Niagara Falls Council Faces Backlash Over Sign Ban Dispute

NIAGARA FALLS, Ontario — A group of women protested at the Niagara Falls city council meeting this week after their request to speak was denied by city officials. They aimed to discuss proposed legislation supporting women’s rights and enhancing municipal governance.

The delegation was led by St. Catharines Regional Coun. Haley Bateman, who said the group felt silenced during the meeting. “If you feel like you’re being silenced, you might speak out with a sign,” she explained.

After displaying signs with messages, the women were escorted out of the council chambers. The city has a long-standing policy prohibiting signs unless they are part of a formal presentation. Mayor Jim Diodati defended the policy, stating, “We’ll always follow the rules of order, and if that’s what the courts tell us, then that’ll be the case.” He added that if residents want to challenge the policy’s constitutionality, they are free to do so.

The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) has taken note of the situation. Christine Van Geyn, CCF’s litigation director, criticized the city’s actions and believes they may be unconstitutional. She emphasized the importance of public participation in democratic processes and indicated that a letter would be sent to the city addressing the issue.

Van Geyn previously fought successfully against a similar ban on signs at regional meetings for Niagara Region, cautioning that passing unconstitutional laws could lead to litigation costs for taxpayers. Her organization argues that residents should be permitted to express their views, including through signs in council chambers.

Other nearby cities, such as St. Catharines and Welland, do not enforce such strict regulations against signs at their council meetings. In St. Catharines, for instance, signs have been permitted as long as they do not disrupt meetings.

During the meeting, Bateman remarked on the nature of their protest. “We came in quietly. We sat quietly. We never intended to disrupt the meeting,” she noted.

As the city navigates this controversy, residents await clarification on the council’s policies and their implications for public debates on important issues.