September 16, 202416 September 2024
The Ombudsman found that the Corporate and Finance Services Committee of the City of Oshawa did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001 during its meeting on March 4, 2024 when audio issues impeded the public’s ability to observe the webcast.
April 29, 202429 April 2024
The Ombudsman determined that council for the Town of Amherstburg did not hold meetings closed to the public on November 29 and 30, 2022 contrary to the Municipal Act, 2001, although he received conflicting information about whether the meetings were livestreamed. The Ombudsman shared best practices about providing information in notices regarding livestreamed meetings.
January 03, 202403 January 2024
The Ombudsman’s investigation found that a quorum of council for the Municipality of Casselman materially advanced matters that constituted council business during a secret call following an official virtual council meeting on January 26, 2021. During the call, members of council took steps to ensure that no member of the public would be present to observe the decision-making process for important local matters. The call constituted a “meeting” under the
Municipal Act, 2001 and was a very serious violation of the open meeting rules.
November 16, 202316 November 2023
The Ombudsman was unable to conclude whether an electronic meeting of the City of Hamilton’s Agriculture and Rural Affairs Sub-Committee was livestreamed to the public.
October 30, 202330 October 2023
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 for a meeting of the Huronia Airport Task Force on April 19, 2022, and also failed to record minutes of that meeting.
October 30, 202330 October 2023
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 for a meeting of the Huronia Airport Task Force on April 19, 2022, and also failed to record minutes of that meeting.
October 30, 202330 October 2023
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 for a meeting of the Huronia Airport Task Force on April 19, 2022, and also failed to record minutes of that meeting.
September 20, 202320 September 2023
The Ombudsman found that while broadcasting in-person meetings increases the accountability and transparency of municipal decision-making, the
Municipal Act’s open meeting requirements are satisfied if the public can attend meetings in person.
September 07, 202307 September 2023
The Ombudsman found that a council meeting was improperly closed when members of the public could not access the live broadcast after council returned to open session from a closed session. Members of the public could attend the meeting both in person and electronically, though only individuals attending the meeting in person were able to observe the second open portion of the meeting.
July 12, 202312 July 2023
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 found that by removing the complainant from the meeting on May 11, 2022, the Township illegally closed the meeting to the public. 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.” Technological options exist that would permit the public to access and observe the Township’s meetings virtually without being able to interrupt.
June 05, 202305 June 2023
The Ombudsman found that council for the Municipality of Calvin contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it provided inconsistent information on its website about how the public could access its May 10, 2022 electronic council meeting.
June 05, 202305 June 2023
The Ombudsman found that council for the Municipality of Calvin contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to provide the public with proper notice of and information about how to access its June 14, 2022 electronic council meeting. Although the Municipality posted a link to the electronic meeting partway through the meeting, the public was unable to observe the entire meeting in real time, and the meeting was therefore effectively closed to the public contrary to the Act.
February 09, 202309 February 2023
A member of the public complained that they were not admitted to a virtual meeting of the Saugeen Municipal Airport Commission on June 20, 2022, which was held over Zoom. The Ombudsman was satisfied that the Commission followed its procedure by posting public notice in advance with the date, time, and Zoom link to observe the meeting. The Ombudsman found that, on a balance of probabilities, the Commission did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001. The Ombudsman suggested the Commission consider including in its public meeting notices a phone number for assistance if a member of the public has technical difficulties accessing or observing a meeting.
February 06, 202306 February 2023
The Ombudsman found that the Hamilton Waterfront Trust is a local board of the City, and is therefore subject to the open meeting rules of the Municipal Act, 2001. For the period of April 2020 to February 2021, members of the public were not permitted to attend the meetings of Waterfront Trust’s Board of Trustees held electronically. Beginning in April 2021, after this concern was raised with the City and the Board, the Board began to comply with the open meeting rules, including providing adequate public notice and ensuring that the public could observe meetings in progress.
January 30, 202330 January 2023
The Ombudsman found that council for the Township of McKellar contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on August 31, 2021 when council returned to open session from an in camera discussion and did not provide a livestream for the public to observe that open portion of the meeting.
January 03, 202303 January 2023
The Ombudsman found that the City of Sault Ste. Marie’s 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. The Ombudsman also found that the City of Sault Ste. Marie’s 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.
September 07, 202207 September 2022
The Ombudsman reviewed a complaint that two meetings, one held by the Heritage Permit Review Sub-Committee and the Agriculture and the other by the Rural Affairs Advisory Committee for the City of Hamilton, were improperly closed to the public because of livestream issues. The Ombudsman found that one meeting experienced a technical glitch causing the livestream to go down for a brief period of time, and was unable to determine the quality or availability of the livestream for the other meeting.
March 15, 202215 March 2022
The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by council for the City of Niagara Falls on November 17, 2020 to discuss the process for establishing a Chief Administrative Officer recruitment sub-committee.
The Ombudsman 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 Municipal Act, 2001 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.
The Ombudsman recommended that council ensure the description of the issue(s) to be discussed in closed session be provided in an accurate manner that maximizes the information available to the public while not undermining the reason for its exclusion. The Ombudsman also recommended that council ensure that its resolutions to proceed in camera are passed during open session, recorded in the meeting minutes, and captured by the live broadcast.
December 09, 202109 December 2021
The Ombudsman reviewed electronic meetings held by the Saugeen Municipal Airport Commission. The Ombudsman found that the Commission is a local board subject to the open meeting rules. The Commission contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to pass a procedure by-law governing its meetings and failing to provide adequate notice of its meetings. The Ombudsman further found that the Commission did not adequately notify members of the public about how to request readmission to the portion of an open meeting following a closed session. The Ombudsman 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 providing for public notice of all meetings and that the Commission ensure the public is able to observe all open portions of meetings.
December 01, 202101 December 2021
The Ombudsman found that the resolution passed by council during a meeting on March 8, 2021 adequately provided a general description of the matter to be discussed in camera. However, council contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to ensure the public could observe the passage of the resolution to proceed in camera during its meetings on March 8, 2021 and March 25, 2021. Whenever the public is excluded from in-person attendance, it is imperative that the alternative electronic format selected enables the public to observe all portions of the meeting except the duly constituted and permitted closed portions. This includes the resolution to go in camera and any business or report back that occurs after council has reconvened in open session. Publishing a recording of a meeting after it has already taken place is not a substitute for enabling the public to observe a meeting while it is happening.
July 14, 202114 July 2021
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.
July 08, 202108 July 2021
The Ombudsman reviewed a meeting held by the City of Niagara Falls. Council met in closed session prior to the regular meeting. Council’s resolution stating the general nature of the subjects to be discussed in camera was not broadcast live. The Ombudsman found that this contravened the requirements of section 239(4)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001. 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.
May 12, 202112 May 2021
The Ombudsman reviewed an electronic meeting held by the City of Greater Sudbury. Council met in closed session prior to the regular meeting. Council’s resolution stating the general nature of the subjects to be discussed in camera was not broadcast live. The Ombudsman found that this contravened the requirements of section 239(4)(a) of the Act. 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.
April 22, 202122 April 2021
The Ombudsman reviewed an electronic meeting held by the LGBTQ advisory committee for the City of Hamilton. The Ombudsman found that during the open portion of the meeting, the public livestream was unavailable due to technical issues. Accordingly, the Ombudsman found that while the livestream was down, the public was excluded from the meeting and the meeting was illegally closed.
March 31, 202131 March 2021
The Ombudsman reviewed several electronic meetings held by the City of Richmond Hill where council’s resolution to go in camera was not broadcast live. The Ombudsman found that this contravened the requirements of section 239(4)(a) of the Act. 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. This recommendation includes meetings where 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.
March 12, 202112 March 2021
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.
April 17, 202017 April 2020
The Ombudsman reviewed a special meeting held by council for the Township of Russell via electronic participation. Members were permitted to participate electronically and be counted toward quorum as a state of emergency had been declared pursuant to the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. The Ombudsman commended the Township for taking steps to ensure members of the public were advised of how to observe the live broadcast of the meeting and urged all municipalities to ensure electronic meetings are accessible to the public.