Three first-term London city councillors have been found to have been in violation of the open meeting rules in the Municipal Act by the Ontario Ombudsman.
Paul Dube released his decision this week after an investigation into Councillors Corrine Rahman, Jerry Pribil, and Susan Stevenson. The investigation stemmed from a complaint that the three members of the Community and Protective Services Committee violated the open meeting rules last March when they took part in a discussion at and went on a tour of the Unity Project.
According to Dube's report, the three councillors attended the Unity Project's offices and homeless shelter at the same time it was seeking a one-time grant of $760,000.
"The three members of council arrived at the site of the non-profit on March 21, 2023, at 2 p.m. and were greeted by the Executive Director," Dube wrote. "We were told that everyone sat down around a table and stayed at this location for most of the gathering. After some discussion, the Executive Director briefly brought the members of council to an outdoor portion of the site, explained where structures would be built, and provided some details about plans for the proposed retrofit."
A few hours later, Rahman, Pribil, and Stevenson took part in a meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee, where members voted in favour of recommending to council that the funding be approved.
In his report, Dube concluded that the gathering of three councillors at Unity Project constituted a quorum of the five-member committee and, therefore, the gathering violated open meeting rules as there was no public notice, no minutes were taken, and the meeting was not open to the public.
"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 decisionmakers one way or the other," he added. "Members of the committee asking questions and viewing the location of the proposal suggest that they were actively assessing the proposal’s merit. I further find indications that decision-making was being actively informed during the gathering by the remark that the proposal was 'a good design' and the later statement by a member of the committee that they had been 'looking for the numbers, answers, [and] the confidence […]'".
Dube's report makes three recommendations:
1. All members of council for the City of London should be vigilant in adhering to their individual and collective obligation to ensure compliance with their responsibilities under the Municipal Act, 2001.
2. All members of council and committees of the City of London should ensure that no council or committee business or decision-making is materially advanced outside of formal meetings.
3. Members of council for the City of London who organize tours that may be subject to the open meeting rules should consult with City staff.
The full report can be read here.
