The thirty six Conservation Authorities in Ontario were set up on a watershed basis. They are unique to Ontario and started up in the 1940’s in response to the severe flooding and erosion problems of that time. Conservation Authorities are either charitable or nonprofit organizations legislated under the Conservation Authorities Act, 1946.
Eight member municipalities are serviced by the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority.
Recent amendments made to the Conservation Authorities Act (Bill 108, Schedule 2) contains wording that applies to their contract with participating municipalities (and source of funding). It states that once enacted, in order for the authority to provide such programs and services, they must enter into an agreement with each individual participating municipality. Further, that the authority is prohibited from including capital costs and operating expenses in its levy to a participating municipality if no such agreement has been entered into.
Up until now, the draft budget for existing and approved programs offered by the GSCA is presented to their Board of Directors which is made up of representatives from each of the eight member municipalities, in advance of the fiscal year. Municipal Councils would review and vote on the budget. Their decisions were carried forward to the GSCA Board meeting by their Board representative(s). The proposed budget specified how each program would be funded and how much municipal levy would be attributed to each program/project area. The levy could be applied to all program areas as stipulated in Board approved budget.
This process enabled a collaborative approach. The watershed area for which the GSCA is responsible does not stop at municipal boundaries.
What this means: Under this new model of operation, the municipal levy can only apply to the provincially mandatory program areas. If municipal levy funding is to be utilized for any other program area (education, stewardship, tree planting, forest management on private property, water quality monitoring, many of the partnership endeavors, etc.) the GSCA will require an MOU with each participating municipality for each of these programs.
There are a number of reasons for this to be of concern:
It undermines the watershed approach.
It undermines the authority of the elected members of Board of Directors to effectively set program areas together.
If municipalities can opt in and out of individual programs, this creates unpredictability which will make it difficult to maintain the high quality, competent staff who oversee these programs.
It creates unnecessary red tape for both the conservation authorities and the municipalities.
The Conservation Authorities were not consulted on these proposed amendments.
We are very concerned about the direction our provincial government is taking with the Conservation Authorities. Their provincial funding was reduced by 50% in April of 2019. Authorities were asked in August of 2019 to shut down any initiatives not related to their “core mandate”, which are funded by their member municipalities. And now these changes to the Conservation Authority Act, which will make these programs difficult or practically impossible to implement.
Severe flooding and erosion are not just things of the past. In Grey Bruce we’ve seen significant problems with erosion and flooding this year. With the forecasts of increased precipitation, higher temperatures, and more frequent severe weather events, the Conservation Authorities in their historical role are in a position to be of increasing importance in our communities.
Our current provincial government talks about reducing red tape. Why is the Ford government creating it for CA programs that benefit the region?
Sincerely,
Danuta Valleau, Georgian Bluffs
David Walton, Owen Sound
