County review proposes changes aimed at streamlining council meetings

Casandra Turnbull

Managing Editor

County of Brant councillors are supporting a staff report recommending a series of potential changes to the municipality’s procedural bylaw, which will be passed along to the incoming council following a comprehensive review of how council meetings are conducted.

The Policy Development Committee reviewed a staff report Sept. 1 outlining 13 proposed changes dealing with everything from public delegations and consent items to technical disruptions during meetings.

The review was initiated following a council resolution in March directing Council Services staff to examine the existing procedural bylaw and compare it with practices in other municipalities. Staff looked at Brantford, Cambridge, Guelph, Haldimand County, Kitchener, Norfolk County, Waterloo and Woodstock. 

The goal is not for the current council to make the final changes. Instead, councillors are being asked to provide recommendations that the newly elected 2026-2030 council can consider after taking office. 

That approach prompted some discussion around the committee table.

Coun. Robert Chambers expressed apprehension about making recommendations for a new council.

Coun. Lukas Oakley, however, said the experience accumulated during the current term could provide a useful starting point for those elected this fall.

“I think it’s valuable for us to give our experience going forward to the next term of councillor,” said Oakley.

Coun. John Bell agreed there was value in drawing on the experience around the current council table. He noted council will lose about 40 per cent of its experience, measured in councillor years of service, because some members are not seeking re-election.

Coun. David Miller said he supported the direction of the report, particularly its emphasis on improving the efficiency of meetings.

“I think it’s a good start,” Miller said.

Some of the most significant recommendations involve public delegations.

Currently, individuals or groups appearing before council or a standing committee are generally permitted up to 10 minutes, while larger delegations can receive up to 15 minutes.

Staff are proposing reducing the limit to five minutes for individuals or groups, while delegations consisting of three or more people would receive up to 10 minutes. Staff-requested delegations and presentations would not be subject to those limits. The report says five-minute limits are common among municipalities and are intended to encourage concise presentations and prevent meetings from becoming unnecessarily lengthy. 

The jurisdictional scan found five-minute delegation limits in several municipalities, including Cambridge, Guelph, Kitchener, Norfolk County, Waterloo and Woodstock, while Brantford and Haldimand County generally allow up to 10 minutes. 

Staff are also recommending the clerk be given authority to determine whether a delegation request would be better addressed through another decision-making process. If a request is declined, the individual could approach their councillors about bringing forward a notice of motion. 

Another proposed provision would prevent delegations from returning to council on the same matter for 12 months after a decision has been made unless new information is being presented. Staff noted similar restrictions are used by other municipalities. 

Several recommendations are aimed specifically at shortening or simplifying meetings.

Staff propose moving adoption of previous meeting minutes and business arising from the minutes into the consent agenda. Councillor updates would also be moved to immediately before closed-session business. 

The definition and handling of consent items would also be expanded. Routine matters could include housekeeping and administrative reports, tender awards that are within budget and awarded to the lowest bidder, advisory committee and agency minutes that do not require action, correspondence not requiring action and County project updates.

Consent items would generally only be separated when a councillor has a pecuniary interest or wants a resolution beyond simply receiving or approving the item as presented. Councillors could still discuss consent items, with the chair moderating discussion. 

Staff are also proposing eliminating the County’s existing “renewal” provision, which allows certain defeated motions to be brought back. The report says the mechanism is uncommon among the municipalities reviewed and can be detrimental to business continuity. 

Another recommendation would replace the existing three-reading process for bylaws with a provision allowing bylaws, unless otherwise requested or required, to be passed through one single motion. Staff said the change would streamline council agendas and meetings. 

The review also addresses what happens when a council meeting livestream fails. Under the proposal, the chair could call a 15-minute recess. If the problem cannot be resolved, the meeting could continue without the livestream provided certain conditions are met, including maintaining an open, in-person public meeting and ensuring quorum can be maintained. 

Staff said the proposed procedural updates are intended to provide greater clarity while improving the focus and flow of council and committee meetings. The procedural bylaw also plays a role in promoting transparency, accountability and public participation in municipal decision-making. 

The committee supported moving the recommendations forward. The motion carried and will now go before County of Brant council for approval.