After years of controversy, North Huron council is set to revisit (and likely soften) its ban on members of the public recording council meetings.
At its February 17, 2026 meeting, council suspended section 20.2 of its procedural bylaw, a rule that barred residents from using cameras or recording devices in council chambers. The township has long recorded and livestreamed its own meetings, but did not permit independent recording.
On Monday night, council will consider By-law 14-2026, which would replace that outright ban with a more flexible approach. The proposed wording would allow recording, as long as it isn’t disruptive, obstructive, or used to harass or intimidate anyone in attendance.
Eric Davis, a partner at SV Law, says the starting point under Ontario law is simple.
"The general rule under section 239 of the Municipal Act is that all council meetings shall be open to the public," Davis said. "That’s the baseline."
Municipalities are required to pass procedural bylaws to govern how meetings operate, but Davis notes the official record of any meeting isn’t video, it’s the minutes.
"The official record of a council meeting is the minutes prepared by the clerk and approved by council," he said. "There is no technical requirement that a municipality record or livestream its meetings."
Still, Davis questions the reasoning behind prohibiting residents from making their own recordings, particularly when the municipality is already doing so.
"I don’t understand why municipal council would ban individuals from recording council meetings, especially if they are recording those meetings themselves," he said. "I have a hard time believing that it would withstand Charter scrutiny."
The bylaw has faced mounting criticism in recent months. Two members of the public were removed from a January meeting for allegedly recording proceedings, and tensions boiled over February 17 in a confrontation outside council chambers involving local business owner Stephen Hill and Deputy Reeve Kevin Falconer. The Ontario Provincial Police continue to investigate that incident.
Under section 241 of the Municipal Act, the head of council can expel someone for improper conduct. Davis says that authority is meant to deal with genuine disruption.
"If people are causing an immediate disturbance like yelling, shouting, throwing things, they can be ejected because that disrupts the meeting," he said. "But as a general rule, people have a right to attend council meetings and to listen to the debates and votes of their elected representatives."
He adds that a blanket prohibition on recording raises broader constitutional questions.
"In my view, it’s difficult to say how a total ban on individual recordings would constitute a reasonable limit on Charter rights," Davis said. "It’s a public meeting."
The revised language before council would permit recording provided it doesn’t create safety issues, block views, interfere with the township’s livestream, or harass participants, an approach Davis calls far more defensible.
"That would be an agreeable revision," he said, adding he would not see the amended provision as violating the Charter.
Council is expected to debate and vote on the updated procedural bylaw Monday night.
