The Ombudsman found that the Township of Lanark Highlands 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.
An audio recording of a secret call held by members of council for the Municipality of Casselman on January 26, 2021 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. The call on January 26, 2021 constituted a “meeting” under the Municipal Act, 2001 and was a very serious violation of the open meeting rules.
The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting of the City of Hamilton’s General Issues Committee held on February 6, 2019. While the Ombudsman found that the subject matter discussed fit within the exceptions under the Municipal Act, 2001, he found that the minutes did not capture the substance of the discussion. There was also no audio or video recording of closed session.
When interviewed, those who were present could not provide details of the in camera discussion and their accounts were not always consistent with one another. As a best practice, the Ombudsman recommended that the Committee ensure that its minutes provide an accurate record of the in camera discussion, including by providing a description of the substantive and procedural matters discussed. In addition, the Ombudsman encouraged the Committee to adopt the best practice of making audio or video recordings of all proceedings, including closed meetings, to ensure an accurate record.
The City of Hamilton provided the Ombudsman with the recording of an electronic committee meeting of the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Sub-Committee. The municipality subsequently permanently deleted the recording while the Ombudsman’s review was ongoing. The Ombudsman clarified that municipalities have an obligation to preserve evidence that is the subject of a review or investigation by the Ombudsman’s Office.
The Ombudsman received a complaint about four meetings of Bruce County’s Executive Committee held on September 21, 2017, August 2 and September 6, 2018, and January 10, 2019. The Ombudsman found that the Committee’s meeting minutes did not include a full description of the subjects discussed in closed session. For several meetings in question, the Ombudsman observed that most of the content of the minutes had been copied verbatim from related staff reports, and it was unclear to what extent this reflected the content of the Committee’s actual in camera discussion. When interviewed, attendees could not recall the discussions. The Ombudsman acknowledged that the County has changed a number of its closed meeting practices since the meetings in question and recommended that the Committee remain diligent in ensuring it keeps a complete and accurate record of the substantive and procedural matters discussed during closed meetings. In addition, the Ombudsman recommended that the Committee make audio or video recordings of all proceedings, including closed meetings, to ensure an accurate record.
The Ombudsman received a complaint about a closed session held by council for the Municipality of Grey Highlands on October 7, 2020. The municipality happened to have a video recording of the closed meeting, which greatly assisted the Ombudsman’s investigation. Prior to the Ombudsman releasing his report, the municipality committed to video recording all closed meetings going forward. The Ombudsman commended the municipality for adopting this exemplary practice.
The Ombudsman reviewed the audio recording practices of the Municipality of Temagami. He noted that the municipality records its closed meetings but does not begin the recording until after council has commenced in closed session, despite holding a brief open session before proceeding in camera. As a result, council’s resolution to proceed in camera is not captured by the audio recording. As a best practice, the municipality should amend its audio recording practices to capture council’s open session resolution to move into closed session.
The Ombudsman found that the Township of Sables-Spanish Rivers failed to record important information about the meeting, including the location, the time the meeting ended, and the time that the closed session began and ended. The minutes did not include a full description of the subjects discussed in closed session and in open session. They were almost entirely limited to a list of resolutions passed. As a result, it was impossible to determine, on the basis of the meeting records, which topics were discussed during the meeting and when. When interviewed, witnesses had conflicting recollections of the discussions. The Ombudsman recommended that the township improve its meeting minutes, and that it make audio or video recordings of closed meetings to ensure an accurate record of proceedings.
The Ombudsman received a complaint regarding two closed meetings of council for the Municipality of West Nipissing. The complaint alleged that the April 20, 2019 special meeting held by teleconference, and the May 26, 2019 in camera council meetings were not audio or video recorded, contrary to requirements in the municipality’s procedure by-law. The Ombudsman’s review found that the April 20, 2019 meeting was the first closed council meeting held remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and that due to inadvertence, no audio or video recording was taken of these meetings as no one participated from council chambers where the recording equipment was located. The Ombudsman also found that all closed meetings after May 26, 2019 have been recorded in accordance with the procedure by-law, and that the municipality has apologized for the recording oversight at a recent council meeting.
The Ombudsman reviewed an in camera session of a meeting of council for the Municipality of West Nipissing, in which council intended to discuss the relationship between staff and council. The discussion instead involved shouting, pointing and arguments between council members. Prior to the Ombudsman releasing his report, the municipality implemented a process to start video recording council’s closed meetings. The Ombudsman commended the municipality for adopting the practice of video recording its council meetings.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Welland to appoint a new member of council. The Ombudsman commended the municipality for recording open and closed meetings of council. However, in this case, the audio recording system failed to work properly during the closed meeting. The Ombudsman recommended that the municipality review its audio recording system to ensure it is working properly.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Niagara Falls to discuss in camera the sale of property. The city audio records its closed session meetings. The closed session minutes for the meeting did not reflect council’s discussion or resolutions. The Ombudsman noted that audio recordings should not replace the written records as required by the Municipal Act, 2001. While an audio recording can provide a record of discussions held in camera, in this case, the audio recording of the closed session was of low quality, and it was difficult to hear all statements and to attribute statements to particular individuals.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Greater Sudbury to discuss an investigation regarding a contract between the city and a transit ticket kiosk. The Ombudsman noted the in camera minutes did not provide any specific information about the discussions that took place. The Ombudsman found that municipalities must record, without note or comment, all resolutions, decisions, and other proceedings at both open and closed meetings. The Ombudsman also recommended that the city make audio and/or video recordings of its closed meetings.
The Ombudsman reviewed a joint closed meeting held by council for the Village of Burk’s Falls and council for Armour Township to discuss amalgamation. The Ombudsman found that while both municipalities kept minutes of the closed session, neither recorded open session minutes. The Ombudsman recommended that both municipalities ensure they keep a complete record of all meetings, especially any decisions made during a meeting, regardless of form. The Ombudsman recommended that both municipalities make audio and/or video recordings of closed sessions.
The Ombudsman reviewed a joint closed meeting held by council for the Village of Burk’s Falls and council for Armour Township to discuss amalgamation. The Ombudsman found that while both municipalities kept minutes of the closed session, neither recorded open session minutes. The Ombudsman recommended that both municipalities ensure they keep a complete record of all meetings, especially any decisions made during a meeting, regardless of form. The Ombudsman recommended that both municipalities make audio and/or video recordings of closed sessions.
The Ombudsman reviewed a number of closed meeting held by council for the Township of Woolwich. The Ombudsman found that in some instances the closed meeting record did not reflect the actual substance of the discussion that took place in camera. The Ombudsman recommended that closed session minutes accurately reflect all of the substantive and procedural items that were discussed. The Ombudsman also recommended that council make audio and/or video recordings of its closed sessions.
The Ombudsman reviewed a number of closed meetings held by the Township of Chamberlain. The Ombudsman found that meeting records for certain meetings were unavailable, and the meeting records that were available lacked detail or did not reflect the substance of the discussions. The Ombudsman recommended that the municipality ensure that complete and accurate records are kept of all meetings and that the records reflect all of the substantive and procedural items that were discussed. The Ombudsman also recommended that council make audio and/or video recordings of its closed sessions.
The Ombudsman reviewed a meeting held by council for the Municipality of Magnetawan. The Ombudsman found that the minutes for the meeting did not include any information about the substance of council’s discussion. The Ombudsman recommended that the municipality ensure that its meeting record is complete and accurately reflects all of the substantive and procedural items that were discussed. The Ombudsman also recommended that council discussions be audio recorded.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by the General Issues Committee for the City of Hamilton. The Ombudsman found that the meeting minutes failed to provide any information about the closed session discussions. The Ombudsman recommended that council keep complete, detailed and accurate records of all matters discussed during closed meetings, and that council make audio and/or video recordings of its closed meetings.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the Municipality of Central Huron. The Ombudsman found that the municipality failed to audio record or video record the session in accordance with the requirements of its procedure by-law. The Ombudsman recommended that council ensure compliance with its own procedure by-law and immediately begin audio recording or video recording its closed meetings.
The Ombudsman reviewed two closed meetings held by council for the Town of Bracebridge. The Ombudsman found that the minutes only captured the resolutions considered during the in camera sessions, but did not capture the substance of the discussions. The Ombudsman recommended that council ensure that minutes of closed meetings reflect the actual substance of the discussion and that council make audio and/or video recordings of its closed sessions.
The Ombudsman reviewed seven closed meetings held by council for the Municipality of South Huron. The Ombudsman found that for several of the meetings, there was a lack of information available in the minutes. For one meeting, for example, the minutes failed to provide any information about the discussions that took place. In another instance, the meeting minutes failed to record all of the topics of the in camera discussion. The Ombudsman recommended that the municipality ensure that its meeting record is complete and accurately reflects all of the substantive and procedural items that were discussed. Additionally, the Ombudsman recommended that the municipality implement a practice of audio recording its closed sessions.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the Township of Baldwin to discuss the qualifications of individual and identifiable candidates for the municipal works foreman position. The Ombudsman found that it was not clear from the meeting record that all of the discussions during the in camera meeting were captured in the minutes. The Ombudsman recommended that township council keep comprehensive and accurate minutes of meetings and also consider audio recording its closed meetings.