Have you ever attended a municipal council meeting and sat through countless public delegations wondering, what does this have to do with anything? No matter how seemingly off-topic the public comments may appear, and even as I may stare at the clock ticking down the time remaining for the delegation, I must remind myself that central to democracy is one’s ability to communicate with elected officials. Although municipal government is very accessible to residents, who have the right to communicate with their council, this case answers whether the public have an unfettered right to meaningful communication.
In Mann v Saugeen Shores,[1] the Applicant claimed Charter violations because of their alleged denial to “meaningfully communicate” with elected officials. The municipality admitted to barring the Applicant’s request to communicate with Council in accordance with their procedural by-law, which was modelled after the procedural by-laws of other municipalities, including requirements such as time restrictions for delegations and presenting only on new information during subsequent delegations on the same topic.[2] The Town did not challenge an individual's fundamental right of communication with elected officials, and the Court agreed that such a fundamental right is protected by Section 2(b) of the Charter. However, the Town challenged the Applicant's claim of the right of "meaningful communication".[3]
Please log in to read the full article.