Councillors' tour of London shelter violated meeting rules, ombudsman says

Three City of London councillors broke Municipal Act rules designed to ensure council meetings don't happen behind closed doors when they met together to tour an east-end shelter last spring, according to an Ontario ombudsman report. 

• Read the Ombudsman's full report here.

In a report released Wednesday, Paul Dubé said Councillors Jerry Pribil, Corrine Rahman and Susan Stevenson — all members of the community and protective services committee — erred when they together toured the Unity Project before they voted on upgrades to the shelter on March 21. 

Dubé ruled the gathering of three members of the committee was enough to constitute quorum and to be considered a meeting of the committee as defined by the Municipal Act. Those rules require that all meetings happen in the open, with advance notice to the public, and minutes taken to record votes. The rules are designed to ensure city politicians don't make decisions behind closed doors.

The councillors toured the shelter with its executive director a few hours before a committee meeting in which they voted to approve $760,000 for upgrades to the shelter. It passed by a 6-0 vote. Committee chair Elizabeth Peloza and Coun. David Ferreria attended the committee meeting but did not take part in the shelter tour.

The standing committee of council has five members, with the mayor serving as an ex-officio member with voting powers. 

When the mayor is present, it takes four members to meet quorum. When he's not present, three members gathered together are enough to be considered a meeting under the open meeting rules. 

While members of a committee are allowed to meet together and have it not be considered a meeting, what's key is what was discussed. If there are enough members to constitute quorum and their discussion "materially advances the business or decision-making of the council," then it could be subject to open meeting rules. 

In his report, Dubé said councillors who were interviewed told him the discussions with Unity Project executive director Chuck Lazenby, during and after the tour, amounted to an informal exchange of information. 

Councillors were 'assessing the proposal's merit'

However, he also found that by going over details about the shelter's planned renovations then voting on it later the same day, the meeting could be construed as a gathering that formed part of the decision-making process. 

"The facts of this case suggest that the information members of the committee received from the executive director during the gathering could reasonably be construed as having informed their decision-making," Dubé wrote in his decision. 

"Despite members of the committee insisting to my office that they had already made up their minds on the proposal or that the visit to the site had no effect on their decision, the discussion that took place was geared at persuading decision-makers one way or the other," Dubé wrote. 

Coun. Rahman accepts the findings

By asking questions of Lazenby and touring the facility, Dubé ruled the three council members were "actively assessing the proposal's merit."

CBC News reached out to the three councillors for comment. Rahman responded by email and said, "I respect the findings and advice provided in the report."

"The ombudsman's office has noted that the purpose of the open meeting rules is not to discourage council members from informal or social interactions, but to ensure such gatherings are not used as a pretext for conducting council business away from public view," wrote Rahman. "The sole purpose of my visit was to see the space to better contextualize the proposal."

Dubé wrote that creating a culture of silence whenever councillors gather at events would be "neither realistic nor respectful of democratic governance in municipalities."

However, he said even an informal meeting of councillors "does not negate the public's expectation of open governance."

Dubé suggested future tours involving groups of council members should be organized through city staff "with proper ground rules in place to ensure the open meeting rules are respected."

No punishment for councillors

Ombudsman reports only come with recommendations to public bodies and can't prescribe any punishment. Their reports form a recommendation to the public body. 

Dubé's report recommends all councillors be vigilant about following the public meeting rules when they gather outside of council chambers and that no decision-making discussions happen during such gatherings. 

Council is required to pass a resolution stating how it intends to address this report at a future council meeting.