Proposed Anti-Harassment Bylaw (Resolution 11)
Summary
Owners are encouraged to carefully review the proposed Anti-Harassment Bylaw before voting at the upcoming SGM.
Most owners would likely agree that respectful conduct within the community is important and that genuine harassment, intimidation, discrimination, or threatening behaviour should not be tolerated. However, owners may wish to consider whether the wording of the proposed bylaw extends beyond addressing serious misconduct and instead grants the Strata Council broad discretionary authority over owner communications and conduct.
Several portions of the proposed bylaw contain language that may be viewed as subjective or open to interpretation, including terms such as:
- “offence”
- “demean”
- “belittle”
- “personal humiliation”
- “embarrassment”
- “vexatious complaints”
Owners may wish to consider whether these terms are sufficiently clear and objective, particularly in a strata environment where owners must often debate, criticize, question, or challenge council decisions regarding finances, bylaws, maintenance, governance, and enforcement matters.
Owners may also have concerns that:
- repeated complaints or persistent advocacy could potentially be characterized as “vexatious”;
- legitimate criticism of council decisions could be interpreted as harassment;
- the bylaw may discourage open participation in strata governance;
- significant discretion would be left to council to determine what conduct or communication crosses the line.
What Does “Vexatious” Mean?
The proposed bylaw prohibits “making vexatious complaints of bylaw violations,” however the term “vexatious” is not defined within the bylaw itself.
In legal and administrative contexts, “vexatious” is often used to describe complaints or proceedings that are repetitive, frivolous, intended to annoy, or lacking reasonable grounds. However, determining whether a complaint is truly vexatious can be highly subjective and dependent on interpretation.
Owners may therefore wish to consider how this provision could operate in practice within a strata environment where owners are often expected to:
- raise concerns,
- report bylaw issues,
- question council decisions,
- request investigations,
- repeatedly follow up on unresolved matters.
Owners may be concerned that persistent complaints or ongoing criticism, even if made in good faith, could potentially be characterized as “vexatious” if council views them as excessive, inconvenient, or repetitive.
Because the proposed bylaw does not establish objective criteria or procedural safeguards for determining when a complaint becomes “vexatious,” owners may wish to carefully consider whether this provision provides sufficient clarity and protection against inconsistent or subjective enforcement.
In addition, owners may wish to consider whether existing laws and bylaws already provide adequate protections against serious misconduct. The Strata Property Act, human rights legislation, nuisance bylaws, civil remedies, and criminal laws already address many forms of threatening, discriminatory, or abusive behaviour.
The question for owners may therefore not be whether harassment should be prohibited, most owners would agree that it should, but whether this particular bylaw is drafted in a sufficiently balanced, objective, and narrowly tailored manner to avoid unintended misuse or suppression of legitimate owner participation.
Owners are encouraged to read the proposed wording carefully and determine whether the language appropriately balances:
- respectful community conduct,
- democratic owner participation,
- freedom to question or criticize council decisions,
- fair, objective enforcement standards.
As with all bylaw amendments, owners should ensure they fully understand both the intended purpose and the potential long-term implications before voting.