The Ombudsman found that council for the Township of Russell did not contravene the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 on January 29, 2024 by not livestreaming the open portion of the meeting after the closed session because members of the public could observe all open portions of the meeting in person, as provided in the Township’s procedure by-law and the public notice of the meeting. However, he encouraged the Township to consider including a clear notice on its website that the livestream of its council meetings will end when council moves into a closed session.
The Ombudsman found that the Municipality of West Elgin did not provide meaningful notice of its council meetings on September 22, September 28, and October 16, 2023, as the meetings were advertised as hybrid or electronic only, but no link was provided for the public to access the livestream of the meetings. This resulted in the meetings being effectively closed to the public contrary to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001.
The Ombudsman found that the Municipality of West Elgin’s emergency council meeting held on September 22, 2023 did not meet the criteria under the municipality’s procedural by-law for an emergency meeting and therefore public notice was required. In addition, the Ombudsman found that the municipality did not provide meaningful notice, as the meeting was advertised as electronic but no link was provided for the public to access a livestream of the meeting. This resulted in the meeting being effectively closed to the public contrary to the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The Ombudsman found that council for the Township of McKellar contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when audio and connectivity issues impeded the public’s ability to observe portions of the electronic meeting of council held on August 24, 2021.
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.
The Ombudsman was satisfied that council proceedings were audible to the public during the April 12, 2022 meeting of council, such that council for the Township of McKellar did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.