Ottawa’s integrity commissioner is seeing a “continuing trend” of city councillors asking her office for advice about disrespectful communications or unreasonable requests from constituents.
Under the Municipal Act, members of council have an obligation to “at all times serve and be seen to serve the interests of their constituents and the city in a conscientious and diligent manner,” integrity commissioner Karen E. Shepherd said in her annual report.
But that doesn’t mean the councillors or their staff should be subjected to hostile or aggressive behaviour, Shepherd said, and she noted that the Code of Conduct for councillors does not set any specific service standard around responses to constituents.
“The day-to-day management of their offices, including how and to what extent they engage with constituents on policy matters, is at members’ discretion,” the report read.
Shepherd didn’t name councillors in her report, but pointed to the example of a request for help from one councillor’s office to manage a “pattern of disrespectful written communications from residents,” including abusive and offensive language that demanded the councillor take specific actions.
The requests were taking an unreasonable amount of time and were taking an emotional toll on staff, Shepherd said. She helped with the councillor’s aim to create templated responses to manage various types of communications.
Shepherd suggested the office consider adding a disclaimer to automatic messages, or at the bottom of templated responses, first noting that the office maintains a policy of zero tolerance towards harassment and may not respond to emails containing hostile, abusive, or offensive language, and secondly indicating that, if the office had previously addressed the concerns or provided the requested information, the office may not continue to respond to repeated inquiries on the same matter.
The City of Ottawa has a public conduct policy that aims to answer requests and provide good service, but it also acknowledges there’s a need to protect staff and put limitations on unreasonable behaviour or frivolous and vexatious complaints or requests from some members of the public.
The city’s policy has definitions that draw a line on bad conduct.
“Unreasonable” behaviour includes conduct that is unacceptable in all circumstances — regardless of how stressed, angry or frustrated an individual is — because it unacceptably compromises the health, safety or security of staff, other people or the individual themselves.
Requests or complaints that are incomprehensible, inflammatory or based on conspiracy theories are also considered unreasonable.
“Vexatious” means that the complaint or request for service is initiated with the intent to embarrass or annoy the recipient or is part of a pattern of conduct that amounts to an abuse of the complaint process or request for service.
A “frivolous” complaint is one that has no serious purpose or value about a matter so trivial or meritless on its face that investigation would be disproportionate in terms of time and cost, according to the definition.
The integrity commissioner oversees three separate codes of conduct for city councillors, local boards and public members of the built heritage committee.
Anyone who feels that a meeting or part of a meeting of city council, a local board, or a committee was closed to the public for the wrong reason can request an investigation. She also administers the city’s lobbyist registry.
The total number of complaints filed with the integrity commissioner’ office in the 2025 reporting year jumped to 17 from 12 in 2024. This year’s total more closely aligns with 2022 and 2023 totals, Shepherd’s report said.
The integrity office also managed 32 “complaint-like enquiries” asking for Shepherd’s intervention to address an issue or grievance. That was a high number, she noted. Complaint-like enquiries are different from complaints in that they are not filed in accordance with protocol requirements such as an affidavit.
Shepherd conducted only one investigation in the 2025 reporting cycle over Rideau-Vanier Coun. Stéphanie Plante’s
online social-media activity
during the 2024 public debate over proposed tent-like structures for asylum seekers. Shepherd recommended suspending Plante’s pay. Councillors instead
voted to reprimand her.
Our website is your destination for up-to-the-minute news, so make sure to bookmark our homepage and sign up for our newsletters so we can keep you informed.
