Recording ban case sits idle

WINNIPEG — A legal fight over Springfield’s attempt to stop residents from recording public council meetings appears to have stalled, as the municipality still has not filed a response in the Court of King’s Bench case that ignited a wider debate about transparency and accountability.

The case stems from a Feb. 4 council meeting where a resident attempted to record proceedings on their phone. According to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), Mayor Patrick Therrien ordered the recording to stop, saying a bylaw prohibited it, and the CAO told the resident only media could record with 48-hours’ notice. The JCCF says no such bylaw existed and argues that preventing residents from recording public meetings violates the Charter’s free expression protections.

Four Springfield residents, represented by JCCF lawyers, filed an application on June 25 asking the court to declare the ban unlawful and unconstitutional. The case, Page et al. v. Rural Municipality of Springfield (CI 25-01-5238), has since become a flashpoint in a broader public conversation about transparency and trust in the RM.

But the newest docket entry shows the RM still has not filed a response, and the next hearing isn’t scheduled until April 30, 2026, potentially leaving the matter inactive for nearly a year.

Local advocate Edwin Giesbrecht said the silence reinforces concerns about how the municipality handles accountability.

“This isn’t just about the courtroom, it’s about trust,” Giesbrecht said. “For months, residents have been told to wait, be patient, and stop asking questions. A year of inaction only reinforces the perception that transparency is optional.”

Mayor: RM won’t comment

while case is active

When asked about the lack of a response, Mayor Therrien said the municipality will not discuss the matter publicly while it is before the court.

“This matter is before the King’s Bench court. It was brought upon us,” he said. “Any prudent individuals, especially those who represent the RM, should know better than to respond at this time.”

Therrien rejected criticism that Springfield is trying to silence residents or hide information and pointed to the RM’s sanctioned open houses, where staff present plans and answer questions.

“We conduct them three or four times a year,” he said. “It’s very well thought of in the community. I answer my phones all the time, and I meet with people for coffee. People know they can talk to me.”

Therrien expressed frustration over a series of independently organized community meetings that have drawn attention online and in surrounding RMs.

“These forums… do not help us at all,” he said. “It’s divisive. People go to these unsanctioned events not knowing it’s not an RM event. They’re saying, ‘Where’s the mayor?’”

He said some topics raised, including CAO Silica’s mining proposal, fall under provincial jurisdiction, not municipal control.

Mayor emphasizes infrastructure over political conflict

Therrien said a focus on political fights only distracts from the infrastructure priorities residents depend on. The RM is working on a long-awaited water treatment plant, lagoon upgrades and a community pool, but provincial approvals have delayed some projects and driven up costs.

“We’ve been waiting 18 months to get an environmental license,” he said. “Every time we have a delay, let’s say 30 days, the price goes up.”

He said his priority is getting projects built, not participating in public disputes.

“We have to work as an RM council, work together as a team,” he said. “It’s the community that pays the price for division.”

With 11 months until the next municipal election, Therrien said voters will ultimately make their judgment.

“Our report cards are due in 11 months,” he said. “Either the vote’s in or the vote’s out. That’s democracy, and I’m for that.”

» Winnipeg Sun