The chair of the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) says the amalgamation of the NVCA and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) is “neither necessary nor advisable.”
Jonathan Scott, chair of the NVCA and a town councillor in Bradford West Gwillimbury, was responding to a Jan. 22 motion by Oro-Medonte Township Deputy Mayor Peter Lavoie that called for the amalgamation of the two conservation authorities, a move Lavoie said would result in a number of benefits for township residents.
“The Township of Oro-Medonte believes there to be advantages of economics, consistency, timeliness and governance to amalgamate the authorities,” Lavoie’s motion from that council meeting read. “The Conservation Authorities Act of Ontario, Part 3, Section 11 provides for a participating municipality to call a meeting to consider the establishment of one authority to have jurisdiction over the areas that are under separate jurisdictions.
“The purpose of this motion is to put the wheels under that process to get it started, so each of the municipalities can decide to their own benefit whether it’s something worth doing,” Lavoie added at the time.
Scott’s letter, dated Feb. 28, was sent to the mayor and council of every municipality located within the NVCA and LSRCA watersheds.
“Following careful deliberation with our board, and discussion with the chair and chief administrative officer of the LSRCA, it is the position of the NVCA board that a formal amalgamation is neither necessary nor advisable,” Scott wrote in the letter.
“To date, no independent, expert analysis has been presented to demonstrate that amalgamation would improve efficiency or service delivery,” he added. “On the contrary, experience has shown that larger municipal entities often result in increased costs, governance challenges, operational inefficiencies and a loss of local focus.”
The letter explained the NVCA and the LSRCA serve distinct watersheds with unique ecological, planning and regulatory frameworks.
Scott noted while some municipalities are within both authorities, the vast majority of the NVCA’s member municipalities have little in common with the Lake Simcoe watershed. The LSRCA also has distinct responsibilities under the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, which highlights the unique challenges of that system.
“A single, combined (conservation) authority could dilute focus and reduce responsiveness to local needs, given the new entity would span a very large geographic area,” Scott wrote.
“Rather than pursuing an amalgamation process — one that would inevitably lead to debates over jurisdiction, governance and composition — the NVCA board is focused on delivering meaningful improvements that address the concerns of our municipal partners.”
Scott listed a number of improvements, including operational accountability, process review and best practices, improving consistency between conservation authorities and customer service.
Lavoie dismissed the letter.
“The communications sent out by the NVCA do not form part of the public process that the conservation authority amalgamation motion has commenced, nor do the NVCA business plans, opinions, motions and/or resolutions,” Lavoie said via email.
However, he said the township will make the public and the development community aware of when they can participate in the public process and make their “desires known” regarding proposed amalgamation.
“At a future date, once having heard from the public stakeholders, there will be deliberations and a vote by the member municipalities as to whether an amalgamation is recommended to the province,” he added.
According to Lavoie, if the recommendation is passed by the member municipalities, the province will either accept or reject it.
Scott, who was copied on the email from Lavoie, doesn’t share that view.
“I just want to respectfully point out that member municipalities of a watershed impacted by an amalgamation proposal may take into consideration any matters they feel are relevant to the question,” Scott said.
He also said the unanimous decision of the NVCA’s board of directors, one of the impacted conservation authorities, and the questions raised by the absence of an expert study analyzing the proposal may have significant bearing.