LAKELAND - There are no further plans to amend the legislation surrounding virtual meetings for municipal councils according to Heather Jenkins, press secretary for Municipal Affairs.
“The Municipal Government Act (MGA) requires municipalities conducting public hearings involving planning and development matters to offer electronic options; municipalities may conduct other meetings by electronic means if they choose to do so. There is no regulation on this matter and the requirement for public hearings for planning and development matters to offer electronic options was part of the recent amendments made through the Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 2024,” said Jenkins.
According to Jenkins, meetings conducted by electronic means meet legislative requirements.
Adopted by municipalities and boards across the province during the pandemic as a means of getting work done while respecting the health restrictions in place at the time, virtual meetings have become ubiquitous, with a wide range of standard practices.
Lac La Biche County
In Lac La Biche, the meetings are livestreamed on the County’s website and the recordings can be viewed for one year afterwards. The official record of the meetings remains the approved written minutes.
According to their policy, the intention is “to promote transparency and access to municipal decision making.”
City of Cold Lake
In Cold Lake, city council meetings are livestreamed on the @CityofColdLake YouTube channel and then deleted after two months.
According to Cold Lake Mayor Craig Copeland, municipalities are like the children of the province ,“but they give us a lot of latitude to work between the lines.”
He said livestreamed meetings has been a good way to increase transparency between the City and its residents.
“We’re allowing the public an opportunity to see the conversation. Say if we make a decision on something, that organization or that entity may go and find it on YouTube and see what was said,” said Copeland.
According to Cold Lake CAO Kevin Nagoya, there are more people accessing the livestream than have historically attended council meetings in person. He said typically five to 12 people are watching at any given point during the meeting and videos average around 65 viewers. He noted they do still see a handful of people attending the meetings in person, which is consistent with public attendance before the pandemic.
“Some viewers of the livestream many not even be a resident of the City of Cold Lake. From time to time, we receive complaints from residents of other municipalities who don’t agree with Cold Lake council may be doing,” explained Nagoya.
M.D. of Bonnyville
The M.D. of Bonnyville livestreams its meetings on the @MDBonnyville87 YouTube channel. According to the municipality’s bylaw, recordings are kept into perpetuity.
According to Reeve Barry Kalinski, the decision to begin livestreaming was made by the previous council during the pandemic and they’ve continued the practice since then.
A review of past council meetings on their YouTube channel shows an average of 125 views.
Kalinski said most of the feedback he receives about the livestream is “from other councils, actually, that watch for information and stuff. And then the odd, person, taxpayer kind of thing that do watch it a little bit.”
Town of Bonnyville
The Town of Bonnyville livestreams its council meeting on the @TownofBonnyville9829 YouTube channel. The archive for the channel goes back 12 months.
Town of St. Paul
The Town of St. Paul livestreams its meetings and keeps the videos available for three months after the fact on the @TownofStPaul-gg6vs YouTube channel. The Town’s bylaw notes the written minutes are considered the official record of meetings.
According to CAO Steven Jeffery, it’s taken time to make the transition, but the Town of St. Paul council and administration have found livestreaming to be beneficial.
“I personally feel that it has given the community more of an opportunity to be involved in their municipality,” said Jeffery.
He said there hasn’t been a lot of guidance from Municipal Affairs on livestreaming and video recordings of council meetings, beyond approving electronic meetings as a legitimate way of holding a meeting under the Municipal Governance Act.
“In terms of risk and confidentiality, everyone must be aware of their audience and the potential impact your comments can have. As much as listeners/viewers don’t like something being discussed in a closed session, there is a need for it and legally we need to adhere to the requirements set out in the MGA to protect anyone or anything that is discussed in closed. Extra guidance from Municipal Affairs is always welcomed on a matter such as this,” said Jeffery.
County of St. Paul
The County of St. Paul livestreams all regular council meetings and public works meetings on their YouTube channel, @CountyofSt.PaulNo.1987 but does not keep recordings of the meetings available to the public after adjournment.
“The decision was made at the time of the bylaw passing to not make the meeting recordings available. We haven’t received ratepayer feedback on this decision directly, from those who attend meetings in person, catch the livestream, or monitor our socials and website for updates,” said Jason Wallsmith, the CAO for the County of St. Paul.
Town of Elk Point
The Town of Elk Point livestreams its meetings on the @TownofElkPoint3953 YouTube Channel. Videos of the meetings are retained into perpetuity according to their bylaw.
