ATTENTION: Due to COVID-19 safety measures, our Office cannot accept visitors. Please contact us online or by phone at 1-800-263-1830.
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. Specifically, the complainants alleged that council voted in closed session not to appeal a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The Ombudsman’s review determined that while in closed session, council voted to direct staff not to proceed with any further appeal of the court decision. The Ombudsman found that this vote did not contravene the Act, as the vote occurred during a properly closed session and was a direction to staff.
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’s review determined that during the in camera discussion on April 28, 2022, council discussed whether to appeal a court decision. Accordingly, this discussion properly fit within the open meeting exception for litigation or potential litigation.
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’s review determined that during the in camera discussion, council discussed legal advice related to a court decision and discussed how to proceed. Accordingly, this discussion properly fit within the open meeting exception for solicitor-client privilege.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by the Committee of the Whole for the Township of Tiny to discuss the community’s reaction to a court decision involving the municipality. The meeting was closed under the litigation or potential litigation exception. The court decision related to ownership of a stretch of beach located in the municipality. The Ombudsman found that the discussion did not fit within the litigation or potential litigation exception because the committee had not discussed current or pending litigation.