The Ombudsman found that council for the City of Elliot Lake contravened the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act, 2001 when it held closed meetings on May 1 and May 15, 2023 to discuss the City’s strategic plan. The Ombudsman determined that these two sessions materially advanced council business, and therefore did not fit into the cited open meeting exception for education or training, nor any other exception to the open meeting rules. However, the Ombudsman found that a subsequent closed session on December 2, 2024 fit under the exception for education or training.
City of Elliot Lake - March 18, 2026
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman found that council for the City of Elliot Lake contravened subsection 239(4) of the Municipal Act, 2001 by failing to state by resolution the general subject matter to be discussed in closed session when it met on May 1 and May 15, 2023 to discuss the City’s strategic plan.
The Ombudsman found that the closed meeting minutes for two meetings held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss the City’s strategic plan failed to adequately record the substance of council’s discussion, contrary to subsection 239(7) of the Municipal Act, 2001.
The Ombudsman found that portions of a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake on December 2, 2023 fit within the open meeting exceptions for personal matters about an identifiable individual and advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.
City of Elliot Lake, September 18, 2024
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman found that the Finance and Administration Committee for the City of Elliot Lake contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it received a presentation on proposed changes to the City’s procurement by-law in closed session on December 18, 2023. As the purpose of the discussion was not to educate or train council members, the discussion did not fit within the exception for education or training.
The Ombudsman found that the Finance and Administration Committee for the City of Elliot Lake contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it received a presentation on proposed changes to the City’s procurement by-law in closed session on December 18, 2023. As the Committee did not discuss personal information about identifiable individuals, the discussion did not fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual.
The Ombudsman found that the Finance and Administration Committee for the City of Elliot Lake contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 when it received a presentation on proposed changes to the City’s procurement by-law in closed session on December 18, 2023. The Ombudsman’s investigation did not identify any instances where the Committee discussed protecting the municipality’s property from physical loss or damage. As such, the discussion did not fit within the exception for the security of the property of the municipality.
City of Elliot Lake, February 20, 2024
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by the City of Elliot Lake to discuss a court decision involving the municipality. During the meeting, council received legal advice and provided instructions to its solicitor. The Ombudsman found that the closed session discussion fit within the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.
The Ombudsman investigated a closed meeting held by the City of Elliot Lake to discuss a proposed sale of municipal land. Council discussed proposals to purchase the property and financial information about a geotechnical study of the land. The Ombudsman found that the information, if made public, could impact the municipality’s bargaining position, so the meeting was appropriately closed under the exception for acquisition or disposition of land.
Council for the City of Elliot Lake relied on the “personal matters” exception to discuss the municipality’s organizational structure in closed session. The discussion took place in two parts. During the first part, council reviewed an organizational chart which included the names and roles of employees. During the second part, council discussed potential reorganization and received information about identifiable employees, including about leaves of absence, performance, and working relationships. The Ombudsman found that the first part of the discussion did not fit within the “personal matters” exception because it did not include personal information about identifiable individuals. The Ombudsman found that the second part of the discussion fit within the exception.
Council for the City of Elliot Lake held a closed session discussion about the municipality’s organizational structure and potential reorganization. The closed session discussion took place in two parts. The Ombudsman found that the first part of the discussion, involving the municipality’s organizational chart, could have been parsed from the second part of the discussion about reorganization, and should have been held in open session.
City of Elliot Lake, August 9, 2017
Read the LetterThe Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss a motion to rescind a previous resolution regarding the recruitment of a chief administrative officer (CAO). The meeting was closed under the personal matters exception. During the closed session council discussed several individuals in the context of their employment, however, the discussion also included information about these employees that went beyond their professional roles. Council also discussed the desired qualities of a CAO. The Ombudsman found that while normally, general discussion of the qualities of a CAO would not fall within the personal matters exception, in this case it would not be reasonable for council to parse its discussion. Therefore, the discussion fit within the personal matters exception.
City of Elliot Lake, December 22, 2016
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman reviewed two meetings of the Ad Hoc Multi-Use Complex Committee for the City of Elliot Lake. The committee’s procedure by-law requires public notice be posted on a bulletin board. As a general practice, the municipality also posts notice of its meetings on the municipal website, however, this was not done for the two committee meetings under review. The Ombudsman found that the municipality failed to provide notice of the two meetings on either the bulletin board or the website.
City of Elliot Lake, November 9, 2015
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss the mayor’s conduct and the roles and responsibilities of the mayor. The meeting was closed under the personal matters exception. The Ombudsman found that a discussion of a committee or council member may qualify as personal where it involves the evaluation of a person’s conduct or performance. The Ombudsman found that although parts of council’s discussion qualified as personal information, council’s discussion about the mayor’s official conduct was not covered by the personal matters exception. However, the Ombudsman found that parsing the closed meeting discussion would not be realistic, given the connection between the parts of the discussion that did not fall within the exception and those that did.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake which relied on the personal matters exception to discuss committee members’ roles and behaviour. The Ombudsman found that council’s discussions about the volunteer committee members’ conduct were personal in nature and therefore fit within the personal matters exception.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake that relied on the acquisition or disposition of land exception to discuss the decision of a committee with respect to the disposition of property. The purpose of the meeting was to update a committee member. The disposition had already been made public. The Ombudsman found that subsequent discussions at council about property-related deliberations could continue to fit within the acquisition or disposition of land exception. Therefore, the discussion fit within the acquisition or disposition of land exception.
City of Elliot Lake, April 24, 2015
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman reviewed a special meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake. Notice of the meeting was initially provided via the municipal website and posted on a bulletin board, but was removed and reposted the next day. The procedure by-law requires notice of a special meeting be provided as soon as reasonably possible. The Ombudsman found that in this case, notice was provided in accordance with the procedure by-law. The Ombudsman recommended that the municipality update its procedure by-law to reflect council’s practice of providing notice to the public of special meetings through posting meeting agendas on the website and in the municipal office, as well as by alerting the media.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake that relied on the personal matters exception to discuss a request from a property owner for an extension to complete construction. If the owner failed to finish construction within the allotted time, the municipality could repurchase the property at 80% of the purchase price. The Ombudsman found that council’s decision would have a significant effect on an identifiable individual, and therefore, council’s discussion fit within the personal matters exception.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss a request from a property owner to extend the time required to finish the exterior of buildings located in the municipality. The meeting was closed under the acquisition or disposition of land exception. The property was originally owned by the municipality. If the owner failed to finish the exterior within the allotted time, the municipality could repurchase the property at 80% of the purchase price. The Ombudsman found that council’s discussion involved the reacquisition of a property by a municipality. Therefore, council’s discussion fit within the acquisition or disposition of land exception.
The Ombudsman reviewed closed meetings held by council for the City of Elliot Lake, which relied on the personal matters exception to discuss the recruitment of a new chief administrative officer (CAO). The discussions involved changes to the current CAO’s contract and extending the service of the current CAO. The Ombudsman found that the information discussed by council during the meetings related to specific terms of an identified employee’s contract, including salary. Accordingly, the discussion fit within the personal matters exception.
The Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake, which relied on the personal matters exception to discuss the recruitment of a new chief administrative officer (CAO). During the closed meeting, council discussed an identifiable individual who had submitted an application for the CAO position. The discussion involved the contents of the application, and included expressing opinions about the individual’s qualifications. The discussion also involved third-party information that was included in the application. The Ombudsman found that the discussion involved personal information about the applicant and third-party information. Accordingly, the discussion fit within the personal matters exception.
The Ombudsman reviewed closed meetings held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss the recruitment of a new chief administrative officer (CAO). The discussions involved changes to the current CAO’s contract and extending the service of the current CAO. The Ombudsman found that the information discussed by council during the meetings related to specific terms of an identified employee’s contract, including salary. Accordingly, the discussion fit within the exception for labour relations or employee negotiations.
City of Elliot Lake, October 27, 2014
Read the ReportThe Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by the Finance and Administration Committee for the City of Elliot Lake that relied on the acquisition or disposition of land exception to discuss the closure of White Mountain Academy. The municipality had an agreement with the school to pay for maintenance of the building. The Ombudsman found that the municipality’s financial interests might have been harmed if the discussion were held in open session. Therefore, the discussion fit within the acquisition or disposition of land exception.
City of Elliot Lake, September 8, 2014
Read the LetterThe Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss unproven allegations against a member of council. The Ombudsman noted that information about an individual in their professional capacity takes on a more personal nature if it relates to scrutiny of that person’s conduct. In this case, council was considering unproven allegations against a council member that had not been investigated or made public at the time. This portion of the discussions fit within the personal matters exception.
City of Elliot Lake, August 1, 2013
Read the LetterThe Ombudsman reviewed a closed meeting held by council for the City of Elliot Lake to discuss the municipality’s negotiations with the Serpent River First Nation with respect to acquisition of crown land for a local development project. The meeting was closed using the acquisition or disposition of land exception. During the meeting, council received information about the status of confidential negotiations with the Serpent River First Nation. Council discussed the municipality’s negotiation strategy and next steps. The Ombudsman found that the discussion fit within the acquisition or disposition of land exception. However, as the meeting notice incorrectly stated the meeting start time, the Ombudsman reminded Council of the importance to ensure accuracy in all future meeting notices.
City of Elliot Lake, May 2, 2013
Read the LetterThe Ombudsman reviewed an emergency meeting held by council of for the City of Elliot Lake. It was impossible to provide notice of the meeting on the municipal website because the matter under discussion arose after business hours. The municipality tried to inform the local newspaper and radio station. The Ombudsman found that the procedure by-law requires notice of special meetings be provided as soon as reasonably possible. The Ombudsman found that in this case there were reasonable steps taken to provide public notice.