Summary#

Executive Committee approved this notice of motion on the consent agenda and sent it to Council for consideration on October 27, 2026. The committee did not approve the motion’s numbered directions; they would take effect only if Council adopts them. The motion’s stated goal is timely, equitable access to information for councillors while limiting staff access to information requests.

• Councillor Tyers sponsored the motion.
• If Council adopts it, the Chief Administrative Officer must ensure information covered by section 208.1 of the Municipal Government Act is shared with other councillors within the law’s timelines, subject to legal exceptions.
• City staff would have to document a process for sharing that information while limiting staff access to employees who need it for their work.
• The current Council Inquiry Management Dashboard would be discontinued, removed and archived only after the new process is in place, and only if legal duties to share information are not reduced or delayed.
• Staff would have to set a service standard to respond to councillor or staff inquiries within 10 business days where reasonably practicable. If they cannot provide a full response by then, they would give written notice of the expected date and, where appropriate, another way to get the information.
• Staff would report through Executive Committee in the first quarter of 2027 with recommendations on “substantial information requests,” including a proposed definition and any draft bylaw or related provisions.

What it means for you#

• Councillors: If Council adopts the motion, it would set expectations for sharing certain information among councillors and for responding to their inquiries. The 10-business-day standard would not be an unconditional deadline.
• City staff: If adopted, staff would need to document and follow a new information-sharing process, restrict internal access as described, and establish the inquiry response standard.
• Residents and businesses: The motion does not directly change public services, benefits, taxes, or residents’ access to City information.
• Council’s next step: Council has not yet decided whether to adopt the proposed directions.

Money#

No publicly available information on costs.

• The motion proposes staff work to document a process, set a service standard and prepare recommendations. It gives no cost or staffing estimate.

What is unclear#

• Council’s decision on the motion is pending.
• The motion refers to section 208.1 of the Municipal Government Act, but the Act was not supplied, so its current requirements, timelines and exceptions could not be verified.
• The motion does not set out the detailed information-sharing process or explain how staff would decide which employees need access.
• “Substantial information requests” is not defined in the motion; staff would propose a definition later.
• The motion does not explain how the new process would work in practice before the dashboard is removed.

Case for#

• The motion says timely and equitable access helps councillors carry out their duties and take part in Council decisions.
• It would direct staff to meet the statutory sharing requirements while limiting administrative access to employees who need the information for their work.
• The proposed written notice when a full response cannot be provided within 10 business days could give councillors an expected response date.

Case against#

• One concern is that removing the dashboard could reduce general visibility of requests and responses within City Administration; the motion does not describe what information, if any, would remain visible through the replacement process.
• The 10-business-day standard applies only “where reasonably practicable,” and the motion does not set a firm deadline when it is not practicable.
• The process, access limits and definition of “substantial information requests” remain to be worked out, so the practical effects are not yet clear.