HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 13-14 City o4 .; Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 13-15
PICKERING Date: October 5, 2015
From: Thomas Melymuk
Director, City Development
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper
Comments on existing legislative, regulatory and policy framework for
Conservation Authorities
File: L-1100-018
Recommendation:
1. That the comments contained in Report PLN 13-15 with respect to the Conservation
Authorities Act(CA Act) Review Discussion Paper (Environmental Registry posting
012-4509, dated July 20, 2015) be endorsed, and that the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Forestry be requested_to:
I. reinforce its role as the "one-window" Ministry for providing a consistent
approach and establishing minimum service levels for all conservation
authorities in Ontario;
II. establish an integrated approach to watershed management by consolidating
legislation that affects conservation authorities, and by clearly defining and
articulating the responsibilities of conservation authorities in relation to those
of municipalities; and
III. increase transfer payments to address inequity in funding between
conservation authorities, and to reflect the Province's role as an important
partner in integrated watershed management; and
2. Further, that a copy of Report PLN 13-15 and Pickering Council's resolution on the
matter, be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham Area Municipalities,
the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Central Lake Ontario
Conservation Authority, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, and the
Ministry of Environment and Climate Change.
Executive Summary: In July 2015, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
posted a notice on Ontario's Environmental Registry announcing the release of a
"Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper", and inviting public review and
comments before October 19, 2015. This report provides feedback on the Discussion
Paper with a focus on the questions raised about the governance, funding mechanisms
and roles and responsibilities of conservation authorities.
Report PLN 13-15 October 5, 2015
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper Page 2
Financial Implications: Not applicable
1. Background
The Conservation Authorities Act(CA Act) was passed in 1946 in response to
extensive flooding, erosion, deforestation and soil loss resulting from poor land,
water and forestry management practices in prior decades. The CA Act outlines
the process to establish, fund, dissolve, amalgamate and operate a conservation
authority. The CA Act is administered by the Ministry of Natural Resources and
l Ministries. The purpose of
Forestry (MNRF) in conjunction with other Provincia st
rY ( ) 1 p p
a conservation authority is to deliver a resource management program, including
flood and environmental protection, watershed planning and stewardship
measures, addressing both provincial and municipal objectives.
The framework and conditions for resource management in Ontario have changed
significantly since the approval of the CA Act. The conservation authorities' role
has become increasingly complex due to increasing development and population
growth, an increasing number of agencies from all levels of government involved
in resource management, and new challenges such as climate change.
In February 2012, the Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Service (the
Drummond Report) recommended that the MNRF undertake a review of the
programs and services delivered by the MNRF and the conservation authorities
to clarify responsibilities and eliminate any overlap in roles and responsibilities in
terms of resource management and environmental protection.
In December 2012, Conservation Ontario released a Whitepaper entitled
"Watershed Management Futures for Ontario" to stimulate discussion between
the conservation authorities and the Province on options for a renewed
watershed management partnership. In response to this Whitepaper, Council
endorsed staff report PLN 15-13 in September 2013, which recommended the
need to initiate a discussion about the roles and responsibilities and a new
funding formula for conservation authorities.
Subsequently, in July 2015, the MNRF issued a discussion paper to engage
ministries, municipalities, conservation authorities, stakeholders and the public to
initiate a review of the CA Act. A copy of the Discussion Paper is provided as
Attachment# 1.
2. Discussion
The purpose of the Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper is to
seek feedback on the following three areas:
• Governance —the processes, structures and accountability frameworks
within the CA Act, which direct conservation authority decision-making and
operations
Report PLN 13-15 October 5, 2015
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper Page 3
• Roles and Responsibilities —the roles and associated responsibilities that
the CA Act enables conservation authorities to undertake; and
• Funding Mechanisms —the mechanisms put in place by the CA Act to fund
conservation authorities.
3. Comments
3.1 Governance
The governance of conservation authorities is shared between the Province and
municipalities. The Province is responsible for establishing a conservation
authority, defining the authority's powers, and directing and monitoring
provincially approved programs. The direction for an authority's operations is
overseen through a board of municipally appointed directors.
While municipally appointed boards have effectively directed operations and local
service delivery, such operations have become increasingly challenging with the
expanding range of provincial and federal legislation and regulations that
conservation authorities must consider (see the table below).
Federal Legislation Provincial Legislation
• Canada Water Act. • Ontario Water Resources Act
• Canadian Environmental Protection • Environmental Assessment Act
Act • Environmental Protection Act
• En vir o nmental Contaminants Act Conservation Authorities Act
• International River Improvement Act • Lakes and Rivers Improvement
• International Boundary Waters Act
Treaty Act • Lake Simcoe Protection Act
• Fisheries Act • Beds of Navigable Waters Act
• Navigable Waters Protection Act • Aggregate Resources Act
• Clean Water Act
• Planning Act
• Municipal Act
• Public Utilities Act
• Drainage Act
• Nutrient Management Act
• Pesticides Act
• Public Lands Act
• Safe Drinking Water Act
• Water Opportunities Act
Recent initiatives for Climate Change, Great Lakes Protection and Source Water
Protection have put increasing pressure on conservation authorities to develop
integrated approaches to environmental management. While the conservation
authorities have embraced implementing provincial programs that the provincial
ministries have not been equipped to carry out, such programs cross multiple
ministries and numerous statutes.
Report PLN 13-15 October 5, 2015
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper Page 4
The range of legislation governing resource management has become more
complex, confusing and sometimes conflicting, leading to inconsistent application
and interpretation of policies, regulations, technical guidelines and provincial
programs.
Conservation authorities undertake work that supports and implements provincial
and municipal objectives. As such, it is recommended that the Province
reinforce the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's role as the
"one-window" Ministry for providing a consistent approach and
establishing minimum service levels for all conservation authorities in
Ontario.
3.2 Roles and Responsibilities
The CA Act provides a broad definition of the roles and responsibilities
associated with the conservation, restoration, development and management of
natural resources (other than gas, oil, coal and minerals). The Province has
indicated that the scope of potential programs is intentionally broad, to allow for
flexibility in local program development that reflects local geography and
priorities.
However, the broad mandate provided under sections 20 and 21 of the CA Act
has led to situations where some conservation authorities have expanded their
mandate beyond their original scope of authority.
For example, through the 2012 Conservation Ontario Whitepaper on "Watershed
Management Futures in Ontario", it was suggested that the authority for
interpreting natural heritage protections under the Planning Act be delegated
from municipalities to the conservation authorities. The City did not support this
direction since removing the ability to consider the full range of interests could
prevent municipal councils from making properly balanced decisions on many
land use planning matters.
The roles and responsibilities of conservation authorities should be coordinated
and consistent between conservation authorities, and not conflict with the
authority that is legislatively provided to municipalities. Therefore, it is
recommended that the Province establish an integrated approach to
watershed management by consolidating legislation that affects
conservation authorities, and by clearly defining and articulating the
responsibilities of conservation authorities in relation to those of
municipalities.
Report PLN 13-15 October 5, 2015
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper Page 5
3.3 Funding
Conservation authority funding comes from a variety of sources, including:
provincial funding; municipal levies; and, self-generated revenue (e.g. fees,
permits, rentals, fundraising).
During the early 1990's, an exercise was undertaken to rationalize service
delivery between the Province and municipalities. This resulted, in part, in a
decrease in Provincial transfer payments. However, the expenditures related to
new roles and responsibilities related to new provincial programs and legislation
were increasing. The result has been a dramatic change in the manner in which
conservation authorities are funded.
As noted in the Conservation Ontario Whitepaper, and illustrated in Figure 1
below:
. . . what had been significant provincial transfer payments to the
Conservation Authorities in the early 1990s, often exceeding the
municipal share, declined drastically to the point where municipalities
contribute three or four times as much as the remaining transfer
payments, even for provincially mandated programs such as flood
hazard management (page 8).
Figurel - Provincial, Municipal and Self-Generated Revenue for Conservation
Authorities (1990-2010) in Millions
$350 -
$3 0 0 -
$2 5 0 - I
0 Self Generated
$200 -
®Municipal
$150 - ❑Source Water Protection
$100 MNR Operations&Capital
$50 - „
$0 "'1 1 I I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 - 1` 1" 1 1'"' 1 1 1 '`1
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
•
The imbalance between partners in conservation authority funding is further
exacerbated in locations where there are smaller populations and associated
small tax assessment bases. Some conservation authorities operate a full range
of technical, scientific and administrative services, while others are not able to do
so due to limited local tax bases. This can create an inequity of service levels in
municipalities that host more than one conservation authority.
Report PLN 13-15 October 5, 2015
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper Page 6
In recognition of the increasing role that conservation authorities play, and the
tremendous amount of work and value they provide to the Province, the Province
should increase its funding commitment to conservation authorities. Accordingly,
it is recommended that the Province increase transfer payments to address
inequity in funding between conservation authorities, and to reflect the
Province's role as an important partner in integrated watershed
management.
4. Conclusion
City staff appreciates the expertise of the conservation authorities in applying
flood hazard and stormwater management regulations, and providing advice on
how best to protect natural heritage and hydrologic features in dealing with
development applications. In addition, City staff rely on conservation authority
input to environmental assessments for major projects proposed by senior
governments, master environmental servicing plans to justify new communities,
and smaller scale infrastructure initiatives.
However, with an increase in the role and responsibilities of conservation
authorities through the delegation of new functions, it is evident that there is a
need to re-examine the governing model and funding formula for resource
management functions in Ontario. This re-examination should address
streamlining service delivery and creating greater consistency across
jurisdictions. To this end, it is suggested that MNRF reinforce its role as the
"one-window" Ministry overseeing resource management activities across
Ontario. Any expanded mandate for conservation authorities should not,
however, compromise municipalities' authority to make decisions or to interpret
policy for natural heritage protection under the Planning Act.
5. Next Steps
The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry will consider all comments
received on the Environmental Registry posting # 012-4509 entitled "Conservation
Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper", prior to October 19, 2015. Since
Council will not be meeting until October 26, 2015 to consider this Report, staff will
provide a copy of the Report and the October 5, 2015 Planning and Development
Committee meeting minutes to the MNRF in advance of Council's formal decision
on this matter.
Attachment
1. Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper
Report PLN 13-15 October 5, 2015
Subject: Conservation Authorities Act Review Discussion Paper Page 7
Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By:
Deepak hatt, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Planner II Chief Planner
L-;2-
Jeff Brooks, MCIP, RPP Thomas Mely uk, IP, R
Manager, Policy & Geomatics Director, City Devel pment
C1/6:144,-' -6r-,‘•ibbi`4 tL*--
Marilee Gadzovski, M.Sc.(Eng.), P.Eng. Rich d Holborn, P.Eng
Division Head, Water Resources Dir tor, Engineering & Public Works
& Development Services
DB:df
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
, � / . ' . Z2ZOS•
Tony Prevedel, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
ATTACHMEN# . 60.1771:10.15
REPORT/' L.
Discussion Paper
Conservation Authorities Act
A review of the roles, responsibilities,funding and governance
of conservation authorities under the Conservation Authorities Act.
1 r
riNi
'' ' ''''4'.....'"VrWit. ''.'V r, 4,,, 734, P ''''$ i 11 1 .ii, tiff •It I , t,I
. - . - •:.• ' -'. - - . 1,,,,,?,;„:4 . ...,,,7 A fe a,1..^f..%.; : ! ',^ tillit.i i. .4' 4, , ''' t c, ‘7
4Pt.....4.k,- -,,, t . ,- 14._11. +,,, 14, II ' 11''■1 '
"'"'f 44 1Z ' ''`• ' ,1 L. '' . ,-4.! . ->ti`
-.. -. "...3.-- '..
„, * ".„ ,:k4** -..;40 4 . ;,. ''-
-
...,:cr '-',” '' e.. * -1gi,,,... r---
_ ..„.. __,_....4 -, .1/4 „t:)kik, -,X.tce k1
— °..i; . 4 - ' , 'te?...6 , 4; - ,. ' 2,- ' 7.
: 'IL) ar S' :4... '''',.•
3„,,,e' a ■,... '' Z.,. 41,..4” ,
''. 't,' , 3 .1 .V -433 0 --"4 .
.... ,• . ''**'",,-.:* ' '''''4°..' ''..-- 37, '-''' ' `1 -
„. - t .... ,,-- - •IL'.,-.C.- .,,
, . ,..
,,....., ...
, ,,,,..,,,,,•rn.-.
-,......
LX Ontario
Photo credits:
Cover photos(left to right):Grand River Conservation Authority(Caledonia Dam);Otonabee Region Conservation
Authority;Otonabee Region Conservation Authority
Page 6:Conservation Halton
Page 21:Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority
Page 27:E.Hartlen;Long Point Region Conservation Authority
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Conservation Authorities Act - Overview
3. Governance
4. Funding Mechanisms
5. Roles and Responsibilities
6. Summary and Questions for Discussion
7. How to Provide Input
References
Appendices
1
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
1. Introduction
The Conservation Authorities Act,administered by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
(MNRF),enables two or more municipalities in a common watershed to establish a conservation
authority in conjunction with the province.The purpose of a conservation authority is to deliver a local
resource management program at the watershed scale for both provincial and municipal interests.
Conservation authorities have played a significant role in Ontario's natural resource management
landscape for nearly 70 years,establishing a successful legacy of resource stewardship and an
impressive record of protecting people, property,and communities from water-related natural hazards
(e.g.flooding,drought,erosion etc.).With the increasing pressures of Climate Change on the
environment, it is imperative that conservation authorities have the proper tools to successfully build
upon this legacy.
Conservation authorities are unique organizations,established on watershed rather than political
boundaries in order to better serve local needs and allow for resource management from a science-
based perspective. Using the tools provided within the Conservation Authorities Act,and with support
from participating municipalities and the province,conservation authorities protect people from water-
related natural hazards, provide recreational and educational opportunities,support science and
research,and conserve and protect the natural environment. Collectively,conservation authorities are
the second-largest landowner in the province after the Crown.
The framework and conditions for natural resource management
in Ontario have changed significantly since the Act's creation, Ontario's Conservation
and the way conservation authorities operate within that Authorities
framework has changed along with it. Resource management has
become increasingly complex due to increases in population Ontario has 36 conservation
numbers and density,the expansion of agencies from all levels of authorities—the vast
government involved in resource management and majority of which are located
environmental activities and new challenges such as addressing
climate change further complicating resource management in southern Ontario.
decisions. In addition,conservation authorities have been
evolving as organizations,growing their funding sources and Over 12 million people, or
influence and accepting and being assigned additional roles that 90%of the province's
extend their responsibilities into additional areas of natural population, live within a
resource management and environmental protection.At the conservation authority's
same time,the disparity among conservation authorities in jurisdiction.
resourcing and capacity has and continues to increase.
As a result of these and for other reasons the MNRF is seeking to engage ministries, municipalities,
Aboriginal communities,conservation authorities,stakeholders and the public in a review of the
Conservation Authorities Act to ensure that the Act is meeting the needs of Ontarians in a modern
context.
2 •
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
i
Interest in a review of the Conservation Authorities Act has been building over the last several years.The
Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Service recommended that the MNRF undertake a review
of the programs and services delivered by the MNRF and conservation authorities to clarify
responsibilities and eliminate any overlap in roles and responsibilities for resource management and
environmental protection that are currently shared across levels of government. In addition,
municipalities,developers,and conservation authorities have all identified their interest in and support
for a formal government review.
The objective of this review is to identify opportunities to improve the legislative, regulatory and policy
framework that currently governs the creation,operation and activities of conservation authorities that
may be required in the face of a constantly changing environment.The purpose of this discussion paper
is to seek feedback on the following three areas:
1. Governance—the processes,structures,and accountability frameworks within the Act which
direct conservation authority decision-making and operations;
2. Funding Mechanisms—the mechanisms put in place by the Act to fund conservation authorities;
and
3. Roles and Responsibilities—the roles and associated responsibilities that the Act enables
conservation authorities to undertake.
These areas are all closely linked and need to be considered in an integrated fashion.We ask that you
read this discussion paper and focus on the questions that are provided.
This discussion paper represents the first step in the Ministry's review.The feedback received in
response to the questions outlined below will help the Ministry identify priority areas for review. If
specific changes to the existing legislative, regulatory or policy framework are considered in the future,
further public consultation will occur as appropriate,for example through subsequent Environmental Bill
of Rights Registry postings.
Your opinions and insights are important to us.This discussion paper outlines a number of ways to
engage in the review and we encourage everyone to participate.The review of site-specific permit
applications and permitting decisions or other local decisions made by conservation authorities are not
within the scope of the Ministry's review.
r
3
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER NMI
i
Figure 1—Map of conservation authority jurisdictions'
lakehead '
` '
wV. ,
P<9bn - Matlagan 1 - �J(i(c°^7,5,
Region .,' , E a,f C a77uEi"L
Inte SrhrtrJor south
? + 1 - NaOOn.. r 1 FlNer /i
r' • North Bay .d. } 4,:::,,L1,`-
l
N k I LI Mattawa CV• -dJOLMF Rtle U
• $alrn$m•M rie - .--.. I-
'
Inseta(Northe,n Ontarb Cattervarbn AUthoritles Region . . ..% w fir
w' f ° Cr ♦ /
v Iky f' f
rys Georgian j ••Jw Cataraqur 1
Z 13 . J • f N^9ion
Lake lLlron ; (' j� ;r.. , te,
a Ho[mwata9a R ,/-‘1..,r-r-
'' '!gyp
Valley )Of
Saupeen Valley ' ? Gbnalztk5
_yk Cent,allnke Iake Ontario
Maitland • it {•'', Ontario
Valley 4"*,./ ,..i
f - Cred'u
�adey Southern Ontario
0,41:::.9„...
9 Conservation Authorities
1 10 11 a1 a1 1 km
} Y
1 F.. '' I 1 I 1 1
11,150000
' (3 Conservation Authority
,. Coltish ; Waterbody
Ketll_
!'_) Creek Creek rwum,ww�
,� Lute&ie awa.ra.� r ..w.M",.em.:
OrnonK Noah kro-rkvo 1.411
'This map has been produced by the MNRF for illustrative purposes only and should not be relied upon as a
precise indicator of conservation authority boundaries
I ■
4
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
I
2. Conservation Authorities Act - Overview
The Conservation Authorities Act was passed in 1946 in response to extensive flooding,erosion,
deforestation and soil loss resulting from poor land,water and forestry management practices in prior
decades.The Act outlines the process to establish,fund,dissolve,amalgamate and operate a
conservation authority.
The creation of the Act and associated conservation authority model was guided by the following
principles:
1. Local initiative—The process to form a conservation authority must be initiated and supported
by municipalities within a common watershed,and that programs be locally driven and
supported.
2. Cost sharing—The costs of the projects should be shared by the municipalities in the authority
and the provincial government.
3. Watershed jurisdiction—Conservation authority jurisdictions would,where possible,follow
watershed boundaries.
Conservation authority jurisdictions can be loosely characterized in various ways: rural or urban;south-
eastern,south-central,or south-western; north or south;or according to revenue or geographic scale.
Some conservation authority jurisdictions are less than a full watershed while other conservation
authority jurisdictions include multiple watersheds. It is difficult to generalize or to speak about a
generic conservation authority as the Act enables a great diversity of organizations in scale and
operations,with significant variance in resourcing strategies, board structures, relationships,and local
programs and activities.
Incorporation under the Act establishes conservation authorities as a distinct legal entity with a degree
of autonomy from the individual municipalities and the province that establish it.Conservation
authorities are local public sector organizations similar to hospitals, libraries or school boards—they are
not agencies, boards,or commissions of the province.
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act sets out the purpose(i.e.objects)of a conservation
authority:
The objects of an authority are to establish and undertake, in the area over which it
has jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration,
development and management of natural resources other than gas, oil, coal and
minerals.
The objects of an authority define the potential scope of programs and services which may be delivered
by a conservation authority within its area of jurisdiction.The scope of potential programs is
intentionally broad, providing each individual conservation authority with flexibility to develop local
resource management programs which are tailored to suit local geography, needs and priorities.
5
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
The powers granted to a conservation authority to accomplish its objects are outlined within Section 21
of the Act and include,among other things,the power to study the watershed,acquire lands,enter into
agreements,erect works and other structures,and charge fees for services.
Amendments to the Act in 1996 and 1998 scoped MNRF approval of conservation authority projects to
those completed with MNRF funding and removed provincial appointees from authority boards.These
changes gave conservation authorities and participating municipalities greater flexibility to decide local
fiscal and program priorities,develop partnerships,and to charge fees for approved services on a cost
recovery basis.The province also introduced provisions for conservation authority amalgamation and
dissolution and standardized the authority of conservation authorities to regulate development and
other activities.
The Act is supported by regulations that direct conservation authorities in the application of levies,the
management of conservation areas,and in regulating development and other activities for purposes of
p ublic safety
and natural hazard management.The province may also make regulations defining any
undefined term appearing in the Act.An overview of regulations established under the Conservation
Authorities Act has been provided in the Appendix.
.5
cl N t ,sr4 r{r
ei.! 11, , t + x
; 11.44 I **3
•
6
CONSERVATION.AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
•
3. Governance
Conservation authorities are local public sector organizations similar to public health units, hospitals,
libraries or school boards—they are not agencies, boards,or commissions of the province as there are
no provincial appointees on the authority boards. Under the Act,every authority is established as a
corporation governed by a municipally-appointed board of directors. Incorporation under the Act •
establishes conservation authorities as a distinct legal entity with a degree of autonomy from the
individual municipalities and the province that establish it. Under the Act,the board of directors is the
conservation authority.
Governance2 of conservation authorities has always been shared between the province and
participating municipalities.The province has the primary responsibility for establishing a conservation
authority(at the request of two or more municipalities),defining the powers of a conservation authority
and directing and monitoring provincially approved programs. Municipalities,through municipally
appointed boards of directors, have the primary responsibility for directing and overseeing conservation
authority operations.The board is responsible for setting strategic and operational policies, and
directing and providing oversight of the Authority's senior management.Oversight of day-to-day
operations is typically delegated to a general manager or chief administrative officer who is responsible
for directing authority staff.
3.1• Conservation Authority Boards
Each conservation authority is governed by a board of directors whose members are appointed by
participating municipalities. Board members decide on the programs and policies of the authority,
including strategic direction,operational decisions, procurement,staffing and budgets.
The Act lays out the composition of the conservation authority board and some general operational
rules,and requires that each conservation authority have administrative policies in place to guide board
operations.The Act does not establish a minimum or maximum number of board members however a
meeting of the board must have at least three members in order to achieve quorum.
2 Governance of public sector organizations involves a set of relationships among an organization's stakeholders,
interest groups,citizens,boards,management and the government.These relationships are framed by laws,rules,
and requirements,and provide the structure through which the objectives of the organization are defined,
operating plans are prepared,performance is monitored,and information is communicated among parties
(Institute of Internal Auditors,2014).
7
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER MUM
As shown in Figure 2,the number of representatives
that each municipality can appoint is based on the Figure 2: Municipal Representation on
population of that municipality within the Conservation Authority Boards
conservation authority's jurisdiction.'Alternatively,
the total number of board members of the authority The number of representatives that each
and the number of members that each participating municipality can appoint is based on the
authority may appoint may be determined by an population of that municipality within the
agreement that is confirmed by resolutions passed watershed:
by the councils of all of the participating
municipalities.4 Population Number of
representatives
There is significant variability in the size of 10,000 or less 1
conservation authority boards with some authority 10,000-50,000 2
boards having as few as five board members while 50,000-100,000 3
others have as many as 28.5 Board members must 100,000-250,000 4
reside in a participating municipality and may be 250,000-500,000 5
appointed for no more than three years at a time.6 500,000-1,000,000 6
More than1,000,000 7
3.2. Relationshi p with
Municipalities
The creation of a conservation authority must be initiated by two or more municipalities located within
a common watershed.'Municipalities who want to establish a conservation authority must petition the
province to establish the authority in accordance with the requirements of the Conservation Authorities
Act. Once an authority is created,it can amalgamate with other authorities and more municipalities can
join without the involvement of the province.'
Participating municipalities determine who to appoint to the board as their representative(s).9 Board
members are usually elected municipal councillors; however, any individual may be appointed to the
conservation authority board.10 Municipally-appointed representatives have the authority to vote and
generally act on behalf of their municipalities.1'
Because decisions are made collectively by all the participating municipalities in an authority through
the conservation authority board,the amount of control each municipality has over conservation
authority decisions varies. For most matters,each representative on the board gets one vote,so that
municipalities with a larger number of board representatives(as a result of having larger populations)
3 Conservation Authorities Act Section 2.(2).
4 Conservation Authorities Act Section 14.(2.1)
As reported by conservation authorities in 2012
6 Conservation Authorities Act Section 14.(3)and Section 14.(4)
'Conservation Authorities Act Section 3.(1)
8 Conservation Authorities Act Section 10 and Section 11
9 Conservation Authorities Act Section 14
10 In 2012,over 80%of board members were municipally-elected officials
"Conservation Authorities Act Section 2.(3)
r
8
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER MEM
have a larger share in decision-making. For votes on the budget,votes are weighted so that each
municipality has the same proportion of the vote as the proportion of the budget it pays.
The number of participating municipalities within each conservation authority is very diverse—some
conservation authorities have more than twenty participating municipalities,while others have only
two. In some conservation authorities,one or two municipalities may have the majority of the votes on
the board.
3.3. Relationship with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
The process to create,operate and fund a conservation authority is established under the Conservation
Authorities Act and administered by the MNRF.The province approves the creation and dissolution of a
conservation authority,the dissolution requiring input from the Minister of Natural Resources and
Forestry and the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change.The province designates the
participating municipalities in the authority,and the authority's area of jurisdiction.The Act establishes
the powers of the board and requires the authority to establish operational and administrative
procedures.The MNRF provides a minimum standard for operational and administrative procedures
which each board can further update or build on.12
While the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry is responsible for overseeing the administration of
the Act, he or she has limited authority under the Act to intervene in most regular day-to-day
conservation authority activities and decisions. Minister's approval is required for projects partially or
fully funded by MNRF through provincial grants,for the sale or lease of lands purchased with provincial
funding and for the expropriation of land.The Minister cannot intervene in most local resource
management or operational decisions.
Prior to Act amendments in the 1990's,the province played a more direct role in overseeing
conservation authorities.The province directed conservation authorities by approving their budgets and
all projects,appointing provincial representatives to authority boards,selecting the chair of the board,
appointing provincial staff to authority advisory committees,and,when requested by the authority,
appointing provincial field officers to direct and coordinate the authority's work.While oversight of
conservation authorities is still shared between the province and the municipalities that form the
authority,over time,the province has given conservation authorities greater autonomy to direct their
own operations providing municipal representatives with a greater role in overseeing conservation
authority activities.
3.4. Relationship with Other Provincial Ministries
With an investment of nearly 70 years of public funding in infrastructure,capacity,staffing,skills,
resources, local knowledge,and land, in addition to local understandings and connections,conservation
authorities have become attractive vehicles for delivery of other provincial initiatives at a local level.
12 Section 30 of the Act requires each conservation authority to develop regulations on board administration.
These regulations are approved by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry.
9
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
\ l
Recent years have seen an increased role for conservation authorities,individually and collectively, in
the delivery of other provincial priorities on behalf of,or in partnership with,other provincial ministries
—including, but not limited to—the Ministries of Environment and Climate Change,Agriculture,Food,
and Rural Affairs, Municipal Affairs and Housing, Northern Development and Mines, Infrastructure,
Education,and Tourism,Culture and Sport.
Conservation authority program relationships with other provincial ministries have grown over time and
may be administered directly by individual ministries through various means(e.g. legislation,contracts,
memorandums of understanding,etc.).A conservation authority's relationship with other provincial
ministries is largely dependent on common interests and capacity,and on the scope of programs and
services delivered by each individual conservation authority.
3.5. Relationships with Tribunals
Certain conservation authority decisions may be appealed to the Ontario Mining and Lands
Commissioner(OMLC)or the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).The OMLC and OMB are independent
adjudicative tribunals that conduct hearings and make decisions on matters appealed under specific
pieces of provincial legislation. In general,these tribunals are designed to resolve disputes in an
informal, less costly and more timely manner than in the courts. In many instances,these tribunals seek
to mediate issues first and practice alternative dispute resolution measures to expedite the resolution of
matters thereby avoiding the need for a full hearing.
Decisions that have a provincial interest associated with them are referred to the OMLC. Decisions
related more closely to municipal interests are referred to the OMB.
Ontario Mining and Lands Commissioner(OMLC)
Municipalities may appeal general levy apportionments to the OMLC. To date there have been only a
few instances of municipalities appealing their municipal levies or levy apportionments the OMLC. Many
of these appeals are resolved without proceeding to a hearing.
A person who has been refused a permit or who objects to conditions imposed on a permit by a
conservation authority may appeal permit decisions and conditions to the Minister of Natural Resources
and Forestry.The Minister has assigned the responsibility for hearing these appeals to the Ontario
Mining&Lands Commissioner under the authority of the Ministry of Natural Resources Act.13
In 2013 the OMLC received seven applications under the Conservation Authorities Act with only one
matter heard.14 The majority of cases(including permit appeals) received during 2013 were resolved in
less than three months.There is no cost to filing an appeal.
13 Ministry of Natural Resources Act Section 6.(4)
14 Office of the Mining and Lands Commissioner,2013
i
10
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER NMI
Ontario Municipal Board(OMB)
The OMB hears appeals by municipalities of municipal levies for special projects. Under the Act,the
OMB also approves salary,expenses or allowances made to the members of the authority board of
directors.
3.6. Relationship with Conservation Ontario
Conservation Ontario,formally the Association of Conservation Authorities of Ontario, is a non-profit,
non-governmental organization that represents Ontario's 36 conservation authorities. On behalf of its
members,Conservation Ontario builds strategic partnerships, develops programs and champions
collective issues/concerns.Conservation Ontario is overseen by a General Manager and directed by a
Council made up of two appointed representatives from each conservation authority that elects a six
member Board of Directors from among the council members to oversee the association.
Conservation Ontario seeks to influence policy that affects conservation authorities and to provide
collective services to the authorities including corporate communications, policy and program
development,government relations,partnership development, research and information,evaluation
and reporting,education and training,and the provision of insurance and benefits for conservation
authority employees.
Conservation Ontario is funded by dues from each conservation authority supplemented by project
funding and contract work.
Conservation Ontario is not established through the Conservation Authorities Act, nor is it governed by
the Act.The structure, roles and responsibilities and funding of Conservation Ontario are not part of this
review.
3.7. Other Accountabilities
Conservation authorities are also governed by other legislative requirements that apply to
municipalities,such as the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act and parts of the Municipal Act,and laws
that apply to corporations and employers.Conservation authorities follow accounting standards for the
public sector established by the Public Sector Accounting Board(PSAB).When reviewing permit appeals,
the board of an authority reassembles as a Hearing Board under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.
Most conservation authorities are also registered charities under federal law and must follow rules for
charitable organizations.
When undertaking infrastructure projects,conservation authorities are also subject to Environmental
Assessment Act requirements.Conservation Ontario has developed a Class Environmental Assessment
for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects which has been approved by MOECC for conservation
authorities to follow when planning remedial flood and erosion control projects.
I
11
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
i
4. Funding Mechanisms
Conservation authority revenue comes from various sources including provincial funding, municipal
levies,and self-generated revenue.The total approximate annual revenue of all 36 conservation
authorities in 2013 was$305 million.15
As shown in Figure 3,in 2013, municipal levies accounted for roughly 48%of all conservation authority
revenue,while self-generated revenue represented 40%, provincial funding represented 10%and
federal funding represented 2%.16 Of the provincial funding provided, roughly 3%was provided by
MNRF for natural hazards management,while 4%was provided for Ministry of the Environment and
Climate Change's source water protection program and 3%was provided for various other special
projects.17
Figure 3:Total Conservation Authority Revenue Sources(2013)
The revenue sources for individual conservation
Federal authorities are highly diverse and of variable
Funding Provincial combinations. For example, in 2013 provincial funding
Self- 2% Funding accounted for as much as 58%of one conservation
Generated / 10%
40% / authority's annual revenue and as little as 4%for
another. In the same year self-generated revenue
accounted for as much as 71%of one authority's
revenue and as little as 10%for another.
Table 1 below shows the variability in conservation
� .;;.; . authority revenue,area and population.This
Municipal
Levies variability means that each conservation authority has
48% a different capacity and ability to offer a different
range of programs and services.
In addition to area and population,conservation authority funding needs vary depending on watershed
characteristics such as the amount of hazard land and the potential for flooding,drought,etc.and the
number and purpose of water and erosion control structures owned and or operated by the authority.
15 As reported by conservation authorities through annual statistics collected by Conservation Ontario
16 As reported by conservation authorities through annual statistics collected by Conservation Ontario
17 source protection funding will be shifting to a steady state
12
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER [ _ J
\ l
Table 1:Diversity of Conservation Authorities'Revenue,Area and Population's
Total Revenue Area Population
UTRCA ' I 4 I
TRCA ! 1
SCRCA 1I '
SNRCA 10 r I
SSMRCA 1 r t
SVCA 6 r I
RVCA 'um r ,
RRCA i r
OCA I• L_ 7 I
ORCA 'I r I
NVCA h `i - - . •
NBMCA w - I
HDCA 'e
NPCA In=
MVC ■
MVCA f t(?.
l
LTCA � ' I
LTVCA I
LPRCA I
LRCA i t
LSRCA o low
KCCA ['
KRCA r t
HRCA Imerme i'
GSCA L I
Grand RCA
GRCA le i I
ERCA
:seet
CVCA Limmum i
CVC
Halton RCA winon
CLOCA r
CCCA
CRCA iln r
ABCA L
$0.0 $40.0 580. 0 500000 100000 150000 0 2.000,000 4,000.000 6000.000
Under the Act, conservation authorities are required to have an annual financial audit with the auditor's
report provided to participating municipalities and the MNRF. In terms of expenditures,conservation
authorities report spending, in total, roughly 43%on water management,42%of revenue on land
management, 12%on administration and 3%on communications.19 However,expenditures from one
conservation authority to another may vary significantly.
4.1. Municipal Levies
The Conservation Authorities Act enables conservation authorities to levy the cost of board-approved
programs and services against their participating municipalities. In 2013, participating municipalities
provided over$140 million to conservation authorities through municipal levies.
The levy process is complex. First,a conservation authority budget is established and approved by the
board.A portion of the budget is paid for with provincial,federal or self-generated revenue,and the rest
18 Revenues shown in Millions of Dollars,Area shown in Hectares,Population shown in Millions
19 As reported by conservation authorities through annual statistics collected by Conservation Ontario
c
13
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
is paid by participating municipalities through municipal levies.The total municipal levy amount is
divided up among the participating municipalities according to the benefit each one receives from the
authority's services,which is determined in different ways for different types of levies. Levies can be
categorized as being for maintenance and administration costs,or for capital and project costs.
For most conservation authorities,the majority of the municipal levy amount is for maintenance and
administration costs.These costs represent the administrative and operational funding provided to
conservation authorities and is divided among all the municipalities according to a formula set out in
regulation.20 This formula is based on the total value of property within each municipality within an
authority's jurisdiction so that municipalities with high land values pay more than those with low land
values.The total land value is also modified according to the type of property,so that urban property
types such as commercial, industrial and multi-residential are worth more than rural property types like
residential,forest or farmland. Conservation authorities and municipalities can also agree on a different
method of dividing these costs as an alternative to using the land value formula?' How costs are divided
(the'apportionment')can be appealed by a participating municipality to the Ontario Mining and Lands
Commissioner.
Capital and project costs may be levied only against certain municipalities who will benefit from the
project.The conservation authority determines how these costs are divided.This apportionment can be
appealed by municipalities to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Additional rules under Ontario Regulation 139/96(Municipal Levies)also apply to any levies for costs
that are not shared with the Province.These additional rules include weighted voting:each municipality
gets the same percentage of the vote on the levy as the percentage of the total municipal levy that it
pays.
4.2. Self-Generated Revenue
Conservation authorities can also generate their own revenue through various means including:
• earned revenues on a 'cost recovery' basis(contracts,fees for service, permits(campsites,
entrance fees) related to conservation areas);
• earned income on a'for profit' basis(rentals,sales,sales of land, resource development such as
logging, hydroelectric production);
• commercial/industrial sector partnerships including businesses(gift shops)and joint contracts
for resource development(generating hydro-electric power etc.);and
• private sector funding from individuals,corporations and foundations(fundraising,gifts,
donations,sponsorships etc.).
In most cases,self-generated revenue may be used at the discretion of the authority board for any
board-approved conservation authority program.22 Additional rules apply to the use of revenue
generated through the disposition of conservation authority property.23 In 2013,self-generated revenue
accounted for over$120 million in conservation authority revenue.
20 As set out in Ontario Regulation 670/00(Conservation Authority Levies)
21 Ontario Regulation670/00 Section 2.(1)(a)
22 Policies and Procedures for the Treatment of Conservation Authority Generated Revenue
23 Policies and Procedures for the Disposition of Conservation Authority Property
14
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
Fees for Service
Subsection 21(m.1)of the Act gives conservation authorities the power to charge fees for services.The
Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry determines which services conservation authorities may
charge fees for.The Minister has given conservation authorities approval to charge fees for permitting
services, plan reviews,extension services(e.g.technical advice/implementation of erosion control
measures,technical studies etc.), education services(e.g.,tours, presentations,workshops etc.),and any
service under other legislation authorized under agreement with the lead ministry.24
The MNRF's policies and procedures require each conservation authority to have a fees policy in place
which includes a fee schedule,a process for public notification about the establishment of or any
proposed changes to fee schedules,a clearly defined review and revision process,and a process for
appeals for fees that are proposed or in place.25
For planning,and compliance-oriented activities such as regulatory or permitting services,the fee
structures should be designed to recover but not exceed the costs associated with administering and
delivering the services on a program basis.26
While the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry approves the services which conservation
authorities may charge fees for,fee amounts are set by individual conservation authorities.Costs vary
from authority to authority for the provision of certain services so therefore the fee structures of
conservation authorities may vary from one conservation authority to another.Through MNRF policy,
conservation authorities are encouraged to review neighbouring conservation authorities'fee structures
when developing or updating their own structure.27
Fundraising
Most conservation authorities also receive funding from individuals,corporations and foundations
through fundraising,gifts,donations and sponsorship.Additionally,conservation authorities provide
many opportunities for in-kind donations to the organization such as volunteer services.
4.3. Provincial Funding
Conservation authorities receive and may apply for funding from the province to support provincially-
mandated activities and local projects.
The province provides conservation authorities with funding for provincially mandated programs—
including the hazards management program funded by MNRF and the source water protection program
funded by MOECC.
The MNRF's hazard management program is funded through two separate transfer payments.
24 Policies and Procedures for the Charging of Conservation Authority Fees(1997)—Section 5.1
25 Policies and Procedures for the Charging of Conservation Authority Fees(1997)Section 5.2
26 Policies and Procedures for the Charging of Conservation Authority Fees(1997)Section 5.3
27 Policies and Procedures for the Charging of Conservation Authority Fees(1997)Section 5.5
15
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
Since 2000, MNRF has provided over$7 million in Section 39 transfer payments annually to conservation
authorities to support the approved programs in natural hazard management and public safety.The
provincial funds support flood and erosion control operations and maintenance,flood forecasting and
warning, ice management,and the authorities' review of Official Plans and Plan Amendments for
consistency with natural hazard policies of the Provincial Policy Statement(2014), natural hazards
technical studies and administration.
The amount each conservation authority receives from MNRF is a fixed amount based on an average of
1990's operational costs and must be matched by municipal contributions through municipal levies.The
MNRF amount provided to each conservation authority was reduced from$7.6 million annually to$7.4
million annually in 2011.
Additional funding for natural hazard management is also provided to conservation authorities through
MNRF's Water and Erosion Control Infrastructure(WECI)transfer payment program.Since 2003, MNRF
has provided conservation authorities with$5 million annually in capital funding(with a temporary two
year reduction to$2.5M from 2012-14)to invest in major repairs and studies of existing conservation
authority-owned or operated water and erosion control infrastructure.This project funding supports
conservation authorities in ensuring the safe operation and maintenance of their dams and water
control infrastructure.These funds are matched by participating municipalities involved,for an annual
investment in water and erosion control infrastructure of$10 million.The WECI funding program is an
application-based program that funds the highest priority projects each year.
Conservations authorities may also receive funding from other federal departments and provincial
agencies through transfer payments to implement programs or projects related to other government
priorities established under other pieces of legislation.
For example,the Province(through MNRF and MOECC) has provided over$220 million since 2004 in
funding to conservation authorities to fulfill their duties as Source Protection Authorities under the
Clean Water Act. Funding was used for capacity building,technical studies,and water budgets,and
supported source protection committees and authorities in developing the province's first science-based
source protection plans for local watersheds. Future levels of funding are expected to move to a steady
state once current source protection plans are approved.
Additional funding may be provided to conservations authorities in support of special projects on a
project by project or application basis. For example,conservation authorities may receive funding for
projects from both the provincial and federal government under the Canada-Ontario Agreement on
Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health funding program.
(
16
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER ISM
5. Roles and Responsibilities
The objects of a conservation authority, under the Conservation Authorities Act, are to establish and
undertake a program to further the conservation, restoration,development and management of natural
resources other than gas,oil,coal and minerals.The Act defines the potential scope of programs and
services which may be delivered by a conservation authority within its area of jurisdiction.The scope of
potential programs is intentionally broad, providing each individual conservation authority with
flexibility to develop local resource management programs which are tailored to meet local geography,
needs and priorities.
Current roles and responsibilities for conservation authorities fall under the five broad headings outlined
below.
5.1. Local Resource Management Agency
The Conservation Authorities Act provides conservation authorities with the authority to develop local
resource management programs or projects that suit local needs and geography.The scope afforded to
projects in the Act under S. 20 is broad—anything to"further the conservation, restoration,
development and management of natural resources other than gas,oil,coal and minerals."The scale of
the authority projects and programs is determined at the local level,decided on by the board.
Collectively through their local programs,conservation
authorities play an important role in resource
Conservation Area Statistics management and environmental protection through
stewardship,conservation land acquisition and
73,645 hectares of conservation areas management, recreation, education, and science and
including research.These programs may include tree planting,
habitat rehabilitation and restoration,water quality
2,491 kilometers of trails improvement and water supply management,ground
and water monitoring,education and outreach, heritage
conservation, management of conservation areas,
8,442 campsites information management,data collection and
accessed by mapping, monitoring and the development of
6,898,229 annual visitors technical studies,watershed plans and the
development of natural heritage strategies. Every
including conservation authority board-approved local resource
430,764 students management program is unique,offering a different
suite of programs designed to reflect local needs and
*As reported by conservation authorities priorities.Conservation authority local programs are
often supported by community volunteers. In 2012
over 37,000 people volunteered to support more than
17
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER OMNI
J
700 local conservation authority projects.28
Conservation authorities also have a role in local resource management as land owners.Conservation
authorities have accumulated large land holdings within their jurisdictions through property acquisition,
eco-gifting and land conveyances.Conservation authority owned land is considered private land under
the Planning Act. Some of these lands are operated by the authorities for educational and recreational
purposes,for conservation or protection reasons and also for income generation.Conservation
authorities may develop their lands to support local programs,or may maintain lands in a natural state
in order to protect them and provide ecological and natural hazard management benefits to the public.
Conservation authorities may also act as interested parties on development applications near their
landholdings. In addition, because of their proximity to watercourses,conservation authorities own or
control lands that have a high concentration of cultural heritage resources.
Board-approved local resource management programs may be funded by municipal levies,self-
generated revenue,or through a contract with another organization. In areas of the province where
conservation authorities have not been established, local resource management programs may be
developed and administered directly by municipalities.
5.2. MNRF Approved Projects under the Act
Section 24 of the Act requires conservation authorities to obtain MNRF approval for projects that are
funded by MNRF through the Act.The project that the Minister currently approves under the Act for all
conservation authorities is related to public safety and natural hazard management.The increased
frequency and severity of extreme weather events associated with climate change has further
underscored the importance of this role in protecting persons and property from water-related natural
hazards including flooding and drought.
All conservation authorities implement a shared provincial/municipal program in public safety and
natural hazard management.As part of their role in implementing the shared provincial/municipal
program in public safety and natural hazard management,conservation authorities own and or operate
over 900 flood control structures including 256 dams,and numerous engineered channels,dykes and
erosion control works. Under this shared provincial/municipal program,conservation authorities also
undertake flood forecasting and warning and ice management.To support these and other programs
(e.g. hazard input into municipal planning),conservation authorities may also collect and prepare
technical data related to natural hazards in their jurisdiction.
As part of the MNRF natural hazard program,the MNRF has delegated to conservation authorities the
responsibility for representing the"Provincial Interest"for natural hazard policies(s.3.1)of the
Provincial Policy Statement(PPS) (2014) under the Planning Act through a Memorandum of
Understanding between the MNRF,the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing(MMAH)and
Conservation Ontario.This delegation does not occur under the Conservation Authorities Act.
Conservation authorities are to comment on municipal planning policy and site plan applications
submitted as part of the Provincial One-Window Plan Review Service to ensure consistency with the
natural hazard policies of the PPS(2014).Where MMAH is not the approval authority conservation
authorities still perform this role under the Municipal Plan Review.Conservation authority comments
28 As reported by conservation authorities through annual statistics collected by Conservation Ontario
r l
18
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER NESEI
are to be made based on MNRF's Natural Hazard Technical Guides(2002)which were developed to
support the PPS policies.When undertaking this role conservation authorities are guided by Planning
Act definitions(e.g.for development, hazardous sites,etc.)and not by definitions under the
Conservation Authorities Act.
The natural hazard program is funded by the MNRF through provincial grants and transfer payments,
and cost shared with municipalities. In areas of the province without conservation authorities natural
hazards are managed by municipalities under the natural hazard policies of the PPS and flood
forecasting and warning responsibilities are undertaken by MNRF.
5.3. Regulatory Authority
Each conservation authority has a provincially-approved 'Development, Interference with Wetlands and
Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses' regulation developed under section 28 of the Conservation
Authorities Act. Conservation authorities are responsible for regulating development within the
regulatory limits described within their respective regulations. In areas of the province without
conservation authorities development in hazardous areas is managed by municipalities under the
natural hazard policies of the PPS.Conservation authorities' regulatory role is primarily funded through
the use of permitting fees and municipal levies.
Under these regulations,conservation authorities are responsible for regulating development and other
activities through a permitting process for purposes of natural hazard management. Regulated activities
are:
• Development in areas related to water-related natural hazards such as floodplains,shorelines,
wetlands and hazardous lands.29 Under the Act,conservation authorities must consider
development applications based on potential impacts to the control of water-related natural
hazards which includes flooding,erosion,dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of
land;and,
• Interference with or alterations to a watercourse or wetland.
In order to the implement the approved regulation,the authority board sets regulatory policies and
practices.
The Conservation Authorities Act regulation authority was expanded through Act amendments in 1998,
and enacted through the'generic' regulation approved by the province in 2004 and updated individual
regulations approved by the Minister in 2006.The updated regulations require conservation authorities
to regulate additional water related hazards such as unstable soils and bedrock,erosion and dynamic
beaches. MNRF technical support for the regulations is provided through the Guidelines for Developing
Schedules of Regulated Areas(2005)and the MNRF Natural Hazards Technical Guides(2002)developed
for the PPS natural hazard policies.
Under the Act, a person who has been refused a permit or who objects to conditions imposed on a
permit by a conservation authority may appeal permit decisions and conditions to the Minister of
29 Hazardous lands is defined in the Conservation Authorities Act under S.28(25)as land that could be unsafe for
development because of naturally occurring processes associated with flooding,erosion,dynamic beaches or
unstable soil or bedrock .
i
19
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER MIMI
i
Natural Resources and Forestry.The Minister has assigned the responsibility for hearing these appeals
to the Ontario Mining&Lands Commissioner.
In 2010, MNRF released the Policies&Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review&Permitting
Activities-a new policy for conservation authorities to clarify and provide best practices for their roles
under the Planning Act and in the municipal planning process and in their regulatory authority under the
Conservation Authorities Act.This policy was developed with the assistance of a multi-ministry, multi-
stakeholder committee(the Conservation Authorities Liaison Committee)co-chaired by the MNRF and
the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and was made up of representatives from the building
industry, municipalities,conservation authorities and environmental organizations.
5.4. Roles under Other Provincial Legislation
Conservation authorities may be assigned responsibilities under other pieces of provincial legislation.
For example, under the Clean Water Act, conservation authorities were assigned the duties and
responsibilities of source protection authorities. In addition,the Lake Simcoe Protection Act assigns the
local conservation authority—the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority—a key role in
• implementing the policies in the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan in collaboration with the province,
municipalities and others.
In many of these other legislative roles,conservation authorities are a commenting agency and are
required to receive notice of proposals made under other pieces of legislation including the Planning
Act,the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act,the Environmental Assessment Act and the
Aggregates Resources Act. In these roles,conservation authorities base any comments on board-
approved policies that the authority has developed as a local resource management agency. Under the
Planning Act as a public body and local board,conservation authorities can comment on and appeal
municipal planning documents on a range of other PPS policies as directed by conservation authority
board-approved policy.This more general PPS policy commenting role is distinct from the MNRF
delegated commenting role related specifically to the PPS natural hazards policies.
5.5. Service Providers
Under the Act,every authority is a corporation,and as such has the inherent capacity to undertake
responsibilities requiring an incorporated organization to accomplish.With an investment of nearly 70
years of public funding in infrastructure,capacity,staffing,skills, resources, local knowledge,
connections in resource manage,and common interests,these organizations are attractive vehicles for
delivery of initiatives of others whether by agreement or through a contract.
Conservation authorities may enter into agreements with others as may be necessary to carry out a
project.As a result conservation authorities may have service agreements or contracts with federal and
provincial government agencies and partnering municipalities or others(e.g.school boards, public
health units,etc.)to perform a variety of services or tasks.
Some conservation authorities may have roles and responsibilities related to joint federal/provincial
interests such as supporting Environment Canada in implementing the Canada-United States Great
i
20
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
i
Lakes Water Quality Agreement and working with federal and provincial agencies as well as local groups
to restore community waterfronts and Great Lakes"Areas of Concern."Some conservation authorities
may be undertaking projects funded under the Canada-Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water
Quality and Ecosystem Health.
Some conservation authorities provide additional technical services to municipalities through service
agreements.Types of services could include data collection and scientific expertise related to natural
resource management,stormwater management, identifying natural heritage features and systems on
behalf of their municipalities,and or reviewing natural heritage evaluations in support of municipal
assessment of Planning Act applications or environmental assessments. Under an agreement with a
municipality,an authority may assume a regulatory responsibility such as administering municipal tree
cutting bylaws or septic system approvals or undertake technical reviews pursuant to the Planning Act
One Window Plan Review Service on parts of planning policy or site plan applications.
I
I
f{' :-' ` air •F . / ' ' 4
h :;1 ' + p. •a
Z- -,t,;.(.41 ,'-'1 t",s4'.;','` ?}y{3 ; Y din irr'rl .,'y KN'n.1 y r P
+-A" -A Z .. Mfar-°a+d<t Sfr 2.'".x .F1.r ,..`... k _ �(i
fr /t{
wSI .:4;,,,.....-„f•-..:...,,,S ,.r4.. ' ., - .,!... ,?--7*r-i'l r,-..,y K�+d'._^s '''''std R'.� r./• .4 i4( 1/'fr
fil 1 i /it,.i, ,motd ,•, 'fi
�1 r, ,lilt r It. llii�/`4
F �1 � V!
- ;Ut, /iii.,ILi'l `t,.f i" -h1 is V-,_
I
21 1
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER M
i
6. Summary and Questions for Discussion
The following questions are intended to help focus the discussion. They are organized around the areas
of review outlined in Section 1:
1. Governance—the processes,structures,and accountability frameworks within the Act which
direct conservation authority decision-making and operations;
2. Funding—the mechanisms put in place by the Act to fund conservation authorities;and
3. Roles and Responsibilities—the roles and associated responsibilities that the Act enables
conservation authorities to undertake.
The questions are general in nature and intended to prompt discussion on a number of focused areas
and are not intended to discourage readers from raising questions or providing comments in other
areas.Where possible, please provide specific examples and/or links to supporting information.
6.1. Governance
Conservation authorities are governed by the Conservation Authorities Act and by a board of directors
appointed by the municipalities that form the authority.The province,through the Act,defines the
objectives to be pursued by the authority and the power granted to the authority to achieve these
objectives.The activities undertaken by conservation authorities in the pursuit of their objectives are
directed by a municipally appointed board of directors. Municipal representatives to conservation
authority boards are directly accountable to the municipalities that appoint them and conservation
authorities must abide by provincial legislative, regulatory and policy requirements.
In the past,the province played a more direct role in overseeing conservation authorities.The province
directed conservation authorities by approving their budgets and programs,appointing provincial
representatives to authority boards,selecting the chair of the board and,when requested by the
authority, by appointing provincial field officers to direct and coordinate the authority's work.The
provincial government was involved in approving projects and activities,and monitoring and reviewing
conservation authority programs.While oversight of conservation authorities is still shared between the
province and the municipalities that form the authorities, changes to the Act, policy and general practice
over time have resulted in less direct provincial oversight.These changes have provided conservation
authorities with greater autonomy to direct their own operations and have given municipal
representatives who comprise the authority board a greater role in deciding and overseeing authority
activities. It has also afforded conservation authority staff greater freedom to make proposals for
programming and research for the board's collective review. Because decisions are made collectively by
all the participating municipalities in an authority through the board,the amount of control each
municipality has over conservation authority decisions varies.
At the same time,conservation authorities are developing new,and enhancing existing, relationships
with other provincial ministries and other partners. In some cases,these relationships are managed
22
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
through other legislative frameworks,such as through the Clean Water Act and the Lake Simcoe
Protection Act. In other cases these relationships are managed on a project-by-project or authority-by-
authority basis by a contract or MOU.There are no processes,standards or tools within the
Conservation Authorities Act or supporting framework governing these relationships.
It is difficult to generalize or to speak about a generic conservation authority as the result of the Act has
been to enable a great diversity of organizations in scale and operations and capacity,with variance in
resourcing or funding and funding strategies, board structures and the level of direct accountability to
and interest of municipalities varies.
QUESTION#1: In your view, how well is the current governance model as provided in the
Conservation Authorities Act working?
a. What aspects of the current governance model are working well?
b. What aspects of the current governance model are in need of improvement?
c. In terms of governance,what should be expected of:
a. The board and its members?
b. The general manager or chief administrative officer?
c. Municipalities?
d. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry?
e. Other provincial ministries?
f. Others?
d. How should the responsibility for oversight of conservation authorities be shared between the
province and municipalities?
e. Are there other governance practices or tools that could be used to enhance the existing
governance model?
6.2. Funding Mechanisms
The Conservation Authorities Act establishes a number of mechanisms which conservation authorities
can use to fund their activities.The Act allows the MNRF to provide conservation authorities with
funding to support Ministry approved programs.As a corporate body,conservation authorities may also
receive or apply for funding from the province to deliver programs on its behalf. Local resource
management programs and services can be funded through municipal levies and conservation
authorities can self-generate revenue through service and user fees,resource development and
fundraising.
Conservation authority revenue across Ontario's 36 conservation authorities is as varied as the
programs and services offered by each authority.While the province provides all conservation
authorities with funding towards approved natural hazards activities,the ability of each conservation
authority to deliver other programs and services largely depends on the ability of each authority to
r �
23
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER MEM
\ l
locally fund programs and services.Conservation authorities with large populations within their
jurisdictions generally have a greater tax base to draw from, as well as more opportunities for self-
generated revenue,so they can offer more programs and services at a lower per capita cost.
In addition,conservation authority funding needs vary depending on the size of their respective
jurisdictions, population levels,watershed characteristics(such as the amount of hazard land and the
potential for flood,drought,etc.)and the number and purpose of water and erosion control structures
owned and/or operated by the conservation authority.
QUESTION#2: In your view, how are the programs and services delivered by conservation
authorities best financed?
a. How well are the existing funding mechanisms outlined within the Act working?
b. What changes to existing funding mechanisms would you like to see if any?
c. Which funding mechanisms,or combination of funding mechanisms,are best able to support
the long term sustainability of conservation authorities?
d. Are there other revenue generation tools that should be considered?
6.3. Roles and Responsibilities
The Conservation Authorities Act enables conservation authorities to undertake a wide range of
activities on behalf of provincial, municipal and other interests through several roles.These roles have
been enabled through the Act,and the responsibilities have followed.Conservation authorities are the
only resource management agencies in Ontario that are organized on a watershed basis.
The Act provides conservation authorities with the power to develop their own suite of programs and
services tailored to the capacity and expertise of each individual authority and the local needs and
interests they serve.This flexibility allows conservation authorities,and the municipalities that fund
them,to focus their resources on areas of greatest need to the local population. It also results in
variability in the scale and range of programs and services delivered by any individual conservation
authority.Some conservation authorities offer a basic program primarily focused on stewardship,
conservation land acquisition and management,recreation,education,and science and research.Other
conservation authorities may offer the same programming at a much broader scale and complexity in
addition to a wider range of programs that can include,for example, promotion of green infrastructure,
development of strategies such as natural heritage strategies, land acquisitions strategies,and extensive
watershed and water management planning.Some conservation authorities invest in resource
development initiatives such as hydroelectric generation, large scale waterfront developments in lake
fills,and income generation projects such as marina operation,cottage rentals and ski hills.
Recent years have seen an increased interest in reviewing conservation authority roles in resource
management in Ontario.The Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Service in particular called
on the province to undertake a review of the programs and services delivered by both the MNRF and
conservation authorities to clarify responsibilities and eliminate any duplication. Other concerns have
been raised regarding the lack of clarity in the scope of conservation authority roles and responsibilities
especially in relation to municipalities and the province.Specifically questions have been raised
24
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER r
regarding conservation authorities' regulatory role and the intention of the regulations,with some key
regulatory terms undefined in legislation(e.g.conservation of land and interference with a wetland).
QUESTION#3: In your view, what should be the role of conservation authorities in Ontario?
a. What resource management programs and activities may be best delivered at the watershed
scale?
b. Are current roles and responsibilities authorized by the Conservation Authorities Act
appropriate?Why or why not?What changes, if any,would you like to see?
c. How may the impacts of climate change affect the programs and activities delivered by
conservation authorities?Are conservation authorities equipped to deal with these effects?
d. Is the variability in conservation authorities'capacity and resourcing to offer a range of
programs and services a concern?Should there be a standard program for all authorities to
deliver?Why or why not?
e. What are some of the challenges facing conservation authorities in balancing their various roles
and responsibilities?Are there tools or other changes that would help with this?
f. Are there opportunities to improve consistency in service standards,timelines and fee
structures?What are the means by which consistency can be improved?What are some of the
challenges in achieving greater consistency in these areas?
6.4. Other Areas of Interest
Broad input is critically important to ensure that a range of perspectives,opinions and ideas are
collected.While we encourage respondents to focus on the discussion questions provided above we
welcome feedback on additional areas.
QUESTION#4: Are there any other areas, questions or concerns regarding the Conservation
Authorities Act or conservation authorities in general that you feel should be considered as part
of the review?
I
25
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER MEI
i
7. How to Provide Input
We want to hear from you. If you have comments or suggestions that should be considered in the
review of the Conservation Authorities Act, please take advantage of this opportunity to provide us with
your feedback.All comments received in response to this discussion paper will be read and considered
in moving forward.
Send us your comments
We strongly encourage your participation in the discussion.Written comments can be
provided by:
Responding to the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry posting by searching the EBR
Registry number 012-4509 on the following website:www.ontario.ca/EBR
Or
Emailing us at:
mnrwaterpolicy@ontario.ca
Or
Submitting answers to the questions outlined in this paper through:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/caactdiscussionpaper
The deadline for providing comments is October 19th,2015
Comments collected in response to this discussion paper will be used to inform decisions regarding
whether or not to pursue changes to Ontario's existing legislative, regulatory and policy framework for
conservation authorities.The review of individual conservation authorities,the specific programs and
services they deliver, and site-specific permit applications and permitting decisions are not within scope
of the Ministry's review.
All Ontarians are encouraged to learn more about Ontario's conservation authorities and the important
role that they play in resource management and environmental protection.
To find out more about conservation authorities and the programs and services they provide please
visit:
https://www.onta rio.ca/environment-and-energy/conservation-authorities
26
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
To locate your local conservation authority please visit:
http://www.conservation-ontario.on.ca/about-us/conservation-authorities/ca-contact-list
#— ,P rI
p +.'!".. 7i 3 - . a t ,t 9
{
``R , t
fit 4� x t r
► 'T f
r
r
27
p
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
1
References
Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Services. (2012). Public Services for Ontarians:A
Path to Sustainability and Excellence. Retrieved from
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/reformcommission/
Government of Ontario. (1990). Conservation Authorities Act. (R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27)
http://www.e-Iaws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws statutes 90c27 e.htm
Government of Ontario. (1997). Conservation Authorities Policies and Procedures Manual.
Government of Ontario. (2010). Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review
and Permitting Activities. Retrieved from
http://www.web2.mnr.gov.on.ca/mnr/water erb/CALC Chapter Final Apr23 Final.pdf
Government of Ontario. (2014). Provincial Policy Statement. Retrieved from
http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463
Institute of Internal Auditors. (2014).Assessing Organizational Governance in the Public Sector.
Retrieved from
http://www.ontariocanada.com/registry/downloads/Ontario%20Regulatory%20Policy.pdf
Office of the Mining and Lands Commissioner. (2013).Annual Report. Retrieved from
https://d r6 j45ik9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/4271/omIc-annual-report-2013-2014-en.pdf
28
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER MIN
� J
Appendices
29
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER �'
List of Conservation Authorities
Conservation Authority Acronym*
Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority ABCA
Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority CRCA
Catfish Creek Conservation Authority CCCA
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority CLOCA
Credit Valley Conservation Authority CVC
Crowe Valley Conservation Authority CVCA
Essex Region Conservation Authority ERCA
Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority GRCA
Grand River Conservation Authority Grand RCA
Grey Sauble Conservation Authority GSCA
Halton Region Conservation Authority Halton RCA
Hamilton Region Conservation Authority HRCA
Kawartha Region Conservation Authority KRCA
Kettle Creek Conservation Authority KCCA
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority LSRCA
Lakehead Region Conservation Authority LRCA
Long Point Region Conservation Authority LPRCA
Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority LTVCA
Lower Trent Region Conservation Authority LTCA
Maitland Valley Conservation Authority MVCA
Mattagami Region Conservation Authority MRCA
Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority MVC
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority NPCA
Nickel District Conservation Authority NDCA
North Bay-Mattawa Conservation Authority NBMCA
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority NVCA
Otonabee Region Conservation Authority ORCA
Quinte Conservation Authority QCA
Raisin Region Conservation Authority RRCA
Rideau Valley Conservation Authority RVCA
Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority SVCA
Sault Ste. Marie Region Conservation Authority SSMRCA
South Nation River Conservation Authority SNRCA
St. Clair Region Conservation Authority SCRCA
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority TRCA
Upper Thames River Conservation Authority UTRCA
*As used within this Discussion Paper
30
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
List of Conservation Authority Regulations
Conservation authority activities are guided by a series of regulations established under the Act.
Section 27(2)O.Reg.670/00 Conservation Authority Levies Regulation.Outlines means for
determining apportionment by the conservation authority of the levy payable by a participating
municipality for maintenance costs on the basis of the benefit derived each municipality,either by
agreement or using'modified current value assessment' under the Assessment Act.
Section 27(3)O. Reg.139/96 Municipal Levies Regulation. LGIC regulation that outlines how'non-
matching' municipal levies are decided with a'weighted'vote at a conservation authority board Meeting
convened to do so.
Section 28(6)O.Reg.97/04-Content of Conservation Authority Regulations under subsection 28(1)
of the Act Development,Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses.
Lieutenant Governor in Council regulation governing the content of regulations made by authorities
including flood event standards and other standards that may be used,and setting out what must be
included or excluded from regulations made by the authorities and approved by the Minister.
Section 28 O.Regs.42/06,146/06-182/06,319/09,—Development,Interference with Wetlands and
Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation.Regulation enables conservation authorities to
regulate development in areas prone to water-based natural hazards(i.e.shorelines,floodplains,
wetlands)for impacts to the control of the water-based hazards(i.e.flooding and erosion)or for
changing or'interfering'with a watercourse or wetland for purposes of public safety and natural hazard
prevention and management.
Section 29 O. Regs.98/90-136/90—Conservation Areas Regulation. Discretionary regulation applies to
conservation areas owned&operated by the conservation authority,outlines prohibited activities or
activities requiring a permit and rules of use(i.e.control of animals,vehicles,with provisions for
enforcement).
Section 30"Mandatory Regulations'-All conservation authorities were required to make regulations
outlining administration functions of the board.Originally Minister approved,these regulations are now
'by-laws'which can be amended without Minister approval if amendments conform to the approved
generic template provided to conservation authorities in 1985.
Section 40 Regulations.The province may make regulations defining any term that is used in the
Conservation Authorities Act and that is not defined in the Act.This regulation making authority has not
yet been used.
31
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT DISCUSSION PAPER
l