|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
M-1160
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Regional Municipality of Haldimand-Norfolk
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Regional Municipality of Haldimand-Norfolk (the Municipality) received a request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) from a member of the media for the settlement agreement reached by mediation between the Haldimand-Norfolk Regional Police, its Chief of Police, a named police constable and a named individual. The settlement arose from a complaint made by the named individual under the Ontario Human Rights Code . The Municipality responded to the requester on behalf of itself and the Haldimand-Norfolk Regional Police Services Board (the Board), and denied access to all responsive records, claiming the following exemptions: closed meeting - section 6(1)(b) invasion of privacy - section 14 The requester, now the appellant, appealed the Municipality's decision. In her letter of appeal, the appellant also raised the possible application of section 16, the so-called "public interest override". The appellant also broadened her request to include the amount of legal fees incurred by the Municipality in reaching the settlement. This information was disclosed to the appellant during mediation and is not at issue. This office issued a Notice of Inquiry to the appellant, the Municipality, the named individual, the Chief of Police and the named police constable. Representations were received from the appellant, the Municipality and the Deputy Chief of Police on behalf of the Chief, but not from the named individual or the named police constable. The records at issue in this appeal consist of a four-page Minutes of Settlement, with five pages of attached appendices; two sets of handwritten notes of in camera meetings of the Board held on September 17, 1997 and January 20, 1998; and the minutes of these two in camera meetings. DISCUSSION: CLOSED MEETING Section 6(1)(b) of the Act states: A head may refuse to disclose a record, that reveals the substance of deliberations of a meeting of a council, board, commission or other body or a committee of one of them if a statute authorizes holding that meeting in the absence of the public. In order to qualify for exemption under section 6(1)(b), the Municipality must establish that: 1. a meeting of a council, board, commission or other body or a committee of one of them took place; and 2. that a statute authorizes the holding of this meeting in the absence of the public; and 3. that disclosure of the record at issue would reveal the actual substance of the deliberations of this meeting. (Order M-64) The first and second parts of the test for exemption under section 6(1)(b) require the Municipality to establish that a meeting was held by the Board and that it was held in camera . (Order M-102) The Municipality states that meetings of the Board were held on September 17, 1997 and January 20, 1998, and that: These meetings were closed meetings held pursuant to Section 35(4) of the Municipal Police Services Boards Act. ... because they dealt with financial and personal matters, they were properly held closed meetings. Section 35(4) of the Municipal Police Services Boards Act provides: The board may exclude the public from all or part of a meeting or hearing if it is of the opinion that (b) intimate financial or personal matters or other matters may be disclosed of such a nature, having regard to the circumstances, that the desirability of avoiding their disclosure in the interest of any person affected or in the public interest outweighs the desirability of adhering to the principle that proceedings be open to the public. The appellant states in her representations: I can only assume this issue was discussed in a closed meeting, as stated by [the Municipality] since I attend all the public sessions of the Police Services Board and it was not discussed there. I am satisfied that section 35(4) of the Municipal Police Services Boards Act authorizes the holding of meetings in the absence of the public, and that in camera meetings were held by the Board on September 17, 1997 and January 20, 1998. Therefore, the first and second parts of the test have been established. To satisfy the third requirement of the test, the Municipality must establish that disclosure of the records would reveal the actual substance of the deliberations of these in camera meetings. As I found in Order M-98, the third requirement would not be satisfied if the disclosure would merely reveal the subject of the deliberations and not their substance (see also Order M-703). Furthermore, "deliberations" in the context of section 6(1)(b) means discussions which have been conducted with a view to making a decision. (Orders M-184, M-196 and M-385) The Municipality submits that: Because the details of the settlement were discussed at the closed meetings, the Minutes of Settlement would as well reveal the substance of the deliberations. The Deputy Chief submits that the January 20 in camera meeting was held for the purpose of giving final approval to the settlement. The appellant states: ... the settlement itself was decided upon before the meeting, so the information shouldn't qualify under section 6(1)(b). The Police Services Board was simply required to ratify an agreement, one which I understand was made previously by the parties. Disclosure of the terms of the settlement won't reveal the actual substance of the deliberations at the board meeting. At the in camera meeting on September 17, the Board discussed how to proceed with respect to the named individual's human rights complaint. A motion was tabled and carried. The relevant handwritten notes and formal minutes for this meeting reflect the deliberations of the Board and the rationale for the Board's decision on how to respond to the complaint. As such, I find that disclosure of these two records would reveal the substance of the deliberations of this in camera meeting, thereby satisfying the third requirement
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
MFIPPA
-
14(1)(f)
-
14(2)(a)
-
14(2)(h)
-
14(3)(f)
-
6(1)(b)
-
Section 16
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Nov 09, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|