsman found that council contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to provide sufficient information about some of the topics of discussion in its resolutions to proceed into closed session. However, the Ombudsman found that the Town did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 on November 29 and 30, 2022, as he determined that the public could have attended the meetings in person, although he was unable to determine whether they were livestreamed. Likewise, council did not contravene the open meeting rules regarding notice of the February 14, 2023 meeting, as its training session did not come within the definition of meeting, and was therefore not subject to the open meeting rules.

The complaint also alleged that a gathering of members of the Town’s Accessibility Advisory Committee at a transit facility, where committee members were shown a demonstration of an accessible bus, in September 2022 was a meeting that was subject to the open meeting rules. The Ombudsman found that the Town did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 on September 8, 2022, as the gathering at the transit facility did not materially advance the committee’s business or decision-making, and was not a meeting subject to the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about meetings held by the Municipality of Calvin’s Ad Hoc Code of Conduct Working Group and Ad Hoc Municipal Planning Working Group. The complaint alleged that these two bodies were committees of council, and that they did not provide the public with notice of their meetings, publish meeting agendas, or have someone clerk or record minutes of their meetings, contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Municipality’s procedural by-law. The complaint also raised procedural concerns that these bodies were not properly established by resolution or by-law.

The Ombudsman found that the Ad Hoc Code of Conduct Working Group and Ad Hoc Municipal Planning Working Group were established through council resolution and were committees of council. The Municipality contravened both the Municipal Act, 2001 and its procedural by-law in not providing notice of these groups’ meetings and in not having someone clerk or record minutes of their meetings. However, the Municipality did not violate either the Act or the Municipality’s procedural by-law by not providing members of the public with these groups’ meeting agendas.

The Ministry of Education has requested comments on three regulatory proposals related to school board governance and accountability.

The Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services has requested input on proposed regulatory amendments to Ontario Regulation 155/18 under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, which would outline additional provisions for searches of staff, visitors and young persons on the premises of youth justice facilities.

The Ministry of Northern Development has recently sought feedback on potential changes to the Northern Services Boards Act.

The Ombudsman received complaints that two closed meetings of council for the City of Elliot Lake did not fit into the closed meeting exceptions. The Ombudsman found that the meetings fit within the closed meeting exceptions except for a portion of one of the closed session discussions, which did not fit within the exception for personal matters.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that the City of Kawartha Lakes’ Short Term Rental Licensing Program Task Force may have held illegal meetings between April and June 2023, during the development of a by-law to licence, regulate, and govern short-term rental accommodation.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about a gathering held by members of the Community and Protective Services Committee of the City of London on March 21, 2023. The complaint alleged that a quorum of the committee held a tour with the Executive Director of a local non-profit organization and expressed concern that, a few hours later, the committee held a formal meeting, during which it voted to recommend approving conditional funding for the non-profit.

The Ombudsman found that the gathering constituted an illegal meeting under the open meeting rules, as a quorum of the committee was present and committee business was materially advanced during the gathering. The Ombudsman noted that the information received by committee members during the gathering could reasonably be construed as having informed their decision-making. The Ombudsman recommended that members who organize tours that may be subject to the open meeting rules should consult with City staff.

The Ombudsman received complaints about a secret call held by members of council for the Municipality of Casselman on January 26, 2021. An audio recording of the call was inadvertently published on the Municipality’s website and the complainants were concerned that the discussion during the call advanced council business and constituted an illegal closed meeting under the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found that a quorum of council for the Municipality of Casselman materially advanced matters that constituted council business during the call, that it constituted a “meeting” under the Municipal Act, 2001, and was a very serious violation of the open meeting rules.

Commissioner's Message - Tangible results

I am pleased to present the 2022-2023 Annual Report of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario. The Commissioner plays an important role in supporting Ontario’s Francophone community, and is responsible for monitoring compliance with the French Language Services Act and recommending ways to improve the delivery of government services in French.

A Francophone municipal employee in Eastern Ontario was invited to take part in an English-only survey on the quality of municipal and provincial emergency management programs.

A Francophone filed a complaint about an announcement of a public consultation on the reform of housing industry regulations posted to the Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery’s French LinkedIn page.

A Francophone reached out to us because he was unable to find French versions of posts on the social media accounts of Lotto Max (Facebook, Instagram and X).

A Franco-Torontonian reached out to let us know that content on Infrastructure Ontario’s X account (@InfraOntario) about plans for an upcoming spa, water park and multi-storey parking garage at Ontario Place was only available in English.

Two Francophone students from Northern Ontario reached out to us with concerns about the quality of the French version of the accreditation exam for emergency medical care assistants.

A Francophone member of the military contacted us about a regulation in the Environmental Protection Act that he needed for work, but was not available in French.

Walking to work one day, a man noticed English-only signs about the upcoming construction of Corktown Station in Toronto for the future Ontario Line.

Our Unit handled a case involving more than 600 English-only road signs in Northern Ontario, reported by a Francophone who told us he drove more than 800 kilometres to document them.

A Francophone resident from the Sudbury area informed us about an English-only sign marking the French River on Highway 69, located between Parry Sound and Sudbury.

A man called the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) call centre in December 2022 to make an online purchase.

A Francophone who had been unemployed for a long time requested a background check from the OPP so he could be hired for a new job.

As he drove to Hamilton in a snowstorm, a driver noticed that the French version of the government’s emergency weather alerts broadcast on the radio were garbled and unintelligible.

A Francophone teen at a secure treatment centre run by a designated organization was having trouble accessing services in French, including in the classroom.

A Francophone representing himself in a dispute received an English-only email inviting him to sign up for the CaseLines platform (used by Ontario courts) to upload his documents for an upcoming hearing.

An Eastern Ontario mom reached out to us on behalf of her daughter.

A Francophone with an Outdoors card noticed that the eye colour field on his (bilingual) card was in English only (“brown”).

A man who had moved from Quebec to Ontario had initiated the process to change his driver’s licence.

A Francophone man in Northern Ontario called 511 to get information on driving conditions and selected service in French.

A Franco-Torontonian contacted us to say that the web page for the “Tow Zone” pilot program operated by the Ministry of Transportation showed stickers in English only on the vehicles of authorized towing companies.

The doctor of a Francophone woman who needed surgery was of the opinion that it would be too risky for her to drive.

A woman in Northern Ontario went to the emergency room of a designated hospital and was greeted by an employee who asked her COVID-19 screening questions in English only.

A patient at a designated hospital in Northern Ontario told us that on one of her many visits to the hospital, she had noticed multiple unilingual English posters, including one that said “Tell us how we’ve done,” as well as posters in French with errors, including one that misspelled “défense de vapoter” (vaping prohibited).

A Francophone told us about her partner’s experience after undergoing heart surgery in a partially designated hospital.

A blind Francophone man complained to us after a designated community health centre in Northern Ontario sent him confidential, encrypted documents regarding his health in English only.

A Francophone man required services from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) after he was injured at work.

A Francophone woman received a construction notice in English only from Metrolinx, which had been mailed to tenants of a residential building in Toronto.

A man went to a ServiceOntario branch in central west Toronto to get an accent added to his first name on his health card.

While at work, a Francophone man noticed that the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) had published a notice on its website in English only about a proceeding.

A Francophone woman who was in a car crash in the Ottawa region received a bill from the Ministry of Transportation’s Highway Incident Claims Unit.

A Francophone in Eastern Ontario reached out to tell us about her experience as a witness to a situation while camping.

The Ombudsman received complaints that a closed meeting of council for the County of Haliburton did not fit into the closed meeting exceptions. The Ombudsman found that the closed meeting did not fit into the exceptions for matters under another Act or information supplied in confidence by a third party. However, a portion of the closed session discussion fit within the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Town of Grimsby contravened the open meeting rules when it held a closed meeting on February 21, 2023.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about a gathering of a quorum of members of council for the Township of Morley on December 14, 2022. The complaint alleged that the gathering was a meeting that did not comply with the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman found that that the Township of Morley contravened the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 on December 14, 2022. The members of council, who also comprised a quorum of the Roads and Public Utilities Standing Committee, held a discussion in a Township garage with a member of staff regarding snowplowing operations and materially advanced the Township’s business and decision-making. In failing to treat the gathering as a meeting subject to the open meeting rules, the Township of Morley contravened the open meeting requirements of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman investigated a complaint about a closed meeting held on February 6, 2019 by the General Issues Committee of the City of Hamilton. The discussion in closed session related to a consultant’s report from November 20, 2013 that found that there were low levels of friction on the Red Hill Valley Parkway. The complaint alleged that the Committee breached the open meeting rules when it misrepresented a four-part PowerPoint presentation as a single item, and that some of the content did not fit within the exceptions of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman concluded that the Committee did not contravene the open meeting requirements under the Municipal Act, 2001, as the in camera discussion was permissible under the Act. However, to improve the accountability and transparency of its meetings, the Ombudsman made best practice suggestions relating to the Committee’s closed meeting procedures.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint regarding two closed meetings held by council for the Township of Sables-Spanish Rivers on July 26 and August 9, 2023.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a meeting of the City of Hamilton’s Agriculture and Rural Affairs Sub-Committee did not livestream a meeting to the public.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that council for the Municipality of Brockton contravened the open meeting rules on February 14, 2023 when it discussed a partnership proposal during a closed session.

The Ombudsman found that discussions about the partnership proposal did not fit within the exception for information supplied in confidence because the information discussed was not supplied confidentially and the reasonable expectation of harm was not clearly established. As a best practice, the Ombudsman recommended that, before relying on the exception for information supplied in confidence, the Municipality should confirm with the third party whether or not the information was supplied in confidence, and, where appropriate, inquire into what concrete harms could be expected if the information was disclosed publicly.
 

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that the April 19, 2022 electronic presentation of the Huronia Airport Task Force was not broadcast in the manner specified on the public notice.
 
The Ombudsman found that the Huronia Airport Task Force was a committee of the Town of Midland, the Town of Penetanguishene, and the Township of Tiny under each municipality’s procedure by-law. The Ombudsman determined that as the Huronia Airport Task Force materially advanced its business on April 19, 2022, the presentation was a meeting subject to the open meeting rules in each municipality’s procedure by-law. The Ombudsman found that the Town of Midland, the Town of Penetanguishene, and the Township of Tiny contravened the open meeting rules under their respective procedure by-laws when the municipalities failed to provide updated public notice regarding the changed electronic location of the Huronia Airport Task Force’s meeting on April 19, 2022, or record minutes of that meeting.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint regarding the April 19, 2023 meeting of Council for the Town of Deep River.

Ombudsman's Message - Value for all
In preparing this Annual Report, my eighth as Ombudsman, I am struck by the sheer scope of change that Ontario’s public sector, including my Office, has experienced since 2016.

An inmate sought our help because he was housed on the same range with another inmate who was facing charges for stabbing him – and, he told us, was now extorting him for access to the canteen, food and phone calls.

An inmate told us a correctional officer threw him to the ground and started punching and kneeing him – leaving the inmate with swollen arms and a broken hand.

A woman whose common-law spouse had died while they were living in a homeless shelter complained to us that the Chief Coroner’s Office had buried him even though she had requested to claim the body.

A woman complained to us about how her municipality handled her request to convert a shipping container into a garden shed.

A woman reached out to us because her family’s subsidized housing unit was uninhabitable after a fire.

Three residents told us that construction near their homes had caused their wells to dry up.

Shortly before the day of the October 2022 municipal election, several voters in one municipality complained to us that their mail-in ballots arrived too late.

A woman sought our help after her husband, who recently had an aneurysm, underwent a capacity assessment to determine his ability to make decisions about his property and personal care.

A community support worker contacted us with concerns about a 97-year-old neighbour.

A single mom of a child with a disability contacted us in desperation.

A man who pays family support through the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) complained to us that the FRO was garnishing too much from his federal disability payments, leaving him unable to pay his rent.

A woman was owed thousands of dollars in support payments by a former spouse who was living in British Columbia.

The mother of an 11-year-old with autism and developmental disabilities contacted us when she wasn’t able to access funding under the Ontario Autism Program (OAP) or the Assistance for Children with Severe Disabilities program (ACSD), even though she believed her child was eligible for both.

After he suffered a traumatic brain injury, an eight-year-old boy in the care of a northern children’s aid society (CAS) was airlifted from his home community to a rehabilitation hospital in southern Ontario.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Fairness)

A youth who was turning 18 called us for help when plans for her to enter a transitional housing program and complete her final semester of high school fell through.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Good care); Rights (Fairness)

A 16-year-old complained that staff at his group home weren’t helpful to him after his personal belongings, including a laptop, were stolen or damaged by other youths living in the home.

Issues: Group home; Rights (Good care); Rights (Safety)

A vendor complained to us after attempting to bid on a school board’s fire alarm testing contract.

A college student in an online learning program sought our help after he lost access to one of his courses.

A Francophone student complained to us that his French-language high school couldn’t provide him with a “section 23” program, which is support provided through the ministries of Education and Children, Community and Social Services to students who cannot attend school due to identified social, emotional, behavioural or mental health needs.

A mother complained to us that her child’s school bus route was far too long, averaging four hours per day.

A man was trying to renew a health card on behalf of his son, who has a disability and does not have a driver’s licence.

A pregnant woman who had tested positive for an infection contacted us when she received the results from Public Health Ontario and realized that the wrong follow-up test had been done.

A mother sought our help when a DriveTest centre wouldn’t let her daughter bring her certified service dog on her road test.

A mother contacted us in frustration about the conduct of a driving instructor towards her son, a student driver.

An aspiring hot dog vendor complained to us after waiting for two years for a letter from the Ministry to confirm that his custom-built propane-fueled hot dog cart did not require a vehicle identification number or licence plate.

A woman contacted us after a difficult experience trying to resolve a traffic ticket.

A woman who was born in Ontario but living in Quebec applied for a name change after discovering that her birth registration listed the wrong name.

A woman applied for a replacement birth certificate for her adult son, who has a disability, but her request was cancelled because her ex-husband had also applied for a birth certificate for him (ServiceOntario does not permit individuals to have two birth certificates).

A woman who immigrated to Canada as a child sought our help in changing her name on official documents.

A woman who had been approved for a second payment of $10,000 from the Ontario Small Business Support Grant program, sought our help after months of waiting.

An injured worker had been approved by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) to see a doctor some distance from his home.

A Francophone man in Quebec had been told he still owed dues for his trade licence, dating back to when he lived in Ontario a decade ago.

An environmental group complained to us when they didn’t hear back from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry about their concerns related to a development project’s unregulated grey water and natural septic systems.

When a conservation authority approved a permit to fill regulated flood plains, we received several complaints from local residents concerned about the negative effects on the environment.

The Ministry of the Solicitor General has requested public and stakeholder input on various proposed regulations made under the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019.

The Ombudsman received complaints about meetings held by the Committee of Adjustment; the Culture, Heritage and Tourism Committee; the Events Committee; and the Implementation and Beautification Advisory Committee in the Municipality of Callander.

Investigation into the Ministry of Long-Term Care’s oversight of long-term care homes through inspection and enforcement during the COVID-19 pandemic

The Ombudsman received a complaint that members of the public could not access the live broadcast of a meeting of council for the Municipality of West Elgin after council returned to open session from a closed session.

Every five years, the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services is required to formally review the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (the CYFSA) and to report publicly on the review’s findings.

A mother contacted our Children and Youth Unit because she was concerned that her son might have been hurt by a staff member in a group home.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Group home; Rights (Safety)

Our Office received a complaint from a person who was removed from the Township of Alberton’s May 11, 2022 hybrid council meeting because they refused to identify themselves on Zoom. The Township has a requirement that all attendees of council meetings, whether in person or virtual, must identify themselves. The purpose of this requirement in the context of virtual council meetings is to prevent “Zoom bombings”, in which uninvited individuals join a meeting and act in a disruptive manner.

The Ombudsman concluded that by removing the complainant from the meeting on May 11, 2022, the Township contravened the open meeting rules. Municipalities have an obligation to ensure that members of the public can freely access and observe open meetings and must be careful about placing conditions on their ability to do so. While not all such conditions will necessarily be a violation of the open meeting rules, in this case, requiring the public identification of all attendees was an overly intrusive measure that was not proportionate to the objective of preventing “Zoom bombings”.

The Ombudsman reviewed complaints that council for the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio contravened the open meeting rules on June 29, 2021, and March 1 and 7, 2022.

The Ombudsman found that discussions with Township solicitors about a development project and a specific agreement fit within the exception for solicitor-client privilege. However, he found that several resolutions to close the meeting to the public did not include a general description of the topic to be discussed in camera. He also found that council failed to formally vote on a resolution to move in camera. Finally, the Ombudsman found issues with the Township’s procedural by-law, which did not adequately address public notice for special meetings of council, and with the Township’s minutes, which fell short of the requirements outlined in its procedural by-law.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint alleging that the Board of Trustees for the Hamilton Waterfront Trust contravened the open meeting rules on February 21, 2023 when it discussed a letter outlining the Ombudsman’s findings about previous closed meeting complaints in closed session.

The Ombudsman received two complaints about electronic meetings held by council for the Municipality of Calvin on May 10 and June 14, 2022. The complaints alleged that the Municipality did not provide the public with proper public notice or the means to observe these two electronic council meetings, contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Municipality’s procedure by-law.

The Ombudsman found that council for the Municipality of Calvin contravened the open meeting rules by failing to ensure proper notice was provided for the May 10 and June 14, 2022 meetings. Additionally, the Ombudsman found that council contravened the Act on June 14, 2022, by failing to ensure that the public could observe the meeting in real time.

The Office of the Children’s Lawyer contacted us on behalf of a 17-year-old who was trying to get the cost of braces for her teeth covered by her children’s aid society (CAS).

Issues: Children’s aid society; Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA); Rights (Good care)

The Ombudsman received complaints that the Niagara Central Dorothy Rungeling Airport Commission lacked a procedure by-law and held meetings that did not comply with the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint alleging that council for the Town of Amherstburg held an illegally closed meeting over dinner on June 13, 2022 in between a scheduled in camera meeting and a scheduled open meeting.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint regarding the September 28, 2022 meeting of the Town of Huntsville’s General Committee.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint regarding the January 23, 2023 meeting of the City of London’s Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a closed meeting held by council for the Township of Douro-Dummer did not fit within the open meeting exceptions.
 

The Ombudsman of Ontario is appointed under the Ombudsman Act as an independent and impartial Officer of the Ontario Legislature.

Investigation into whether the Ministry of the Attorney General, Tribunals Ontario and the Landlord and Tenant Board are taking adequate steps to address delays and case backlogs at the Landlord and Tenant Board

Investigation into the adequacy of measures undertaken by Johnson Children’s Services Inc., Anishinaabe Abinoojii Family Services, and a Southwestern Ontario children’s aid society to ensure the safety of “Misty”

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Municipality of Arran-Elderslie held meetings that did not comply with the Municipal Act 2001’s open meeting requirements.

The Ombudsman investigated a special closed meeting held by the Grey Bruce Health Unit’s Board of Health on May 12, 2021 and a closed meeting held by the Board’s Executive Committee on May 10, 2021. The Ombudsman found that the Board of Health fits within the definition of a “local board” under the Municipal Act, 2001, while the Executive Committee fits within the definition of a “committee”, and accordingly, both are subject to the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman found that the discussions of the Executive Committee and the Board of Health on May 10 and 12, 2021 fit within the exceptions for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege and litigation or potential litigation. He also found that the Board’s discussion on May 12, 2021 fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual. However, the Ombudsman found that both the Board of Health and the Executive Committee contravened the open meeting rules by passing resolutions to move into closed session without providing a general description of the matters to be discussed and by failing to keep a record of all matters discussed in the meeting minutes.

The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by council for the City of Greater Sudbury on July 12, 2022, during which council received detailed information and legal advice about two third-party bids for a proposed municipal project.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that members of council for the City of London met improperly behind closed doors ahead of a meeting of the city’s Corporate Services Committee (“the Committee”) on October 12, 2021.

The Ministry of the Solicitor General has requested public and stakeholder input on four proposed regulations under the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019 regarding special constables.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about a training session held by council for the Township of Emo on May 28, 2022. The complaint alleged that council contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 and its procedure by-law when it held a budget training in a closed session without providing notice to the public.

The Ombudsman found that council for the Township of Emo did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 or its own procedure by-law when it held a training session in camera on May 28, 2022. The session fit into the “education and training” exception since council received training on the new budget format and did not materially advance its business or decision-making.  Additionally, the Township was not required to post notice of the training session, as it did not constitute a meeting under the Municipal Act, 2001, and was therefore not subject to the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that the Saugeen Municipal Airport Commission contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on June 20, 2022, by failing to admit a member of the public to a meeting that was held virtually, using Zoom.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding closed meetings held by the City of Cornwall’s Municipal Grants Review Committee / Working Group on November 9 and November 30, 2021. The complaint raised concerns that these meetings were closed contrary to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman found that the Committee is a committee of council and must comply with the open meeting rules. The Ombudsman found that the Committee’s discussion on November 9, 2021 did not fit within any exception to the open meeting rules. The Committee also contravened the Act on November 30, 2021, as only some of its in camera discussion fit within a prescribed exception to the Act’s open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman received complaints about the Hamilton Waterfront Trust’s meeting practices.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about gatherings held by the newly elected council for the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio on November 15, 24, and 29, 2022.

The Ombudsman reviewed complaints that council for the Township of McKellar contravened the open meeting rules during meetings on August 24, August 31, and September 9, 2021, and April 12, 2022 relating to the public’s ability to observe meetings of council.

The Ombudsman found that the Township contravened the Municipal Act, 2001, on August 24, 2021, when audio and connectivity issues prevented the public from observing the livestreamed meeting, and on August 31, 2021, when it failed to publicly livestream the meeting after council came out of closed session. Council also contravened the open meeting rules when it provided contradictory information about the time and location of its September 9, 2021 meeting and the location of its April 12, 2022 meeting in public notices.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint about numerous closed meetings held by the Township of Nipissing. The complaint alleged that council’s in camera discussions did not fit within any of the closed meeting exceptions under the Municipal Act, 2001, and should have occurred in open session. The Ombudsman determined that council for the Township of Nipissing did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 during in camera meetings on February 17, March 9, April 6, May 18, June 8, and August 3, 2021. The Ombudsman found that these in camera discussions were permissible under the Act’s closed meeting exceptions. However, the Ombudsman found that the Township contravened the Act on July 13, 2021, when it discussed the Township’s hiring plan in camera. This discussion did not fall within any of the Act’s closed meeting exceptions, and could have been parsed from the rest of council’s in camera discussion.

The Ombudsman received complaints alleging that council for the Municipality of Casselman contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it discussed the purchase of an identified property during a closed session.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that the City of Hamilton’s Working Group of the Physician Recruitment and Retention Steering Committee violated the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 when it held meetings on January 12, September 14, October 14, October 29, November 23, and December 14, 2021.

The Ombudsman reviewed two complaints about an emergency closed meeting held by council for the Township of Prince on March 15, 2022.

The Ombudsman reviewed complaints about meetings held by the Cultural Vitality Committee and the Tourism Board of the City of Sault Ste. Marie. The Ombudsman determined that the Cultural Vitality Committee contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on November 17, 2021, by holding a meeting that did not comply with the open meeting requirements. The Ombudsman found that the meeting was not open to the public, as the Committee did not provide the public with information about how to attend the virtual meeting. However, the Ombudsman found that the Cultural Vitality Committee’s resolution to proceed in camera was sufficiently descriptive to provide information to the public without undermining the reason for excluding the public. The Ombudsman also found that the Tourism Board contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on November 25, 2021 by holding a meeting that did not comply with the open meeting requirements. The meeting was not open to the public, as the Board did not provide the public with information on how to attend the virtual meeting.

Investigation into the Children’s Aid Society of Toronto’s response to child protection concerns involving “Brandon” between December 31, 2015 and October 26, 2018

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding closed meetings held by council for Norfolk County on March 8, April 12, and May 10, 2022.

A man noticed a post in French on the Office of the Auditor General’s Twitter account, announcing the release of its annual report on the environment.

A man saw a post in French on Twitter from the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario, indicating that the latest report from the Integrity Commissioner was available, with a link to the report “Re: The Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, President of the Treasury Board.”

A woman seeking a review as part of her work visited the website of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC).

A man shared with us his family’s experience after their dying mother was admitted to a designated hospital in Northern Ontario.

A man complained to us about the lack of French language services at a COVID-19 vaccination clinic.

A woman contacted us because she was unable to obtain home care services in French for her spouse, who had lost the ability to speak English due to health problems.

A crane operator attempted to contact Skilled Trades Ontario (STO) to request an explanation regarding an invoice and was unable to obtain services in French.

We were contacted by a Francophone mother whose child identifies as female – which represented a change from the gender assigned to the child at birth.

A man filed a complaint about Ontario Health’s job postings.

A woman informed us that French subtitles had disappeared from the videos on the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development’s Facebook page entitled “Lieux de travail de l’Ontario [Ontario At Work].”

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that the Coordinated Committee for the Town of Wasaga Beach contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on July 21, 2022, when it moved in camera to discuss a report pertaining to the redevelopment of Town-owned property.

Commissioner's Message - The future begins now

This is already my third Annual Report as French Language Services Commissioner, within the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario.

When I reflect on the progress we have achieved since May 1, 2019, I am proud of the work we have accomplished. My objective with this report is to take stock and to seize the opportunity to look to the future, in light of possibilities arising from the modernization of the French Language Services Act.

A 13-year-old in the care of a children’s aid society (CAS) contacted us when he didn’t hear back from his CAS about making arrangements to see his mother.
 

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Good care)

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the City of Niagara Falls held a closed meeting on April 12, 2022 that did not comply with the requirements in the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ministry of the Solicitor General has requested public and stakeholder input on proposed amendments to Ontario Regulation 926/90 concerning equipment and the use of force by police services.

A Francophone man who wanted some information about renewing his licence plate contacted our Office because he was unable to obtain service in French from a ServiceOntario office in a designated area.

A woman contacted us to complain about her experience with inadequate French services from the Ministry of Colleges and Universities, both during telephone conversations and in written communications in response to her access to information request.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding closed meetings held by council for the Township of Minden Hills in 2021 and 2022.

The Ombudsman received two complaints alleging that the Town of South Bruce Peninsula voted in closed session on April 28, 2022, contrary to the requirements in the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding a meeting held by the Heritage Permit Review Sub-Committee on March 15, 2022, and a meeting held by the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Advisory Committee on March 29, 2022, for the City if Hamilton.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the City of Pickering violated the open meeting rules found in the Municipal Act, 2001 on January 10, 2022.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding a closed meeting held by Dufferin County’s Infrastructure and Environmental Services Standing Committee on April 28, 2022.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Municipality of Casselman contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 during a meeting on October 26, 2021, by failing to pass a resolution describing the general nature of the matter to be discussed in closed session before moving in camera. The Ombudsman found that council contravened subsection 239(4) of the Act when it failed to state by resolution the general nature of the matter to be considered in camera. The Ombudsman also noted that the minutes did not accurately reflect the proceedings of the meeting.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Municipality of Casselman held a closed session on May 27, 2021, when three members of council participated in a video call pertaining to a development project with a neighbouring municipality. The presence of two members of council was never disclosed to other participants on the video call. The complainant was concerned that this gathering constituted an illegal meeting under the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman found that the video call did not contravene the Act because the discussions during the call were technical and informational in nature and did not materially advance council business or decision-making. However, the Ombudsman strongly encouraged the Municipality to maximize the transparency of its practices by disclosing the presence of all participants at any virtual gathering.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that council for the City of Brockville contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it went in camera on October 13, 2021. Council’s in camera discussions pertained to an employee’s performance in their role and to the employee’s conduct. The complaint also raised concerns relating to public notice for the meeting on October 13, 2021, and also for a meeting on October 18, 2021. The Ombudsman found that council’s in camera discussion on October 13, 2021 was permissible under the exception at paragraph 239(2)(b) of the Act, personal matters about an identifiable individual. However, council contravened the Act by failing to state in its resolution the general nature of the matter to be considered, as required by subsection 239(4). The Ombudsman also found that council did not comply with subsection 238(2.1) of the Act on October 13 and October 18, 2021 because its procedure by-law fails to provide for public notice about the calling, place and proceedings of special meetings.

Ombudsman's Message - A gradual return
It is with cautious optimism that my colleagues and I turn the page on 2021-2022 and plan for a gradual return to the activities and methods of operation that we were forced to curtail with the onset of COVID-19 more than two years ago.

After an inmate complained to us that he was pushed to the ground and attacked by several correctional officers, we intervened to verify that a local investigation had been conducted.

An inmate with HIV complained that he hadn’t been receiving testosterone and other supplements he required to prevent muscle deterioration.

A man contacted us in frustration after his application to have his issue heard by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) was dismissed.

A man who was in jail awaiting sentencing complained to us that correctional officials had told him he could not vote in the September 2021 federal election, even though he was eligible.

A homeowner complained to us that her municipality was demanding she pay more than $5,000 in fees for a permit for a culvert that had been built under her driveway years ago.

A man seeking a property tax deferment complained to us that council had unfairly rejected his request because there wasn’t time to consider it.

A woman complained to us that she had no idea why her water bill had tripled in a few months with no change to her consumption, and the municipal billing department would not help.

After water rates were increased in a small municipality, we received 48 complaints from local residents who disagreed with the increase.

We received a complaint from the father of a student with disabilities who resides during the week at a provincial demonstration school in southern Ontario.

A university student who was exclusively enrolled in online courses and as an online teaching assistant complained to us that he was “unenrolled” because he did not provide proof that he had received the COVID-19 vaccine.

A man who had accidentally submitted incorrect information to the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) sought our help when OSAP converted his $32,000 grant to a loan.

A man studying online for his real estate certification complained to us after he was accused of leaving his seat during a virtual exam and then locked out of the program.

A woman who was behind on her hydro bills asked Ontario Works (OW) for help to avoid getting disconnected.

A mother had been waiting for months to access support funding to assist with her nine-year-old son’s developmental mental health conditions.

A woman who was owed more than $10,000 in support payments from her ex-husband complained to us that she had provided documents to the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) proving that he had the money in a bank account, but the FRO would not take action.

An Ontario Works (OW) recipient urgently needed help when her benefits were suspended because she submitted some paperwork late.

A man who had continued to make regular family support payments to his former mother-in-law, who had cared for his now-adult daughter, complained to us after he learned the older woman had been dead for more than a year.

A couple with disabilities contacted us after trying for months to get an expedited hearing with the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) to address unsafe conditions in their apartment.

A woman sought our help after trying for several weeks to get a refund from the Ontario Cannabis Store (OCS) for a package that Canada Post never delivered.

A former client of the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee (OPGT) contacted our Office after she was told she would have to pay an outstanding restitution order to receive a pardon for a past criminal offence.

A man contacted our Office after waiting almost two years for the Ministry of Transportation to return a $5,000 security deposit.

A woman who needed to drive to visit her husband in hospital sought our help after ServiceOntario told her she could not renew her licence.

A woman complained to us that the Ministry of Transportation had suspended her licence even though she had faxed in her eye test results a month earlier for special review.

A woman sought our help when she found out her driver’s licence had been suspended for medical reasons five years earlier, without her knowledge.

We heard from a man who was still waiting for his semi-annual grant for ostomy supplies from the Ministry’s Assistive Devices Program.

A man contacted our Office after trying unsuccessfully to have his Trillium Drug Program deductible increased.

A man contacted us on behalf of his father, who was immunocompromised and receiving cancer treatments.

A woman whose husband was killed in a workplace accident complained to us that she had heard nothing about the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development’s investigation of the incident for more than a year.

After receiving the first of two Small Business Support Grant payments, a business owner was told he was no longer eligible for the second.

A homeowner sought our help with servicing his septic tank – which was located on the property of a neighbour who would not allow access.

A group of residents near a construction site complained that the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks was not acting on their complaints about debris.

A woman sought our help after she purchased an annual Ontario Parks pass by mistake – she had meant to buy a Parks Canada pass (for national parks) instead.

A mother complained to us about delays in obtaining long-form birth certificates for her two university-aged children, who needed the documents to apply for post-secondary education funding.

A mother contacted us in frustration after waiting several months for her son’s name change to be processed.

The Ombudsman received complaints alleging that council for the Town of Amherstburg violated the open meeting rules found in the Municipal Act, 2001 when it held in camera meetings on August 8, September 13, November 8, and November 16, 2021.

The Ombudsman found that the Town did not contravene the Act’s open meeting requirements in closing these meetings to the public. However, the Town contravened section 239(4)(a) of the Act on September 13 and November 16, 2021 by failing to state by resolution the general nature of the matters to be considered in camera. The Town also contravened the requirements of section 239(7) of the Act by failing to keep a record of what occurred in camera on November 8 and November 16, 2021.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a special council meeting held by the Township of Russell on January 10, 2022.

A concerned adult contacted our Office on behalf of a youth who was denied a Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA) by a children’s aid society (CAS). VYSAs are available to 16- and 17-year-olds who have left home because of concerns about their safety, and who are in need of child protection services.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA)

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding a closed meeting held by the Governance Committee for the Niagara Falls Downtown Business Improvement Area on January 12, 2022.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that the Committee of the Whole for the Township of Leeds and the Thousand Islands contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it received an update about negotiations with a commercial partner during a closed session.

We received a complaint from a Francophone who contacted the Ministry of Finance regarding provincial property taxes in an unorganized territory in Northern Ontario.

The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by council for the Township of Lanark Highlands on December 7, 2021. Council proceeded in camera to discuss the performance of an individual in the context of their employment with the Township. Council also discussed the Township’s finances, which would typically occur in open session. However, the Ombudsman found that it would have been impractical for council to parse its discussion of the Township’s finances from its discussion about the performance of an employee. The Ombudsman found that council did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 since the meeting fit under the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual.

The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by council for the Town of Pelham on April 19, 2021, during which council discussed future management and potential development of the local airport. The Ombudsman found that council contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it met in closed session since the discussion did not fit under any exceptions to the open meeting rules. The Ombudsman also found that council contravened the requirements of section 239(4)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001 when it failed to state by resolution the general nature of the matters to be considered in camera.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that the Saugeen Municipal Airport Commission contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it went in camera during a meeting on September 27, 2021. The Ombudsman found that the Commission’s discussion about an agreement with a client was permissible under the exception for plans and instructions for negotiations. However, the Commission contravened the Act when it discussed an agreement with municipalities and the related withdrawal process, as well as financial information. Moreover, prior to moving into closed session, the Commission failed to state in its resolution the general nature of the matter to be considered as required by subsection 239(4) of the Act.

As large numbers of Ukrainians have sought refuge in Ontario in the wake of Russia’s invasion of their country, Ontario has made efforts to help them settle. However, we recently heard of some having difficulty in obtaining driver’s licences.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the City of Owen Sound violated the open meeting rules found in the Municipal Act, 2001 on March 14, 2022.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about four meetings of Bruce County’s Executive Committee on September 21, 2017, August 2 and September 6, 2018, and January 10, 2019. The complaint alleged that the Committee contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it closed these meetings to the public and failed to report back in open session about its discussions.

The Ombudsman found that the Committee did not contravene the Act when it proceeded in camera on August 2, 2018. However, the Committee contravened the Act on September 21, 2017, and September 6, 2018. The Committee’s brief in camera discussion on January 10, 2019, about a new position for a specified individual fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual, however, this matter could have been parsed from the rest of the Committee’s discussion, which did not fit within any of the closed meeting exceptions.

A person complained that some LinkedIn accounts of the Ontario government and its agencies, including those of the Ministry of Transportation and Ontario Health, showed a unilingual English logo and title.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about three closed meetings held by council for the Township of Huron-Kinloss.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that meetings of the Board of Directors of the Niagara Falls Hydro Holding Corporation constitute meetings of City council, and that consequently, these meetings do not comply with the Municipal Act, 2001’s open meeting requirements because they are not open to the public.

A 14-year-old youth needed our help getting identification documents to register for school and access health care, after he was removed from his home by a children’s aid society (CAS) over safety concerns.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Get help)

A man informed us that although he had chosen to receive the Metrolinx e-newsletter about the Ontario Line in French, it was still being emailed to him in English every week.

Investigation into the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services’ implementation of the decision to close custody and detention programs at Creighton Youth Centre and J.J. Kelso Youth Centre.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about two working group meetings of the Off Road Vehicle Task Force of the City of Kawartha Lakes held on February 19 and March 4, 2021. The complainant alleged that the meetings were held in violation of the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 because they were not open to the public. The Ombudsman found that the Task Force was a committee of council and was therefore required to comply with the open meeting rules. It was determined that there was quorum and the business of the Task Force was materially advanced at the February 19 and March 4, 2021 working group meetings. In closing these meetings to the public, the Task Force violated the requirements of the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that council for the Township of Leeds and the Thousand Islands contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it went in camera on August 11, 2020. Council’s in camera discussion pertained to a study report and a funding application, both related to an internet broadband project.

The Ombudsman found that council’s discussion about the study report was permissible under the exception at s. 239(2)(j), information belonging to the municipality. However, council contravened the Act by discussing the funding application in camera and by holding a vote by consensus on this matter. Furthermore, prior to moving into closed session, council failed to state in its resolution the general nature of the matter to be considered as required by s. 239(4).

Investigation into Laurentian University’s cuts to French-language programming during restructuring and into the administration of the university’s designation by the Ministry of Francophone Affairs and the Ministry of Colleges and Universities

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Town of Hawkesbury met in closed session on November 8, 2021, contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman investigated two closed meetings held by council for the Township of McMurrich/Monteith on June 8 and July 6, 2021. The Ombudsman found that council did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 when it held a closed meeting on June 8, 2021 since part of the discussion fit under the exception for solicitor-client privilege and the rest of the discussion fit under the exception for plans or instructions for negotiations. The Ombudsman found that the delegation to council during the closed meeting on July 6, 2021 did not fit under any closed meeting exceptions while council’s subsequent discussion fit under the exception for litigation or potential litigation. Accordingly, the Ombudsman found that council contravened the Municipal Act because it would have been possible for council to parse the delegation portion of the meeting from its subsequent discussion.

We were contacted by a person who requested a bilingual hearing at a courthouse in Northern Ontario.

A youth sought our help with retrieving belongings she had left behind at her family home after experiencing physical abuse at the hands of her stepfather.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Good care); Rights (Get help)

 

The Ombudsman found that council for the City of Niagara Falls contravened the open meeting rules when it discussed the process for establishing a Chief Administrative Officer recruitment sub-committee in closed session on November 17, 2020. The discussion did not fit within any exception under the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman also found that council failed to describe the subject to be discussed in closed session in its resolution to proceed in camera. Council further contravened the Act when it passed a resolution to go in camera during a portion of the meeting that was effectively closed to the public, as the public was unable to attend in person or observe a live broadcast.

A 16-year-old complained to us that her children’s aid society (CAS) had refused to allow her to enter into a Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA) after she had left her home due to the abusive behaviour of her aunt.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA); Rights (Get help)

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that the Environmental Services Committee for the Municipality of St.-Charles held a closed session on August 17, 2021, when the two members sitting on the Committee attended a gathering with residents relating to garbage collection issues.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about an electronic meeting held by the City of Hamilton’s Board of Health on August 11, 2021.

A youth in care sought our help in filing a complaint about staff at her residential placement.

Issue: Rights (Get help)

A man contacted the provincial COVID-19 vaccine system by phone and chose the “French” option to request his proof of vaccination by mail.

The Ombudsman reviewed a closed session held by council for the Township of Pelee on June 22, 2021. The Ombudsman found that since council did not discuss a matter in a way that materially advanced business or decision-making, the gathering was not a meeting subject to open meeting rules under the Municipal Act. The Ombudsman found that even if the gathering had been a meeting, it was permissible to have the discussion in camera under the exception for education or training.

The Ombudsman reviewed two closed meetings held by council for the Town of Collingwood on February 6 and June 11, 2018. The Ombudsman found that legal fee quotes containing specific information, such as suggested strategy, constitute advice subject to solicitor-client privilege. The Ombudsman found that council did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 since both meetings fit under the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Ombudsman received complaints about the meeting practices of the Board of Directors for the City of Hamilton Farmers’ Market.

The Ombudsman reviewed meetings held by the Investigation Committee in the Township of Nairn and Hyman. The Ombudsman found that the municipality contravened the open meeting rules when it did not provide public notice of Investigation Committee meetings and when council did not state by resolution the general nature of the matters to be discussed in camera. The Ombudsman recommended that the Township ensure it provides public notice for all committee meetings, and that resolutions to proceed in camera provide a general description of the issues to be discussed.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Township of Russell contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it proceeded in camera on November 16, 2020 to discuss an infrastructure project. The complaint contended that the discussion did not fit within any exception to the open meeting rules. After investigating the matter, the Ombudsman held that council’s discussion was permissible under the exceptions at s. 239(2)(c), acquisition or disposition of land, and s. 239(2)(k), plans and instructions for negotiations.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Town of Wasaga Beach contravened the Municipal Act, 2001’s open meeting requirements on September 22, 2021.

The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the Township of Russell to discuss information received in confidence from another level of government.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint alleging that the Saugeen Municipal Airport Commission contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it did not provide consistent public notice of its electronic meetings, including instructions on how to access the meetings. The complaint further alleged that the Commission contravened the open meeting rules because members of the public were unable to rejoin meetings after the commissioners rose from closed session. The Ombudsman found that the Commission is a local board and contravened the Municipal Act when it held meetings without providing adequate public notice, and by failing to pass a procedure by-law governing its meetings. The Commission also contravened the Municipal Act when it failed to adequately notify members of the public about how to request readmission to the portion of an open meeting following a closed session. The Ombudsman recognized that the Commission did not intend to exclude the public and commended the Commission’s efforts to increase transparency through changes to its public notice process and adoption of a formal procedure to ensure that observers are adequately informed about how to observe portions of a meeting occurring after a closed session. The Ombudsman recommended that the Commission adopt a procedure by-law governing its meetings and providing for public notice of all meetings. The Ombudsman further recommended that the Commission ensure the public is able to observe all open portions of meetings.

The Ombudsman received a complaint in May 2021 that a quorum of council for the Town of Espanola, made up of the Mayor and three councillors, improperly met on January 31, 2019 behind closed doors after the regular council meeting had concluded, contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001.

Commissioner's Message - Taking Care of Ontario's Linguistic Health
This is the second Annual Report of the French Language Services Commissioner presented by the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario. As we look back on the past year, we are more motivated than ever by the opportunity we have, even amid the COVID-19 pandemic, to find effective solutions to the challenges we confront.

In February 2021, the government launched an online consultation to get ideas and feedback on its plan to introduce a digital ID (digital identification).

We were contacted by a person who watched the Trillium Awards ceremony on Facebook on June 17, 2020, which was held in English only.

We were contacted by a Francophone woman after she tried to call Metrolinx. Although she chose the French phone line, she said the agent who took the call could only speak English.

We were contacted by a person who visited the Ontario Health Data Platform website to learn more about a Ministry of Health research project – only to discover the site was only available in English.

A man working at a French-language school board contacted us because he wanted to obtain the French version of the Fire Code (Regulation 213/07 of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act) in order to know the provisions that apply to school facilities.

We were contacted by a person living in a designated area of Eastern Ontario who requested the French version of an inspection report conducted by the Electrical Safety Authority (ESA).

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for Loyalist Township improperly held a closed session on May 3, 2021, when a council member conducted a series of individual phone calls with other council members ahead of a committee meeting concerning a grant policy.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about closed meetings held electronically by council for the Municipality of Temagami on March 8, 2021 and March 25, 2021.

A mother complained to our Office that her son’s school didn’t notify the local children’s aid society (CAS) about allegations he made to his teacher that his grandmother had hurt him.

Issues: Duty to report; Rights (Safety)

A woman told us that she wanted to get physiotherapy care for her father.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Township of South Algonquin contravened the Municipal Act, 2001’s open meeting requirements on September 8, 2021.

A 14-year-old in care told us her worker was insisting that she go to school in person, even though her preference was to continue to attend school online.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Disability; Rights (Good care); Rights (Identity)

A Francophone woman complained to us that a dermatology clinic at an eastern Ontario hospital did not provide services in French when she booked her appointment on the phone, at reception or during the medical examination.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Town of Fort Erie contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on July 26, 2021 when it met in closed session to discuss the disposition of a fire station.

The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint alleging that meetings held by the Baconfest Committee and two workings groups in the Township of Lucan Biddulph contravened the open meeting requirements. The Ombudsman found that the Baconfest Committee fell within the Township’s definition of “committee” and that council contravened the open meeting rules when it did not provide notice, or record meeting minutes, of Baconfest Committee meetings. The Ombudsman applauded the Township’s proactive choice to dissolve the two working groups, which was done prior to his investigation, and replace them with one committee. The Ombudsman recommended, as a best practice, that the Township formally establish all committees by by-law, and ensure that all meetings are conducted in accordance with the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Town of South Bruce Peninsula improperly met in closed session on March 16, 2021, to receive a delegation  contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ontario Ombudsman oversees the administrative conduct of more than 1,000 public sector organizations, including the province’s 72 school boards and 10 school authorities, as well as provincial and demonstration schools.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Township of Brudenell, Lyndoch and Raglan contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on October 8, 2019. The complaint alleged that council’s discussion did not fit within the exception for litigation and potential litigation under the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman’s investigation found that council’s discussion was permissible under this exception, as it related to a matter before an administrative tribunal. However, the Ombudsman found that the Township failed to record minutes of the closed session or state by resolution the general nature of the matters to be considered in camera. The Ombudsman recommended that the Township keep minutes of all open and closed meetings, ensure the integrity of any audio recordings of meetings, and make a number of amendments to bring its procedure by-law in line with the requirements under the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Township of South Frontenac contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on July 13, 2021.

The French Language Services Unit has received several complaints about the Amber alert system.

The Ombudsman received complaints alleging that council for the Municipality of West Nipissing contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on May 12, 2021.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Township of Lanark Highlands contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on September 22, 2020. The complaint alleged that council’s discussion did not fit within the exceptions to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman’s investigation found that council’s discussion was permissible under the Municipal Act’s closed meeting exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual in s.239(2)(b). As a best practice, the Ombudsman recommended that the Township ensure that its meeting minutes reflect the council’s discussion on all substantive matters and that closed sessions are recorded.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about the meeting practices of the Joint Planning Committee (JPC) for the ConnectWell Community Health Centre in the Township of Lanark Highlands.

Since January 1, 2016, my Office has had the authority to review complaints about municipalities, including municipal boards and corporations. Between January 1, 2016 and March 31, 2021, we received more than 14,000 complaints about municipalities. Through our review and investigation of complaints, we often identify best practices and suggestions to improve municipal processes and strengthen local governance and accountability. Most municipalities appreciate the information that we provide, and are happy to implement improvements locally.

A Francophone education professional complained to us about the inadequate quality of French on some of the forms for the Ontario Youth Apprenticeship Program (OYAP), a school-to-work transition program offered in high schools across the province.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Township of McKellar improperly met in closed session on June 24, 2021, to discuss the West Parry Sound Pool and Wellness Centre contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that three councillors for the Township of McKellar improperly met with the incoming CAO/Clerk on March 3, 2021, contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman found that the Township of Bonfield violated the open meeting rules when it held meetings in May and June 2020 over Zoom, without broadcasting or otherwise making the meetings accessible to the public. The Ombudsman recognized that these were the first meetings held by the Township during the COVID-19 pandemic, but noted that the pandemic did not alter the open meeting requirements. The Ombudsman also found that the Township failed to include information about topics discussed in the meeting minutes, including resolutions that were voted on but failed to pass. He recommended that, as a best practice, the Township improve its minute-taking practices.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Town of Kirkland Lake contravened the open meeting requirements in the Municipal Act, 2001, when it met in closed session on August 25, 2020. The Ombudsman found that council’s closed session discussion involved scrutinizing individuals’ conduct and job performance and that the employee-employer relationship was central to the discussion. Accordingly, the Ombudsman found that the discussion fit within the ‘personal matters’ and ‘labour relations’ exceptions to the open meeting rules. The Ombudsman found that council for the Town of Kirkland Lake contravened the requirements of s.239(4)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001, by failing to state by resolution the general nature of the matters to be considered in camera.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by council for the City of Niagara Falls on October 6, 2020. The complaint alleged that council discussed the designation of the Niagara River as a protected wetland in closed session. The Ombudsman found that this topic fit within the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege as council received legal advice from the City solicitor about the potential designation. However, the Ombudsman found that council’s resolution to go in camera was not broadcast live. The Ombudsman recommended that the City ensure that the public is able to observe all open portions of electronic meetings.

Ombudsman’s Message - Essential Lessons from a Pandemic Year

At this time last year, reporting on the impact of the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic on Ontario public services, I observed that in mid-March 2020, “everything changed.”

A man with ALS complained that when he moved into a long-term care home in 2017 due to his deteriorating condition, he become ineligible for the ventilator that he had been provided through the province’s Ventilator Equipment Pool program.

A First Nations trapper sought our help in obtaining a refund from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry for licences to sell furs commercially, and a mandatory humane trapping course.

A homeowner complained to us about a pipe outlet on his property that was leaking foul-smelling fluid. His municipality referred him to the Ministry of Transportation, which denied responsibility.

A group home worker raised health and safety concerns with us after he and a few colleagues contracted COVID-19.

A personal support worker contacted us in frustration when he and his colleagues were denied “pandemic pay,” despite being in close contact with patients.

A woman who was waiting for the Fair Practices Commissioner (FPC – the WSIB’s internal ombudsman) to assist her with a loss-of-earnings assessment and prescription cost refund sought our help early in the pandemic.

A woman contacted us in frustration over delays and a lack of communication from the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee (OPGT) regarding her brother, who was an OPGT client.

Several people who work as title searchers complained to us about the province’s decision to end in-person services at all 54 of its Land Registry Offices in October 2020.

A father whose child was born through a surrogate mother complained to us after the Registrar General asked him to resubmit the paperwork for registering the birth, and include an additional form swearing that his statements were true.

A man complained to us about long delays in getting ServiceOntario and the Registrar General to correct a name error on his mother’s death certificate.

A woman contacted us after she missed several cheques from the province’s Assistive Devices Program (ADP), which she required to cover the cost of ostomy supplies.

A woman who has several health issues and relies on Ontario Disability Support Program benefits complained to us that her request for coverage of her medications had been denied by the Ontario Drug Benefit program.

A woman who had lived in Canada for 76 years sought our help when she attempted to renew her health card and discovered she did not have Canadian citizenship.

A driver complained to us after he was told the Ministry had no record of the licence he had surrendered to them 30 days earlier.

A man who had driving experience in India and in British Columbia sought our help after he tried to obtain an equivalent Ontario driver’s licence.

A driver whose licence was suspended as a result of a criminal charge successfully appealed the charge and had it removed from his record.

The mother of a 21-year-old woman with developmental disabilities complained to us that she had not been reimbursed by the province’s Passport program for support services that she purchased for her daughter.

An Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) recipient complained to us that her benefits had been cut off twice without warning.

An unemployed woman who had been paying child support to her children’s father complained to us that the Family Responsibility Office was still intercepting 50% of her unemployment benefits, even though the man had died and the children were now in her care.

After a youth living in a treatment home complained that his request for a service dog was refused, we followed up with his CAS worker.

Issues: Disability; Rights (Identity)

A 13-year-old in a group home complained that staff were forcing him to talk to them and share his feelings, rather than respecting his privacy.

Issues: Group home; Rights (Good care); Rights (Safety)

A Black 16-year-old complained that her CAS worker was dismissive of her requests for hair and skin products that met her cultural needs, making her feel like she was being treated differently because of her race.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Black youth; Rights (Identity); Rights (Get help); Rights (Fairness)

A would-be commercial truck driver complained to us after the private career college where he took his Mandatory Entry Level Training course was suspended by the Ministry of Colleges and Universities.

A college graduate seeking to pursue studies at a university sought our help when he was unable to provide official transcripts from the college, whose offices were closed in spring 2020 due to COVID-19.

A university student who had completed two years of courses applied for late withdrawal because of a previously undiagnosed mental illness.

After a woman told us her drinking water was discoloured and she feared it was unsafe to drink, we contacted her municipality and the Ontario Clean Water Agency, which runs its water system.

More than 30 people from the same municipality sought our help with concerns about leaking water pipes.

A man who received a ticket for stopping in a “no stopping” zone complained that only a “no parking” sign was visible from the spot.

Residents who live close to an open-pit mine contacted us in frustration after complaining to their municipality about noise, dust, and emissions for years.

We received numerous complaints in 2020-2021 about delays in approvals by Ontario’s Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) for transfers of restricted firearms.

An inmate sought our help after he was involved in an altercation with another inmate and then pepper sprayed and assaulted by correctional officers.

Several inmates in the same facility complained to us that they were strip searched in a main hallway, in view of security cameras.

A youth revealed to us that her concerns about being physically restrained at her group home were not being heard.

Issues: Group home; Physical restraints; Death and Serious Bodily Harm Report (DSBH); Rights (Safety); Rights (Get help)

Our Office checked on a youth after we heard she was hurt when her group home staff physically restrained her self-injurious behaviour.

Issues: Group home; Physical restraints; Death and Serious Bodily Harm Report (DSBH); Rights (Safety)

Our staff reached out to a youth after we learned that he had his arm broken while being restrained by staff at his group home.

Issues: Group home; Physical restraint; Police involvement; Disability; Death and Serious Bodily Harm Report (DSBH); Rights (Safety)

Our Office made inquiries when we learned that a children’s aid society (CAS) asked the police to bring back a youth who had left her foster home without permission to return to her family home.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Police involvement; Death and Serious Bodily Harm Report (DSBH); Rights (Get help); Rights (Fairness)

A whistleblower came to us with several disturbing allegations about a group home serving children and youth who are medically fragile or have other vulnerabilities.

Issues: Group home; Quality of care; Rights (Good care); Rights (Safety)

A woman who had been granted full custody of her niece – with the support of a children’s aid society (CAS) – contacted us after waiting four months for a certified copy of the original court order, which she needed in order to apply for a health card and other important items for the girl.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Your file)

The Ombudsman received complaints about vote results displayed to the public during electronic meetings held by the City of Hamilton.

A Francophone student seeking information about scholarships via the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) contacted us when he discovered there was no option to select services in French in the automated phone system of the OSAP department he called.

Investigation into how the Ministry of Health oversees patient complaints and incident reports about ambulance services

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Municipality of Grey Highlands held a closed session on October 7, 2020, that did not fit within the closed meeting exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001. Council discussed plans to proceed with negotiations to enter into a joint venture with a third party and provided staff with directions on a series of matters related to the negotiations. The Ombudsman found that the discussion was permissible under the Act’s closed meeting exception for plans and instructions for negotiations.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Ministry of the Solicitor General’s proposed amendments to Regulation 778 related to segregation, inmate discipline and misconduct, and mandatory training for correctional officers.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by council for the City of Greater Sudbury on January 12, 2021 via electronic participation. The complaint alleged that council discussed an entertainment district in closed session. The Ombudsman found that council did not discuss the entertainment district. The Ombudsman found that the topics discussed in closed session fit within the exception for personal matters and information supplied in confidence by a third party. However, the Ombudsman found that council’s resolution to go in camera was not broadcast live. The Ombudsman recommended that the City ensure that the public is able to observe all open portions of electronic meetings.

A woman sought our help after her two foster children disclosed to her that their former foster parent had been physically and verbally abusive toward them.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Duty to report; Quality of care; Rights (Get help); Rights (Fairness)

A woman returning from an overseas trip complained to us that she was not served in French during the COVID-19 test she was required to undergo at Toronto Pearson airport.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about an electronic meeting held by the LGBTQ Advisory Committee for the City of Hamilton. The Ombudsman found that the public livestream of the meeting was not available for approximately 23 minutes. As a result, the Ombudsman found that the public was excluded from the meeting contrary to the Municipal Act.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about two closed meetings held by council for the Township of the North Shore on October 8 and October 29, 2020.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by council for the Town of Grimsby on February 16, 2021.

The Ombudsman received complaints about in-person closed meetings held by council for the City of Richmond Hill on April 16 and May 14, 2019, and about electronic council meetings held on April 1, April 22, and May 14, 2020. The Ombudsman found that at each meeting where it was discussed, council’s discussion in camera about a land use planning matter that had been appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal fit within the exception for litigation or potential litigation. However, the Ombudsman found that on April 22 and May 14, 2020, council’s resolution to go in camera was not broadcast live. The Ombudsman recommended that the City ensure that the public is able to observe all open portions of electronic meetings, including the resolution to go in camera and any business conducted after rising from closed session, even when the only item on the agenda is an in camera matter. The Ombudsman also recommended that the City ensure that information on how to access the live broadcast of an electronic meeting is provided in all meeting notices.

While the Ombudsman’s systemic investigation into delays at the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) is ongoing, we have resolved many individual complaints, including from landlords and tenants who had difficulty receiving services in French.

A mother complained to us because she was not receiving any family support payments from her children’s father, even though the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) had the ability to garnish his wages.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that on June 15, 2020, a quorum of councillors for the Town of Hawkesbury discussed council business that they intended to introduce and vote on at a council meeting scheduled for the next day. The complaint alleged that this discussion amounted to a “meeting” and was improperly closed to the public contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman found that the Town did not violate the Act’s open meeting requirement because the Mayor’s sequential discussions did not constitute meetings under the Act.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held on August 19, 2020, by council for the Township of Lake of Bays.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the County of Norfolk met in closed session to discuss the budget under the exceptions for personal matters, labour relations and acquisition or disposition of land. The closed session discussion focused on reducing service levels in the municipality by eliminating staff positions. Ombudsman found that council discussed items that fit under the exceptions for personal matters and labour relations. The Ombudsman also found that council’s discussion about selling municipal land to raise capital fit within the “acquisition or disposition of land” exception.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding two meetings held by council for the Village of Westport on September 15, 2020. The complaint alleged that due to a technical issue, council did not livestream the virtual committee of the whole or special council meeting for the public. The complaint alleged that, as a result, these meetings were closed to the public contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman confirmed that the public was excluded from these meetings due to technical issues and that as a result, they were improperly closed to the public.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by council for the City of Sault Ste. Marie on July 13, 2020.

After her second suicide attempt, a 15-year-old girl contacted us from the hospital.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Disability; Rights (Get help)

A French-speaking member of the board of directors of a small housing co-op in northern Ontario sought our help when he had trouble completing an annual form from the Condominium Authority of Ontario (CAO).

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by council for the Township of Russell on September 8, 2020.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Town of Plympton-Wyoming held a meeting on June 24, 2020 that did not fit within the closed meeting exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman found that council contravened the Act when it discussed how to fill the council vacancy in closed session. The Ombudsman found that this portion of the discussion did not fit within the exception cited under the Act for “personal matters”. Further, because the discussion was not permitted to be closed to the public, council contravened the Act when it decided, in camera, to fill the vacancy by appointment rather than by holding a by-election. The Ombudsman found that council’s closed session discussion regarding two individuals interested in filling the council vacancy fit within the “personal matters” exception under the Act. The Ombudsman also found that council’s vote to consider a motion in open session was a direction to staff and permitted under the Act.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Municipality of Temagami discussed matters during two closed meetings that did not fit into the exceptions in the Municipal Act. Council met in closed session on June 13, 2019 to discuss a harassment complaint under the personal matters exception. The Ombudsman found that the discussion only focused on the fact that a complaint had been made and did not include any personal information about identifiable individuals. Council met in closed session on November 7, 2019 to receive the findings of an Integrity Commissioner investigation and harassment investigations. During the meeting, council received legal advice from a lawyer. The Ombudsman found that the discussion fit within the exceptions for personal matters and advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Ombudsman received complaints about the audio quality of a teleconference meeting held on August 11, 2020, by the committee of the whole for the Township of Lanark Highlands.

A 16-year-old youth complained to us that staff at his group home threatened to lock the refrigerator after he helped himself to food at night when he was hungry.

Issues: Group home; Rights (Good care); Rights (Get help)

After requesting information from the Ministry of Health in French and receiving answers in English twice, a Francophone journalist complained to our Office.

A truck driver who crosses the Canada-U.S. border weekly as an essential worker complained to us that a ServiceOntario location would not let him in and demanded he self-isolate for 14 days because he had recently crossed the border.

The Ombudsman received several complaints related to the meeting practices of the Board of Management for the Greater Napanee Business Improvement Area (the Greater Napanee BIA), which is a local board in the Town of Greater Napanee. The complainants alleged that the Board of Management made a decision about charging a levy without holding a properly constituted board meeting. They also alleged that on June 24, 2020, board members met in private at a local business, contrary to the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements.

The Ombudsman found that the board did not violate the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements with regard to the levy decision or the social gathering. The Ombudsman also did not support the complainants’ contention that the then-Chair acted unilaterally regarding the levy.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that the committee of the whole for the Township of Johnson discussed matters during a closed session of a special council meeting on October 29, 2019, that did not fit within the exceptions to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act. Further, the complainant alleged that the Township did not provide notice for the special council meeting. The Ombudsman found that the committee’s discussion about the employment history and qualifications of identifiable individuals fit within the personal matters exception to the Municipal Act’s open meeting rules. Further, the Ombudsman found that the Township of Johnson provided sufficient notice for the special council meeting. However, the Ombudsman found that the committee of the whole violated the open meeting rules when it had a vote in closed session to recommend a candidate to fill the council vacancy.

The Ombudsman received complaints regarding meetings held by the Township of Stone Mills between August 10, 2020 and October 27, 2020.

Commissioner's Message - Two watchdogs, one access point
On January 13, 2020, I officially took up my duties as French Language Services Commissioner, following a rigorous selection process conducted across the country by the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario.

The Ombudsman found that the Township of Southgate Fire Department Advisory and Support Committee held a meeting on October 22, 2019 that was not illegally closed to the public. However, the Ombudsman found that by proceeding to discuss fire services more than 30 minutes after the scheduled start time of the meeting, the township contravened its procedure by-law.

A woman worried about the health and safety of a young relative complained to us that the local children’s aid society (CAS) had done “nothing” in response to her concerns.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Quality of care

Our French Language Services Unit received two complaints from people who called the general DriveTest phone line to book driving tests and were obligated to listen to a 90-second message in English only.

A small business owner reached out to us after he was unable to update the information attached to his business licence through ServiceOntario, despite several attempts.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by the General Issues Committee for the City of Hamilton on August 10, 2020.

A 16-year-old who has a developmental disability and lives in a group home contacted us to raise questions about his rights.

Issues: Group home; Disability; Rights (Get help)

A 13-year-old racialized youth complained to us after her children’s aid society (CAS) called the police to transport her to a new group home – which they did by handcuffing her and placing her in the back of a police vehicle.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Police involvement; Rights (Identity)

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for the Township of Emo contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on June 23, 2020. The complaint alleged that council’s discussion relating to a “Council Code of Conduct” matter did not fit within the exceptions to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman’s investigation found that council’s discussion was permissible under the Municipal Act’s closed meeting exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual in s. 239(2)(b). However, the Ombudsman found that the Township contravened the requirements of section 239(4)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to state by resolution the general nature of the matters to be considered in camera.

A woman in Thunder Bay decided to go to a local ServiceOntario to update her home address on her driver’s licence, after first checking the website to confirm the service location offered services in French.

A 16-year-old youth living in a group home complained to our Office that staff at the home were not allowing him to contact certain members of his family because his mother – his legal guardian – did not want him speaking to them.

Issues: Group home; Rights (Good care)

A young person in custody contacted us last year to complain that he wasn’t able to vote in the federal election, although he had expressed his interest in voting to the youth facility’s staff members.

We received a complaint that council for the Township of Sables-Spanish Rivers discussed matters in a closed meeting on September 25, 2019 that did not fit into the exceptions in the Municipal Act. The Ombudsman found that council’s discussions about a bidder on a request for proposals, and about candidates for an internship, fit within the exception for personal matters. The complaint also alleged that, prior to entering closed session, the mayor announced that the meeting was over – but council reconvened after the closed session to conduct additional business. The Ombudsman found that council violated the open meeting rules by failing to ensure that the public could observe the portion of the meeting that followed the closed session. The Ombudsman made several recommendations to the township to improve its meeting practices, including ensuring that minutes are complete and accurate, and that votes are limited to directions to staff or procedural matters.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed meeting held by council for the City of Pickering on August 10, 2020.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that council for Loyalist Township contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on July 8, 2019, related to an in camera vote. The complaint also raised concerns about the amount of information that council shared in its report back following the closed session. The Ombudsman’s investigation found that council’s discussion was permissible under the Municipal Act’s closed meeting exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege in s. 239(2)(f). However, the Ombudsman found that due to confusion and inadvertence, council’s in camera vote was neither procedural nor a direction to staff contrary to the Act’s voting requirements.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that closed meetings held by council for the Municipality of West Nipissing on April 20th and May 26th were not audio or video recorded, contrary to requirements in the municipality’s procedure by-law.

After being injured and hospitalized, a college student was unable to complete his one-year course, so the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) converted his $15,000 grant to a loan.

We helped a parent who was refused an identification, placement and review committee (IPRC) to assess her daughter’s giftedness in kindergarten.

With the current pandemic and the necessity to work from home, using conference call lines has become the norm in many organizations.

A 15-year-old emailed us that she was being physically and verbally abused by her mother, and had started to self-harm and even attempted suicide as a result.

Issue: Children’s aid society

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Town of Saugeen Shores contravened the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements on July 22, November 11 and November 25, 2019. He also received a complaint that council held an informal private gathering that amounted to an illegal closed meeting on February 24, 2020. The Ombudsman’s investigation found no contraventions of the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements.

A father whose wife died in childbirth sought our help in obtaining a birth certificate and Social Insurance Number for the new baby, which he needed in order to claim survivor benefits.

A former master’s student who began to work in her field just before she completed her degree complained to us that the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) had deemed her ineligible for an Ontario Student Opportunities Grant, due to unreported income.

A 16-year-old living in a foster home sought our help when she was invited to spend the night at a friend’s house, but her foster care agency denied her request, citing COVID-19 restrictions.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Get help)

When new signs were installed at the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's Fish Culture Station in North Bay, some Francophone residents noticed something fishy - the signs were in English only.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding the April 15, 2020, closed meeting of council for the Township of The North Shore.

A trailer park owner contacted us when a dispute arose about responsibility for the municipal sewage system servicing the park.

After firefighters used foam containing PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) to put out a fire at her property, a woman complained to us about how long it was taking to ensure her water was safe to drink.

A woman sought our help in getting the Registrar General to help her correct an error she made on her mother’s death certificate.

A man complained to us after trying for years to resolve a name discrepancy with ServiceOntario.

A man sought our help when he was contacted by a collections agency many years after receiving funding from Second Career – a program now operated by the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

We have resolved several complaints over the past three years about the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program (OINP), which nominates skilled immigrant workers for permanent residency.

A driver who moved to B.C. sought our help after waiting for a copy of his driving record from Ontario for 7 weeks.

When attempting to reload her Presto card, a transit rider purchased a monthly Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) pass by mistake. She contacted Metrolinx, which referred her to the TTC, which in turn referred her to Metrolinx.

A man whose vehicle was damaged by a large pothole complained to us after the Ministry of Transportation’s adjuster denied his claim and the road construction company denied responsibility.

A woman came to us in frustration after trying several times to obtain her renewed driver’s licence. Each time she visited ServiceOntario, she was given a temporary licence and told a permanent one would be mailed to her.

A patient contacted us after being told by their physician that a non-cosmetic dermatological treatment was not covered by OHIP, and could only be provided if the patient paid.

A cancer patient who had appealed OHIP’s decision to deny him coverage complained to us when he did not receive a response within the Ministry of Health’s posted deadline.

A woman sought our help after her application for an overnight accommodation allowance was denied by the Northern Health Travel Grant because she did not meet the minimum distance requirement.

A transgender student at a college of applied arts and technology complained to us that she had experienced harassment, bullying, and a lack of accommodation.

A federal inmate who was taking university courses sought our help with submitting a grade appeal. He had tried to submit it to the university’s senate committee, but received no response because he sent it directly to his professor instead of the registrar.

An English-speaking mother whose child attends a French-language school was facing barriers when attempting to raise concerns with the school principal.

A woman in a remote northern community complained to our Office that her grandson, who has Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD), had been excluded from school for four months due to escalating violent behaviour. When the child was allowed back to school, he was only allowed to attend for two hours per day, four times a week. 

A homeowner sought our help after learning that his property type had been incorrectly recorded by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) when it was first assessed almost a decade earlier.

After a woman under the guardianship of the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee (OPGT) took out two short-term, high-interest loans without the OPGT’s knowledge or consent, we asked for more information about how it prevents unauthorized loans and other dissipation of clients’ assets.

A recipient of Ontario Disability Support Program benefits contacted us when he discovered his monthly natural gas and water tank rental fees had not been paid since 2016 and he owed $2,000 in outstanding fees.

A man with significant medical issues contacted us with the help of his social worker because he was experiencing financial hardship due to the Family Responsibility Office garnishing his Canada Pension Plan benefits for past child support arrears – although his children were now in their 30s.

A woman complained to us that she had not received any family support payments in over a year, despite submitting paperwork to the Family Responsibility Office asking that she receive them via direct deposit rather than by mailed cheque.

We received three complaints about a chaotic meeting of council for the Municipality of West Nipissing in March 2019.

As noted in last year’s Annual Report, we received 77 complaints in February 2019 about a City of Hamilton committee’s decision to meet outside of the city – the highest number of complaints we have ever received in a single closed meeting case.

A dog owner who went to renew the licences for her pets complained to us when the municipality also charged her to renew the licence of a dog that had died six months earlier.

A man who moved a trailer onto a property while he waited for a permit to build a house on it complained that the municipality had removed the trailer without notice.

A man complained to us that he was charged $123.79 for the installation of a new water meter at his cottage, even though the municipality’s fees by-law listed the fee for water meter replacement as $34.38.

A group of Indigenous inmates complained to us that they were strip-searched before attending a smudging ceremony, leaving them feeling violated, discriminated against and targeted because of their Indigenous spirituality.

An inmate who uses a customized wheelchair to support his spine sought our help because he was being repeatedly transferred to a second institution without his chair.

An inmate complained to us after a sergeant at his facility penalized him by taking away 30 days of earned remission (time off his sentence) for refusing a transfer to another facility.

An 11-year-old told us she felt unsafe in her group home after another resident threatened her with a knife.

Issues: Group home; Rights (Safety)

A young person who was serving a youth sentence at an adult correctional facility complained to us that he was not being provided CAS access to services required by his court-ordered plan.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Good care)

Ombudsman's Message - A year like no other

As mandated by the Ombudsman Act, this report reviews the main trends and highlights of the 26,423 cases my Office handled between April 1, 2019 and March 31, 2020. In other words, most of the resolutions and investigations described herein took place long before the first cases of novel coronavirus were confirmed in Ontario.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council discussed a matter that was not listed on the agenda during a closed session on November 19, 2019, and that council held an informal gathering on November 18, 2019 during which they made a decision.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that a quorum of councillors for the Town of Pelham informally met to discuss a possible donation from a cannabis producer on January 9, 2020, contrary to the open meeting rules of the Municipal Act, 2001. The complaint also alleged that councillors subsequently voted via email on whether they would be in favour of accepting the possible donation. The Ombudsman found that the informal discussion and subsequent email did not contravene the Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements as these exchanges did not constitute meetings under the Municipal Act. However, the Town of Pelham acted without legal authority when it decided to inform a third-party organization that it was not in favour of accepting a potential donation from a cannabis company. By failing to act through resolution and confirming by-law passed at a properly constituted council meeting, the municipality tried to shield its decision-making process from public scrutiny. These actions were contrary to law and wrong under section 21(1) of the Ombudsman Act.

A man complained to us after he wore a non-medical mask to prevent coronavirus spread inside his local Liquor Board of Ontario (LBCO) outlet, and staff there asked him to remove it so they could verify his identity.

Our staff helped a woman who was having trouble reaching a manager at the Family Responsibility Office (FRO), due to recent changes to its phone system.

A woman sought our help after she was provided with a temporary accessible parking permit with a duration of only six months, when she had previously had one that lasted five years.

An education worker complained to our French Language Services Unit about a unilingual English survey about technology that was being conducted on behalf of the Ministry of Education.

A man complained to us about his municipality issuing parking tickets during the COVID-19 state of emergency.

A cancer patient who is an Ontario Disability Support Program recipient told us she was about to have surgery and urgently needed funds to pay for transportation, but could not reach her caseworker.

A woman whose job was deemed an essential service during the COVID-19 pandemic sought our help when her driver’s licence was suspended due to a medical matter and she was temporarily unable to get to work.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding the November 25, 2019 closed meeting of council for the Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a special meeting held by the Township of Russell on April 2 by electronic participation due to COVID-19. The complaint alleged that the meeting agenda did not provide a link to the website where the meeting would be broadcast. The Ombudsman found that council for the Township did not violate the open meeting rules. The Township provided notice to the public that the meeting would be held via electronic participation and posted a link to the broadcast on its website and on social media prior to holding the meeting.

The Ombudsman commended the Township of Russell for taking additional steps to ensure that information about how to observe and participate in electronic meetings was widely available to the public. The Ombudsman urged all municipalities to do as much as possible to facilitate access by the public to any meetings held electronically during a declaration of emergency. This was the first time the Ombudsman conducted an investigation into a municipal meeting following the passage of the Municipal Emergency Act, 2020, which allows for additional flexibility in holding electronic meetings during an emergency, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Ombudsman received complaints regarding a closed session discussion held by council for the City of Niagara Falls on July 29, 2019.

A Black youth living in a rural group home with little access to public transit complained to us that staff would not drive him to get a haircut.

Issues: Group home; Black youth; Rights (Identity)

A man visited a London DriveTest centre with his son, who wanted to take the theory component of the road test, and requested services in French.

The mother of a teenager with developmental disability complained to us about an incident involving her daughter at a group home.

Issues: Group home; Police involvement; Disability

A francophone man complained to our French Language Services Unit that he waited an hour on the phone for service in French when he called the disability eligibility decision unit of the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services.

A mother called our Children and Youth Unit after her local children’s aid society told her it would not review her complaint due to a lack of information.

Issue: Children’s aid society

The Ombudsman reviewed a meeting of council for the City of Welland held on September 17, 2019.

A woman complained to our French Language Services Unit that the Superior Court in Toronto could not serve her in person in French, resulting in a wasted trip and frustration.

A 16-year-old youth in care of a children’s aid society felt that her needs were not being met since she had a change in caseworkers.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Voluntary Youth Services Agreement (VYSA); Rights (Good care); Rights (Get help)

Investigation into matters relating to the Regional Municipality of Niagara’s hiring of its Chief Administrative Officer, and its administration of his contract

A French-speaking woman sought our help after she encountered difficulties with the website of the Psychiatric Patient Advocate Office.

When a woman complained to us about how she and her family were treated by a children’s aid society, we first advised her to contact her caseworker and raise the issue through the society’s internal process.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Get help)

The Ombudsman determined that council for Norfolk County did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001, when it went in camera on March 26 and April 2, to discuss the hiring of an interim Chief Administrative Officer (CAO).

The Ombudsman received 77 complaints that closed meetings held by the City Manager Recruitment Steering Committee for the City of Hamilton were held in violation of the Municipal Act and the city’s procedure by-law. The complainants alleged that the public was denied access to these meetings, which were held outside city limits at a private venue. They also alleged that meeting times had been changed without notice and that the committee had denied public delegations. The Ombudsman determined that the public had been improperly prevented from attending the open portions of one meeting, contrary to the Municipal Act, and that the city failed to update the meeting time on its website. However, he determined that the location of the meetings was permissible. Exercising his general jurisdiction under the Ombudsman Act to review administrative concerns about municipalities, the Ombudsman determined that the city did not violate its delegation policy by refusing to permit members of the public to delegate during one of the meetings.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about three meetings of council for the Township of Carling, held on July 27, October 10, and November 13, 2018.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that the Committee of the Whole for the Municipality of St.-Charles inappropriately met in closed session on April 3, 2019, to discuss documents and recommendations about the municipality’s finances. The Ombudsman determined that the committee contravened the Municipal Act, 2001, when it went in camera to discuss the steps necessary to rectify errors and discrepancies in its accounting software. This discussion did not fit within the exception for personal matters, or any exception, to the open meeting requirements.

The Ombudsman determined that the council for the Municipality of West Nipissing inappropriately met in closed session on March 19, 2019, under the exception for personal matters in the Municipal Act, 2001 to discuss “Municipal Act/Roles & Responsibilities”. The Ombudsman’s investigation found that council’s in camera discussion was unrestricted and covered a wide range of topics, but did not involve any personal information that would have brought the discussion within the personal matters exception. The Ombudsman also found that the tone of the discussion – which was described as toxic, chaotic and disrespectful – was not a basis for closing the discussion under the personal matters exception. In addition, the Ombudsman determined the discussion, although intended to educate and train council members on their roles, did not actually involve any education or training. The discussion therefore did not fit within the narrowly construed exception for education and training.

Unhappy with his placement at a foster home, a 17-year-old asked his children’s aid society caseworker for a placement change, only to be told the home he was staying in was best for him.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Rights (Get help); Rights (Fairness)

A man who was following the complaints process regarding a bilingual community legal clinic reached out to us after receiving an English-only version of the clinic’s complaints policy.

My team and I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Ministry of the Solicitor General’s three proposed changes to Ontario Regulation 778.

We received a complaint from a man who had recently moved to Canada. Although his motorcycle licence was valid in his home country, he was required to re-take the test in Ontario. The man had been assigned an English-speaking examiner for his motorcycle road test, even though he requested a French-speaking examiner in advance at a designated DriveTest centre.

The Ombudsman received a complaint alleging that resolutions to proceed in camera passed by council for the Municipality of The Nation at three separate meetings were not sufficiently detailed.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a gathering that two council members attended on April 14, 2019, and a special meeting of council held on April 15, 2019, without prior public notice.

A 16-year-old girl living in a group home told us she had asked her children’s aid society worker to initiate a review of her placement because she felt unsafe, but the caseworker didn't follow up with her.

Issues: Children’s aid society; ; Group home; Rights (Safety); Rights (Get help)

Transparency of Near North District School Board’s decision to close Widdifield Secondary School after the 2016-2017 Pupil Accommodation Review process.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding a closed special meeting held on April 29, 2019. Council closed the meeting to the public to discuss a legal letter.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that the doors to Hamilton city hall were locked during part of a meeting of council on February 14, 2019, and that the doors to city hall were barricaded during part of a meeting of the city’s Audit, Finance and Administration Committee on April 18, 2019.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a vote by the City of Hamilton’s Selection Committee during a March 1, 2019 closed meeting was not permitted by the open meeting rules.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding the attendance of three councillors at an April 30, 2019 public proceeding of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.

A father complained to us that FRO had collected thousands of dollars of support payments from him for 14 years, even though his daughter was no longer in the care of her mother but had been made a Crown ward.

Ombudsman’s message - A defining moment
In many ways, this past year has been a defining one for the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario. Without question, fiscal 2018-2019 was one of the busiest years in this Office’s 44-year history in terms of complaints handled – 27,419, representing an increase of almost 30% over the previous year. It was also historic in terms of our mandate, which was expanded by government for the second time in four years.

A woman who had been pursuing her case at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario for several years sought our help after she learned that the adjudicator assigned to her case was no longer able to continue.

An inmate complained to us that staff at his correctional facility had taken his eyeglasses and refused to return them.

An inmate sought our help in reaching the appropriate correctional officials after her father passed away and she could not get a response to her request to attend his funeral.

An Ontario Works recipient sought our help when he received a letter saying he would have to repay $1,835 to Ontario Works, and that his monthly income would be reduced by $202.

A pensioner who had a longstanding agreement to pay her family support arrears off at $50/month complained to us that the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) sent her a letter threatening to garnish half of her monthly income, which would leave her with no money to pay her utility bills.

A mother who receives support for her adult child with disabilities sought our help after she inadvertently provided inaccurate information to FRO, resulting in the termination of her support and a $21,000 credit to the payor.

The family of a man who won $2,000 in the lottery but died before he could collect the prize sought our help in dealing with OLG officials, whom they had contacted several times over the course of four months.

A woman placed an order with the Ontario Cannabis Store (OCS) on October 17, 2018, the first day that recreational cannabis became legal in Canada.

A cannabis purchaser received a delivery from the OCS that turned out to be an empty box.

A small business owner sought our help after he was ordered to install fire detectors and alarms on his property, noting that he could not access the technical standard of the Ontario Fire Code that was cited in the order.

A man who wanted to dispute a $40 parking ticket told municipal staff he would call back to schedule a hearing, but when he did so, he was told it had already taken place.

When a snowplow hit a pothole, digging up asphalt and other debris, it dumped the pile in a woman’s front yard and left a larger hole in the road. She complained to us after the municipal crew she called only filled the potholes, leaving the debris in her yard.

A man who received a water bill for more than $700 – around seven times more than his usual charge – called us in frustration when the local water company told him his previous bills were only estimates, but this one was based on actual use, and they could not alter his bill.

After we made inquiries about a man’s complaint that the required notice of a proposed zoning by-law amendment was not posted on the relevant property, the municipality changed its practices.

A Grade 10 student was disappointed to receive a failing grade on the writing component of the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test.

In a case that officials called “unprecedented,” a brother and sister complained to us about difficulties in applying to the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) – one to attend college, the other university.

A student who was close to completing her program at a college of applied arts and technology was unsure if she had all the credits she needed for her diploma, so she enrolled in an extra course just in case.

A commercial truck driver complained to us that his licence had been downgraded and he had not been able to get an explanation or assistance from ServiceOntario or DriveTest.

A 74-year-old woman who delayed a required driver’s test so she could have hip surgery sought our help after the Ministry cancelled her driver’s licence. She was required to take several tests to keep her licence after having a car accident.

A driver who required his licence for work sought our help when it was suddenly suspended due to a fine he had incurred 27 years earlier. He had been convicted of impaired driving in 1990 and fined $735.

A woman who had lived abroad for many years returned to Ontario and applied to exchange her foreign licence for an Ontario licence.

A transgender woman complained that the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) had improperly refused her application for prior approval for breast reconstruction surgery.

A concerned social worker at a psychiatric hospital asked us if we could help a patient whose OHIP coverage had been suddenly cancelled.

A woman complained to us that the Registrar General’s website froze when she was in the midst of applying for death certificates for two family members.

An international student who had completed post-secondary studies in Ontario and was now employed sought our help in communicating with ServiceOntario about getting an Ontario Health card.

A transgender man seeking a name change complained to us when his application was rejected because the sex on his birth certificate differed from the gender on his name change application.

A provincial government employee complained to us that the practices of the Workplace Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Office (WDHP) were onerous and unfair.

After our staff assisted a Tesla owner in having his Electric and Hydrogen Vehicle Incentive Program application approved, he returned to us for help in February 2019, after he received only half of his $14,000 rebate.

A woman who runs a commercial fishing business complained that the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry had not responded to her request for a refund of more than $31,000 she had overpaid in Crown lease fees over several years.

We received a complaint about a meeting held by the General Issues Committee for the City of Hamilton. The complainant alleged that committee’s two in camera discussions about the city’s contribution to the Hamilton Tiger-Cats’ bid for the 2020 or 2021 Canadian Football League Grey Cup Championship game did not fit within the open meeting exceptions for “advice subject to solicitor-client privilege”, “information belonging to the municipality”, or “negotiations”. The Ombudsman found that the first in camera discussion fit within the “advice subject to solicitor-client privilege” exception and the second in camera discussion fit wtihin the “negotiations” exception.

A pregnant youth called us for help when she went for an ultrasound and was told her health card was cancelled.

Issues: Rights (Good care); Rights (Get help)

A young person in a treatment group home called us, saying she felt like she had no one to talk to.

Issues: Children’s aid society; Group home; Rights (Fairness)

A 15-year-old who had been in a group home for three years sought our help in moving into a foster home where he could become more independent.

Issues: Group home; Rights (Get help)

We received a complaint that council for Wollaston Township did not provide enough information to the public before closing meetings on December 3, 2018 and January 7, 2019, and that council should have used the exception for labour relations instead of the exception for personal matters.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding the January 10 and March 28, 2019 closed meetings of council for the Municipality of Temagami.

We received a complaint that members of council for the City of Hamilton contravened the open meeting provisions by exchanging emails relating to a vacant council seat in June 2018. The complaint also alleged that the city’s General Issues Committee contravened the rules by discussing and voting on matters related to the vacant seat in camera on July 9, 2018. The Ombudsman found that the city did not contravene the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 when they exchanged emails regarding a vacant council seat in June 2018. The new definition of “meeting” in the Act requires that a quorum be present, such that an exchange of emails cannot be considered a meeting subject to the open meeting rules. In the interest of openness and transparency, municipal councils should continue to avoid conducting business outside of a formal meeting. The city’s General Issues Committee also did not contravene the open meeting rules when it discussed advice subject to solicitor-client privilege in camera on July 9, 2018. The committee did not vote regarding the vacant seat in camera on July 9; it did not contravene the voting provisions in the Act.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a meeting held by council for the City of St. Catharines in June 2018.

The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding four meetings held by council for the Township of Tehkummah in June 2018.

In addressing the changes proposed by Bill 57, I will devote most of my comments to those amendments that affect the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario, and the Ombudsman Act. Most notable among these are amendments that will expand the mandate of this office into areas that are presently within the mandate of my fellow Officers of the Legislature, the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth (Child Advocate) and the French Language Services Commissioner.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about the June 12, 2018 closed meeting of the Policy Review Committee for the Town of Carleton Place. The complaint alleged that the committee’s discussion about the sale of two municipally-owned properties and a related discussion regarding water and sewer services did not fit within the “acquisition or disposition of land” exception in the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman found that the closed session fit within the exception.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that one regular meeting of council, four special meetings of council and two committee of the whole meetings were held without posting notice online, as required by the procedure bylaw.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about the August 8, 2018 closed meeting of the board of directors for the Owen Sound Downtown Improvement Area.

Investigation into the adequacy and effectiveness of the Ministry of Transportation’s notifications and communications with drivers about licence suspensions and reinstatements.

The Ombudsman investigated a complaint about two information sessions on March 7, 2018 attended by a quorum of council for the Village of Casselman. During these sessions, the council members in attendance received information and updates with respect to the business of the municipality. However, his investigation did not uncover evidence that the council members in attendance at the sessions “materially advanced” the business or decision-making of council. These sessions were therefore not “meetings” under the definition in the Municipal Act, 2001 that came into force on January 1, 2018. In the interests of openness and transparency, the Ombudsman suggested that council members receive information and updates about the business of the municipality during public meetings of council.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Town of Deep River held a vote in closed session on May 16, 2018 that did not comply with the open meeting rules.