QuickLinks
Municipal Investigation Reports
Reports appear in order of date posted (most recently posted appear first). When multiple reports are posted on the same date, the reports within that grouping are in alphabetical order.
Note: A web version of a report may have been edited from the original version.
Reports are available in alternate formats upon request.
-
Rural Municipality of Harrison Park: Case MO-02594 – 2024-06-11
Three residents in the Rural Municipality (RM) of Harrison Park complained to our office that a council member of the Rural Municipality of Harrison Park violated The Municipal Council Conflict of Interest (MCCOI) Act by participating in council discussions and decisions on short-term rental conditional use permit applications. We investigated whether the council member had a conflict of interest and whether the RM’s response to the complaints was reasonable. Our investigation did not find evidence of maladministration. We did not find evidence to confirm a direct or indirect pecuniary conflict of interest existed. The council member subject of this complaint took reasonable steps and made good faith efforts to assess compliance with The MCCOI Act. We also found the RM’s actions and decisions to be reasonable and consistent with applicable policies and laws.
case-mo-02594-final-report-en.pdfDownload
234 KB
-
Village of Dunnottar: Case 2019-0574 – 2022-05-06
An individual was concerned that a decision made by the Village of Dunnottar's council to close part of a meeting to the public did not comply with the Municipal Act. The municipality informed us that it closed the meeting to discuss preliminary negotiations it was involved in. We were not satisfied that council had the authority to discuss this matter in a closed session. The Village of Dunnottar accepted our recommendation that no subject should be discussed in a closed session unless it clearly comes within the Municipal Act exceptions to the open meeting requirement. We also recommended that the municipality start writing closed session minutes, but council did not accept this recommendation.
case-2019-0574-en.pdfDownload
268.58 KB
-
City of Winnipeg: Case 2018-0313 – 2022-01-11
A Winnipeg resident applied for permission to construct a driveway that did not conform to one of the rules for driveways in Winnipeg’s Private Access By-law. The bylaw allows the community committee for each area to approve an application even when a proposed driveway does not meet the rules. Ultimately the resident submitted three applications to the city, paying the application fee three times. His application was approved after his third attempt, despite the fact that it was the same proposal that he had submitted on his second attempt, which had been denied. The resident complained to our office that his application was treated unfairly by the community committee and the city. The ombudsman found that there were different interpretations of the Private Access By-law among city entities and that the resident did not receive reasons for the second denial of his application. The ombudsman recommended that the city review the bylaw and develop a common interpretation of the relevant provision, that community committees deliver verbal reasons for decisions and record them in minutes and that the city refund one of the application fees paid by the resident.
case-2018-0313-en.pdfDownload
415.16 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Lac du Bonnet: Cases 2019-0283 and 2019-0284 – 2022-01-11
A property owner in the RM of Lac du Bonnet, whose property was adjacent to public reserve land in the municipality, was concerned about snowmobilers using his property and the public reserve to access the Lee River. The property owner raised concerns about snowmobile activity with the RM, but believed that the RM had not treated his concerns fairly. In this case, the ombudsman concluded that while the RM has no obligation to enforce the Off-Road Vehicles Act (the RCMP enforces the act in this area), the RM has an obligation to set expectations and rules for snowmobile use in the area, given that it markets itself as a “four-season playground.” The ombudsman recommended that the RM work with the local RCMP detachment to create a safer and more compliant environment for snowmobiling and also that the RM review plans and bylaws of other municipalities that regulate snowmobile use and consider how such practices could apply in the RM.
cases-2019-0283-0284-en.pdfDownload
442.76 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Rockwood: Case 2018-0311 – 2022-01-11
Property owners contacted our office about actions and decisions of the RM of Rockwood related to music festivals and retreats held on adjacent agricultural zoned land. The RM issued temporary development permits for the events but did not enforce noise restrictions outlined in the permit conditions. The ombudsman concluded that if the RM was stipulating conditions in its temporary development permits, it should take steps to ensure it has the ability to enforce all conditions on behalf of its residents. The ombudsman recommended that the RM put in place a framework to guide decision making related to deploying enforcement resources and it should post the framework on its website. The property owners also believed that there may have been a conflict of interest on the part of a council member because his spouse publicly supported these events. While there was no financial gain for the council member or his spouse, there may have been the perception of a conflict of interest. The ombudsman suggested that the RM ensure its elected officials are aware of their responsibilities under its Council Members’ Code of Conduct Policy and that it consider further training in this area.
case-2018-0311-en.pdfDownload
470.10 KB
-
City of Winnipeg, Handi-Transit Service: Case 2016-0057 – 2019-01-08
A complaint about the City of Winnipeg’s Handi-Transit Service was received from the Independent Living Resource Centre, a Winnipeg-based organization that supports people with disabilities, many of whom use the transit service. The ombudsman found that in many instances, Handi-Transit provides a reasonably equivalent service to fixed-route transit, but in certain areas falls short. The report includes 19 recommendations to improve the service.
case-2016-0057-en.pdfDownload
1.47 MB
-
Municipality of North Cypress-Langford: Case 2016-0228 – 2018-12-17
We received a complaint about a decision by the Municipality of North Cypress-Langford to approve multiple staff dwellings on an agriculturally zoned property. We determined that the municipality had the authority to approve the staff dwellings; however, we noted that the municipality did not have specific criteria to consider when assessing applications for accessory use buildings or structures. Having such criteria would help identify the factors council considered and applied in making its decision. The complainant further believed that the property owners did not have a conditional use permit for their home-based business, which sells items produced off-site. Our office is of the view that in accordance with the municipality’s zoning by-law, conditional use approval is required for the home-based business. At the conclusion of our investigation, our office made three recommendations to the municipality.
case-2016-0228-en.pdfDownload
273.32 KB
-
City of Winnipeg Parking Authority: Case 2017-0313 – 2018-05-16
A citizen whose licence plates were stolen complained to our office after receiving a parking ticket issued to a vehicle bearing the stolen plates. The citizen tried to appeal the ticket but missed the deadline for doing so even though she followed instructions provided to her by the City of Winnipeg’s 311 service. The Winnipeg Parking Authority advised her that it could not reconsider the parking violation and that the $100 fine must be paid. Our office found that the 311 service did not provide complete information about how to address the parking violation, which raised an issue of administrative fairness. We made four recommendations to the parking authority and it advised our office that it has taken steps to implement the recommendations, including waiving the $100 fine.
case-2017-0313-en.pdfDownload
623.82 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Whitemouth: Case 2014-0164 – 2018-01-08
A group of citizens in the Rural Municipality of Whitemouth (the RM) complained about the RM’s decision to rebuild the Water Street Bridge. Specifically, the complainants alleged that there was a lack of public consultation regarding the project and inadequate information for ratepayers. They also alleged that the RM did not follow its purchasing/procurement policy, did not have the authority to reallocate Disaster Financial Assistance (DFA) funds and that a councillor was in a conflict of interest situation. Our office found that the RM did undertake the proper procedures in approving the project and providing public consultation opportunities. We did not find maladministration with respect to conflict of interest in a vote by a specific councillor. However, we did conclude there were issues related to following the purchasing/procurement policies and a lack of clarity in the use of DFA funding for the bridge. Our office made four recommendations to the RM of Whitemouth.
case-2014-0164-en.pdfDownload
694.25 KB
-
City of Flin Flon: Case 2016-0412 – 2017-12-19
The City of Flin Flon billed a property owner over $10,000 for waterline repairs and later adjusted the amount owing to approximately $2,700. The property owner made a complaint to our office about the city’s authority to assess costs and the amount billed to him. While the City of Flin Flon has the authority to bill property owners for repairs to waterlines, we found that the city did not communicate changes to its waterline repair billing policy to citizens. It also did not provide the property owner with sufficient information about how the invoice amount was determined or about the extent and location of waterline repairs. We made a number of recommendations to improve administrative practices and to ensure citizens are treated fairly. The City of Flin Flon advised our office that it will implement our recommendations.
case-2016-0412-en.pdfDownload
434.09 KB
-
Municipality of Swan Valley West : Case 2017-0078 – 2017-12-19
A resident of the Municipality of Swan Valley West complained to our office that the municipality was violating sections of the Municipal Council Conflict of Interest Act (MCCIA) with respect to the tendering and purchasing of goods, the declaration of conflicts, the annual statements councillors are required to provide with respect to assets, and the management and production of records. We found that the municipality did not breach the act with respect to the production of records or its tendering and purchasing policy. Issues with respect to the filing of the annual statements of assets were related to amalgamation challenges in 2015. We concluded that the municipality did breach the MCCIA with respect to the declaration of conflicts; however, the breach resulted from an oversight on the part of the municipality and has now been corrected.
case-2017-0078-en.pdfDownload
556.52 KB
-
RM of Rosser: Cases 2016-0156 and 2016-0157 – 2017-10-25
We received complaints about a decision by council in the RM of Rosser to re-open its August 11, 2015 council meeting in order to pass a resolution in accordance with the Municipal Act approving the absence of the reeve at three consecutive council meetings. This resulted in procedural irregularities that contravened certain requirements in the RM’s procedures by-law. As a result, we recommended that if the RM council wants to suspend requirements in its procedures by-law it should vote on the suspension of the by-law at a council meeting and minutes should clearly indicate which by-law requirements council chose to suspend. We also suggested that the RM develop a formal procedure to track attendance of council members at meetings. The RM accepted our recommendation and administrative suggestion.
case-2016-0156-en.pdfDownload
430.60 KB
-
RM of Springfield: Case 2014-0379 – 2017-10-25
A group of residents complained about water quality and capacity issues in the RM of Springfield. Specifically, the complainants were concerned about the operation of gravel pits close to the source of the Oak Bank/Dugald municipal water system, improper decommissioning of the Hillside Road landfill in 1997 and inadequate planning for increasing the capacity of the Oak Bank/Dugald water supply system to meet the ongoing needs of current and projected users. Throughout the course of our investigation, the RM took action to resolve the issues that that were raised and is taking steps to develop a comprehensive water supply plan.
case-2014-0379-en.pdfDownload
727.80 KB
-
RM of Hanover: Case 2015-0094 – 2017-05-25
A property owner complained to us about the Rural Municipality of Hanover’s decision to enforce an emergency clean-up of her property and bill her for the cost. Debris had been piled on the municipal road by a landscaping company hired by the property owner. The municipality considered the debris a hazard that needed to be immediately removed, and as such, we found that it was authorized to charge the property owner for removal of the debris. However, under the municipality’s litter by-law an individual was only liable to a fine upon a summary conviction. In this case, the time frame to take such legal action had expired. We recommended that the municipality rescind the offence notice fine, which it agreed to do.
case-2015-0094-en.pdfDownload
542.02 KB
-
Local Government District of Pinawa: Case 2015-0086 – 2016-12-01
Concern that a business located in a residential building in the Local Government District of Pinawa was contravening home occupation requirements in the LGD’s zoning by-law. Recommendation made.
case-2015-0086-en.pdfDownload
357.78 KB
-
RM of Franklin and Manitoba Sustainble Development: Cases 2013-0297 and -0298 – 2016-12-01
Concerns about the response of the Rural Municipality of Franklin and Manitoba Sustainable Development to overland flooding. Complaints not supported.
case-2013-0297-0298-en.pdfDownload
962.46 KB
-
RM of Sifton (Town of Oak Lake): Case 2012-0196 – 2016-12-01
Concern about the manner in which the Town of Oak Lake (RM of Sifton) removed and demolished a trailer from the property of the complainant. Recommendations made.
case-2012-0196-en.pdfDownload
608.82 KB
-
RM of St. Andrews: Cases 2014-0402, -0403, -0404 and -0405 – 2016-12-01
Concerns about approval of a 20-lot subdivision in the RM of St. Andrews and notice of the public hearing for the subdivision. Complaints not supported; administrative improvement suggested.
cases-2014-0402-0403-0404-0405-en.pdfDownload
949.35 KB
-
City of Winnipeg Handi-Transit: Case 2012-0358 – 2016-04-27
We received four unrelated written complaints from individuals who believed their eligibility for Handi-Transit service was unfairly assessed. While the individual complaints were ultimately resolved, we investigated broader issues raised regarding the Handi-Transit application and appeal process. As a result of our investigation, Handi-Transit implemented administrative changes to improve the fairness of its decision-making process and its written communication with applicants, including: providing written reasons in its decision letters to ineligible applicants; advising unsuccessful applicants in writing that if an applicant wishes to provide new information related to eligibility, Handi-Transit will accept the new information and then decide whether a reassessment, additional information, or a new application is required; and providing an appellant a copy of the functional assessment report the Handi-Transit Appeal Hearing Body considers at the hearing.
case-2012-0358-en.pdfDownload
1.28 MB
-
Red River Planning District: Case 2015-0040 – 2016-04-27
We received a complaint from a property owner in the RM of St. Clements alleging that the Red River Planning District (RRPD) handled his subdivision application unfairly. The property owner’s application to subdivide his parcel of land was conditionally approved by the RM’s council. However the RRPD board, which is the approving authority, rejected the application. The property owner believed that the RRPD did not provide him with sufficient notification of the board meeting and that the board did not provide him with meaningful reasons for its decision. While we concluded that the RRPD did not breach any statutory requirements regarding meeting notification or the provision of reasons, we did suggest that the RRPD revise its online information about the subdivision process and that it provide meaningful reasons to applicants.
case-2015-0040-en.pdfDownload
618.60 KB
-
RM of Armstrong: Case 2014-0515 – 2016-04-27
We received a complaint from a property owner in the RM of Armstrong. The property owner had received a compliance order from the RM requiring her to clean-up her property, and she explained to us that she did so prior to the prescribed deadline. She further explained that the RM visited her property several months later, took material away, and issued her a bill for $630. We were unable to determine whether an inspection occurred or whether the property was cleaned-up by the deadline as the RM does not have any record of inspecting the property within a reasonable time following the deadline. In our view it was unfair for the RM to wait approximately three months to enforce the compliance order without further notifying the complainant that she was contravening the order. We made four recommendations to the RM. As a result of our investigation, the RM decided to cancel the clean-up charges. The RM indicated that it will also amend its policy for dealing with unsightly property in order to improve record-keeping and set reasonable time frames for enforcement of compliance orders.
case-2014-0515-en.pdfDownload
1.62 MB
-
RM of De Salaberry: Case 2013-0222 – 2015-12-10
Eight individuals complained about the process by which a new sewage system was approved in the RM of De Salaberry. In dispute were a number of issues including the validity of a petition referenced in the project documentation, the adequacy of notice provided for the public hearing, the accuracy of information provided to taxpayers by the RM at the public hearing, and the accuracy of the information provided by the RM to the Municipal Board for final approval of the project. It was also alleged that the borrowing by-law to fund this project was defeated and that two council members were in conflicts of interest when they participated in debates and voted on the new sewage system. We supported the complaint that the RM did not fulfill all of its statutory obligations and we issued nine recommendations to the RM.
case-2013-0222-en.pdfDownload
1.14 MB
-
RM of West St. Paul: Case 2013-0391 – 2015-12-10
We received complaints alleging that a councillor with the RM of West St. Paul failed to comply with legislation and RM policy regarding conflicts of interest in relation to the tendering and construction of a new Fire Hall for the RM as well as other matters. We found that the RM did not provide a fair tendering process for this project and that the councillor failed to follow the statutory requirements and RM policy regarding conflicts of interest. We also found that RM council did not meet its obligation to ensure council members followed legislative provisions and RM policy regarding conflicts of interest. We made four recommendations to the RM.
case-2013-0391-en.pdfDownload
916.62 KB
-
Local Government District of Pinawa: Case 2014-0252 – 2015-06-22
A property owner complained that the Local Government District (LGD) of Pinawa unfairly denied her request to be reimbursed for a portion of the charges she incurred for multiple sewer line inspections and repairs. The individual also questioned whether an increase in property tax assessment was related to her disagreement with the LGD. The ombudsman found that the LGD followed applicable legislation, policies and procedures regarding the complainant’s sewer line repairs and that the property tax assessment increase was not affected by the complainant’s sewer dispute with the LGD. The ombudsman also identified two administrative changes that, if implemented, would improve the LGD’s administrative practices regarding property owner requests for reimbursement.
case-2014-0252-en.pdfDownload
538.65 KB
-
RM of St. Clements and Red River Planning District: Case 2013-0069 – 2015-06-22
Property owners complained that the Red River Planning District and the Rural Municipality of St. Clements handled their subdivision application unfairly. The RM delayed making a decision about the subdivision application (despite having approved similar requests in the past) on the basis that an anticipated secondary development plan would provide guidance on such matters. The secondary plan, however, had not yet been finalized, so after a two year delay, the RM approved the subdivision application, which was then subsequently denied by the planning district. The property owners appealed the decision to the Municipal Board and the appeal is still ongoing. The ombudsman found that the subdivision application was not treated consistently with how other similar applications were treated, and that the property owners experienced an inordinate and excessive delay. The ombudsman suggested that the planning district and RM review the process by which they deal with subdivision applications in the interest of providing better customer service, and that the RM develop a policy that sets out when, how and for what period a subdivision application may be tabled. The RM agreed to develop a policy, and the planning district explained that it is revising its brochures to ensure that the subdivision process and procedures are clear to the public.
case-2013-0069-en.pdfDownload
442.07 KB
-
Winnipeg Fire Paramedic Service: Case 2014-0070 – 2015-06-22
An individual contacted our office about an invoice she received from the Winnipeg Fire Paramedic Service (WFPS) for costs WFPS had incurred by hiring a private company to secure a fire-damaged garage. The individual did not believe that the contractor carried out work on her property, nor did she believe that WFPS adequately responded to her concerns about the invoice. After our office contacted WFPS, they found that the work described on the contractor’s invoice had not been done. WFPS refunded the individual the full invoiced amount and has implemented administrative improvements. The ombudsman found that WFPS gave reasonable consideration to this matter and administrative improvements implemented should help to prevent future complaints of this nature.
case-2014-0070-en.pdfDownload
434.58 KB
-
City of Winnipeg - Board of Adjustment: Case 2011-0064 – 2015-02-10
Complaint that the city’s Board of Adjustment rejected a variance application without explaining why it believed the application did not meet the criteria for approving variances, as set out in The City of Winnipeg Charter.
case-2011-0064-en.pdfDownload
107.34 KB
-
Town of The Pas: Case 2013-0414 – 2015-02-10
Complaint that the town used special tax revenues it had collected for purposes other than destination marketing.
case-2013-0414-en.pdfDownload
149.23 KB
-
City of Winnipeg: Case 2013-0185 – 2014-07-18
Complaint that the city's 311 service would not provide the identity of real property owners, even though this information is available at public access computers at designated city locations.
case-2013-0185-en.pdfDownload
153.50 KB
-
City of Winnipeg: Case 2013-0381 – 2014-07-18
Complaint that street work adjacent to a restaurant resulted in lost income when access to the premises was restricted, and that construction and tree roots caused damage to a parking lot.
case-2013-0381-en.pdfDownload
155.82 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Alexander: Case 2011-0555 – 2014-07-18
Complaint that the RM failed to properly manage a local improvement plan for construction of a shoreline protection barrier and did not adequately respond to the concerns of affected cottagers.
case-2011-0555-en.pdfDownload
722.08 KB
-
Rural Municipality of De Salaberry: Case 2013-0250 – 2014-07-18
Complaint that a council member of the RM authorized a road repair expenditure without the authority to do so and that an elected official treated the complainant unfairly.
case-2013-0250-en.pdfDownload
81.22 KB
-
Rural Municipality of St. Andrews: Case 2013-0303 – 2014-07-18
Complaint that a public hearing for a conditional use application to operate a dog kennel was procedurally unfair.
case-2013-0303-en.pdfDownload
123.45 KB
-
City of Winnipeg: Case 2010-0526 – 2014-04-29
A complainant believed the City of Winnipeg’s practice of adding the unpaid water bills of tenants to the property taxes of the owner of the real property (the landlord) was unfair.
case-2010-0526-web-version-en.pdfDownload
116.83 KB
-
City of Winnipeg: Cases 2009-0469 and 2010-0081 – 2014-04-29
A complainant alleged that the process by which the City of Winnipeg re-designated sections of Plessis Road and Grassie Boulevard to a non-truck route was unfair. A second complainant raised general concerns with the way the City of Winnipeg establishes and deletes truck routes.
cases-2009-0469-2010-0081-web-version-en.pdfDownload
114.91 KB
-
Selkirk and District Planning Area Board: Case 2013-0138 – 2014-04-29
Property owners in the Rural Municipality of St. Clements complained that the Selkirk and District Planning Area Board (now Red River Planning District) unfairly revoked their building permits a year after the permits were issued and after construction of their home commenced. The complainants alleged that the planning board did not provide an explanation for its decision to revoke the permits.
case-2013-0138-web-version-en.pdfDownload
95.41 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Alexander: Case 2012-0369 – 2013-12-06
A resident of the Rural Municipality of Alexander complained that the RM had failed to correctly interpret and adequately enforce provisions of the municipal Zoning By-Law 08/98 and By-Law 06-12. As a result, the complainant incurred costs to obtain a land survey demonstrating a neighbour’s lack of compliance with the by-laws. Based on the evidence disclosed by the investigation, the ombudsman found that the complainant had been treated unreasonably and recommended that the RM compensate the complainant for the cost of obtaining a land survey.
case-2012-0369-web-version-en.pdfDownload
99.38 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Macdonald: Case 2012-0213 – 2013-12-06
A landowner in the Rural Municipality of Macdonald complained that the RM had unfairly denied two variances required for the subdivision of his land. The complainant also believed that the public hearing held to consider his variance requests was procedurally unfair because he was not advised as to when the vote on his variance applications would take place.
case-2012-0213-web-version-en.pdfDownload
88.68 KB
-
Rural Municipality of Saskatchewan: Case 2011-0474 – 2013-12-06
A landowner in the Rural Municipality of Saskatchewan complained that the RM unfairly rejected a conditional use application to build a residence on land the complainant owned in the municipality. The complainant believed the decision was inconsistent with previous decisions in which similar conditional use applications were approved. The complainant believed council had a personal bias against her which influenced its ruling. The complainant also maintained that the public hearing held to consider her request was procedurally unfair.
case-2011-0474-web-version-en.pdfDownload
92.71 KB
-
Town of Neepawa: Case 2011-0460 – 2013-12-06
A complainant alleged that on September 6, 2011, Neepawa town council discussed certain matters at a meeting closed to the public (in-camera), which he believed were not eligible for in-camera discussion under section 152 of The Municipal Act. The complainant also expressed concern about the posted notice of the meeting, asserting that that posted start times for the regular meeting and in-camera portion of the meeting were unclear to the public and could result in people missing part of the regular meeting.
case-2011-0460-web-version-en.pdfDownload
68.79 KB
-
Town of Neepawa: Case 2012-0080 – 2013-12-06
A complainant alleged that a Town of Neepawa councillor had placed himself in a conflict of interest position by being present at two meetings of council that included discussions of an item in which the councillor had a personal interest.
case-2012-0080-web-version-en.pdfDownload
86.07 KB
-
Report regarding the Municipality of Killarney-Turtle Mountain Local Improvement Plan – 2007-09-05
A report of an investigation into a local improvement plan for a new recreational facility where costs had increased substantially and citizens were concerned about the way additional borrowing was being approved by the municipality.
killarney-turtle-mountain-local-improvement-plan-2007-en-1.pdfDownload
240.37 KB
Follow Us