Two former members of The Blue Mountains council have expressed concerns about potential changes to the town’s procedural bylaw that would loosen rules around virtual participation at meetings.
On April 18, the town held a public meeting to consider community input on changes it is proposing to the procedural bylaw. At the meeting, the lone presenters to council were Alar Soever, the former mayor, and Bill Abbotts, a former councillor.
As part of the review of its procedural bylaw that happens in the first term of every new council, the town is considering a number of changes and amendments to the bylaw including:
- Limit the number of meetings attended virtually to 20 per year (council, committee of the whole, council public meeting).
- Limit the number of consecutive meetings in which a member may participate in virtually to three.
- Remove the requirement for the clerk to read the (public) comments on behalf of the author.
- Limit the length of the public comment to 400 words, if public comments are to be read by the clerk’s office.
- No council meetings after the election, before new council has been sworn in
- Document attendance of council members in minutes and on council attendance summary, that members attended virtual, in person, or if an absence is due to a council function.
- Remove the roll call at the beginning of each meeting, with attendance being recorded in the minutes.
- The town is also looking at some housekeeping matters in the bylaw that should be updated, one of which is the question of whether or not to record closed meetings.
Both Abbotts and Soever said the previous rules on virtual meetings – councillors were able to attend virtually four times each half of the year – were sufficient.
“I feel like a broken record on this topic,” said Abbotts. “Being a councillor is a full-time, in-person position.”
Abbotts said the public expects to see elected members of council in the council chambers, in-person for meetings. He said allowing up to 20 virtual meetings was “excessive.”
Soever said the previous rules (four virtual meetings per half of the year) were fine.
“That is sufficient to accommodate most people,” he said. “This is a local council.”
Soever also said the town should be recording closed meetings when possible. He said having a recording of a meeting would be a great benefit in the event the town has to conduct a closed-meeting investigation.
“Having that recording is a best practice,” he said.
The town also received written concerns from local resident Rick Tipping about the proposed amendments that would change aspects of the public comment period during council meetings. Tipping expressed concerns that the proposal might limit public participation.
Cerk Corrina Giles explained that the practice of the clerk reading public comments at meetings was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic when the town moved to virtual-only meetings.
“Virtual participation was very new,” she said. “Moving forward, we’re far more sophisticated in our electronic participation.”
Giles said the proposal would see members of the public invited to attend virtually to make their comments directly to council. Currently, virtual public comments during the public comment portion of the meeting are not allowed. Giles also said if a local resident was unable to attend virtually to make their comments, the clerk’s department would make arrangements to have the comments submitted and read at the meeting.
Council made no decisions about the proposed changes at the meeting. Staff will be bringing a follow-up report to the committee of the whole meeting on May 15 and a final version of the bylaw should come forward for a decision at council’s regular meeting on May 29.
