Niagara, Regional Municipality of

The Ombudsman investigated a meeting of council for the Regional Municipality of Niagara on December 7, 2017. While the council meeting was ongoing, the main outside doors to the Regional headquarters were locked. The Ombudsman found that although the later part of the meeting was intended to be open to the public, the locked doors prevented those members of the public arriving late from accessing the last 35 minutes of the meeting. As a result, the last part of the meeting was closed to the public, interfering with its right to observe municipal government in process. The Ombudsman noted that in future, the Region should take steps to develop a clear policy on when the doors to the municipal building should be locked and unlocked to ensure public access during meetings, and train its staff accordingly.

The Ombudsman investigated the closed sessions of a meeting of council for the Regional Municipality of Niagara on December 7, 2017. The Region’s procedure by-law indicated that a closed session is to be held after “other business.” The Ombudsman found that a strict reading of the procedure by-law would appear to fetter council’s ability to enter into closed sessions as circumstances arise during the course of an open council meeting. The Ombudsman recommended the Region amend its procedure by-law to clarify council’s authority to exercise discretion to hold a closed session outside of a set agenda order. The Ombudsman also recommended the Region update the by-law to reflect all of the closed meeting exceptions in the Municipal Act, 2001.

The Ombudsman investigated the closed sessions of a meeting of council for the Regional Municipality of Niagara on December 7, 2017. The Ombudsman found that there was discussion about the personal circumstances of a councillor who was the subject of an Integrity Commissioner’s report. Generally, the discussion of an Integrity Commissioner’s report on its own would not fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual because it relates to a councillor in his or her capacity as an elected official. However, the Ombudsman found that information relating to the councillor’s personal circumstances was discussed, which fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual.

The Ombudsman investigated the closed sessions of a meeting of council for the Regional Municipality of Niagara on December 7, 2017. The Ombudsman found that council received and discussed legal advice while in closed session. Accordingly, these discussions fit within the exception to the open meeting rules for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege. When council went back into closed session briefly to obtain clarification on the legal advice it received, this discussion also fit within the same exception.

The Ombudsman investigated the closed sessions of a meeting of council for the Regional Municipality of Niagara on December 7, 2017. The resolution passed by council to proceed in camera failed to provide a general description of the matter to be considered in closed session. While the minutes indicated that resolution was passed to close the meeting to discuss matters subject to solicitor-client privilege, the video recording of the meeting showed that no reference was made in the resolution to either the general nature of the subject to be discussed, or even to the exception relied upon. The Region’s argument that the subject to be discussed was apparent based on discussions preceding the closure does not satisfy the legal requirement in the Municipal Act, 2001 to include the subject in the resolution itself.

The Ombudsman reviewed a meeting held by the Long Term Case Task Force for the Regional Municipality of Niagara. Notice of the meeting was not provided to the public. The Ombudsman found that the Long Term Case Task Force had to comply with the open meeting requirements when meeting, including providing notice as required by the Municipal Act, 2001 and by the municipality’s procedure by-law.

The Ombudsman reviewed the practice of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, which did not post the agendas for the meetings of its committees on the municipal website. The Ombudsman found that although the municipal website provided an annual calendar of committee meetings, the procedure by-law requires public notice of all committee meetings by posting the agenda, time and date of each meeting as well. The Ombudsman found that the municipality did not provide notice of committee meetings as required and defined by its by-law, because it did not include meeting agendas alongside the meeting dates on the municipal website’s annual calendar of committee meetings.