Ombudsman makes suggestions after 2024 bans

By: CONNOR LUCZKA, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

Two years after three Stratford residents were temporarily banned from all city property, some questions have been answered – for some.

After a fiery February 2024 council meeting, the City of Stratford issued notices of suspension from all city property to three individuals: Barb Shaughnessy, Mike Sullivan and Ken Wood, saying that all three had breached the city’s respectful workplace policy, though no specific instances were shared with the public.

Following a summer of protests and meetings being abruptly cancelled after the suspended individuals were spotted in the gallery, the suspensions were lifted, city council amended its policy as calls came from the public to revoke it entirely, and Shaughnessy, Sullivan and Jane Marie Mitchell, another resident who was issued a warning, vowed to fight back.

All of that leads to today, after Shaughnessy shared the letter she received from the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario, who completed a review at her request.

In the letter, which only addressed Shaughnessy’s complaint, investigator Johanna Dennie noted the city did not address its concerns with her behaviour prior to issuing the letter of suspension. Under the respectful workplace policy of the day, and the amended version used today, staff must be satisfied that the issue has been thoroughly investigated and that there has been adequate communication with the person in question. Neither policy provides staff with guidance about what is considered adequate.

“We also noted that the restrictions issued by the city were very broad, given that the examples of inappropriate behaviour provided were limited to one council meeting,” Dennie wrote. “The city did not explain why it was necessary to restrict you from all city buildings. We explained to the city that as a best practice, a trespass notice or a service restriction should be considered as a last resort and should restrict access as little as possible, based on the circumstances.”

Moreover, the city’s appeal process has the chief administrative officer (CAO) always making the final decision in the appeal, even if the matter involves them.

The ombudsman reviews and investigates complaints about the administration of public sector organizations. It may consider whether the municipality’s policies or processes were followed and if they were fair; however, it does not have the authority to direct municipal council decision-making or to force municipalities to decide matters in a certain fashion. The office and its investigators share best practices and suggestions in the hopes of improving municipal processes.

Shaughnessy told the Times that despite the ombudsman not having the authority to enact change at the city level, she is happy the letter affirmed what she believed.

“It clearly supports the fact that what the city's staff and what council supported was not fair and equitable to anybody,” Shaughnessy said. “… Everything to me is a work in progress. If I were to say the chapter is closed, that would mean that I would stop advocating for the people of Stratford, and I can tell you, I am going to continue advocating for the people of Stratford.”

When asked to comment on the ombudsman’s suggestions and whether they will be considered, CAO André Morin, who was not with the city during these events two years ago, said that staff have reviewed the suggestions.    

“In relation to the letter from the ombudsman, their review did not lead to any orders or findings, however they have provided best practices and recommendations for the city to consider,” Morin wrote in a statement. “The city did review and revised the policy in October 2024 and separated the respectful workplace policy into three distinct policies. They can be found on the city’s website at https://www.stratford.ca/inside-city-hall/respectful-community/.

“Further to that, in May 2026, following the conversations with and the letter from the ombudsman’s office, staff reviewed the policies and have noted several further potential changes. Those changes are still under development but will be brought forward for updates later this year and will include further refinements based on recommendations from the ombudsman’s office and current best practices.”