Proposed changes to how the public can participate in Ottawa police board meetings up for a vote next month
How people can make their voices heard at public board meetings has been a friction point for months
Article content
Members of the Ottawa Police Services board were on the defensive this week over proposed changes to public participation at their meetings.
They explained the proposed revamp of the board’s procedure bylaw during a meeting Monday night, which includes limiting the time allocated for public presentations and potentially shutting out people who appear month after month, as being about making the meetings more accessible, productive and welcoming to a range of perspectives.
Their citizen challengers, meanwhile, criticized the move as one that could sideline people and feedback that aren’t convenient for the board, which now includes Mayor Mark Sutcliffe.
Public engagement at board meetings has been a friction point for months, following the board’s move back to in-person-only meetings when pandemic restrictions eased, and in the wake of its membership shakeup during the “Freedom Convoy” occupation. It reached a boiling point in November when activists disrupted the proceedings with what they called an act of civil disobedience that led to the meeting’s abrupt end.
A committee of board members proposed granting a request to implement a permanent virtual option for public presentations, known as “delegations,” at their meetings. It was something activists and city council had called for, but was accompanied by other, more contentious proposals.
One was to schedule a single hour for delegations between noon and 1 p.m., at a separate virtual session ahead of the board’s regular meeting. Previously, board meetings would last until the list of delegates was exhausted.
Interested presenters would also be required to set out “the particulars of the matter on which the person wishes to speak.” Right now, that’s an ask but not a requirement for those who want to comment on an agenda item. It would then be up for approval by the chair, who would tell all board members if they declined someone, and why.
Delegates would be selected for one of the five-minute presentation slots (or three minutes, if more than 12 people want to present) on a first-come, first-served basis, though priority would be given to those who hadn’t appeared before the board in the previous three months and those speaking on agenda items. They also wouldn’t be allowed to put questions to the board or police service for a response.
“The time and energy that has gone into these bylaw changes is wild, to be honest,” said Samantha McAleese. “Imagine if you all put the same energy into scrutinizing the words and actions of OPS instead of the residents who show up here concerned about safety and well-being in our neighbourhoods.”
McAleese is one of the public delegates who confronted the board Monday on the proposed bylaw changes, which they variously described as an affront to public engagement, police accountability and those delegates who come to the board with dissenting opinions, lived experiences and challenges to the policing status quo.
“Democracy means that sometimes you have to listen to things that you don’t want to hear, and sometimes over and over,” said delegate Andrea Chandler.
Other board members, including the mayor, defended the proposed bylaw changes, which won’t be finalized and voted on until their February meeting. They said the board can choose to hold longer consultations on specific issues — Coun. Cathy Curry said she’d been happy to sit through 100 delegates on the budget, as has occurred in the past — and delegations at meetings aren’t the only avenue for the public to engage with the board.
Curry said requiring information about presentations ahead of time gives board members an opportunity to digest and consider questions in advance. As for spending an extended period of time on public delegations, Curry noted that it can exhaust board members and lead to shallower engagement with agenda items.
“I don’t think the community wants that, where people are saying ‘It’s getting too late, we’ll just pass this.’ When in fact, if we’d had a longer discussion, maybe things would have been amended or changed or deferred or referred or whatever.”
Sutcliffe said he listened very carefully to all the delegates at Monday’s meeting. There were 10 in total, including those whose protest at the November meeting prompted its swift end.
But there also needs to be attention paid to people who aren’t currently presenting to the police board “because they don’t feel it’s an environment for them,” said Sutcliffe.
While the mayor said he was open to making adjustments to the proposed bylaw changes, he opined that they would provide an opportunity to “hear from more people, hear from different people, and to hear focused comments that pertain to the agenda we’re dealing with that day and find other ways to consult with the public on more general matters about the future of policing and so on.”
The only one on the board to express significant reservations Monday was new member and Alta Vista ward Coun. Marty Carr.
She said she was uncomfortable proceeding with the bylaw changes, having heard from concerned delegates and being a new member of the board herself, with another soon to join. Recruitment is underway for new citizen member.
“At this time, I do find it overly restrictive,” said Carr, of the public participation reforms.
A vote is slated for the board’s Feb. 27 meeting, at which point they would be enacted if passed.
Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.