Peterborough City Council is currently considering a series of amendments to its Procedure By-law, changing the way that both general committee and council meetings are run. This review is customary for each term of council, yet this term’s proposed changes are extensive, as the entire by-law has been significantly rewritten.

“The proposed updates to the Procedure By-law aim to modernize meeting practices,strengthen transparency, and ensure that Council and Committee proceedings continue to reflect best practices across Ontario municipalities,” the by-law report says. “By clarifying roles, tightening procedural rules, and enhancing accountability measures, the revised by-law supports effective governance and contributes to a more consistent and efficient decision-making framework.”

A comparison of the present by-law and the proposed draft conducted by Arthur shows that despite the briefing in the report, the by-law has been effectively restructured, namely around how motions are presented to council, how members and chairs conduct themselves during meetings, and how the public can engage with council. 

This includes changes to how public delegations are registered and presented before council and a further restriction on how many delegations can be made during a council meeting. 

Under the current by-law, public delegations are heard at City council meetings in respect to agenda items presented the week prior at a general committee meeting. To register a delegation, applicants complete an application to the Clerks’ Office outlining general information (the name of the speaker, their address and contact information), the agenda item they wish to speak to, and a description of the points they’d like to make to council. This must be filed before 11:00 AM on the day of the council meeting. 

An individual delegation must be under five minutes and is limited to a singular item on the meeting’s agenda. Delegations are also grouped by item in the order they appear on the agenda, with a maximum of ten delegations per item, save for meetings under the Planning Act and other public meetings like consultations on the city’s budget. 

The section pertaining to delegations was last amended in 2021, where the previous procedure by-law review committee, composed of former mayor Diane Therrien and Ashburnham Ward Councillor Gary Baldwin, suggested amendments to how delegations are posted in light of COVID-19 restrictions. This included the discontinuation of unregistered delegations, the streamlining of how delegations are organized, and the current restrictions on the amount and nature of such presentations. The report with these proposed amendments includes an extensive explanation of each change to public participation during council meetings. 

Now, this term’s working group—comprised of Mayor Jeff Leal, Northcrest Ward Councillor Andrew Beamer (the chair of General Committee), Otonabee Ward Councillor Lesley Parnell (the chair of the Planning Committee), CAO Jasbir Raina, Commissioner of Legislative Services David Potts, and the City’s clerks—have proposed sweeping amendments to the by-law, but haven’t made all of the changes clear to the public through the by-law’s report. 

Proposed amendments also include restricting “electronic device” use during council meetings, the audio recording of closed session proceedings, how notices of motion are introduced to council, and enshrining the finality of a member's vote at council. The draft by-law—a 12-page document—is significantly shorter than its 23-page predecessor, with more clarifying language around the interpretation of the by-law and the removal of specific sections, especially pertaining to meeting conduct and the various methods of how the public may engage with council during public meetings.

While some removed sections have been reincorporated into the by-law—namely with meeting conduct being enshrined as a part of the roles of chair and councillors instead of having its own section—some sections have been completely culled with little explanation in the draft’s corresponding report.

Under the proposed by-law, council meetings could have a maximum of ten delegations per meeting. The report cites that this change is “in order to support efficient agenda management and ensure that all scheduled business can be completed in a timely manner.” 

Most notably, this new limit would not apply to public meetings under the Planning Act or other statutory public meetings as applicably legislated. Meetings under the Planning Act are arguably the most notorious offenders of derailing scheduled business, not public delegations at regular council meetings: a recent example includes a six-hour meeting of the Planning Act on August 25th, 2025 that saw the rest of the evening’s agenda recessed due to the length of registered delegations and hours of proceeding debate. 

There are now also limits on how members of council can engage with a delegate following their presentation: the draft as initially proposed would’ve permitted councillors to ask delegates one question related to the delegation’s content, and the delegate would only have 90 seconds to respond. This decision “maintains opportunities for meaningful public input while balancing the need for orderly and effective meeting proceedings,” the report states. 

An amendment from a January 26th general committee meeting would bump the amount of council’s questions per delegate to two, yet further discussion on the procedural by-law at this meeting was limited to how it would affect councillors, namely through their use of electronics during meetings and the prescribed amount of speaking time for each member speaking to a motion. 

This is not the only measure that will affect the public’s engagement with council: sections regarding correspondence and petitions have been completely removed from the by-law, and the City Clerk would have enshrined powers to decline delegations if the Clerk determines that the criteria for a delegation is not met or if delegations on a meeting’s agenda exceed the new maximum of ten presentations. 

In the current by-law, public participation includes written correspondence submitted through the Clerk, communication on matters on the agenda, and electronic communication to council through email and public comments online on the Connect Peterborough engagement website. The proposed by-law does away with mention of these correspondences. 

A January 27th overview package from the City of Peterborough summarizing the drafted by-law claims that the review of the procedural by-law included referencing “best practices from municipalities including Caledon, Cambridge, Chatham-Kent, Guelph, Pickering, Richmond Hill, St. Catharines, Whitby and Windsor.” 

None of the listed municipalities have stipulations in their procedural by-laws regarding a maximum number of delegations at any regular meeting of council or any standing committee. Most have a 5-10 minute limit on public delegations, with some exceptions that respond to a higher volume of delegations: for example, meetings of Chatham-Kent’s council will gradually reduce the time on multiple presentations on a particular agenda item if there's a higher volume of delegations being presented. 

Most of these municipalities also have language in their meeting by-laws enshrining written correspondence, petitions, and other methods of public engagement with their respective councils. Why the City of Peterborough seeks to not explain these changes to the public and why there is no further explanation regarding the removal of these sections around correspondence to Peterborough City Council is yet to be seen.

The draft Procedural By-law was recommended section-by-section on January 26th, with its section on delegations being recommended with amendments 8-3. The by-law is set to be ratified by Peterborough City Council during its next council meeting on February 2nd.