5.       CLOSED MEETINGS AND MEETINGS INVESTIGATOR

 

RÉUNIONS À HUIT CLOS ET ENQUÊTEUR AUX RÉUNIONS

 

 

Committee Recommendations

 

That Council approve that:

 

1.         The Procedure By-law be amended to incorporate the Notice provisions for City Council meetings, in accordance with the requirements of Municipal Act, 2001 as outlined in Appendix D;

 

2.         The City appoint a Meetings Investigator for the City of Ottawa pursuant to Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001;

 

3.         The City Solicitor be delegated the authority to hire the Meetings Investigator in accordance with the criteria outlined in this report, and prepare an appointment by-law and agreement; and

 

4.         The interim process for accepting and investigating complaints outlined in this report be adopted and publicized pending the development of a formal process to be brought forward by the Meetings Investigator in early 2008.

 

 

Recommandations du comité

 

Que le Conseil approuve :

 

1.         que le Règlement de procédure soit modifié de façon à inclure les dispositions d’avis pour les réunions du Conseil municipal, conformément aux exigences de la Loi sur les municipalités de 2001, tel que décrit au document D;

 

2.         que la Ville nomme un enquêteur pour les réunions pour la Ville d’Ottawa conformément à l’article 239 de la Loi sur les municipalités de 2001;

 

3.         que l’on délègue au chef du contentieux le pouvoir d’embaucher l’enquêteur pour les réunions conformément aux critères énoncés dans le présent rapport et de préparer une entente et un règlement sur les nominations; et

 


 

 

 

4.         que le processus intérimaire pour accepter et étudier les plaintes énoncé dans le présent rapport soit adopté et rendu public en attendant l’établissement d’un processus officiel qui sera présenté par l’enquêteur pour les réunions au début de 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

Documentation

 

1.   City Clerk’s and City Solicitor’s joint report dated 9 November 2007 (ACS2007-CMR-CCB-0020).

 

2.   Extract of Draft Minute, 19 November 2007.

 


Report to/Rapport au :

 

Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee

Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique

 

and Council / et au Conseil

 

9 November 2007 / le  9 novembre 2007

 

Submitted by/Soumis par : Pierre Pagé, City Clerk/Greffier municipal

and

 M. Rick O'Connor, City Solicitor/Procureur de la ville

 

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Leslie Donnelly, Deputy City Clerk/ Greffière adjointe

City Clerk’s Branch/Direction du greffe

(613) 580-2424 x28857, Leslie.Donnelly@ottawa.ca

 

City Wide/à l'échelle de la Ville

Ref N°: ACS2007-CMR-CCB-0020

 

 

SUBJECT:

CLOSED MEETINGS AND MEETINGS INVESTIGATOR

 

 

OBJET :

Réunions à huit clos et enquêteur aux réunions

 

 

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

 

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve that:

 

1.      The Procedure By-law be amended to incorporate the Notice provisions for City Council meetings, in accordance with the requirements of Municipal Act, 2001 as outlined in Appendix D;

 

2.      The City appoint a Meetings Investigator for the City of Ottawa pursuant to Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001;

 

3.      The City Solicitor be delegated the authority to hire the Meetings Investigator in accordance with the criteria outlined in this report, and prepare an appointment by-law and agreement; and

 

4.      The interim process for accepting and investigating complaints outlined in this report be adopted and publicized pending the development of a formal process to be brought forward by the Meetings Investigator in early 2008.

 

 


RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

 

Que le Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique recommande au Conseil d’approuver :

1.      que le Règlement de procédure soit modifié de façon à inclure les dispositions d’avis pour les réunions du Conseil municipal, conformément aux exigences de la Loi sur les municipalités de 2001, tel que décrit au document D;

2.      que la Ville nomme un enquêteur pour les réunions pour la Ville d’Ottawa conformément à l’article 239 de la Loi sur les municipalités de 2001;

3.      que l’on délègue au chef du contentieux le pouvoir d’embaucher l’enquêteur pour les réunions conformément aux critères énoncés dans le présent rapport et de préparer une entente et un règlement sur les nominations; et

4.      que le processus intérimaire pour accepter et étudier les plaintes énoncé dans le présent rapport soit adopté et rendu public en attendant l’établissement d’un processus officiel qui sera présenté par l’enquêteur pour les réunions au début de 2008.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Assumptions and Analysis:

 

Bill 130, the Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006 made numerous amendments to the Municipal Act, 2001 designed to improve accountability and transparency at the municipal level. One of the Bill 130 accountability measures, specifically the amended Section 239, deals explicitly with issues of closed meetings.  It outlines the specific criteria for which a meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public.  Further, Section 239 of the amended Municipal Act, 2001 provides that an individual may ask for an investigation into the propriety of a closed meeting either through an investigator appointed by the municipality or, in the event the municipality does not appoint an investigator, through the Provincial Ombudsman.

 

The City of Ottawa is a leader in the province in open meetings, and already has many best-practice open meetings procedures in place (such as advertising meetings, disclosing reasons for moving in camera, and providing reporting out dates for in camera reports and decisions).  This report recommends a ‘housekeeping’ amendment to the Procedure By-law that will enshrine the public notice provisions already in place through the Notice By-law in the Procedure By-law as well (a new requirement under the Bill 130 amendments).

 

Given City Council’s demonstrated commitment to open meetings, staff has reviewed a number of options for the appointment of a Meetings Investigator and is recommending that City Council appoint a City of Ottawa Meetings Investigator on retainer to ensure that investigations are conducted as a priority (within 30 days), and to the highest standards. As well, an interim process for receiving and investigating complaints is being proposed until such time as the City’s Meeting Investigator brings forward a recommended process for Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee’s and City Council’s consideration in early 2008.

 

Financial Implications:

 

Given that the City of Ottawa has a history of openness and generally holds meetings of Committee and Council in open session, it is anticipated that the ongoing costs of closed meeting investigations will be minimal.  As such, the Legal Services and City Clerk’s Branches will absorb the costs of a Meeting Investigator.  A review of the costs will be incorporated as part of any regular reporting from the Meetings Investigator.

 

 

RÉSUMÉ

 

Hypothèses et analyse :

Le projet de loi 130, Loi de 2006 modifiant des lois concernant les municipalités, a apporté de nombreuses modifications à la Loi sur les municipalités de 2001 visant à améliorer la reddition de comptes et la transparence au niveau municipal. Une des mesures de reddition des comptes du projet de loi 130, en particulier l’article 239 modifié, traite de façon explicite des questions relatives aux réunions fermées. Il énonce les critères particuliers pour lesquels une réunion ou une partie de celle‑ci peut être fermée au public. De plus, l’article 239 de la Loi sur les municipalités de 2001 modifiée stipule qu’un particulier peut demander une enquête sur le bien-fondé d’une réunion fermée par l’intermédiaire d’un enquêteur nommé par la municipalité ou, dans le cas où la municipalité ne nomme pas d’enquêteur, de l’Ombudsman de la province.

La Ville d’Ottawa est un chef de file dans la province pour ce qui est des réunions publiques et a déjà mis en place un grand nombre de procédures exemplaires pour les réunions publiques (comme annoncer les réunions, divulguer les raisons pour lesquelles une réunion a lieu à huis clos et fournir les dates de compte rendu pour les rapports et les décisions des réunions à huis clos). Le présent rapport recommande une modification d’ordre administratif au Règlement de procédure qui inscrira dans le Règlement de procédure les dispositions d’avis public déjà en place dans le Règlement sur les avis (nouvelle exigence en vertu des modifications au projet de loi 130).

Étant donné l’engagement manifeste du Conseil municipal envers les réunions publiques, le personnel a envisagé et évalué un certain nombre d’options pour la nomination d’un enquêteur pour les réunions et recommande que le Conseil municipal nomme un enquêteur pour les réunions de la Ville d’Ottawa sous contrat pour veiller à ce que les enquêtes soient menées de façon prioritaire et selon les normes les plus élevées. De plus, un processus intérimaire pour recevoir et étudier les plaintes est proposé jusqu’à ce que l’enquêteur pour les réunions de la Ville propose un processus recommandé pour examen par le Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique et le Conseil municipal au début de 2008.

Répercussions financières :

Puisque la Ville d’Ottawa est reconnue pour son ouverture d’esprit et puisque ses réunions avec le Comité et le Conseil sont en général des réunions publiques, on prévoit que les coûts continus des enquêtes sur les réunions fermées seront minimes. Ainsi, les Services juridiques et le Bureau du greffier absorberont les coûts d’un enquêteur pour les réunions. Un examen des coûts sera inclus dans tout rapport régulier provenant de l’enquêteur pour les réunions.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Bill 130, the Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, came into effect, with some minor exceptions, on January 1st, 2007.  This omnibus bill included nearly 200 pages of revisions to the Municipal Act, 2001, and provided Ontario’s 444 municipalities with broad powers and often the discretion to determine which powers it will use to meet its own specific needs.  This greater authority is balanced with increased accountability and transparency tools for municipalities.

 

As Bill 130 revisions are quite significant, municipalities across Ontario are just beginning to understand the potential for improved governance and service delivery that now exist.  Ottawa City Council received its first report in October 2006, entitled “Bill 130 – Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act”, which outlined some of the significant amendments of the Act and staff were directed to “provide the 2006-2010 Council with an update on amendments to Bill 130 in order to enable Council, upon its enactment, to determine its strategic priorities arising from same”.  Council was then provided with a series of White Papers on Bill 130 amendments during the Council Strategic Planning Sessions in May 2007.  Based on recommendations and feedback from these sessions, staff is bringing forward various reports to implement the mandatory provisions in Bill 130 as well as consider the discretionary options City Council may wish to pursue. 

 

Given the depth and breadth of the potential changes the City of Ottawa might undertake in the area of governance, particularly with respect to the new Bill 130 tools to enhance accountability and transparency and the enhanced ability to adjust the delegation of powers, staff intends to undertake a comprehensive review of these tools as part of the Mid-term Governance Review and bring forward an integrated package in 2008 following extensive consultations.

 

With that, however, the revised Municipal Act, 2001 requires the City of Ottawa (and all municipalities) to establish a number policies by December 31, 2007.  At the present, City Council has already adopted the following four statutory policies:

 

 


The additional policies that must be adopted are:

 

 

Another issue the municipality must resolve by December 31, 2007 is that of the appointment of a Meetings Investigator.  Section 239.1 of the revised Municipal Act, 2001 enables any person to “request that an investigation of whether a municipality or local board has complied with” either the statutory requirements for closed meetings or a procedure by-law.  This investigation is to be undertaken by either:

 

 

The revised Municipal Act, 2001 also requires that public notice for Council and Standing Committee meetings be enshrined within the municipality’s Procedure By-law, and not just in the Notice By-law.

 

As well, City Council has directed staff to look at establishing a Code of Conduct for elected officials as one of the City Strategic Directions approved in July 2007.  Reports on these items are being brought before City Council in advance of the Mid-term Governance Review to meet the legislated timelines where required.  They are being brought forward together, as they are related.

 

This report makes recommendations regarding the Meetings Investigator and recommends an interim process for receiving and investigating complaints.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

As outlined above, changes resulting from Bill 130 to Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 regarding closed meetings, the requirements for a meetings investigator and related process have been proclaimed to come into force on January 1, 2008.  These changes necessitate some action by the City to ensure that the required mechanisms are in place in order to adhere to the provisions of the Act.

 

Closed Meetings

 

It is important to note that the City of Ottawa is considered to be a leader in the province for open meetings, particularly in the areas of the motions to move in camera, in camera minutes, and reporting out dates as part of the disposition.  Moreover, City Council has gone beyond the provisions in the Act for openness by directing staff to incorporate the specific subject matter to be discussed in camera in addition to the reason under Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001
 
(a practice which staff will incorporate into the revised Procedure By-law that will be brought forward with the Mid-term Governance Review). 

 

Previously, Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 permitted closed meetings of council only to discuss the following matters:

 

  1. The security of the property of the municipality or local board;
  2. Personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees;
  3. A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board;
  4. Labour relations or employee negotiations;
  5. Litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board;
  6. Advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; and
  7. A matter in respect of which a council, board, committee or other body may hold a closed meeting under another Act.

 

Under Bill 130, the criteria for holding a closed meeting of council has been changed in Section 239 (3.1) to permit a closed session for educational purposes or training of members where no member “discusses or otherwise deals with any matter in a way that materially advances the business or decision-making of the council, local board or committee.”  These criteria may include such things as orientation for members of council or technical briefings.

 

The inclusion of the new, albeit discretionary, factor that allows municipal councils to move into closed session is already the subject of considerable scrutiny by a number of entities involved in open government.  Provincial Ombudsman André Marin, in particular, has indicated that his office will take an active and strong interest in reviewing how municipalities incorporate the new closed meeting criteria, the development and adoption of a complaints process and the provisions for the appointment of a meeting investigator (see Appendix 1).  Mr. Marin noted in his 2006-2007 Annual Report that his Office was already tracking closed meeting complaints and indicated that his Office would continue to monitor closed meeting investigations performed by individual municipalities “with a view to ensuring that these new and important legislative provisions are applied in a fair and consistent manner through the province.”

 

Also of note is the recent decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in London (City) v. RSJ Holdings Inc., released in June 2007.  In delivering her decision, Justice Charron defends the principles of “open meetings” in the following fashion:

 

The open meeting requirement set out in s. 239 concerns a citizen’s rights to observe municipal government in process and reflects a clear legislative choice for increased transparency and accountability in the decision-making process of local governments.

 

As indicated previously, the City of Ottawa holds the vast majority of its Standing Committee and City Council meetings in open session as a matter of course.  From January 1, 2007 to October 24, 2007, City Council resolved in camera nine times, as set out in Appendix 2, and considered 27 in camera reports, as set out in Appendix 3, 18 of which were confidential because of Personal Matters about identifiable individuals; five because of Labour Relations; one for Solicitor -Client Privilege; and three for multiple reasons (i.e. Security of the Property; Litigation or Potential Litigation; and Solicitor-Client Privilege).  Council only resolved in camera to discuss four of these reports; the remainder carried on consent.

 

The revised Municipal Act, 2001 requires that all municipalities give public notice of their Council and Standing Committee meetings, and enshrine this notice within their Procedure By-law.  While the City of Ottawa has provided public notice of its Council and Committee meetings for many years, and these provisions are put forward in the City’s Notice By-law, a new clause is being recommended to be added to the Procedure By-law (see Appendix 4) to reflect current practice and meet the Bill 130 requirements.

 

The broadening of the closed meeting criteria to include the educational or training option necessitated the inclusion of additional provisions related to providing notice of the general nature of the closed meeting’s subject-matter by resolution and recording all decisions and other proceedings of the meeting.  These changes, along with formalizing City Council’s direction to include the subject matter being discussed in camera referenced earlier, will be reflected in the City Council’s Procedure By-law as part of the Mid-term Governance Review.

 

Meetings Investigator /Closed Meetings Complaints Process

 

Under the previous Municipal Act, when any individual or group objected to the propriety of the closed meeting of a municipal council or local board, the sole option was to challenge the matter in court.

 

Now, Section 239.1 of the revised Municipal Act, 2001 enables any person to “request that an investigation of whether a municipality or local board has complied with” either the statutory requirements for closed meetings or a procedure by-law, beginning January 1, 2008. 

 

Section 239.2 of the revised Municipal Act, 2001 authorizes a municipality to appoint an investigator to investigate, in an independent manner, complaints with respect to non-compliance with open meeting requirements.  In the event that a municipality chooses not to appoint such an investigator, the Provincial Ombudsman would then have the authority to undertake the investigation.  As previously mentioned, this section will come into force on January 1, 2008 at which point it is recommended that the City of Ottawa have a meeting investigator appointed to receive such complaints.

 

Appointment of a Meetings Investigator

 

Under Bill 130, there are a number of principles councils must have regard for when appointing a Meetings Investigator:

 

1.      The Investigator’s independence and impartiality;

2.      Confidentiality with respect to the investigator’s activities; and

3.      The credibility of the investigator’s investigative process.

 

In considering the appointment of a Meetings Investigator, staff recommend that the successful candidate possess:

·          Previous municipal government experience (i.e. former Clerk, CAO, municipal lawyer);

·          Knowledge of municipal government and the closed meeting provisions of the Municipal Act, 2001;

·          Understanding of Council operations and policies;

·          Credibility with City Council, staff, public, and media;

·          The ability to receive complaints and conduct an investigation in both official languages; and

·          No specific connection or interest with the City.

 

Options for a Meetings Investigator

 

As part of the preparation of this report, staff investigated various of the options Ontario municipalities are pursuing for a Meetings Investigator.  As a result of this investigation, staff is recommending that the City of Ottawa appoint its own Meetings Investigator.  The appointment of a City of Ottawa Meetings Investigator on retainer will:

§         Allow the municipality to set the standard for a responsive, timely and thorough investigation and reporting process (i.e. 30 calendar day turnaround time, own standards for reporting rather than others, no potential for delays from ‘waiting in line’ as may occur with Provincial Ombudsman);

§         Ensure the Meetings Investigator remains completely independent and arms-length from the City (i.e. not a City staff person with an office and staff, not a consultant/contractor with other dealings with the City); and,

§         Keep costs low (i.e. on a retainer rather than creating a permanent office/staff at City Hall; no hotel/transportation costs in addition to daily rate) and allows the municipality to conduct the investigations at no cost to the complainant.

 

The other options investigated are set out below.

 

Enrol in AMO/LAS Closed Meeting Investigator Program

 

In April/May 2007, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (“AMO”) Local Authority Service (“LAS”) conducted a survey of Ontario municipalities to gauge interest in access to an Investigator Program.  The program would provide access to a team of trained municipal experts who would respond to requests for an investigation as they arose locally.  Due to the positive response, LAS has developed a program to provide access to a team who would respond to requests for an investigation as they arose locally. 

 

AMO released details of the program at its annual Conference in August 2007.  Enrolment in the program will require a municipality to enter into a 2-year agreement with automatic renewal with a term retainer fee of $600.  In the event that the municipality receives a complaint, a fee of $1,250 per day (8 hours/day) will be applied in addition to reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the investigator.  Fees may be billed on an hourly basis where only part of a day is required.  It is anticipated that an investigation process will require a minimum of a half-day’s time once referred to an Investigator even if the request is withdrawn or deemed vexatious.

 

After reviewing the components of the LAS Meeting Investigator Program, staff determined that the program would not be advantageous for the City of Ottawa for a number of reasons.  Foremost, the program lacks consistency with respect to the assignment of Investigators who may be retained from various locations in Ontario.  This factor could contribute to higher transportation, hotel, meals and out-of-pocket expenses.  Further, the City of Ottawa has a tradition of conducting the majority of business in open session and is looking to further reduce the occasions for which Council would actually go in camera.  This practice is not necessarily customary for all municipalities in Ontario, and a local Meetings Investigator would measure us against the Municipal Act as well as our own procedural standards, rather than by the Act and the current norm amongst municipalities. 

 

However, staff do believe the notion of hiring the Meetings Investigator on retainer and paying an hourly rate for any investigations provides for both independent and arms-length review while being cost-effective, and are recommending this approach be taken for the City of Ottawa Meetings Investigator.

 

Provincial Ombudsman Investigates

 

Section 239.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that, in the event that a municipality has not appointed an investigator and a complaint is lodged against the municipality, the Provincial Ombudsman shall have the authority to investigate.  The Ontario Ombudsman recently announced that complaints would be investigated at no charge to the municipality or complainant and dealt with according to procedures set out in the Ombudsman Act.  However, no further details of the process have been disclosed to date and, given that investigations will be treated in the same fashion as other complaints received by the Ombudsman, the time required to complete such an investigation may be longer than if the review was undertaken by a local meetings investigator.  Further, resource allocations within the Office of the Ombudsman remain unclear and subject to annual budget approval of the Provincial Legislature.  This means a possibility of a future charge should meetings investigations place a significant strain on the resources of the Office.

 

While City staff does not recommend using the Provincial Ombudsman to investigate complaints, staff is recommending that the City of Ottawa complaints be investigated at no charge to the complainant.

 


Appoint a Joint Meetings Investigator

 

Some municipalities in Ontario have decided to appoint a Joint Meetings Investigator in conjunction with neighbouring municipalities in order to share the cost.  While this option might potentially lower the cost of retaining a full-time Meetings Investigator (and staff for the office), staff believes that the City of Ottawa would be best served by an independent, arms-length Investigator who will have specific regard for City of Ottawa standards for open meetings.  Further, it is anticipated that the number of complaints with respect to closed meetings would not justify a full-time position in the City of Ottawa in any case. 

 

Municipal Ombudsman

 

As previously discussed, Bill 130 includes the discretionary authority to appoint a number of public officials with respect to accountability and transparency.  Particularly, Bill 130 provides the authority to appoint a municipal Ombudsman to investigate complaints and whose duties could extend to investigating meeting complaints.

 

The City of Toronto has appointed an interim Meetings Investigator whose duties are intended to be assigned to the City Ombudsman when the statutory office is established in late 2007. 

 

At this point, the City has not made a determination of the establishment of an Ombudsman for Ottawa.  Should City Council decide in the future to establish this office, they may wish to look at incorporating the duties of the Meetings Investigator into this office at that time.

 

Recommended Duties of the Meetings Investigator

 

Section 239.2 authorizes the City to appoint a Meetings Investigator and to assign him/her duties required by position.  Specifically, it is recommended that the Meetings Investigator be giving the authority to:

 

 


Powers of the Investigator

 

Under Section 239.1, the Investigator position is subject to Section 223.13 (6) and Sections 223.14 to 223.18 of the Municipal Act, 2001, which delineate the powers of the municipal ombudsman.  As such, the following are powers of the Investigator:

 

 

Interim Process

 

Staff recommends that once a Meeting Investigator has been appointed, s/he be directed to establish the process for submitting a complaint, determine the validity of a complaint, launch an investigation, and disclose the results of the investigation.

 

In the interim, staff proposes that complaints regarding the propriety of closed meetings of Council and its local boards be dealt with in a similar fashion to requests for information under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“MFIPPA”).  Further, it is recommended that this process be facilitated by the City Clerk’s Office in the same fashion and that investigations be performed at no cost to the complainant.  Specifically, the interim process of submitting a complaint would proceed as follows:

 

1.      A Request for Investigation would be submitted to the City Clerk’s Office.

2.      Request would be logged and forwarded to the Meetings Investigator.  An initial collection of Council/Committee information (i.e. resolution to move in camera) would take place in order to assist the Meeting Investigator in assessing the validity of the complaint.

3.      The Meeting Investigator would then review the request and determine whether the request warranted further investigation.

4.      In the case that the Investigator decides to pursue the request, he/she would then inform City Council via a memo (as per the current MFIPPA process) and launch an investigation and collect all the relevant information required.

5.      Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigator would report to Council and/or local board with his/her findings and recommendations.

6.      The investigation would be completed and reported on with 30 calendar days of the initial complaint. 

 

In addition to the interim process above, staff is recommending that the term of the Meetings Investigator be set at one year, with a review brought forward to Council in conjunction with the Mid-term Governance Review.

 

Hiring a Meetings Investigator

 

As both the City Clerk’s Office and City Council are likely to be directly involved in many of the Closed Meetings complaints, it is recommended that the City Solicitor be delegated the authority to hire the City of Ottawa’s Meetings Investigator in accordance with the criteria established in this report.  This is to further enhance the independent, arms-length relationship of the Meetings Investigator.

 

 

CONSULTATION

 

City Council was presented with information on the new provisions of the revised Municipal Act, 2001 as part of the Governance package for the Council Strategic Priority Setting sessions. As well, consultations were undertaken with the Regional and Single-Tier Clerks group as well as the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario.

 

Furthermore, upon the public release of this report, staff will forward same to the Office of the Provincial Ombudsman for his ongoing information.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

In consultation with the Legal Services Branch, it is recommended that the Meetings Investigator be hired at the following rates:

 

$600 Annual Retainer;

$175 Hourly Rate, to a maximum of $1250 per day; and

Mileage and Reasonable Expenses

 

It is anticipated that the financial impact of closed meeting investigations will likely be well under $25,000 annually and, as such, the Legal and City Clerk’s Branches will absorb the costs of a Meeting Investigator in their existing budgets.

 

 

COUNCIL STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS

 

The appointment of a Meetings Investigator supports the implementation of Strategic Direction G6, “Establish clarity around conflict of interest and code of conduct policies for elected representatives”.

 

 

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

 

Appendix A – Letter from the Provincial Ombudsman

Appendix B – Ottawa City Council In Camera Sessions

Appendix C – Ottawa City Council In Camera Reports

Appendix D – Procedure By-law Excerpt

 

 

DISPOSITION

 

Upon Council approval, the City Solicitor will initiate a recruitment process for a Meeting Investigator and prepare a draft appointment by-law for Committee and Council approval.  Staff will provide this report to all local boards subject to the Meetings Investigator and direct that they provide to him/her copies of their procedure by-laws and other relevant documents with respect to their open and closed meetings.  Further, this report and all documents related to the appointment of the Meetings Investigator and the Closed Meeting Complaints process will be forwarded to the Provincial Ombudsman and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in response to their requests.

 

 


APPENDIX A

 


APPENDIX B

Ottawa City Council In Camera Sessions

January 24, 2007

That City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Procedure By-law 2006-462, Subsections 13. (1):

(b)        personal matters about an identifiable individual, including staff; and,

(f)         the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose;

with respect to the North-South Light Rail Transit Project and a personnel matter.

 

February 23, 2007

That City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Procedure By-law 2006-462, Subsections 13. (1):

(e)        litigation or potential litigation, affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals;

(f)         the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose;

respecting the cancelled Light Rail Transit Project.

                                                                                                           

March 28, 2007

That City Council resolve In Camera to consider:

 

Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee Report 4A, In Camera, Item 1 Appointments to the Rural Issues Advisory Committee - Personal Matters About Identifiable Individuals and Item 2 - Commemorative Naming Application - Stuart Holmes Arena - Personal Matters About An Identifiable Individual

 

pursuant to Subsection 13. (1):

(b)        personal matters about an identifiable individual, including staff.

And that the Rules of Procedure be waived to consider, In Camera, the Judicial Review of the Health Tax Award with the A.T.U.

 

pursuant to Subsection 13. (1):

(d)        labour relations or employee negotiations;

(e)        litigation or potential litigation affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals; and

(f)         the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose.

of Procedure By-law 2006-462.

 

April 25, 2007

That City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Subsections13. (1) (a), the security of the property of the City; (d) labour relations or employee negotiations; and (f) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, of Procedure By-law 2006-462 -respecting Community and Protective Services Committee Report 6, Items 1 and 2, namely Ray Friel Recreation Complex - Operating Agreement; and, Ottawa Community Ice Partners - Sensplex.

 

June 13, 2007

That City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Subsection13. (1) (e) litigation or potential litigation, and (f) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications for that purpose affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals, with regard to the North-South Light Rail Transit Project Agreement.

 

August 29, 2007        

That the rules of procedure be waived and that, in accordance with Procedure By-law 2006-462, City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to:

 

·        Subsection 13. (1) (a) the security of the property of the City with respect to Lynx Stadium;

·        Subsections 13. (1) (e) litigation or potential litigation, affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals, and (f) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, with regards to litigation with the Ottawa Lynx; and

·        Subsection 13 (1) (b) personal matters about an identifiable individual, including staff with respect to the Urbandale LRT proposal. 

 

September 26, 2007

That City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Subsection13. (1) (e) litigation or potential litigation, and (f) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications for that purpose affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals, with regard to the ongoing Light Rail Transit litigation including the recent claim by St. Lawrence Cement Inc.

 

October 10, 2007

That the Rules Of Procedure be waived to consider the following two matters:

 

That, in accordance with Procedure By-law 2006-462, City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Subsections 13. (1) (e) litigation or potential litigation, affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals, and (f) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, with regards to:

 

a)         litigation with the Ottawa Lynx; and

b)         The School of Dance.

 

October 24, 2007

That the Rules Of Procedure be waived to consider the following matter:

 

That, in accordance with Procedure By-law 2006-462, City Council resolve In Camera pursuant to Subsections 13. (1) (e) litigation or potential litigation, affecting the City, including matters before administrative tribunals, and (f) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, with regards to litigation with the Ottawa Lynx.

 


APPENDIX C

Ottawa City Council In Camera Reports

 

January 24, 2007

 

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT 1A(IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENTS TO THE OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD – IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUALS

REPORTING OUT DATE: 24 JANUARY 2007

(Carried on Consent)

 

February 14, 2007

 

AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE REPORT 2A(IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENTS TO THE RURAL PANEL OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT: IN-CAMERA- PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUALS – REPORTING OUT DATE: AFTER COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT 2A(IN CAMERA)

 

Ontario heritage TRUST – Nominations for the heritage community recognition program 2006 – In-camera – Personal matters about identifiable individualS

REPORTING OUT DATE: ONCE NOMINEES ARE CONFIRMED BY THE ONTARIO HERITAGE TRUST

(Carried on Consent)

 

March 28, 2007

 

AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE REPORT 4A (IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENTS TO THE RURAL ISSUES ADVISORY COMMITTEE – IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUALS  – REPORTING OUT DATE: AFTER COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Resolved In Camera to discuss)

 

COMMEMORATIVE NAMING APPLICATION – STUART HOLMES ARENA - IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL.  REPORTING OUT DATE: MARCH 28, 2007

(Resolved In Camera to discuss )

 

CORPORATE SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT 4A (IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENTS TO THE PINEVIEW MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE BOARD - in camera - Personal matters about identifiable individuals - REPORTING OUT DATE, UPON COUNCIL APPROVAL
(Carried on Consent)


POLICE SERVICES BOARD CITIZEN APPOINTMENT SELECTION COMMITTEE REPORT 1

(IN CAMERA)

 

CITIZEN APPOINTMENT to the city of ottawa police services board - IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

April 11, 2007

 

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT 5A (IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENT TO THE SENIORS ADVISORY COMMITTEE – IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL – REPORTING OUT DATE, UPON COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

APPOINTMENTS TO THE CUMBERLAND HERITAGE VILLAGE MUSEUM BOARD – in camera - Personal matters about identifiable individuals – REPORTING OUT DATE, UPON COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

TAXI advisory committee – appointmentS (IN CAMERA – PERSONAL MATTER ABOUT IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUALS) REPORTING OUT DATE: UPON COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

April 25, 2007

 

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT 6 (IN CAMERA)

 

RAY FRIEL RECREATION COMPLEX - OPERATING AGREEMENT – reporting out date: not to be reported out until follow-up report is approved by council. (Security of Property, labour relations, solicitor client privileg)

(Resolved In Camera to discuss)

 

Ottawa community ice partners - sensplex – REPORTING OUT DATE: UPON COUNCIL APPROVAL (Security of Property, labour relations, solicitor client privileg)

(Resolved In Camera to discuss)

 

May 9, 2007

 

CORPORATE SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

REPORT 7A (IN CAMERA)

 

LONG TERM DISABILITY CAP - IN CAMERA - LABOUR RELATIONS OR EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS - REPORTING OUT DATE:  FOLLOWING COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

June 13, 2007

 

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT 9A (IN CAMERA)

 

1119 WALKLEY ROAD – VITHORN PLAZA – ACCESS ISSUES – IN CAMERA – SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE-REPORTING OUT DATE:  SIX MONTHS AFTER IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT

(Carried on Consent)

 

July 9, 2007

 

AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE REPORT 9A (IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENTS TO THE SOUTH NATION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY -
in camera - Personal matters about identifiable individuals  -
reporting out date: after council approval

 

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT 11A (IN CAMERA)

 

COMMEMORATIVE NAMING APPLICATION – DaVID IRELAND SOCCER FIELD - IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL - REPORTING OUT DATE: UPON COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

canterbury community association – program management agreement- In-Camera- SECURITY OF THE PROPERTY OF THE CITY; LABOUR RELATIONS OR EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS; AND THE RECEIVING OF ADVICE THAT IS SUBJECT TO SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, INCLUDING COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY FOR THAT PURPOSE.  REPORTING OUT DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2007

(Carried on Consent)

 

CORPORATE SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT 10A

(IN CAMERA)

 

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING - THE CANADIAN UNION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 503, PART-TIME RECREATION AND CULTURE - IN CAMERA - LABOUR RELATIONS OR EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS.  REPORTING OUT DATE:  Upon approval by City CounciL

(Carried on Consent)

 

FUNDING MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT - OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY AND
CUPE LOCAL 503 LIBRARY GROUP - IN CAMERA - LABOUR RELATIONS OR EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS.  REPORTING OUT DATE:  UPON APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL

(Carried on Consent)

 

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER base honorarium and COST OF LIVING Adjustment - In Camera - Labour RELATIONS OR EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS. rEPORTING OUT DATE:  FOLLOWING CONSIDERATION BY COUNCIL

(Carried on Consent)

 

August 29, 2007

 

AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE REPORT 10 (IN CAMERA)

 

COMMEMORATIVE NAMING APPLICATION – FERGUSON PRATT PARK - IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL.  REPORTING OUT DATE: AUGUST 30, 2007 

(Carried on Consent)

 


September 12, 2007

 

HYDRO OTTAWA HOLDING INC.

 

HYDRO OTTAWA HOLDING INC. – NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT - IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL.  REPORTING OUT DATE: FOLLOWING COUNCIL APPROVAL

(Carried on Consent)

 

CORPORATE SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

REPORT 11A (IN CAMERA)

 

APPOINTMENT TO THE BUSINESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE – in camera – Personal matters about identifiable individualS - REPORTING OUT DATE: ONCE THE appointment HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY CITY COUNCIL

(Carried on Consent)

 

COMMEMORATIVE NAMING APPLICATION – Murray Thompson Volunteer Lounge - IN CAMERA - PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL.  REPORTING OUT DATE: Upon approval by City CounciL

(Carried on Consent)

 

October 10, 2007

 

CORPORATE SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

REPORT 14A (IN CAMERA)

 

MORTGAGE GUARANTEE for THE cRICHTON CULTURAL COMMUNitY CENTRE - in-camera - SECURITY OF THE PROPERTY OF THE CITY; LITIGATION OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION AFFECTING THE CITY; THE RECEIVING OF ADVICE THAT IS SUBJECT TO SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE - reporting out date: october 15, 2007

(Resolved In Camera to discuss)

 

October 24, 2007

 

COMMUNITY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT 15 (IN CAMERA)

 

NOMINATION FOR THE 2007 HERITAGE COMMUNITY RECOGNITION PROGRAM OF THE ONTARIO HERITAGE TRUST – IN-CAMERA – PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUALS  REPORTING OUT DATE: ONCE NOMINEES ARE APPROVED BY COUNCIL AND CONFIRMED BY THE ONTARIO HERITAGE TRUST

 

(Carried on Consent)

 

DIRECTOR, SOLID WASTE SERVICES – (IN CAMERA – PERSONAL MATTERS ABOUT AN IDENTIFIABLE INDIVIDUAL INCLUDING MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES) – REPORTING OUT DATE:  IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY OBLIGATIONS AS SET OUT IN MFIPPA, THIS REPORT CANNOT BE REPORTED OUT

(Carried on Consent)

 

 


APPENDIX D

Procedure By-law Excerpt

 

33.1     (1)        Notice of a regular meeting of Council shall be given by publication in a daily newspaper no later than the Friday immediately prior to the meeting.

 

(2)        Notice of a special meeting of Council shall, where time permits, be given by publication in a daily newspaper no later than the Friday immediately prior to the meeting.

 

(3)        Notice of a special meeting of Council shall be given at least three hours prior to the meeting by the issuance of a Public Service Announcement to all local media.

 

(4)        Prior notice of a special meeting held pursuant to subsection 14(6) is not required but notice of the meeting having occurred shall be published in a daily newspaper as soon as possible thereafter.

 

77.1     (1)        Notice of a regular meeting of a Standing Committee shall be given by publication in a daily newspaper no later than the Friday immediately prior to the meeting.

 

(2)        Notice of a special meeting of a Standing Committee shall, where time permits, be given by publication in a daily newspaper no later than the Friday immediately prior to the meeting.

 

(3)        Notice of a special meeting of a Standing Committee shall be given at least three hours prior to the meeting by the issuance of a Public Service Announcement to all local media.

 

(4)        Prior notice of a special meeting held pursuant to subsection 82(6) is not required but notice of the meeting having occurred shall be published in a daily newspaper as soon as possible thereafter.

 

Clause 2(14) of the Procedure By-law is amended by repealing the expression “Interpretation Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter I.11, as amended” and substituting therefore the expression “Legislation Act, S.O. 2006, c. 21, Sched F, as amended”.

 

By-law No. 2002-522 entitled “A by-law of the City of Ottawa respecting public notice pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001”, as amended, is further amending by repealing the following row in Schedule “A”.

 

 

Procedure By-law

 Notice of intention to pass by-law

 

 

S.238

 

 

 

- Daily newspaper

 

 

 

 

- Description

- Contact for further information

- Date of public meeting

 

 

2 insertions, 1 week apart

 

- 1st insertion a minimum of 14 days prior to the Standing Committee meeting

 



           

Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee

Report 17

28 november 2007

 

Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique

rapport 17

le 28 novembre 2007

 

 

 

Extract of draft Minutes 18

19 november 2007

 

Extrait de l’ébauche du procès-verbal 18 – le 19 novembre 2007

 

 

CLOSED MEETINGS AND MEETINGS INVESTIGATOR

RÉUNIONS À HUIT CLOS ET ENQUÊTEUR AUX RÉUNIONS

ACS2007-CMR-CCB-0020                               CITY-WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE

 

Responding to questions from Councillor Wilkinson with respect to criteria for the Meetings Investigator, Mr. R. O’Connor, City Solicitor, noted that as part of the process and procedure to ensure the integrity and the arms length of this position, the report set out statutory criteria to which Council had to have regard when appointing a Meetings Investigator.  In addition, staff had set out a number of bullets, which they felt would be important criteria for Council to also include in this hiring process.  He confirmed that a candidate could be a legal mind, though it could also be someone who had experience in dealing with procedural and statutory issues, such as a former municipal clerk.

 

In reply to a question from Councillor Jellett, Ms. Donnelly expressed staff’s belief that the $25,000 budget outlined in the report was an over-estimate given this City’s history of open meetings. 

 

Following this brief exchange, Committee voted unanimously in support of the report recommendations.

 

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve that:

 

1.         The Procedure By-law be amended to incorporate the Notice provisions for City Council meetings, in accordance with the requirements of Municipal Act, 2001 as outlined in Appendex D;

 

2.         The City appoint a Meetings Investigator for the City of Ottawa pursuant to Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001;

 

3.         The City Solicitor be delegated the authority to hire the Meetings Investigator in accordance with the criteria outlined in this report, and prepare an appointment by-law and agreement; and

 

4.         The interim process for accepting and investigating complaints outlined in this report be adopted and publicized pending the development of a formal process to be brought forward by the Meetings Investigator in early 2008.

 

                                                                                                            CARRIED