Bill 39 makes three discrete but consequential changes to Ontario municipal law. It adds a new statutory procedure that lets a head of council compel a council meeting and a recorded vote on a proposed by‑law the head considers capable of advancing a “prescribed provincial priority,” and sets a low threshold for passage.
It gives the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing authority to appoint the head of council for the 2022 term for three regional municipalities. And it repeals the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005 and replaces it with transitional provisions that alter the legal status of related easements and covenants and largely block litigation about the repeal.
Those are technical changes with broad practical effects. The by‑law mechanism changes municipal decision dynamics and lowers the effective vote threshold for some measures.
The ministerial appointment power and the repeal’s immunity clauses each assign legal consequences beyond purely local governance, affecting property rights, pending litigation, and the balance between provincial direction and local autonomy. Compliance officers, municipal clerks, landowners in the Duffins Rouge area, and counsel with pending claims will need to read the schedules closely.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act (a) inserts a new power in the City of Toronto Act and the Municipal Act allowing a head of council to propose a by‑law tied to a prescribed provincial priority and force council to consider and vote on it; such a by‑law is enacted if more than one‑third of council members vote in favour; (b) authorizes the Minister to appoint and fix the term of the head of council for the 2022 term for Niagara, Peel and York regions; and (c) repeals the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005 and sets out transitional rules about easements/covenants and litigation arising from the repeal.
Who It Affects
Directly affected actors include heads of council and municipal councils in Toronto and in municipalities designated under the Municipal Act, municipal clerks (who must handle proposed by‑laws and supporting reasons), the Minister and provincial officials implementing appointments and regulations, landowners and entities with DRAPA easements or covenants, and conservation bodies and the Crown that are shielded by the repeal’s litigation clauses.
Why It Matters
The bill reallocates procedural leverage inside municipal councils (by empowering heads of council and lowering the vote threshold for some by‑laws), creates exceptional provincial appointment power over three regional heads for one term, and closes civil‑law pathways tied to Duffins Rouge—reallocating legal risk away from the Crown and conservation bodies and altering remedies available to property holders.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act operates as three separate packages tucked into one Bill. First, it adds a new statutory route for passing certain municipal by‑laws: if a head of council believes a proposed by‑law could ‘potentially advance’ a prescribed provincial priority, the head can put the by‑law on the council agenda and compel a vote.
The statute requires the head to provide the clerk and each councillor with a copy of the proposed by‑law and the head’s reasons in a form and on a timetable the regulations will set. Importantly, the statutory voting rule reduces the normal majority requirement for those by‑laws: they pass if more than one‑third of council members vote for them.
The head of council may also participate in the vote.
Second, the Municipal Act additions let the Minister appoint the head of council — and fix the term — for three named regional municipalities for the term that began in 2022. The appointment is effective immediately on the date specified in the order and, if an elected head has already been chosen, that elected appointment ceases to have effect when the Minister’s order takes effect.
The Minister must publish the order in The Ontario Gazette and provide a copy to the affected municipality, and the Act gives the Minister broad regulation‑making powers to prescribe transition rules, define the appointed head’s powers and duties, and modify related statutes and regulations as necessary for implementation.Third, the Duffins Rouge schedule repeals the earlier Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act and then lays down specific transitional mechanics. It defines “DRAPA easement or covenant” by reference to the old Act and then deems each such easement or covenant to have the legal effect it would have had if the repealed Act had never been in force.
The schedule also removes the application of certain Conservation Land Act subsections to those DRAPA instruments and declares any notices previously registered under the Conservation Land Act in respect of DRAPA lands to be of no effect once the schedule comes into force. Critically, the schedule bars causes of action and proceedings that arise from the enactment, amendment or repeal of the old Act (with an explicit exception for applications for judicial review), directs that any proceeding already commenced is to be dismissed when the schedule comes into force, and states that nothing in the schedule constitutes an expropriation or entitles anyone to compensation.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The by‑law procedure applies to by‑laws under the City of Toronto Act, the Municipal Act, the Planning Act and any other prescribed Acts or sections — but only where the by‑law could ‘potentially advance’ a prescribed provincial priority.
Under the Municipal Act additions the Minister may, by order, appoint and fix the duration of the head of council for the term beginning in 2022 for the Regional Municipality of Niagara, the Regional Municipality of Peel and the Regional Municipality of York.
A by‑law proposed under the new head‑of‑council procedure is passed if more than one‑third of council members vote in favour, and the head of council may vote on that question.
Regulations implementing the ministerial‑appointment power may be made retroactive for up to six months and may prevail over conflicting provisions of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and parts of the Municipal Act.
The Duffins Rouge schedule declares that causes of action, claims and proceedings arising from the enactment, amendment or repeal of the Duffins Rouge Act are barred (pending proceedings are deemed dismissed), while permitting applications for judicial review as the sole preserved remedy.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Head of council can force consideration and a low‑threshold vote on by‑laws tied to prescribed provincial priorities
Section 226.9.1 creates a narrow but powerful procedure. If the head of council considers a by‑law could potentially advance a prescribed provincial priority, the head can put that by‑law before council and require a vote. The head must provide the clerk and each councillor with the by‑law and the head’s reasons in accordance with regulations. The statute overrides city procedure by‑laws as to placement and timing, and sets a special passage rule: a by‑law is enacted if more than one‑third of council members vote for it, with the head able to participate in the vote. Practically, this statute compresses agenda control and allows a minority coalition to enact measures connected to provincially designated priorities.
Repeal of the 2005 Act with a deeming rule for DRAPA instruments
The Schedule repeals the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Act, 2005 and defines ‘DRAPA easement or covenant’ by reference to the earlier statute. It then contains a deeming rule: each DRAPA easement or covenant is treated as having the legal effect it would have had if the repealed subsection had never been in force. That textual construction restructures how those private instruments are to be read going forward; users and counsel must review the old instruments against current land law to determine actual rights and obligations after the deeming takes effect.
Cancels certain Conservation Land Act notices and bars most causes of action related to the enactment/repeal
The Schedule excludes DRAPA instruments from specified Conservation Land Act provisions and declares any notices registered under the Conservation Land Act in accordance with the old Duffins Rouge Act to be of no effect once the Schedule is in force. It also contains broad immunity language: it bars causes of action and proceedings that arise directly or indirectly from the enactment, amendment or repeal of the earlier Act, and deems proceedings already under way to have been dismissed when the Schedule comes into force. The sole preserved avenue is judicial review. The Schedule also says nothing in it constitutes an expropriation and denies any entitlement to compensation.
Minister may appoint heads of council for the 2022 term and make implementing regulations
Sections 218.3–218.5 let the Minister appoint and fix the term of a head of council for the 2022 term for three named regional municipalities. An appointed head is deemed a member of council and an existing elected appointment ceases when the order takes effect. The Minister must publish the order and notify the municipality. The regulation‑making power is broad: the Minister may prescribe transition rules, powers and duties for the appointed head, and modify other statutes and regulations as necessary to implement the appointment.
Parallel head‑of‑council by‑law power for designated municipalities
Section 284.11.1 mirrors the City of Toronto provision for municipal councils more generally. It applies to municipal by‑laws under the Municipal Act, the Planning Act and other prescribed statutes or sections. It directs that, subject to prescribed requirements, the head of council may propose a by‑law tied to a prescribed provincial priority and require council to consider and vote; the by‑law is passed if more than one‑third of members vote in favour and the head may vote. The provision also preserves the clerk’s role (the head must provide the clerk and each member with the by‑law and reasons in accordance with regulations) and overrides local procedure‑by‑laws where inconsistent.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Provincial government and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing — gains an administrative tool to advance provincially prescribed priorities through municipal bodies (via heads of council and by‑law procedure) and a direct appointment power for three regional heads for the 2022 term.
- Heads of council (mayors/reeves) — receive a procedural weapon to place measures on the council agenda and force a vote, plus the statutory right to vote on those measures.
- Conservation bodies and the Crown — the Duffins Rouge repeal Schedule largely immunizes them from civil claims arising out of the repeal or prior enactments and removes certain registered notices that could cloud property titles.
Who Bears the Cost
- Municipal councillors and local majorities — face a new risk that a small minority backed by the head of council can pass by‑laws that bypass normal majority dynamics and local procedure rules.
- Landowners, rights holders and litigants affected by DRAPA easements/covenants — lose certain registered notices and most civil remedies tied to the enactment or repeal of the earlier Act; pending proceedings are dismissed and avenues to compensation are expressly denied.
- Municipal clerks and legal departments — must implement the new notice, record‑keeping and voting mechanics and adapt to ministerial orders and regulations that may alter conflict‑of‑interest and election rules.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between provincial capacity to advance province‑level priorities quickly (by empowering heads of council and enabling ministerial appointments) and municipal self‑government plus individual rights: the statute accelerates provincial ends but does so by compressing local decisionmaking and limiting civil remedies for affected landowners, forcing a choice between administrative expediency and traditional safeguards of local democracy and access to court remedies.
The bill’s language creates several practical and legal puzzles. The head‑of‑council procedure rests on undefined and yet‑to‑be‑prescribed elements: who decides what counts as a ‘prescribed provincial priority’, what the regulations require for notice and timing, and which Acts or sections are excluded by regulation.
Those regulatory blanks will determine whether the procedure is narrow and consultative or broad and programmatic. The low passage threshold (more than one‑third) is a blunt instrument: it speeds adoption of measures tied to provincial priorities but also lowers the barrier for minority rule on specific items, testing norms of municipal deliberation and majority decisionmaking.
On Duffins Rouge, the statutory deeming and the broad bar on causes of action and dismissal of pending proceedings materially reallocate legal risk. The Schedule preserves judicial review as the only preserved pathway, but it also asserts that nothing in the Schedule is an expropriation and denies compensation; that drafting choice narrows statutory remedies but raises questions about whether other common‑law remedies or constitutional arguments might be invoked.
The combination of retroactive regulatory authority (for appointment rules) and sweeping immunity provisions increases the likelihood of judicial scrutiny — and practical confusion for land registries, title insurers and counsel advising affected landowners.
Implementation will turn on regulations and proclamations. Many changes come into force by proclamation, the Minister can make regulations that prevail over other municipal statutes, and some regulations can be retroactive.
That creates procedural uncertainty for municipal administrators and courts until the regulations and proclamations are published and tested in practice.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.