The simmering tensions dividing the leaders of a bucolic eastern Ontario township have now boiled over into the legal arena, with three council members suing all but one of their council colleagues over alleged abuses of their public positions.
In the latest turn of a roller-coaster term that the mayor of the Township of Rideau Lakes says reflects dysfunction “beyond repair,” he and two councillors have filed a statement of claim against five other council members.
The claimants allege that the five councillors sought “retribution” during a turbulent meeting last fall during which the mayor was financially penalized 18 times more than what the township’s third-party integrity commissioner had recommended, and one councillor confronted a heckler and said she was calling 911.
Following that Oct. 6 meeting — which was prematurely adjourned over safety concerns and prompted a move to virtual proceedings that’s still in effect — Ontario’s Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing started monitoring council meetings.
This after a term already riven by heated exchanges, the exit of more than one integrity commissioner, and a flurry of code-of-conduct complaints over everything from a joke about one councillor’s allergies to members turning their backs on a public delegate.
Now, with a fall election on the horizon and some on council contemplating another term, voters in the township face the prospect of choosing between candidates caught in legal crosshairs.
“As an outsider and as someone who spends a lot of time looking at municipal councils … this really strikes me as something that I have never, ever come across before,” Robert Williams, a University of Waterloo professor emeritus specializing in municipal politics, said of how things have escalated in the township.
“It certainly begs the question about what this election is going to be about.”
The Township of Rideau Lakes is a collection of small communities in southeastern Ontario cottage country where residents enjoy a “relaxed and peaceful” way of life, according to the township’s website.
But the aging township office in Chantry, located about 100 kilometres southwest of Ottawa, has been a major source of the tension between councillors, as even the legal documents filed in the lawsuit suggest.
The nine council members are aligned as follows in the case:
The other Ward 3 representative, Dustin Bulloch, is the only council member not named in the lawsuit. He joined council last year and says serving his community has been a positive experience.
“But yeah, it’s made more difficult by the fact that we have background disagreements going on and [by] having a council table that is [marked] by distrust and personal disagreement,” Bulloch said.
CBC reached out to the five defendants about the lawsuit, which was filed in Kingston civil court in February.
The lawsuit alleges that on Oct. 6, the five set out to deliberately inflict “maximum damage” onto Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard based on political or personal motives.
Carr, Hutchings and married councillors Paula and Jeff Banks deny that “any of their actions” were taken in bad faith, according to their shared statement of defence.
Dunfield, who has her own lawyer and also denies the allegations, says in her own statement of defence that “the mayor’s conduct was serious and warranted a significant response.”
Earlier in 2025, the township’s integrity commissioner had found that Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard misstepped when they placed financial penalties on the Bankses over misconduct complaints where no violation was found.
Misconduct complaints, both proven and unproven, spread like wildfire around the council table this term, costing the municipality of fewer than 11,000 people an estimated $41,000 in payments to the commissioner last year alone, according to the township.
Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard characterized their penalties against the Bankses as an honest mistake, according to the commissioner, and council later rescinded some of those penalties. But the commissioner said Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard should have known better in the first place.
Hoogenboom was also found to have breached the code for joking about using Old Spice after Hutchings left the council meeting room due to an allergic reaction, for disclosing he was under investigation by the integrity commissioner, and for making misleading statements that the province had advised him on using strong mayor powers (as he did in 2025 to override a council decision related to the Chantry office).
For penalizing the Bankses and the deodorant joke, the commissioner recommended council shave a total of 10 days off Hoogenboom’s pay.
In what the mayor calls “an overreach” in response to “two minor offences,” councillors instead voted on Oct. 6 to reduce his pay by a total of 180 days. Maxwell and Pollard also received heftier financial penalties than what had been recommended.
“The defendants abused their power and sought retribution against Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard for having penalized them in March 2025,” the lawsuit alleges.
That decision, Hoogenboom told CBC, “has made the relationships at the council table so much more difficult.”
In an email to CBC, Paula Banks said Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard are misrepresenting the record, including their claim that “maximum damage” was inflicted. Under Ontario’s Municipal Act, a councillor who breaks the code can have 90 days of pay taken away, per infraction.
“The mayor could have faced up to 360 days [for his four infractions]….” Paula Banks wrote. “Those maximums were not applied.”
Dunfield’s lawyer said the allegations of acting in bad faith are “completely without merit.”
The events alleged by Hoogendoom, Maxwell and Pollard stem from their “pattern of oppressive and retaliatory conduct,” according to Dunfield’s statement of defence, which points out that the plaintiffs are suing the defendants personally instead of having sought a judicial review of the council decisions last fall.
Two weeks after the Oct. 6 meeting that co-defendant Jeff Banks has called a “meltdown,” a reprimand of Hoogenboom appeared on both the news section of the township’s website and a homepage pop-up. A move to publicly censure the mayor had been passed at council.
Township clerk Mary Ellen Truelove has worked for the municipality since 1999 and said she’s not aware of any other reprimands in that time.
One month later, on Nov. 21, Hoogenboom, Maxwell and Pollard served the five councillors (who they dubbed “The Group of Five”) a cease and desist letter calling the pop-up “bizarre” and demanding an apology for “malicious conduct.”
The group reissued the reprimand.
The mayor, Maxwell and Pollard then filed their statement of claim in February, seeking $26,244 in lost wages. It was later amended to seek $150,000 in general damages and $250,000 for “punitive and aggravated damages for bad faith.”
“Enough is enough….” Hoogenboom said when asked in April why they took the legal route. “We felt that we owed it to our taxpayers to hold these people accountable for their behaviour.”
Ontario’s Bill 9, which is meant to crack down on misbehaving municipal politicians, passed third reading on May 26 and is on its way to becoming law. It standardizes codes of conduct across hundreds of municipalities and gives them the power to remove members who are found to be in serious violation.
But Robert Williams, the professor emeritus in municipal government affairs, said what’s unfolded in Rideau Lakes is a case for why “someone other than the rest of council” should make the call about removing a person from office.
According to the township, the province’s Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing will continue to watch its council meeting livestreams until the end of the term. The ministry didn’t reply when asked how many other Ontario municipalities are being monitored like that.
As of last month, council meetings remained virtual, with only Hoogenboom and two township staffers physically present around the otherwise empty council table.
Coun. Dustin Bulloch, the only member not involved in the lawsuit, said moving online has helped improve “some of the decorum.”
In the wake of the lawsuit, however, signs of tension remain.
At the April 7 regular meeting, Paula Banks said the “toxicity” at council was due to the mayor’s failure to understand procedural bylaws. Hoogenboom objected, prompting Dunfield to rule that “we will not talk about personalities.”
And at the last regular meeting, on May 4, Paula Banks accused Hoogenboom of having to Google what “misogynistic” means. The mayor cut her off and denied that allegation.
Bulloch said he intends to run for re-election this fall and is hopeful the turmoil of this past term won’t deter other potential candidates.
But how many of Bulloch’s council colleagues seek re-election remains unclear. Maxwell said she’s undecided. Ditto Jeff Banks. Others did not reply when asked by CBC.
“I just know that they are not happy with what has been going on, are upset about the poor perceived reputation of the township, and are looking for change with this new council,” Maxwell said via email of the public.
Hoogenboom said he’s waiting to see whether “appropriate” people step forward in the mayoral race before deciding whether “I wish to continue to do this,” while Paula Banks said she wants to run again in her ward.
“But if no one runs for mayor [who] opposes strong mayor powers, I will run for mayor,” she said.
Rideau Lakes Councillor Paula Banks is speaking out against the use of strong mayor powers after the town mayor used the newly appointed powers to veto a majority decision by the council regarding a plan to renovate the township’s municipal offices. Councillor Banks shares why she thinks the problems with strong mayor powers are much bigger than the issues in Rideau Lakes.
The future of the township’s decades-old office also remains uncertain.
Hoogenboom and other council members support building a new township office in a more populated area of the township, while Banks and other councillors have questioned the project’s cost and called instead for the current office to be repaired.
The so-called “Group of Five” successfully voted through a renovation plan last year, but Hoogenboom used strong mayor powers to override that decision.
Now the next council will have to decide, he said.
“I’d hoped that that decision could have been made by this council,” the mayor said. “But clearly with the divisions on this council, it simply wasn’t going to happen.”
As of Sunday, only one person — not a current member of council — had filed their nomination papers to run in this fall’s township election.
