Norfolk County

Norfolk County

October 29, 2019

29 October, 2019

The Ombudsman determined that council for Norfolk County did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001, when it went in camera on March 26 and April 2, to discuss the hiring of an interim Chief Administrative Officer (CAO). The meetings relied on the exceptions for personal matters about an identifiable individual, and advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Ombudsman found that the discussions about the hiring of a candidate for the interim CAO position and the performance of identifiable staff members fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual. The Ombudsman also found that council’s receipt of legal advice from the County Solicitor fit within the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege. 

The Ombudsman determined that council for Norfolk County did not contravene the Municipal Act, 2001, when it went in camera on March 26 and April 2, to discuss the hiring of an interim Chief Administrative Officer (CAO). The meetings relied on the exceptions for personal matters about an identifiable individual, and advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Ombudsman found that the discussions about the hiring of a candidate for the interim CAO position and the performance of identifiable staff members fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual. The Ombudsman also found that council’s receipt of legal advice from the County Solicitor fit within the exception for advice subject to solicitor-client privilege.

Read the letter (accessible PDF)