Advocates push Ontario council to apologize after women arrested holding signs

Global News

16 hours ago

An Ontario municipality is facing the threat of a legal challenge and calls to apologize after advocates were removed from its council chambers and arrested for holding signs.
On June 17, three members of the group Women of Ontario Say No attended a Niagara Falls council meeting, hoping to talk about a proposed provincial law and the conduct of municipal councillors.
Specifically, they wanted to discuss gaining local support for legal changes that would put sitting councillors facing criminal charges on a paid leave.
The city, however, said it would not hear their delegation, suggesting it related to an ongoing legal matter. The advocates then sat in the council chamber, with signs printed on card stock which said, 'Women of Ontario Say No.'
Niagara Falls officials say they asked the women to put their signs down and called the police. Officers arrested the trio and eventually released them without charge.
Story continues below advertisement
Now, the group — which has long called for stricter local accountability at councils — is threatening to take legal action against Niagara Falls if they are not allowed to present to councillors.
They're also calling for an apology.
Denied delegation
Emily McIntosh, the founder of Women of Ontario Say No, said her group wanted to appear at a Niagara Falls council meeting to seek support for their changes to the rules that govern councillors.
The group, which has made presentations to various city councils over the year, said it wanted to talk about the possibility of changes to provincial legislation to put any councillor charged with a criminal offence on a paid leave of absence until a court decides on the charges.
The Women of Ontario Say No were told they could not present at the meeting, although they were allowed to submit written statements if they chose.
Story continues below advertisement
'The municipality cited ongoing court proceedings; it is my understanding that currently there is a councillor who has been charged with domestic assault,' McIntosh said.
'But that is not a reason to exclude productive dialogue and democratic engagement when it comes to legislative change that would benefit all Ontarians.'
Niagara Falls Coun. Mike Strange was charged with domestic assault on May 3, according to media reports.
In response to questions about Strange from Global News, Niagara Regional Police said they had charged a 54-year-old man with domestic assault on May 3, but did not name him. Strange did not respond to written questions ahead of publication.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
Despite the delegation request being denied by the Niagara Falls council, three members of Women of Ontario Say No attended a June 17 meeting with small placards showing the name of the group.
They sat with them in the chamber — something a report written by city staff alleges created 'an unsafe, unwelcoming, undemocratic and uncivil situation.'
St. Catharines Coun. Haley Bateman was one of the three women attending the meeting and holding the signs. She said the advocates were quiet and did not wave their signs.
'It was peaceful, there should be no reason why a sign — an 8.5 by 11 piece of card stock with 'The Women of Ontario Ontario Say No' — should have been intimidating or threatening to them at all,' she said.
Story continues below advertisement
'We sat there peacefully, we didn't approach, we didn't get out of our seats, we didn't shake our signs.'
Officers with Niagara Regional Police were called. The City of Niagara Falls would not confirm to Global News who called the police, but CAO Jason Burgess said it was 'staff's decision.'
Police said they received the call around 4:15 p.m. on June 17 and told the advocates they would be in violation of trespassing laws if they did not leave.
'Following a prolonged discussion, three adult females continued to display their signs and were briefly detained by police,' a spokesperson for Niagara Regional Police told Global News.
'They were escorted from council chambers and off City property. The individuals were released unconditionally after the City declined to proceed with formal charges.'
Burgess said the city was 'attempting to get compliance' and therefore was not looking to press charges.
Legal letter
After the arrests and deputation denial, the Women of Ontario Say No retained a lawyer, who wrote to both Niagara Regional Police and Niagara Falls City Council.
Story continues below advertisement
In her letter to councillors, lawyer Susan Toth said the women at the June 17 meeting had been 'exercising their lawful right,' holding signs that 'were neither offensive nor derogatory.'
The letter called for council to allow the presentation to go ahead and to issue an apology and admission of wrongdoing.
In a report to council, city staff said they would allow the Women of Ontario Say No to submit written information to the council meeting and to protest outside the council building — but not in the room where meetings take place.
'The group has opposed Staff's enforcement of the decorum policy, and more specifically, of the conditions that signs with messages not be held up inside chambers, and that legal matters outside council's jurisdiction not be spoken to as part of the deputation,' part of the staff report said.
Toth said she didn't accept the city's position.
'Frankly, they're just not on solid legal ground,' she said. 'You don't get to pick and choose when the rule of law is convenient to you. You don't get to pick and choose when you like charter rights to what it looks like.'
Provincial policy
The Women of Ontario Say No wanted to present to councillors about provincial legislation which, if passed, will make it easier to remove municipal councillors found guilty of serious violations.
Story continues below advertisement
Removal would have to be recommended by integrity commissioners and would ultimately be approved by a unanimous vote of councillors.
Allowing colleagues to make the final decision on the punishment for councillors who face removal is a gap, the group argues, pointing to Strange's continued presence at Niagara Falls council as an example.
'If this was the judicial system and we were looking at a case there, no council person would qualify to be a juror because the bias is so strong,' McIntosh said.
'So when we're looking at this legislative development, it's not just about getting it done, it's about making sure that it's done right and we're modelling it off of best practices. And (Niagara Falls) is a great example as to why it would not be appropriate for a decision like that to come back to council.'
Neither the current Municipal Act nor the proposed new policy automatically deals with what councillors facing criminal charges should do. Strange has been charged. The allegations against him have not been proven.
A spokesperson for Ontario's Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing said the government had carefully considered its legislation.
'Removal from office is a serious measure, reserved for the most extreme code of conduct violations, and safeguarded by a high threshold and thorough review to ensure it is never taken lightly,' they wrote in a statement.
Story continues below advertisement
Upcoming meeting
Niagara Falls City Council will meet again on Tuesday, July 8, and members of the Women of Ontario Say No intend to attend.
The city told Global News it would be telling anyone going to the meeting to 'acknowledge the rules and confirm that they are not going to undertake behavior that will be against the written rules.'
Burgess said, if police are called again, 'the City may take a different stand on whether to formally press charges.'
Bateman said the move was 'laughable' and said advocates would likely be there again.
'Oh how ridiculous of them, that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard,' she said of requiring an acknowledgement before entering the chamber. 'I can't even imagine what the thought process is on this.'