Table of Contents

Municipal Law Summary.......................................................4

What is a Municipality?.........................................................4

Subsidiary Principle.................................................................................. 4
Service Delivery Model............................................................................. 4
Public Meeting Rule..................................................................................4
Magnusson Article......................................................................4
Regina v Greenbaum SCC 1993..............................................................5
East York v Ontario 1997..........................................................................5
Brandon v Municipal Commissioner 1931................................................5
Canadian Pacific Railway v Outlook 1924................................................5
St Stephen v Charlotte.............................................................................5
Ste Paul County no. 19 v Belland (2006)..................................................5

Municipal Act, 2001..............................................................6

S.5(1) VERY IMPORTANT.........................................................................6

Councils and Committees............................................................7
Special Purpose Bodies............................................................................. 7
Municipal Service Boards.........................................................................8
Municipal Service Corporations...............................................................8
Business Improvement Areas...................................................................8
Municipal Associations............................................................................. 8
Evolution of Municipal Legislation...............................................8
Ottawa Electric Light Company................................................................9
Vancouver (City) v Shell Products Canada...............................................9
City of Toronto Act, 2006..........................................................................9
Charter Cities........................................................................................... 9
Levi and Valverde Article..........................................................................9

Guest Speaker, Jason Reynar Deputy CAO/Town Solicitor for

the Town of Innisfil.............................................................10
Council!...................................................................................10
Role of Council.........................................................................10
S.225 Head of Council............................................................................10
S.229 Chief Administrative Officer.........................................................11
S.228 Clerk............................................................................................. 11
S.286 Treasurer...................................................................................... 11
S.1.1(6) of the Building Code Act Chief Building Official.....................11
S.227 Municipal Administration.............................................................11
Procedural By-laws...................................................................11
S.238(2) Procedure respecting meetings...............................................11
S.5(3) Delegated Authority.....................................................................12
S.239(1) Open Meeting Rule..................................................................12
S.23.1(1) General Power to Delegate.....................................................12
Open Meeting Rule Is No Joke, People...................................................13
Southam Inc v Hamilton-Wentworth Economic Development Committee
1988........................................................................................................ 13

Southam v Ottawa..................................................................................13
How to put a by-law together.....................................................14
Morrison v Kingston............................................................................... 14
Sea change: Annus Mirabelis 1994......................................................14
Shell Products and Vancouver................................................................15
Bill 130: Broad Authority Powers:..........................................................15
Limitations.............................................................................................. 16
Spraytech v Hudson................................................................................16
United Taxi v Calgary.............................................................................16
Croplife Canada v Toronto......................................................................16
Catalyst Paper Corp v North Cowichan..................................................16
Eng v Toronto.......................................................................................... 17
Conclusions:............................................................................................ 17

By-Law Enforcement...........................................................17

What is a bylaw?..................................................................................... 17
Resolutions............................................................................................. 17
Procedures to Enact by-laws..................................................................17
Pre-drafting considerations:...................................................................18
Components of By-laws.............................................................18
Discretionary Enforcement Principle:....................................................19
Brown v Hamilton...................................................................................19
Self-Help Remedy:.....................................................................19
Suprun v Bryla 2007 SCJ........................................................................19
Sunnybrae Springbrook Farms Inc v Trent Hills 2012 SCJ....................19
Powers of Entry:..................................................................................... 19
Orders and Remedial Actions:................................................................20
Site plan agreement:.............................................................................. 20
Grounds to Attack a By-law........................................................20
Challenging a Municipal By-law.................................................20

Licencing and Regulation.....................................................21

Ontarios Every Changing Municipal Regime...............................21

Virgo v Toronto........................................................................................ 21
Fees.........................................................................................21
Pre-bill 130 Licensing Regime....................................................22
Post Bill 130 Regime.................................................................23
What is a business?...................................................................24
Adult Entertainment Assn v Ottawa.......................................................24
2211266 Ontario Inc v Brantford...........................................................24
Licence Fees.............................................................................25
Enforcement.............................................................................25
Building Code Act, 1992..........................................................................26
Licencing and Procedural Fairness........................................................26
Municipal Powers to Regulate................................................................26
Conclusions............................................................................................. 27

Land Use Planning..............................................................27

Outline of Municipal Bonusing...................................................27

Hahahahaha S.107(1) General Power to Make Grants...........................27
History:................................................................................................... 27

Friends of Lansdowne Inc v Ottawa.......................................................28

Nowak v Fort Erie (Town).......................................................................28

Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.........................................28

Lorello v. Meffe (2010), 99 M.P.L.R. (4th) 107 (S.C.J.):.............................28

Moll v Fisher (1979)...............................................................................29
Council Members Oath of Office:...........................................................29
Direct interest......................................................................................... 30
Moffat v Wetstein (1996)........................................................................30
Indirect interest...................................................................................... 30
Deemed Interest...................................................................................... 30
Interest in common with the electors.........................................31
Greene v. Borins (1985), 28 M.P.L.R. 251 (Div. Ct.):...............................31
DArcey v. Mino (1991)............................................................................ 31
Moll v Fisher........................................................................................... 31
Whiteley v. Schnurr (1999), 4 M.P.L.R. (3d) 309 (Ont. S.C.J.):................31
Craig v. Ontario (Attorney General) (2013), 15 M.P.L.R. (5th) 23..........32
Hazineh v McCallion............................................................................... 32
Duty of Disclosure:....................................................................32
Kazowski v. Rexe, (1987) 38 M.P.L.R. 59................................................32
Re Jackson v Wall (1978)........................................................................32
4 Obligations of Disclosure.....................................................................32
Quorum....................................................................................33
Alleged Contravention............................................................................ 33
Penalties for Contravention under the MCIA...............................33
Saving Provisions......................................................................34
Appeals....................................................................................34
Standard of Review.................................................................................34
Tuchenhagen v. Mondoux.......................................................................34
Amaral v. Kennedy..................................................................................34
Mississauga Judicial Inquiry.....................................................................34
Hazineh v McCallion................................................................................35
Magder v Ford........................................................................................ 35

Planning and Land Use Regulation.......................................35

Euclid Village v Ambler Reality 1926 US................................................35
5 Key Players in Land Use Planning............................................36
Cloverdale Shopping Centre v Etobicoke (1966)....................................36
Metropolitan Separate School Board v Scarborough 1988....................37
Planning Act for Subdivisions....................................................37
Consent to sever..................................................................................... 37
Mills v York Land Division Committee 1975...........................................37
West Don Lands Case Study...................................................................37

Land Use Planning..............................................................37

Heritage Protection and Application...........................................37
St. Peters Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Ottawa (City) (S.C.C.):.........37
What Qualifies for protection?...................................................38
Designation of Individual Properties........................................................39

Financial Administration.....................................................39
Roles and Responsibilities.........................................................40

Financial Reporting..................................................................41
Policy Framework......................................................................42
Confirmation of Broad Municipal Authority................................42
Friends of Lansdowne Inc v Ottawa.........................................................42
Nowak v Fort Erie.................................................................................... 43
Tax Collection:..........................................................................44
Payment in Lieu of Taxes.........................................................................45
Mississauga v Canada.............................................................................45
Municipal Budgets....................................................................46
Fees and Charges.................................................................................... 46

Municipal Law Summary

What is a Municipality?
Subsidiary Principle
There is a theory of urban government that says services should be as
close to the ground as possible.
Lawmaking and implementation are often best achieved at a level of
government that is not only most effective, but also closest tot the
citizens affected and thus most responsive to their needs
(Spraytech v Hudson, 2001 SCR),
Municipalities are corporations established by the province.
Section 1(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001 defines a municipality to mean
a geographic area whose inhabitants are incorporated.
Section 2 of the Municipal Act, 2001: Municipalities are created by
the Province of Ontario to be responsible and accountable
governments with respect to matters within their jurisdiction and
each municipality is given powers and duties under this Act and many
other Acts for the purpose of providing good government with respect
to those matters.
Service Delivery Model
Municipalities act as a business corporation with an administrative
role. They provide:
Protective services
Transportation services
Environmental services
Social and health services
Recreation and cultural services
Land Use Planning

*The history of municipal corporations is marked by the tension

between the governance and service delivery roles.
Public Meeting Rule
States that all council discussions and decisions have to be made in
public. First thought up in 1922.

Magnusson Article
Are Municipalities Creatures of the Province?
Argues that most major municipalities in Canada predate the country.
Victoria, Toronto, Quebec City, etc; so the provinces didnt really
create them at all.
Basically what hes saying is that political power exists where people
believe it does. Its my old mantra: Canada is like Tinkerbell; stop
clapping and it dies. Power exists due to the monopoly of violent
enforcement, yeah, but also because we believe it does. We need to
have more power at the municipal level if we want to be serious about
democracy.
Regina v Greenbaum SCC 1993
T-shirt case. Iacobucci says municipalities are entirely creatures of
the government, and that courts have to be vigilant in making sure
they dont pass ultra vires laws that impinge of the common law or
civil rights of their constituents.
Dillons Rule upheld.
East York v Ontario 1997
Ontario Court of Justice
Everyone and their grandmother was turbo-against the amalgamation
of Toronto and the surrounding bullshit, and each of the separate
municipalities took the province to court to get them to stahp (plus a
bunch of other people). Sections 2(b) and (d), 7, 8, and 15(1) of the
Charter.
Borins J said too friggin bad. Municipalities lack constitutional status,
and the province can do whatever it wants with them.
i) Municipal institutions lack constitutional status
ii) Municipal institutions are creatures of the legislature and exist
only if provincial legislation so provides
iii) Municipal institutions have no independent autonomy and their
powers are subject to aboliltion or repeal by provincial legislation
iv) Municipal institutions may exercise only those powers which are
conferred upon them by statute.
Brandon v Municipal Commissioner 1931
Manitoba Court of Appeal

Ummm some taxes are illegal? Check into this on the internet.
Canadian Pacific Railway v Outlook 1924
Saskatchewan Kings Bench
Something about the incorporation of municipalities. The town exists
as an entity of its own, tied neither to the people who live in it nor the
geographical boundaries which encompass its area of land.

St Stephen v Charlotte
Body corporate constituted by the incorporation of the inhabitants
residing within the defined area blah blah blah corporate status.
Body corporate means you can sue and be sued; it acts as a trustee,
and its a fiduciary. It is all of those things, but most importantly it is
a body corporate.
Ste Paul County no. 19 v Belland (2006)
Service delivery model? Not quite. Its more than that. Allegedly
theres no party politic at the municipal level, but thats bullshit.
Clearly there is.
Municipal Corporation
It is a body corporate; S.4 of Municipal Act, 2001
Special type of corporation
Created by statute
The Mayor is the CEO
municipality is a body corporate
it is a special type of corporation
no letters patent or articles of incorporation
created by statute
municipality = business corporation
council = board of directors
mayor = chair of board
by-laws = minutes and resolutions

Municipal Act, 2001

1) Lower-tier Municipalities (cities, towns, villages, etc)
2) Upper-tier municipalities (replacing regional gov)
3) single-tier municipalities (one-tier)

Used to just govern local municipalities, and the regional guys did the
outlying areas. That was continued on in the Municipal Act, but we
dont really know why.
This is all very confusing to the tax-payer. Separated municipalities:
generally of an urban nature, denser; they tend to remove themselves
from the larger government. They all vary. Barrie may have
separated for certain things, but Stratford and Kingston did it for
different reasons.
Lower-tier is generally subservient to the upper tier. S.11 of the MA.
Councillors are generally elected to lower-tier councils and statutorily
representative of their upper-tier councils.
Regions have no political status
Counties do, there are County Acts
Districts: have no jurisdiction
Regional Governments: basically to assist with super-municipal
service delivery. Police, Fire, that kind of thing.
Single-tier municipalities: like Toronto, remember?
Separated municipalities: see above
S.5(1) VERY IMPORTANT
The powers of a municipality SHALL be exercised by its council
You dont have a choice, you have to do it in a certain way. You have
to do SOMETHING.
5(3) municipality must act through its council and by by-law (or as
otherwise permitted)
The CASE LAW says that matters of a minor nature or of an
administrative nature can be done by resolution instead of a by-law.
Most important body is the council in local government. Quasijudicial powers and functions. Council will often sit as a tribunal or a
hearing body.
Generally there is a head of council (mayor/reeve/chairs) and
councillors. They are generally elected at-large or by ward.
** Theres an unspoken rule in Toronto that whatever the ward
councillor wants, the ward councillor gets. This is awesome.
We finally have 4-year terms, for obvious reasons (trying to get 2
years of real business done). This didnt actually work.
The term continues until the successor is elected. You can get
removed, but only in very specific instances. The council itself cant
do it, and nothing in that video we watched didnt contain anything
that would be sufficient.

Eligibility anyone who is entitled to be an elector and who is not

otherwise disqualified from holding office. So you have to be a
resident or a tenant or their spouse.
Ineligibility Anyone who is an employee of the same municipality
they are running in. Judge, MP, MPP, public servant
Disqualification: ceases to be a Canadian citizen, is not a resident or
tenant of land (or spouse of owner or tenant) in municipality, is
prohibited from voting in an election (at ANY TIME, so you cant go to
jail even for one night), contravenes the Municipal Conflict of Interest
Act,

Councils and Committees

Municipality must ultimately act through its council/by-law/otherwise
permitted.
Municipal business is very labour-intensive, so most in ON have
implemented the committee structure, which breaks down the
workload. This is pretty important, because if you have a problem
with anything you have to go and deputate to the committee. Council
will not listen to you. Committee of the whole means that the
committee has been given authority by the council to make decisions.
In the old days, there was limited power. Now there is a general
power with certain restrictions.
Starts at 23.1 of the Municipal Act
Power that has been prescribed means one that is given by
regulation.
Committees are generally only advisory. They give recommendations.
They talk about it, debate it, whatever, and then they make a
resolution that council hears and decides on. No two structures are
exactly the same. What that means is that whenever someone asks
you to do something, you have to figure out quicktime wtf the deal is
in their municipality.
Special Purpose Bodies
ABCs!
Susan Adolbes paper, 1970.
Special purpose bodies are either elected by local voters or appointed
by council, the provs, or someone else, and they get all their money
from either municipal funding, provincial funding, or user fees.
Insulated from local politics because service is either too important or
too complex or there is a conflict of interest.
Recruitment of persons with specific skill set and interest.
Issues of fragmentation and non-aligned mandates and decision. Isnt
council supposed to do this shit? What about accountability?

Scale: ??
Elected or appointed representatives: should they be elected? Who
cares? They have the same term length as council (usually)
Local board means a municipal service board, transportation
commission, blah blah blah. Whatever, they are the agents of a
municipality. Wait MOST are. Appointed by one or more councils
and can include members of council. Hard to get rid of.
Has to maintain certain policies. HAS TO. Procedural by-laws, and
open meetings. Fees and charges provisions applies
Municipal Service Boards
Bodies corporate that are agents of the municipalities s.96
eg. The Collingwood Airport joint service board was made by three
municipalities and none of the councils run it, its the board. Another
ex. Is the Jlland Marsh Flood people. What kind of money are we
going to spend on this?
Municipal Service Corporations
You can now have shares and incorporate. Municipal business
corporations. Made for the ability to make public/private
partnerships. Doesnt get used very often because the rules are super
complex. Water and waste service and that kind of thing.
Business Improvement Areas
s.204 to the Municipal Act
To promote the area as a shopping district, they are allowed to make
decisions and impose levies on businesses to make the public space
look pretty
Municipal Associations
S.3(1) requires the provs to consult with municipalities in accordance
with a memorandum of understanding (MOU) entered into between
the province and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)
(which does not include Toronto. We thought they didnt understand
us, so we pulled out). A MOU provides for consultation between the
Prov and the AMO when the gov is proposing a change in legislation
and regulations.

Evolution of Municipal Legislation

The Baldwin Act was modelled on the UK act. Set out municipal
powers. It was basically a big list of bullshit that they called the

laundry list approach. The powers were relatively expansive, and

then they got retrenched. At the end of the 1800s a lot of powers
were taken away as some municipalities buckled under financial
pressures.
Dillons Rule
Ottawa Electric Light Company
Could only get powers that were absolutely essential to a municipality,
expressly granted, or necessarily or fairly implied or incident to
powers granted.
1994 Things all began to change.
Vancouver (City) v Shell Products Canada
Remember this case? Its the one where VanCity banned the city fleet
from buying gas a Shell and Shell took them to court, saying the bylaw was ultra vires.
Dillons Rule worked well in terms of the delegated model, until
Alberta be like: bullshizzle. This isnt working. Now were going to
give municipalities natural person powers. Granted lots of power, and
provided an interpretive provision noting that by-law making powers
are stated in general terms to give broad authority to municipal
councils to govern as they best feel is appropriate and to enhance the
ability of councils to respond to present and future issues in their
municipalities.
Basically this shit was so completely different from what they
were doing before. They can now differentiate and discriminate
how they feel best.
Municipal Act 2001 is a whole big change, but its got a huge
amount of clawback provisions.
City of Toronto Act, 2006
Gave us some taxing power.
Bill 130 - 3 days later, this bill was introduced for first reading which
would extend most of the same enhanced powers and authorities
granted in the City of Toronto Act to all municipalities in Ontario.
Every thing except the new taxation powers. Also EXCEPT Toronto
has to have a bunch of integrity people, the rest dont.
Charter Cities
City that is governed by a separate piece of provincial legislation,
which bestows upon city certain powers and responsibilities that are
not given to other municipalities in the province. They are not
subjected to the apparatus of a general municipal statute.
10

Saint John, NB; est. via Royal Charter in 1785; first municipality in
Canada.
Montreal, QC; est. 1832; new charter in 1840, revisions in 1959 and
1970
Winnipeg, MB; incorp 1873
Van City; incorp 1886
NOT CHARTER CITIES: CowTown, Ottawa, TDot
Levi and Valverde Article
Freedom of the City: Canadian Cities and the Quest for Governmental
Status
Basically a giant article arguing why municipalities should have more
power. Mega pissed off about the amalgamation in 1998. Superior
Court concluded that the City of Toronto Act did not exceed the
provinces constitutional authority to make laws relating to the
municipal institutions in the province.
*******************

Guest Speaker, Jason Reynar Deputy

CAO/Town Solicitor for the Town of Innisfil
Clerks are lawyers! Hey hey hey I found a job I want!

Council!
They are all powerful when acting as one body. COUNCIL HOLDS
ALL OF THE POWER.
Council can only fuck themselves up, theyre not really supposed to
fuck up the next council.
S.5(1) sets out: The powers of a municipality SHALL be exercised by
its council. You dont have a choice.
S.5(2), unlike the fed and prov parliaments, proposed laws can carry
though to the next Council.
S.6(1) 4 year terms, start Dec 1
S.6(3) Holders continue to hold until successors are elected and
organized; some wriggle room here as to what organized means.
Silly Season! Is election season. Every little goddamn thing becomes
an election issue.
Municipal Act sets out a few key positions, and the duties and roles
that those people have. They werent written for modern times; they

11

were written by provincials who wanted to make municipalities who

would do as they are told.

Role of Council
224. It is the role of council,
(a) to represent the public and to consider the well-being and
interests of the municipality;
(b) to develop and evaluate the policies and programs of the
municipality;
(c) to determine which services the municipality provides;
(d) to ensure that administrative policies, practices and procedures
and controllership policies, practices and procedures are in place to
implement the decisions of council;
(d.1) to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations
of the
municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the
municipality;
(e) to maintain the financial integrity of the municipality; and
(f) to carry out the duties of council under this or any other Act.
Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25
S.225 Head of Council
(a) CEO of the munic
(b) preside, (c) provide leadership, (d) represent at official functions,
(e) other stuff.
S.226(1) A whole bunch of civil/public duty stuff that RoFo totally
ignores. Economic, social, and environmental well-being, etc etc.
S.229 Chief Administrative Officer
Its a may job. You dont have to hire one. Its a pretty sweet job
where you make a lot of money and you dont do a whole lot of heavy
work.
What the hell is the job description?
(a) exercising general control and management of the affairs of the
municipality for the purpose of ensuring the efficient and effective
operation of the municipality; and
(b) performing such other duties as are assigned by the municipality.
$92,415* (Average)
$212,112 (Oakville)
$331,226 (Toronto)

12

S.228 Clerk
Its a shall position. You have to write everything down; its heavily
prescribed. Pretty much the job is to record everything council does.
S.286 Treasurer
Do we really need an act, in todays modern society, to tell the
treasurer that their job is to take care of the money?
S.1.1(6) of the Building Code Act Chief Building Official
Municipalities that are growing and growing have a lot of wiggle room
in this position. They have a lot of discretion. They can be your best
friend or your worst enemy.
Youre going to get S.19(1) in your FACE all the time. No person shall
hinder or obstruct, or attempt to hinder or obstruct, a chief building
official inspector, officer blah blah blah
Its a drag because they work for the province and not the city, and
they can be dicks about things when theyre trying to enforce the
building code instead of playing the political game.
S.227 Municipal Administration
Their job as staff is to do research and help council and give advice.
Sometimes council takes the advice and sometimes they dont.
If there is an appeal of a council decision and council hasnt taken the
advice of their staff, theyre allowed to go get new advice.
If you keep the lines between the professional advice giving and the
political manoeuvring, you have a strong municipality. If you blur
them, its a problem.

Procedural By-laws
S.238(2) Procedure respecting meetings.
Every municipality and local board shall pass a procedure by-law for
governing the calling, place and proceedings of meetings.
This is the mother of all by-laws. It spells out all this rules of the
game and how the city is going to make what they want done get
done.
They can decide that certain decisions need a more than a simple
majority, budgetary and all kinds of other stuff.
Once again, staff give advice, and its up to Council to make a
decision.

13

S.5(3) Delegated Authority

S.5(3) A municipal power, including a municipalitys capacity, rights,
powers and privileges under S.9 shall be exercised by by-law unless
the municipality is specifically authorized to do otherwise.
How does this work? General Power to Delegate! Woo! Subject to a
few restrictions but not too many.
If Council is going to sit as a hearing type body, maybe they shouldnt
be delegating that down to someone else. Cannot delegate the power
to adopt an official plan, but you can delegate the authority to manage
the Planning Act.
S.239(1) Open Meeting Rule
S.239 (1) Except as provided in this section, all meetings shall be open
to the public.
This is an interesting concept, in that the Provs said that Munics have
to have open meetings, but the Provs still have closed ones.
Council has a list of meeting types that CAN be closed if they want to
do it that way, but they dont have to be. Sometimes the Councillors
are idiots and they dont take advice about when the meeting should
be closed.
This comes up in the media sometimes, where theyre trying to figure
out when politicians are doing this for political purposes and when its
legit. There is actually a closed-meeting investigator for this.
S.23.1(1) General Power to Delegate
Without limiting sections 9, 10, and 11, those sections authorize a
municipality to delegate its powers and duties under this or any other
Act to a person or body subject to the restrictions set out in this Part.
Scope of power
(2) The following rules apply to a by-law delegating any of the
municipalitys
powers or duties:
1. A delegation may be revoked at any time without notice unless the
delegation
by-law specifically limits the municipalitys power to revoke the
delegation.
2. A delegation shall not limit the right to revoke the delegation
beyond the term of
the council which made the delegation.
3. A delegation may provide that only the delegate can exercise the
delegated
power or that both the municipality and the delegate can exercise the
power.

14

4. A delegation or deemed delegation under paragraph 6 of a duty

results in the
duty being a joint duty of the municipality and the delegate.
5. A delegation may be made subject to such conditions and limits as
the council of
a municipality considers appropriate.
6. Where a power is delegated, the power is deemed to be delegated
subject to
any limits on the power and to any procedural requirements, including
conditions,
approvals and appeals which apply to the power and any duties
related to the
power are deemed to be delegated with the power.
What CANNOT be delegated?
Legislative and quasi-judicial powers, for example the power to adopt
an official plan,
EXCEPT: under the Planning Act;
I dont really understand this.
Open Meeting Rule Is No Joke, People
239.(2) A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if
the subject
matter being considered is,
(a) the security of the property of the municipality or local board;
(b) personal matters about an identifiable individual, including
municipal or local
board employees;
(c) a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the
municipality or
local board;
(d) labour relations or employee negotiations;
(e) litigation or potential litigation, including matters before
administrative
tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board;
(f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including
communications
necessary for that purpose;
(g) a matter in respect of which a council, board, committee or other
body may
hold a closed meeting under another Act. [E.g. Section 2.1(7) of the
Emergency
Management and Civil Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 9]

15

Southam Inc v Hamilton-Wentworth Economic Development

Committee 1988
Once youre invited to meet together by the clerk, thats a meeting. It
also has to be within their jurisdiction.
Members of a committee can discuss questions informally, but when
theyre all summoned to a regularly scheduled meeting, they have to
meet in public.
Blacks law dictionary says you have to be meeting for the purpose of
discussing and acting upon matters in a common interest.
Southam v Ottawa
Council goes to a resort for a strategic planning meeting, press not
allowed.
Court said: its not about whether they have the minutes and the
agenda and all that, its about whether the council members are
invited to discuss, or just show up to discuss matters that are usually
included in council business.
Courts say:
No longer type of meeting but subject matter;
Right to notice and participate which is distinct from the right to
observe local government in process.
Read in: cannot be trivial or inadvertent.
If you do this, they will quash your decision even if its intra vires.
Andre Marin will watch you if you dont appoint one of your own.
If you do something really stupid, the courts will take back a decision
that Council has made retroactively.
Ombudsman of Ontario decided that the meeting must exercise the
power or authority of Council for the purposes of doing groundwork.
This beautiful man thinks that we can look at this as a ven diagram.
Its going to be on the website.
Marin said: To me, some municipalities are like gangrenous limbs.
They make provincial politicians look like choirboys.

How to put a by-law together

Now hes explaining how to put a by-law together, but its not really
that helpful. Basically, hes going through the whole thing explaining
the sections.

16

Most of this is just delineating how by-laws are set up to explicitly cite
all the statutory powers they have under provincial legislation
(Municipal Act?) so that their shit is all intra vires.
We have like 6 cases for this class today all about this topic.
Repeal clauses are really important for obvious reasons.
By-laws are formal written documents that have to be signed by
the head of council or the presiding officer, and the clerk, and
they also have to be embossed with the municipal seal.
First piece of legislation in Canada: the Municipal Corporations Act,
1849, called the Baldwin Act.
What it did was decide the powers a local govt should have. It
grafted together a whole bunch of random bits from other pieces of
legislation.
Why does the Municipal Act have paragraphs? Thanks Baldwin Act.
The laundry list approach.
There was a big discussion about what the purposes of a city are.
Morrison v Kingston
The general health, safety and welfare power in s.259 of the then
Municipal Act
Court said, you cant actually use that power. You have to limit that
power else we will live in chaos.
Court said: everything a city can do is in the Act. The Provs already
said what they wanted to give the municipalities, and they did so
explicitly. If it isnt in there its not a power.
For years, Morrison was cited to prove how limited this power really
is.
Sea change: Annus Mirabelis 1994
Dillons Rule worked well in terms of the prescriptive delegated
model; powers are narrow and specific.
Shell Products and Vancouver
SCC fundamentally split 5-4
Van City said they wouldnt do business with anyone who did business
in South Africa. Shell said thats not fair. Youre not entitled to say
that. ISnt that discrimination? What about the territory thing.
Sopinka J said well shit Shell, I guess youre right. Wheres the
authority to do this? Geographical limits baby.
Mclachlin J (dissent) said: deferential approach should be accorded
municipalities that they can effectively serve their citizens.
17

Then you get the Municipal Act 2001 come into effect in Alberta:
The idea was that municipalities should have natural person powers.
This means that the munics, if they could find the power somewhere
in an act, can just go ahead and do it. Hire staff, enter into contracts,
acquire land and equipment, etc, as long as it has amunicipal
purpose.
Subsection 11(3) of the Municipal Act 2001 gives munics general
authorization to pass by-laws.
Bill 130: Broad Authority Powers:
Municipalities can pass by-laws for basically all kinds of shit. Big list.
1. Governance structure of the municipality and its local boards
2. Accountability and transparency of the municipality and its
operations and of its local boards and their operations.
3. Financial management of the municipality and its local boards.
4. Public assets of the municipality acquired for the purposes of
exercising its authority under this or any other Act.
5. Economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality.
6. Health, safety and well-being of persons.
7. Services and things that the municipality is authorized to provide
under subsection 10/11(1)
8. Protection of persons and property, including consumer protection.
9. Animals
10. Structures, including fences and signs.
11. Business licensing.
Interpretation: broadly: confer broad authority on the municipality to
govern its affairs. 8(1)
In the event of ambiguity, shall be resolved to include powers the
municipality had on the day before the MA2001. 8(2)
8(3) can regulate or prohibit respecting the matter; require persons to
do things respecting the matter, provide for a system of licences
respecting the matter.
Authority to Differentiate:
8(4) lol you can do what you want if you consider it appropriate.
Rules of Application
In a two-tier system, you can give the powers to one tier, the other
tier, or both. If theres a problem the upper tier generally has the
upper hand.
Limitations
S.13-19
ss. 13 to 19 of the Municipal Act, 2001 set out general restrictions
and limitations on municipal powers
s. 13 upper-tier by-law applies over lower-tier by-law

18

s. 14 by-law without effect to the extent it conflicts with superior

(i.e. federal or provincial) legislation
s. 15 specific power applies over general power
s. 17 sets out financial restrictions:
no taxes or debt; no ability to borrow or invest
s. 18 no monopolies to be granted
s. 19 geographic limitation
Upper tier takes precedence
By-law is without effect where it conflicts with superior legislation. If
it frustrates the purpose of the superior legislation. Specific power
applies over general power.
HOWEVER: you cant use person powers to enact taxes of debt, cant
borrow or invest. No monopolies; geographic limitation.
Spraytech v Hudson
SCC held that a broad approach to such a power was necessary in
order for local government to properly respond to unforeseen or
changing circumstances
Principle of subsidiarity: govt that is closest to the people and best
equipped to deal with the matter should have the power to deal with
it.
United Taxi v Calgary
Old legislation allowed AB munics to limit and issue the number of
taxi licences. Calgary made a by-law under the new Municipal
Government Act, 1994. Trial judge said that was fine. Appeal judges
disagreed because they are stupid. Justice OLeary said (dissent): the
whole purpose of this legislation was to enhance the powers of
municipalities. Where can you not read that in?
SCC 9-0 decision allowing the Citys appeal. Shortest SCC decision of
all time lol
Croplife Canada v Toronto
TO pesticide by-law under S.130 (health and well being)
Croplife said: there is a specific direction to interpret only Part II
powers broadly, not specific powers. Court said: unless there is an
express direction to the contrary, we have to interpret everything
broadly.
Other Court of Appeal judges all agreed.

19

Catalyst Paper Corp v North Cowichan

Catalyst had its own port and roads and everything, and the town
imposed property taxes 20 times higher than the peeps around them.
Catalyst took them to court. Court said: deference is wide wide wide;
municipality is not required to provide formal reasons for or to explain
the rationale or basis of a by-law. Social, economic, and political
matters that are relevant to the electorate are good factors to
consider.
Eng v Toronto
Council prohibited anyone from having or eating shark fins. Relied on
broad powers thing. Enact to protect the environmental well-being of
city; health, safety, and well-being of persons and animals.
Issue: was there a valid municipal purpose?
Sharks live in the OCEAN. How then are you protecting your
electorate?
No valid municipal purpose found: by-law struck.
Conclusions:
Munics have real broad powers now. Courts have, generally,
interpreted powers v broadly. Munics still act within the confines of
delegated powers and their by-laws may be quashed on numerous
grounds (i.e. illegality) and for bad faith.

By-Law Enforcement
What is a bylaw?
Municipal legislation! Haha!
The formal written expression of a municipalitys legislation.
The bylaw has to be signed by the clerk and the head of council who
is there at the meeting. Also must be embossed.
Resolutions
Are informal documents that signify the intent of a municipal council
but may not necessarily be binding. Do not have to be written down.
Over 30 specific instances in the Municipal Act where a council does
not have to enact a formal by-law in order to authorize a particular
action.

20

There is a common law tradition that says you dont have to write
down by-laws which is really weird because its one of the few
instances where common law rumps statutes.
Procedures to Enact by-laws
Written enactment, at a valid meeting of the council. A properly
convened, conducted and constituted meeting in English or French.
GOTTA HAVE QUARUM. Was there enough notice? There might be a
time when the by-law is void, or it might be voidable, which means
that its valid until its challenged.
Pre-drafting considerations:
Legal authority You have to find the authority somewhere. Usually
you can, but sometimes its a stretch. Natural person powers, broad
spheres of authority powers. Is there any provision that claws that
authority back? Dammit!
Purpose there has to be a legitimate purpose for the by-law. What
does council want to do? And do they have the authority to do that?
Notice If you dont give someone enough notice, they can challenge
it.
Objectives is it constitutionally valid? You want to regulate signage
maybe, but does that violate freedom of expression? That kind of
thing.
Language as precise as possible. Certain terms should be defined.

Components of By-laws
Bunch of bullshit
See printed slides.
Definitions should be restricted to words that normally have a
different meaning than what the meaning in the by-law is. You even
need to define what municipality youre talking about.
Regulatory provisions You write down whatever youre trying to
prohibit or regulate.
Offence Provision you have to specifically state that contravening it
is bad. A person who contravenes any provision of this by-law is
guilty of an offence.
Penalty You spell out all the bad shit youre going to do to whoever
breaks the rules. Whatever offence, multiple offences, escalating
offences, etc etc etc.
Say youre prohibited from opening on Christmas day, but you dont
care, so you open anyways and what does the court say? Fines you
for however much money you made.
21

Interpretation Any reference to a by-law, statute, or other piece of

legislation also includes any future incarnations of that law.
Schedules - you attach schedules when you don think some long list
of bullshit would fit in to the body of the law.
Repeal Provision IF YOURE OVERRIDING SOME OTHER LAW, YOU
HAVE TO OFFICIALLY REVOKE IT. You can do it either in the by-law
itself, or you can do it in a standalone.
Date of Enactment This by-law enacted on this date blah blah blah
Signing and seal buttfuck obvious.
BY-law enforcement
General Powers
Munics can make something an offence
S.429 Munic has the authority to establish fines
Munic has the authority to ask for an injunction
Basic fine range: $500-$100,000
Admin Monetary Penalites:
Cannot be punative, exceed the amount reasonably required to
promote compliance, and currently only available for parking by=laws
under s.102.1
Enforcement Officers:
When the Popo are enforcing municipal by-laws, they are peace
officers NOT police officers.
Discretionary Enforcement Principle:
A rule of genreral application.
Munics spend a lot of time on this shit. A munic will very rarely pass
a great big by-law unless staff has studied it a whole lot.
It applies to permissive (as opposed to mandatory) by-laws, and gives
a wide range of discretion regarding the enforcement of these bylaws: against whom, and how it happens.
In general, there is no private duty of care to individual
residents/taxpayers.
Brown v Hamilton
Browns riding the streetcar and gets hit in the eyeball with a roman
candle.
He sues the city for negligence because they did not enforce the bylaw prohibiting fireworks on public streets.

22

Municipal Act recognizes that there is no duty.

Self-Help Remedy:
S.440 If any by-law of a municipality of by-law of a local board of a
municipality under this or any other Act is contravened, in addition to
any other remedy and to any penalty imposed by the by-law, the
contravention may be restrained by application at the instance of a
taxpayer or the municipality or local board.
#Unique to Ontario
Suprun v Bryla 2007 SCJ
Without s.440, a taxpayer would be at the mercy of a munic that
refuses to enforce a by-law
Anyways the self-help thing means a resident can enforce a by-law if
the munic refuses to.
Sunnybrae Springbrook Farms Inc v Trent Hills 2012 SCJ
S.440 of the Municipal Act provides a remedy to an aggrieved
taxpayer where a munic fails to act.
Powers of Entry:
Munic can grant power to entry to land for inspection to determine
compliance with bylaws at any reasonable time. They dont explain
what a reasonable time is, and it doesnt apply to dwellings.
Orders and Remedial Actions:
If you ignore whatever the city tells you, the city can enter the
property, and they have a direct remedial right, and do whatever it is
they asked you to do. Then they charge you for it. If you dont pay
them, they can sell your land for tax arrears.
Site plan agreement:
Under s.446 you have to get a land use planning approval thing or
whatever and if you dont build whatever it is, the city will enter the
property, build whatever you didnt that you said you would, and then
charge you for it.
S.446 is a great big hammer the municipality has.
41(11), 41(12), or 41(13) is where you get this? I think. Missed that.

23

Under ss.447 and s.447.1 the city can get a court order to close the
premises.
S.447.2 the munic can inspect buildings they think are grow-ops.

Grounds to Attack a By-law

Paul Perells Ten Commandments to Attack Municipal By=laws
#8 has kind of fallen away

Challenging a Municipal By-law

Municipal by-law may be challenged by:
a) application to quash
This is how youre supposed to do it. Under s.273(1) of the MA:
any person may apply to the Superior Court of Justice to quash a bylaw of a munic in whole or in part for illegality. Unreasonableness
isnt a good grounds.
b) judicial review application
You have to apply under the judicial review procedures act.
Apply to Divisional Court. Can grant relief under admin law.
c) provincial offences court trial
When you get charged with something you can go in front of a
more junior judge and get the by-law thrown out on the basis of
illegality. No time limit.
d) application under Rule 14.05(d)
Where the relief claimed is the interpretation of rights is
dependent on the interpretation of whatever part of the by-law is
affecting you. No limitation period.
e) constitutional application
Charter challenge
f) appeal
Direct statutory appeals: wards boundaries; various land use
and planning approvals under the Planning Act. All kinds of others.
person challenging validity of by-law must prove invalidity;
presumption of validity
Municpal something blah blah

24

Licencing and Regulation

Ontarios Every Changing Municipal Regime
Licencing businesses revenue stream for municipalities. Was super
restricted under the Municipal Act RSO 1990
The Savings and Restructuring Act 1996 modernized and consolidated
licensing authority.
Old municipal act was archaic and prescriptive. Lol body rub parlours
Savings and Restructuring Act 1996 gave authority to license subject
to certain specific exemptions business or economic activity except for
manufacturing the sale of goods by wholesale or resource
exploitations, extraction, haversting, processing, renewal or
transportation or natural resources.
Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act 2006 is a step towards
recognizing municipalities as responsible govts.
Municipal regulation is a broad term denoting the power of a
municipality to pass by-laws in a number of general and specific areas
Licensing relates to system of permissions which is a form of
regulation
Licensing is one of the most important areas in which municipalities
have the power to pass by-laws and control and regulate a persons
activities
Why at the municipal level?
Enhanced flexibility for inspections and compliance work
Improved awareness of local needs
Enhanced accountability to the public
A municipality can more appropriately set standards befitting its own
communities
Virgo v Toronto
Historical analysis of municipal licensing authority. All kinds of old
timey shit about carrying small wares in a basket you dont need a
licence for that.
City licensing by-law restricted hawkers and peddlers from using city
streets
Application to quash dismissed by Chief Justice of Common Pleas and
decision upheld by Court of Appeal
Supreme Court of Canada: licensing by-law not invalid as being in
restraint of trade or ultra vires citys legislative authority under The
Municipal Act.

25

Fees
Fees have always been for regulation and revenue generation. The
fees have not always (or ever) been homogenously prescribed.
Licensing of business by municipalities has long been recognized as a
basic form of consumer protection s.92(9) of Constitution Act, 1867:
Shop, Saloon, Tavern, Auctioneer, and other Licences in order to
raising of a Revenue for Provincial, Local or Municipal
Purposes.
Licensing had historically been addressed in a largely ad hoc fashion
in the former Municipal Acts
Separate and disparate licensing authorities were scattered
throughout the statute
Licensing fees were treated in a similar fashion
Municipal discretion granted but provisions were still largely
restrictive

Pre-bill 130 Licensing Regime

Used to be in the Savings and Restructuring Act, passed under Harris.
Harris was trying to download responsibilities and services. This Act
really changed the scheme.
Instead of having specific and itemized licencing authority, it made
general licencing power.
Savings and Restructuring Act, 1996 significantly reconstituted the
licensing authority for municipalities in Ontario
new Part XVII.1 of old Municipal Act General Licensing Powers
municipalities were authorized to license any type of business or
economic activity carried out in full or in part within the municipality
except for manufacturing, wholesale, natural resources matters
general powers to licence, regulate or govern
issuance, revocation and suspension of licences
power to impose licence fees
You find a retrenchment of the broader powers that had been given
only six years earlier in the Harris Act.
Before, you were able to licence, regulate, and govern; now you can
only licence for the following purposes:
health and safety
nuisance control
consumer protection
These express purposes not set out in s. 257.2 of former Municipal
Act.
Municipalities were required to provide:
an explanation of the reasons for licensing, and
an explicit link to purposes in the licensing by-law
26

The Harris Regime included a sunset provision:

licensing by-laws were stipulated to have a maximum life of
five years from the date they originally came into force; they
had never had that before.
prescribed onerous notice and consultation requirements.
They didnt have to do this before either and the councils were
super pissed.
public meeting with notice to the public that it could make
representations and submissions
limitations on licensing fees costs could not exceed the costs
of administration or enforcement of by-law. This eliminated
the revenue generation aspect of licencing fees.
councils could seek the views of the public prior to enacting a
licensing by-law or issuing, renewing, revoking, imposing
conditions or suspending a licence

Post Bill 130 Regime

general authority for a municipality to establish a system of
licences (s. 151)
licence very broadly defined as a permit, an approval, a
registration and any other type of permission (s. 1) This means that
it doesnt really have to be a licence anymore.
extends municipal powers to license to any business activity, matter
or thing that a municipality can regulate under ss. 9, 10 (broad
authority), 11 (s. 151(5))
Now theres no sunset clause (removal of 5-year time limitation
period) again.
specific licensing criteria removed
This means that its not just about businesses anymore. Any
real use, had a system of provisions.
Mandatory notice and public hearing provisions removed. No more
criteria anymore, so you dont need an explanation or the reasons.
authority
a municipality may provide for a system of licences with
respect to a business carried on within the municipality
licensing
includes a permit, an approval, a registration and any other
type of permission
purpose
to shore up gaps in provincial regulation of businesses or
activities
to ensure compliance with general standards
to promote health and safety and to protect consumers

27

business licensing listed as a matter under the spheres of

jurisdiction (s. 11(3) 10) and under the broad authority powers (s.
10(2) 11)
151(1)
Without limiting sections 9, 10 and 11, a municipality
may, inter alia:
a)prohibit the carrying on of a business without a licence
b)refuse to grant a licence
c)revoke or suspend a licence
d)impose conditions for holding or renewing a licence
e)impose special conditions by class in order to obtain, continue
or renew a licence
municipalities cannot license:
manufacturing or industrial businesses
the wholesale of goods
generation, exploitation, extraction, harvesting, processing,
renewal or transportation of natural resources
municipalities cannot:
refuse a licence because of location
exception: adult entertainment parlours
municipalities may include prohibitions, but may not prohibit a
trade in its entirety
O. Reg. 586/06: no municipal licensing of liquor sales and service,
couriers, real estate sale and brokerage business, transportation.
This is because, brutally, these industries all had huge lobby groups
who threw a bunch of money at the government and got their
exemptions.

What is a business?
any business carried on within a municipality
even if the business is being carried on from a location outside the
municipality
includes, inter alia:
a)trades and occupations
b)exhibitions, concerts, festivals and organized public
amusements
c)the sale or hire of goods or services and the activities of a
transient trader
d)the display of samples, patterns or specimens of goods for sale
or hire
Municipal powers are broad, with regards to business licensing:
the power to license, regulate or govern places or things
includes a power to license, regulate or govern the trades,
occupations or business for which such places or things are
used and the persons carrying on or engaged in them
28

the licensing power in s. 151(2) is broad enough to include

requirements to licensees respecting the conduct of their trade
and to be cognizant of the safety of people who work in their
establishments
s. 151(5) [business licensing provisions] apply with necessary
modifications to a system of licences with respect to any activity,
matter or thing for which a by-law may be passed under ss. 9,
10 and 11 as if it were a system of licences with respect to a
business
Adult Entertainment Assn v Ottawa
This case led, in part, to the Bill 130 licencing amendments.
Ottawa enacted a by-law that banned touching between performers
and customers. Essentially banning lapdancing. Adult entertainment
parlours in Ottawa challenged the by-law, as it effectively outlawed
lapdancing. Court of Appeal held that the City had the authority to
enact the by-law.
dequate notice of by-law provided by City
licensing by-law was enacted in the interests of public health and
safety and consumer protection and City provided explanation of link
to purposes of by-law
no unlawful delegation of Citys licensing authority to chief of police
and chief licence inspector
licensing by-law not discriminatory (authority to differentiate under
s. 10)
licensing by-law not vague nor unreasonable
neither the provision prohibiting touching nor the provisions
regarding signage and the posting of the by-law were violations of the
limitations on the municipal licensing power
2211266 Ontario Inc v Brantford
decision concerned the scope of municipal licensing authority
municipalities are granted broadly general licensing authority under
the Municipal Act, 2001
whereas once municipalities could only licence business, trades and
occupations and could only do so for specific purposes (health &
safety, nuisance control and consumer protection) this is no longer the
case
s. 8(3)(c) of the Municipal Act, 2001 grants municipalities the power
to create a system of licences respecting any matter over which they
have by-law making authority under ss. 10 or 11
s. 8(1) directs an expansive interpretation of the scope of this power
so as to confer broad authority on the municipality to enable it to
govern its affairs as it considers appropriate.

29

Look at the spheres of jurisdiction, the broad purpose authority.

in this case, the City could enable by-laws dealing with the (i) health,
safety and well-being of persons, (ii) protection of persons and
protection, including consumer protection and (iii) business licensing
s. 151(5) of the MA 2001 which provides that the business licensing
provisions apply with necessary modifications to a system of licences
with respect to any activity, matter or thing for which a by-law may be
passed under ss. 9, 10 and 11 as if it were a system of licences with
respect to a business.
Under the old act, the licencing fee authority was always linked with
the specific licence. The connexion used to be explicit, but now its
implicit.

Licence Fees
power to impose licence fees is implicit through the authority to
impose conditions upon issuance of a licence
Part XII Fees and Charges
s. 391: affirms that ss. 9, 10, and 11 authorize municipality to
impose fees or charges for services or activities provided or done by
or on behalf of the municipality
these fees may include costs incurred in relation to the
administration and enforcement of the licensing regime
fee cannot be so high as to amount to a tax;
test: there must be a nexus between the fee charged & licensing
service provided; absolute precision is not required to uphold
licensing fee. Has to be reasonable.
Still no revenue generation.

Enforcement
Administrative Penalties
municipalities may charge these if any person fails to comply with
any part of a licensing system - s. 151(1)(g)
Licence Suspensions
suspension without hearing for up to 14 days if immediate danger to
health or safety of person or property - s. 151(2)
municipality must give licensee reasons for suspension
licensee must be given opportunity to respond
Compliance Inspections
power of entry under s. 436
inspections allowed in order to ensure compliance with conditions of
licence

30

Building Code Act, 1992

Licencing and Procedural Fairness

controls on municipal action to ensure fairness:
council must act fairly in deciding whether to grant or refuse
a licence, and
council must not refuse an application without giving due
consideration of all relevant information. They dont have to
give reasons.
however, a municipality has discretion to prohibit the carrying
on of a business without a licence, to refuse or to revoke a
licence, and to impose conditions - s. 151(4)
Municipal Powers to Regulate
Municipal Act, 2001 - Part II
general municipal powers
natural person powers
spheres of jurisdiction
broad authority powers
scope of by-law making power s. 8(3)
regulate or prohibit
require persons to do things
provide for a system of licences
various limitations & restrictions set out in ss. 13-19
powers can regulate, control and prohibit activities and actions
Municipal Act, 2001 - Part III
specific municipal powers divided into two main groups:
powers that either supplement or limit the grants of authority
in the spheres of jurisdiction & broad authority powers, like
highways.
powers not associated with the spheres/broad authorities
two limitations imposed:
general municipal powers in Part II are to co-exist with & be
supplemented or restricted by the specific powers in Part III
by-laws passed under ss. 9, 10 or 11 are subject to any
procedural requirements imposed on the power by Part II
Selected Specific Municipal Powers
Roads & Transportation: like if theyre going to close a road they have
to do it in a certain way.
highways (ss. 24-68)
transportation (ss. 69-73)
31

parking, except on highways (ss. 100-102.1)

Other Municipal Infrastructure:
waste management (ss. 74-76)
public utilities (ss. 78-93)
drainage and flood control (ss. 96-97)
structures, including signs and fences (ss. 98-99.1)
Health & the Environment:
culture, parks, recreation and heritage (ss. 94-95)
animals (ss. 103 and 105)
health, safety and nuisance (ss. 115-134)
natural environment (ss. 135-147) Trees, site alteration.
Miscellaneous Powers:
economic development services (ss. 106-114)
closing of retail business establishments (s. 148)
annual farm dues (s. 149)
Conclusions
longstanding municipal authority to license businesses and persons
has constitutional basis
licensing generally for health and safety, consumer protection and
nuisance control
municipal licensing authority has undergone a number of significant
changes in a short period of time
granting municipalities broad powers to enact by-laws related to
business licensing signifies a greater acceptance of municipal
governments as responsible and accountable levels of government
municipal regulation can of course, also be done through the general
and specific powers in Parts II & III

Land Use Planning

Outline of Municipal Bonusing
Anti-bonusing clause is in S.6 of the MA2001. Bonusing means the
conferring of an obvious financial advantatge to a particular person or
entity.
No matter what anything else says, the city cant give any money to
any businesses ever.
Sub two describes money/help as: everything.
Hahahahaha S.107(1) General Power to Make Grants
You can give grants to pretty much anyone for any reason.
32

History:
1860s and 1870s: Munics were empowered to pass by-laws intended
to attract certain businesses. They would give tax-breaks and build
roads or whatever to get jobs. They liked railways and manufacturing
especially.
In the 1900s, they got rid of that and banned the bonuses thing. Put a
cap on it.
1914: Municipal institutions Act permitted some bonuses for some
businesses.
1961: Bonuses prohibited again.
1989: Stat examples of prohibition modified slightly, similar to
current.
Present: No definition of bonuses.
Moder Framerwork: Broad stat powers, number of exceptions. Some
prohibitions that override S.1.7 which seems to override s.6.
Friends of Lansdowne Inc v Ottawa
Court gave additional sanction to common law exception. City was
going to go sole-sourcing for some park.
Looks like bonusing to me! Bad news! Free rent, free land, bullshit
bullshit bullshit!
Nowak v Fort Erie (Town)
City would allow certain redevelopment projects on the waterfront in
exchange for improvements to the area. Judge said thats not it, you
have to see if there is a granting of a clear monetary benefit to one
person to the exclusion of all other people.
So: cant give or lend money, cant least land for less than market
value, cant give a total or partial exemption from any levy, charge, or
fee.

Municipal Conflict of Interest Act

Municipal Conflict of Interest Act enacted in 1972. There are no
regulations under the MCIA. Pretty similar pieces of legislation all
over the country.
Covers more than just elected officials. Does not apply to staff. Only
applies to elected or appointed members.
Legislative goal is to protect the public interest. Supposed to prohibit
elected officials from participating in anything where they have a
financial interest (pecuniary)
33

Direct interest
Indirect interest
Deemed interest
Sets out an ethical framework for when participation in local
government decision-making is appropriate.
MCIA in a lot of ways is about OPTICS. The appearance of bias. You
need to maintain the public faith.
Lorello v. Meffe (2010), 99 M.P.L.R. (4th) 107 (S.C.J.):
The MCIA governs the conduct of local government members
regarding conflicts of interest. It reflects the need for integrity and
accountability as the cornerstones of a strong local government
system.
Halton Hills (Town) v. Equity Waste Management of Canada
(1995), 30 M.P.L.R. (2d) 232 (Ont. Gen. Div.):
The [MCIA] is crystal-clear. It is harsh. It must be. It controls the
actions of council members. They are positories of the citizens
highest trustThey must not only be unshirkingly honest they must
be seen to be so by those who voted for them and those who voted
against them.
Moll v Fisher (1979)
Based on the moral principle that no man can serve two masters. All
judgment may be affected. Officials are there for public purpose.
Intent to prohibit an member of municipal council or a local board
who has a pecuniary interest from involvement in anything the council
is considering.
Enactment of the MCIA was a fundamental change in the approach of
the Prov Leg to handling conflicts of interest in the municipal setting.
Its not a big deal to have a conflict of interest, its almost expected.
The conflict is not a problem, but you have to adhere to the rules.
19th century principle of disqualification was bullshit. Unrealistic.
New one has two concepts: disclosure and abstention.
MCIA is about OPTICS, not just outcomes:
It is of no consequence, in my opinion, what the nature of the
effect might be for his betterment or otherwise as long as it may
be seen by the public to affect that pecuniary interest.
....

34

The very purpose of the statute is to prohibit any vote by one

who has a pecuniary interest in the matter to be considered and voted
upon. It is only by strict observance of this prohibition that public
confidence will be maintained.
Re Greene and Borins (1985), 28 M.P.L.R. 251 (Div. Ct.)

Council Members Oath of Office:

Both Municipal Act, 2001 and City of Toronto Act, 2006 expressly
provide that a person cannot take a seat on council until the person
makes a declaration of office
Declaration of office is a standard form established by the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and Housing
Third declaration:
3.I will disclose any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in
accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.
Requirement to abide by the declaration is a personal obligation of
every member of council
The above is a declaration of the person before they are allowed to sit
in office.
At the VERY LEAST it means you should have read the act, and are
aware of it.
Direct interest
Is one that the member directly has. Potential interest does not
necessarily constitute an interest but where a party, without further
conduct on its part, stands to have its financial position affected, a
potential interest may be considered a pecuniary interest;
Moffat v Wetstein (1996)
When does the conflict crystallize in the members head?
Potential interest does not necessarily constitute

Indirect interest
Is where a member OR THEIR NOMINEE is a direcotor or a senior
officer of a public or private company, is a shareholder of a private
company, has a controlling interesting in a puvlic company (>10%), is
a member of a body [body is not a defined term], is a partner, or is
an employee of an entity with something coming up in front of council

35

to do anything with pecuniary repercussions, this is an indirect

interest.
is a director or senior officer of a public or private company
is a shareholder of a private company
has a controlling interest in a public company (>10%)
is a member of a body [body is not a defined term]
is a partner
is an employee
Deemed Interest
S.3 of MCIA
Direct or indirect interest of a spouse, child (regardless of age), or
parent is deemed to be the members own interest.
Exceptions:
a) as user of public utility;
b) entitlement to any service, subsidy, loan or benefit common to other
persons;
c) purchase or ownership of debenture;
d) deposit with municipality;
e) interest property affected by Drainage Act works or local
improvements;
f) interest in exempted farm lands;
g) eligibility for election to fill vacancy;
h) director or senior officer of municipal corporation;
i) regarding allowance, remuneration, salary or benefit for being a
member;
Heres a case Mr Mr is talking about where the mayor who
overspent his budget three years in a row. Now the councilors are
trying to get him to repay. Can he vote on the motion?
j) interest in common with electors generally;
k) remote or insignificant interest.

Interest in common with the electors

Greene v. Borins (1985), 28 M.P.L.R. 251 (Div. Ct.):
Council voted on development proposals for lands very close to
properties owned by councillors father
Divisional Court held that the properties were close enough to the
development that they would be affected by the development
The pecuniary interest of the member was held not to be an interest
in common with the electors generally since the familys parcel was of
a physical size and location as to readily lend itself to redevelopment,
a factor that distinguished it from the landholdings of individual
homeowners in the area
36

Factors militating against a finding of community of interest:

The member stands to enjoy personal profit not shared by other
members of the community;
There exists an indirect pecuniary interest in avoiding potential
competition;
A benefit to one group in the area may represent a detriment to others
in the same area, etc.
Summary: if the pecuniary interest of the member is different in kind,
not merely degree, from that of other ratepayers in the area under
discussion, the exception of interest in common will likely fail.
S. 1 of MCIA:
Interest in common with electors generally means a
pecuniary interest in common with the electors within the area of
jurisdiction and, where the matter under consideration affects only
part of the area of jurisdiction, means a pecuniary interest in common
with the electors within that part.
An interest in common generally does not always mean the entire
municipality.
To qualify for remote or insignificant interest the interest has to be so
indirect or trivial that it leads to the conclusion that potential personal
gain was NOT A MOTIVATING FACTOR in the members decision
making.
DArcey v. Mino (1991)
the fact that the value of the pecuniary interest is particularly small
does not relieve a member from compliance with the MCIA:
Moll v Fisher
Members of school board had spouses who were employed as
elementary school teachers voted on a secondary school contract.
members interests were not remote or insignificant as there was a
real connection between the two contracts, establishing a predictable
relationship between them
Whiteley v. Schnurr (1999), 4 M.P.L.R. (3d) 309 (Ont. S.C.J.):
Would a reasonable elector, being apprised of all the circumstances,
be more likely than not to regard the interest of the councillor as
likely to influence that councillors action and decision on the
question?
Necessary to consider all of the circumstances:
Amaral v. Kennedy (2012), 96 M.P.L.R. (4th) 49
Hazineh v. McCallion (2013), 11 M.P.L.R. (5th) 18

37

Craig v. Ontario (Attorney General) (2013), 15 M.P.L.R. (5th) 23

City of the mayor of Cambridge, was asked to bring a case in front of
the board to figure out if he should have recused himself.
Hazineh v McCallion
The argument was that the Councillor was really concerned with her
constituents, so thats why she went to the meeting.

Duty of Disclosure:
Arises AT THE MEETING at which the pecuniary interest is to be
discussed. Member must disclose the interest and the general nature
of the conflict. Absence from the meeting does not constitute a
declaration, you have to declare at the next meeting.
Disclosure must be precise
Kazowski v. Rexe, (1987) 38 M.P.L.R. 59
A councillor member disclosed that his uncle was the president of a
firm that was seeking a rezoning.
Member failed to mention that he would personally benefit from a
rezoning by receiving a finders fee if the property was sold, which
was in turn based upon the success of the rezoning application.
Member was found to have contravened the MCIA.
You must disclose even if you intend to vote against your own interest.
Re Jackson v Wall (1978)
A council member voted against a resolution approving a new arterial
road to relieve traffic on a street upon which he resided
Despite the fact that he voted against the motion (and seemingly on
its face, contrary to his own personal interest), the member had
breached the MCIA because he failed to declare an interest and voted
in the matter.
4 Obligations of Disclosure
1) Disclosure
2) Non-participation: YOU CANT EVEN TALK ABOUT IT. SILENCE,
BITCHEZ!
3) No Influence: member cannot in any way.
4) Must EXIT a closed meeting.: GTFO muthafucka

38

The Clerk or secretary is required to record in minutes of the meeting

(both open and closed) the declaration of the conflict and the record
of you leaving.
You have to keep disclosing. Every time. Like when youve had
herpes. *sigh*
You have to disclose the type of interest it is and give a few contextual
details.

Quorum
If a member is disqualified as a result of the Act, quorum is deemed to
be whoever is left. If its less than two, the council or local board may
apply to a judge for an order that they may consider the matter.

ct, indirect or deemed pecuniary interest in a matter being consid

Yes:

No: Consider the Matter

re there any exemptions in section 4 that may apply?

No:

Yes: Consider the matter.

ting: Do not attempt, in any way, to infuence the voting

ion of the matter, and the pecuniary interest and the general nature ther
ting: Do not attempt, in any way, to infuence the vote
Alleged Contravention
Within 6 weeks, an elector must bring a private application before a
judge of the Superior Court of Justice. REMEMBER THAT THIS IS
EXPENSIVE. Action can be brought against current or former
members. Ultimate limitation is 6 years from the date of
contravention, so you have to ask yourself when someone would
reasonably have had knowledge of the alleged contravention.

39

Hervey v Morris: he was deemed to have had reasonable access to the

knowledge that the contravention occurred WAY before he brought
the claim.

Penalties for Contravention under the MCIA

Considered punitive, as breach carries potential loss of democratic
rights; removal from office. Judge MUST declare seat vacant. Verdun
v Rupnow.
Member may be subject to the following:
Seat vacated.
Disqualification from holding office as a councillor for 7 years.
Restitution of the financial gain.
Member CANNOT be suspended.

Saving Provisions
OMG I didnt even realize! Sorry! Or, I made an error in judgement.
Right.
These provisions apply so that the members seat will not be vacated,
or they will not be disqualified. Restitution may be ordered if gain
resulted to the member or the former member from the contravention.

Appeals
S.11 of MCIA contains a very narrow right to appeal to the Ontario
Divisional Court from an ORDER under S.10. Very limited.
S.11(2) looks like only the respondent would be able to appeal
The Divisional Court may give any judgment that ought to have
been pronounced, in which case its decision is final, or the Divisional
Court may grant a new trial for the purpose of taking evidence or
additional evidence and may remit the case to the trial judge or
another judge and, subject to any directions of the Divisional Court,
the case shall be proceeded with as if there had been no appeal.
Standard of Review
Tuchenhagen v. Mondoux
Majority determined that broad language of s. 11(2) permitted
Divisional Court to hear appeal as hearing de novo given the
important and distinct role the MCIA plays in the accountability
framework for local government in Ontario

40

Amaral v. Kennedy
Unanimously preferred the dissenting opinion in Tuchenhagen:
Notwithstanding what might be regarded as invitational language
appeal courts refrain from hearing cases de novo
s. 11(2) of the MCIA does not justify a non-deferential approach to
the original decision
Mississauga Judicial Inquiry
Judicial inquiry requested by Mississauga City Council pursuant to s.
274 of Municipal Act, 2001
two broad areas to be investigated:
Enersource Hydro Mississauga shareholder agreement
conflict of interest involving Mayors son and failed attempt of his
company to acquire 8.5 acres of land in Mississauga city centre in
order to develop a hotel, convention centre and condominium
development
Updating the Ethical Infrastructure was released on October 4, 2011
Justice Cunninghams report:
the Municipal Conflict of interest Act (MCIA) does not constitute
a complete codification of the law governing conflicts of interest for
members of municipal council. The common law also applies. The
MCIA is restricted to pecuniary interests of members of council in the
deliberative and legislative contexts but the common law is much
broader and recognizes conflicts of interest involving non-pecuniary
interests.
Mayor McCallion did not breach her statutory duties under MCIA but
she did have a real personal conflict of interest and breached her
common law obligations
Hazineh v McCallion
Application brought by resident seeking to have Mayor removed for
violating the MCIA by voting on a matter that involved lower levels of
fees for her sons company.
Judge said she did it for the public interest. He said the history of the
matter shows that she was not trying to personally benefit her son,
she was trying to benefit Peel Region. Also the applicant did not file
within 6 weeks.
Magder v Ford
Intergrity Commissioner made a recommendation but not a ruling or
anything. Council then made a ruling to impose a penalty. Hackland
found there was a conflict of interest, especially because Ford
wouldnt pay back the money despite 6 letters from the integrity
commissioner.

41

Ontario Divisional Court said the council didnt have the authority to
impose repayment obligation on Ford, so overturned.

Planning and Land Use Regulation

A system of rights and entitlements respecting property. The
economic and social realities of the early 20th century made for a
conflicting demand for land in concentrated areas. Uncontrolled
development was rampant. How do you build and pay for proper
infrastructure?
Euclid Village v Ambler Reality 1926 US
This little village wanted to regulate a zoning by-law that dictated how
the land in Euclid was going to be used. Ambler had a bunch of land
that they wanted to use for reasons that would have made them a lot
of money.
TJ said this is a valid use of the municipal authority.
In Toronto there was a problem because there werent enough roads
or some shit.
S.92(13) delegates power of property and civil rights to the Provs.
The Feds still maintain their authority over navigable waters,
telecommunication, aviation, a whole bunch of things.
Provincial role in the Stat Authority to conduct land use planning
including
The Planning Act, Municipal Act, Greenbelt Act, Places to Grow Act,
Ontario Heritage Act, Environmental Protection Act, Development
Charges Act
Prov interest and Prov plans
Planning is not only a local function, land use regulation has not been
exclusively delegated to municipalities.
Planning act S.2: matters of provincial interest
S.3(1) policy statements such as: you cant have an adverse effect on a
marsh.
S.3(5) Decisions shall: be consistent with, which is a way higher
standard than have regard to.
Provincial Policy Statement: you have to conform with the Greenbelt
plan, or sometimes you have to not conflict with.

5 Key Players in Land Use Planning

1. The Landowner
Only a minimal amount of land development can occur without
obtaining an approval fro a municipality or approval authority.

42

2. The Municipality
Prepares policy documents known as Official Plans which guide future
growth. Also Implements Official Plans through zoning by-laws and
other by-laws.
3. The Province
EXCLUSIVE CONSTITUTIONAL JURISDICTION. If they want, they
can enact a Ministerial Zoning Order to do whatever they want, with
little or no warning.
4. The General Public
Land development is a public process. Public can influence political
decisions and appear at the OMB. Also, the public votes for council,
so if a councillor does too much shit that the public doesnt like they
dont get reelected.
5. The Ontario Municipal Board
Independent, quasi-judicial, administrative. The Municipal Act does
not allow for stalling. If someone wants to do something and the
municipality doesnt want them too, they can appeal immediately to
the OMB.
DOES NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW PRECEDENT. Like thats a good
thing?
Cloverdale Shopping Centre v Etobicoke (1966)
Concern was: Yorkdale didnt want them to build the mall.
Appeal: Sets out what the powers of the OMB are, and how they have
to sometimes make decisions that neither party really wants all that
much.
Simplified Development Approvals Process.
The simplified private land development application process under the
Planning Act for Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-Law
Amendments generally involves:
1. Complete Application: you have to describe completely how and
what your development is going to be. Shade, parking, trees, blah
blah blah.
2. Review, Discussion, Public Notice and Public Meeting
3. Municipal decision or lack of decision
4. Opportunity to appeal
5. Public notice of an OMB hearing
6. OMB Hearing
7. New decision
You can non-conform as long as you were grandfathered in.
Doesnt have to be the same use. Country bar, strip club, same diff.
You can expand the use.

43

Metropolitan Separate School Board v Scarborough 1988

About portables. School had portables on land for three years, city
wanted land back. School won because the three year agreement
wasnt under the rules the city had anyway, so they couldnt enforce
it.

Planning Act for Subdivisions

Central Goals:
Land Owner: Separate conveyable lots
Municipality: creation of a properly serviced community
including roads,
Parks, schools, and infrastructure.
Subdivision approval:
You have to build all the shit the city says. You need roads and
schools and all that stuff.
Permission to create conveyable lots with appropriate infrastructure.
A combination of a number of items: draft plan of the Subdivision,
condition of subdivision approval, subdivision agreement.
Consent to sever
If you want to buy a piece of land and then divide it, you need to have
consent. Its way easier than a subdivision.
Mills v York Land Division Committee 1975
Mills didnt want to pay the fee. It has to be materially connected to
the service youre getting for the fee. Mills had to pay the fee.
West Don Lands Case Study
Blah blah blah they made a bunch of fill with the subways and then
needed a whole mess of amendments and it was real boring and real
hard.

Land Use Planning

Heritage Protection and Application
Qualifies if it is of historical or valuable interest. Includes cultural
value now.
Importance in evaluated by attributes set out in the Heritage Act.
Usually status is afforded by way of formal designation.
Started in Kingston 1974 to protect some buildings. Other cities
caught on, til the province decided to make big legislation.

44

St. Peters Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Ottawa (City)

(S.C.C.):
The Ontario Heritage Act, 1974 was enacted to provide for the
conservation, protection and preservation of the heritage of Ontario.
There is no doubt that the Act provides for and the Legislature
intended that municipalities, acting under the provisions of the Act,
should have wide powers to interfere with individual property rights.
Zoning at its root has a societal and communal benefit. This is
something that gets repeated over and over.
Statutory mechanisms in the Ontario Heritage Act to provide for the
conservation of built heritage:
(i)Part IV designation of individual properties of cultural heritage
value of interest
(ii)Part V designation of heritage conservation districts
(iii)Sections 21 & 37 heritage easement agreements
(iv)Section 35.5 - building standards by-laws for designated heritage
properties
Bill 60 An Act to Amend the Ontario Heritage Act, received Royal
Assent in April, 2005
Intended to strengthen and improve heritage protection in Ontario
Most comprehensive amendments since the original Ontario Heritage
Act was first enacted in 1974
Result of consultative process which saw Bill 60 considered in
Committee over a number of months

What Qualifies for protection?

Real property that has cultural heritage, value or interest
Criteria for identification are set out in O. Reg. 9/06 (made under the
Ontario Heritage Act):
Design value or physical value its physical form
Historical value or associative value like Maple Leaf Gardens
Contextual value a little more amorphous
Must meet only one of the nine criteria to be a property with
cultural heritage, value or interest
Must meet one of the following 9 criteria
Design Value or Physical Value
1. The property has design value or physical value because it,
i. is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style,
type, expression, material or construction method,
ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or
iii. demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific
achievement.

45

Historical Value or Associative Value

2. The property has historical value or associative value because it,
i. Has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person,
activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community,
ii. Yields, or has the potential to yield, information that
contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or
iii. Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect,
artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community.
Contextual Value
3. The property has contextual value because it,
i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the
character of an area,
ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its
surroundings, or
iii. is a landmark. Like that guys lawn
Just because something is old, or famous, doesnt necessarily give it
cultural value.
Changes in the 2005 Legislation
Significant changes in the Ontario Heritage Act:
Retroactivity of designation
Registry of properties of cultural heritage value or interest
Finality of council decisions and restriction of appeals to the OMB
Ministers order (for designation)
Building standards by-law for designated heritage properties
In the old days there was no obligation to maintain the property. Now
you have to upkeep it. Sometimes you can get out of some of your
taxes to help pay for the maintenance.
Designation of Individual Properties
Set out in Part IV of the OHA
Prior to designation, municipality must give notice of intention to
designate to owner of property and to the Ontario Heritage Trust and
published in a local newspaper
Property owners have 30 days to file a notice of objection to the
proposed designation once notice has gone out you could still get a
demolition permit. Once notice has gone out, you have to behave
as though the designation has already happened. This is

46

HUGE. Might have been helpful for that church down the road,
amiright?
Once the notice is issued any permits previously issued are void
(including a building permit) - it is as though the designation process
were complete and the property had been designated
Notice Requirements
(a) an adequate description of the property so that it may be
readily ascertained;
(b) a statement explaining the cultural heritage value or interest
of the property;
(c) a statement that further information respecting the proposed
designation is available from the municipality; and
(d) a statement that notice of objection to the designation may
be served on the clerk within 30 days after the date of publication in
the municipality under clause 29(3)(b)
Off-notice search? You have to have a look to see if theyre going to
heritage your property.
Designation of Individual Properties
Objections are heard by Conservation Review Board (CRB) CRB is
very biased in favour of heritaging properties. Dont say something
like I dont want to pay for the upkeep, or this is too much trouble.
That probably isnt going to fly.
CRB is only an advisory tribunal it can only make recommendations
to a municipal council
CRB must report to council within 30 days of hearing
After considering CRB report, council must pass by-law to designate
property OR withdraw the notice of intention to designate
Council decision is final - no appeal to OMB
Restricted Appeal Rights
You can challenge if you think the municipality has done something
out of spite or to punish you as a property owner.
OHA also contains limited appeal rights where the municipality seeks
to repeal or amend the reasons for designation or where an
application to alter a designated property is made:
Referral to the CRB for a hearing
CRB reports to council within 30 days
After considering CRB report, council makes final decision
No requirement of subsequent public hearing prior to making
decision
No appeal to OMB

47

Planning Act
Application
Delegated Authority

Financial Administration
Municipal Act 2001 and Financial Admin
Section 2:
2. Municipalities are created by the Province of Ontario to be
responsible and accountable governments with respect to matters
within their jurisdiction and each municipality is given powers and
duties under this Act and many other Acts for the purpose of
providing good government with respect to those matters.
Sections 8 through 11 cover broad powers and spheres of
jurisdiction
Section 17 provides exceptions to broad powers regarding certain
financial matters
Section 17 provides the restrictions:
17. (1) Sections 9, 10 and 11 do not authorize a municipality to,
(a) impose taxes;
(b) borrow or invest money or sell debt;
(c) incur debt without borrowing money for the purpose of obtaining
long-term financing of any capital undertaking;
(d) enter into agreements for the purpose of minimizing costs or
financial risk associated with the incurring of debt;
(e) make a grant or a loan;
(f) take any other prescribed financial action;
(g) become a bankrupt under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act
(Canada); or
(h) as an insolvent person, make an assignment for the general
benefit of creditors under section 49 of the Bankruptcy and
Insolvency Act (Canada) or make a proposal under section 50 of that
Act.
Parts regarding finances:
General
Financial Administration Part VII
Municipal taxation Part VIII
Limitation on Taxes for Certain Property Classes Part IX
Tax collection - Part X
Sale of Land for Tax Arrears Part XI
Fees and charges Part XII
Debt and Investment Part XIII
48

Roles and Responsibilities

Council must appoint a treasurer
286. (1) A municipality shall appoint a treasurer who is responsible for
handling all of the financial affairs of the municipality on behalf of and
in the
manner directed by the council of the municipality, including
(a) collecting money payable to the municipality and issuing receipts
for those payments;
(b) depositing all money received on behalf of the municipality in a
financial institution designated by the municipality;
(c) paying all debts of the municipality and other expenditures
authorized by the municipality;
(d) maintaining accurate records and accounts of the financial affairs
of the municipality;
(e) providing the council with such information with respect to the
financial affairs of the municipality as it requires or requests;
(f) ensuring investments of the municipality are made in compliance
with the regulations made under section 418.
Council may appoint deputy treasurers who have all the
powers and duties of the treasurer (subsection 286(2))
The treasurer or deputy treasurer(s) are not required to
be employees of the municipality
Council may delegate to any person all or any of the
powers and duties of the treasurer under this or any
other Act with respect to the collection of taxes
(subsection 286(5))
The treasurer may continue to exercise the delegated
powers and duties, despite the delegation (subsection
286(6))
Section 296 provides for appointment of auditor, and
outlines duties and powers
(1) A municipality shall appoint an auditor licensed under the Public
Accounting Act, 2004 who is responsible for,
(a) annually auditing the accounts and transactions of the municipality
and its local boards and expressing an opinion on the financial
statements of these bodies based on the audit; and
(b) performing duties required by the municipality or local board.
Auditors term cannot be longer than 5 years
Auditor shall NOT be an employee of the municipality
Broad access to records and meetings
Auditor reports to Council

49

Financial Reporting
Audit conducted annually by auditor
294.1 every year, audited financial statements are to be
prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles for local governments as recommended, from time to
time, by the Public Sector Accounting Board of the Canadian
Institute of Chartered Accountants
Public reporting requirements section 295
Publish notice that statements are available
Make them available to any taxpayer at no cost
Subsection 294(1) requires the annual preparation of
a financial information return (FIR) in the form
required by MMAH and submit it to the ministry
What does MMAH do with the FIR? Goes on the website. You can
get all the municipal finance stuff from forever on the website. Pretty
cool.
Municipal Performance Measurement Program
(MPMP) financial and operating performance
(benchmarking)
There is also mandatory reporting on certain
reserves, like development charge reserves

Policy Framework
Municipalities are generally autonomous to make own
decisions, within legislative and policy framework
There are some restrictions
Section 106 no bonusing
Section 107 power to make grants
Section 270 requirement for procurement policies
Sections regarding investment policies Part XII
Requirements to establish budget, set tax rates, levy
taxes
Some provincial oversight
Financial reporting
Municipal Affairs Act
Provincial-Municipal Audit
Oversight
RARE
Ontario Municipal Board regarding debt level issues
This doesnt happen very often. If you get too close to your debt
ceiling, someone will call you up and shout at you.

50

Confirmation of Broad Municipal Authority

Heres the case blah blah blah
Section 106
Assistance prohibited copy from slides
Friends of Lansdowne Inc v Ottawa
Complex and multi-faceted partnership arrangement between Ottawa
and consorium of developers to revitatlize and redevelop Lansdowne
Park
Waterfall distribution of payments
Hackland J wrote a great decision
By-laws authorizing contractual arrangements challenged for beubg
ebacted

Ontario Superior Court of Justice and Court of Appeal

upheld the Citys by-law and found that there was no
breach of the anti-bonusing provision in section 106
Common law exemption complicated matrix of
covenants:
The commercial arrangement must be viewed as a
whole and the question asked as to whether the City
has conferred an obvious advantage on the private
developer which is not balanced by a concomitant
benefit to the City - Hackland J.
Nowak v Fort Erie
Some case about beach front property. Sigh
Tips and Tricks
Courts will permit the stucturen of reciprocal public/private
agreemtns that allocate mutual risks and benefits.
Complicated matrix of covenants is a form of exemption to the
municipal anti-bonusing provision. It allows the by-laws to talk to
each other. If you screw it up, your decisions will be found outside
your authority.
Section 107

51

Is subject to S.106. Genearl power to make grnats subject to the

section that says you cant give grants.
Property Assessment and Taxation
Municipalities raise money through taxation
Assessment Act is totally different from the Municipal Act
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation
Created by legislation
Board of Directors combination of municipal, provincial, and
taxpayer appointees
Responsibility to assess every property in Ontario
Its slow, but it has improved.
The Assessment Act sets out the legislative framework for property
assessment.
MPAC must produce assessment roll for each municipality, provide to
each municipal cleark no later than the second Tuesday following Dec
1 in the year in which the assessment is made (S>36)
The roll lists the owner, property description, size of property, roll
number, classification of the land and assessed value of each property
in the municipality = amounts liable to taxation and amounts exempt
from taxation
Hospitals, churches, educational institutions, whole bunch of
exemptions.
S.340 of Municipal Act Treasurer is to prepare a tax roll based on
the last returned assessment roll for the year.
Treasurer takes the roll, converts it into the tax roll, and certifies it.
Once prepared and certified ,the T uses it to collect taxes.
S.341 addresses adjustments. If something burns down, if theres an
appeal, if theres anything that changes the property, the T has to
change the roll throughout the year.
S.7 of the Assessment Act
Classes of property: residential, multi-residential, Commercial,
industrial, pipeline, farm
S.8 is subclasses for tax reductions. There are very particular
considerations for knowing what is what.
How Property Taxes get Calculated - Used to be easy, now it is hard.
Part VIII of the Municipal Act
Tax ratio = different from a tax rate. You multiply your assessment by
the tax rate and thats your tax.
The ratio is a representation of the distribution of the tax burden
across types of property.
Residential = 1

52

The province came out and said there was a range of fairness. Its a
balance between the municipalities and how much money they need,
and all the lobbying they receive from big business lobbies.
On-line Property Tax Analysis System tax modelling and tax shift
analysis tool.
A GIFT from the Province! Wow! Such generous! Very internet.
Every class is in OPTAS every year. Its basically a manipulation
matrix to see where the burden is and how much money will be
generated.
Requirements regarding limitations on year over year tax increases.
Take-home rule: if someone asks you about this, ask someone else.

Tax Collection:
OMG PAY YOUR FUCKING TAXES
Part X of the Municipal Act
Letters and phone calls if you dont pay. At 3 years there are things
called Tax Sales.
MA S.2(1), S.2(2), S.3
In addition to taxes, there are certain charges that are owed the city
that can be collected at an eventual time. Priority Lien Status: the
ultimate recovery mechanism that allows the Municipality to get their
money
Property tax bills.
1st by-law of the year permits temp borrowing from the bank. Second
bill is a by-law authorizing the city to charge up to half of what the
year previous was. Just for cash flow.
Content and form of tax bill are legislated under S.343, Minister of
Finance may prescribe form S.344
Regions dont send out tax bills, it the lower tier and single-tier.
Education tax rates are set by the provs and they are collected by the
lower/single tiers as well.
Must have a by-law authorizing instalments.
After 3 years, the process can be started CAN BE STARTED,
sometimes there are good reasons to leave it alone - with the
registration of a tax arrears certificate on the title to the property,
setting out the outstanding amount of taxes owing and the cost to
bring the account up to date.
They figure out how much it would cost to get the money owed, and
thats the Cancellation Price.
Once you have that, you have to give notice within 60 days.
During the one year registration period Council can pass a by-law to
enter into an extension agreement with the owner (or other person
53

with interest) to extend the time to pay the cancellation price (S.378)
This is a good idea because some people are temporarily poor.
Cannot reduce the cancellation price, cannot prohibit any person from
paying the cancellation price at any time. Just gives them more time.
If during the one year period the amount is paid, thats it. If not, the
city can carry out a Tax Sale. Auction or tender. Tender is the most
common. This is a public process. Minimum amount is usually the
cancellation price.
Lots of notices and form obligations. If the bid is for more than its
worth, the city gets their money and the rest goes to court. There, a
creditor can apply to get the money. You ask for the rest after a year.
If no bids are received or if no qualified bids are received, the
municipality has one year to decide if it wants the property or not.
This is important because in the old days, if there was no qualified
bid, the property vested in the city automatically.
Very long conversation about the tax sale process. Pretty unfair.
If you want a Request for Reconsideration you HAVE TO APPEAL BY
31 MARCH of the next year.
You can appeal the appeal! 90 days following the RfR decision.
Parties to an appeal:
Property owner/tenant
MPAC
Municipality
Types of disputes:
Assessed value too high
Assessed value is incorrect
Incorrect school support
Incorrect person on roll
Property classification is incorrect
Payment in Lieu of Taxes
What is it? Govt owned properties dont pay taxes, but they do pay
PIL. To represent what tax payments WOULD have been had the
property been fully taxable.
Discretionary they dont have to pay it.
Halifax v Canada
Feds said the Citadel was worthless. Hali took them to court.
Court said the Ministers decision that the Citadel was worth $10 was
unreasonable.

54

Mississauga v Canada
Whether the property was federal property or not because it was
leased to the GTAA and then sub-leased to private businesses. Subtenants defaulted. The result???

Municipal Budgets
REQUIRED under S.290 of the Municipal Act.
Most municipalities start partway through the year before. Mostly
done by November. Meetings, policy priorities, etc etc. Lots of work.
MPAC needs to pay for itself, so they charge municipalities whatever
they think their share is.
Operating v. Capital budget.
Fees and Charges
S.391 of the Municipal Act (part 12) permits imposing fees and
charges.
S.391(5) says that if there is a conflict between a fee or charge by-law
and the Municipal Act or any other act or regulation, the fees and
charges by-law prevails.
Enbridge v Toronto
Toronto wanted money for digging up sidewalks. Enbridge said this is
NO FAIR. Court said Enbridge was full of shit. Upheld the by-law.

55