HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-19_Minutes_RWA_2019-05-22Toronto and Region
Conservation
Authority
Regional Watershed Alliance Meeting #2/19 was held at Head Office, 101 Exchange
Avenue, Vaughan, on Wednesday, May 22, 2019. The Chair Jennifer McKelvie, called the
meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
PRESENT
McKelvie, Jennifer
Chair
Broadbent, Heather
Member
Calvin, Elizabeth
Member
Dies, Joanne
Member
Dyce, Dave
Member
Heath, Jack
Member
lacobelli, Tony
Member
Keenan, Rosemary
Member
Kelly, Jill
Member
Laing, David
Member
Lockridge, Karen (Via teleconference)
Member
Mallet, Lisette
Member
Malowany, Mick
Member
Mattos, Mike
Member
McCullough, Sean
Member
McDowell, Madeleine
Member
McGlynn, Chris
Member
Nonnekes, Joanne
Member
O'Connor, Kevin
Member
Pickles, David
Member
Ramsay Brown, Jason
Member
Schulte, Deb
Member
Scotchmer, Carolyn
Member
Vrana, Andrew
Member
Wickens, Andy
Member
I_1:Ic9g01111
Ngan, Amory
Member
Barrett, Suzanne
Member
Bream, Margaret
Member
Burnett, Neil
Member
Deawuo, Leticia
Member
Ditschun, Lisa
Member
Drake, Jennifer
Member
Felix, Rui
Member
Presutti, Michael
Member
Wright, Doug
Member
The Chair recited the Acknowledgement of Indigenous Territory.
RES.#R5/19 — MINUTES
Moved by: David Laing
Seconded by: Mick Malowany
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/19, held on February 13, 2019, be approved.
CARRIED
Items for the Action of the Regional Watershed Alliance
REGIONAL WATERSHED ALLIANCE YOUTH COUNCIL WORKPLAN
PRIORITIES
To update and seek Regional Watershed Alliance (RWA) approval of
Youth Council workplan priorities.
Moved by: Jack Heath
Seconded by: Madeleine McDowell
THAT the presentation by Youth Council Executive members Adeena Afridi, Anjali Bapat,
Alana Cameron, Adrian DeRushe, Wai Ying Lam, Alessia Mole and Eleni Pappas,
regarding workplan priorities be received for Regional Watershed Alliance input and
approval;
AND FURTHER THAT Shannon S. Holness, Community Benefits Organizer and youth
representative of Toronto Community Benefits Network, be welcomed to join the
Regional Watershed Alliance Youth Council Working Group as a collaborator.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Around the world, youth councils have been created by governments, community groups, and
non-profit organizations as a means of providing local youth with an opportunity to gain
important skills, build capacity and network, while providing the sponsoring agencies with
important input and perspectives from youth stakeholders. The long-term success of efforts to
advance environmental protection and sustainability in TRCA's jurisdiction depends on the
support of the region's youth, both now and into the future. TRCA's Community Engagement
Strategy (2017) recommends more focused engagement of youth to enhance the reach of
TRCA programs and activities and prepare the next generation of conservation leaders (Actions
6.1 and 6.2). Activities of the Youth Council will build on existing engagement programs while
deploying new tools and strategies to develop a strong network of youth driven to take active
ownership of their local environment.
The Youth Council is comprised of community youth champions, existing youth group
representatives and new recruits. The Youth Council reports directly to the Regional Watershed
Alliance. The mission, mandate and goals, along with the Terms of Reference for the Youth
Council, have been developed by TRCA staff and the RWA in consultation with relevant
stakeholders. At Regional Watershed Alliance Meeting #1/2017, held on November 15th, 2017,
Resolution #R002/17 was approved, in part, as follows:
WHEREAS THE Terms of Reference of the Regional Watershed Alliance proposes the
establishment of Watershed/Working Groups, Youth Council, and Indigenous Liaison
Committee;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the following members of the Alliance work
with staff to lead the establishment of Youth Council including development of terms of
reference:
a) Lisette Mallet; b) Amory Ngan; c) Rui Felix; d) Mick Malowany; and e) Karen
Lockridge.
At RWA meeting #2/17 held on February 2112018, the framework for the Youth Council was
approved (RES. #010/17). The framework described four objectives for the Youth Council:
a) Build capacity and engage youth by providing youth across the Toronto region with
learning opportunities;
b) Build a youth network/strengthen existing networks through creation of a broad
network of youth in the region that is interested in environmental and sustainability
issues;
c) Identify youth perspectives by developing an understanding of youth opinion around
current environmental issues and how these might be incorporated in the work of TRCA
and its partners; and
d) Create fun opportunities for youth through entertaining and engaging learning
opportunities.
Two tiers of Youth Council membership are described: general and executive membership. The
general membership is open to all youth in TRCA's jurisdiction. General members are invited to
participate in Youth Council meetings and events, but their participation is voluntary. Executive
members are an application -based position; youth are invited to submit their resumes along with
a completed application. The RWA Youth Council Working Group then selects 10 members who
will serve a one-year term. Executive members are responsible for the development of priorities,
communication with the general membership, organizing meetings, and the development of a
work plan.
Members of the executive were selected by the Regional Watershed Alliance Youth Council
Steering Committee in October 2018. The executive members were provided the approved
framework and agreed on a Terms of Reference. Both the framework and Terms of Reference
have been adapted to create workplans to meet council objectives and goals.
RATIONALE
The Youth Council Executive has developed a workplan that addresses all four Youth Council
objectives set forth in the framework.
To build capacity among youth and build/strengthen the youth network (objectives a and b), the
Youth Council will network with other youth council, NGOs, and organizations. Opportunities for
volunteering or for youth engagement have been shared with the wider general membership
through quarterly newsletters (the April edition included links to external opportunities such as
Youth Challenge International Climate Action Catalyst).
To investigate "Youth Perspectives" (objective c), the Executive Council has surveyed the
general membership, as well as members of the public. Respondents were asked to indicate
issues they feel are most important and have the greatest impact on their daily lives. Some
preliminary results from this survey are summarized in the attached presentation. The Executive
Council will use this information to inform engagement opportunities (objective d) throughout the
year. Climate change was consistently the most reported topic. Some geographical differences
in priorities identified by respondents were noted: "wildlife and habitat conservation" was more
frequently reported by respondents outside of the City of Toronto, and respondents from
Toronto indicated "Access to Greenspace" as an important issue more frequently than those
from outside of the city. This data will help to better inform the development of engagement
opportunities, which will include newsletters, online engagement tools, small localized
events, and a large culmination event at the end of their one-year term.
In addition to the April Newsletter and the survey to both members and the broader public, the
Youth Council held an Earth Day Clean-up event in The Meadoway on April 28'", 2019,
submitted an abstract to the Latornell Conservation Symposium, and initiated discussion with
Swim Drink Fish and Ryerson Urban Water regarding co -hosting movie nights over the summer
of 2019.
Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan
This report supports the following strategy set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan:
Strategy 5 — Foster sustainable citizenship
Strategy 7 — Build partnerships and new business models
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Staff is engaged in community engagement, consultation, outreach and education work as part
of their ongoing roles. No additional funding is proposed to support this engagement work.
Youth Council Executive members are encouraged to raise funding for specific activities.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
1. Build capacity among youth and build/strengthen youth network by continued
establishment and maintenance of relationships with other NGO's/Youth Councils.
2. Continue analysis of youth perspectives to inform workplan priorities.
3. Create fun opportunities and experiences for youth, specifically the creation of a larger -
scale culminative event in Fall 2019 aligned, if possible, with TRCA activities such as
world River Day activities and /or Humber Heritage 201" Anniversary Event.
Report prepared by: Kate Goodale, extension 5280; Raysha Carmichael, extension 5623
Emails: kate.goodale@trca.ca
For Information contact: Kate Goodale, extension 5280
Emails: kate.goodale@trca.ca
Date: May 3, 2019
Regional Watershed Alliance
Youth Council Workplan
Priorities
Presented by: TRCA Youth Council Executive
May 22nd, 2019
Toronto and Region
Conservation
Authority
What is the Youth Council?
Youth from TRCA's jurisdiction
General and Executive membership
General members: 115 members
Executive members: team of 9
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2
Who is the Youth Council?
Demographics
115 members
as of April 30,
2019
Average age: 20
80% female;
20% male
r5g1 O U
rye.
Coulaons NAl
Lak
o
Mulmur
eemae
T,h
Q
N..o Mir Albers O
cies
S..b
Nexlxo-
SIaO°n
Robina. Bradlwd west
J Mole, NIII
Gw,llimkry Uxbndge
p°m perry.
Bl.,Mno
6wd Nnd GwJhaxl n a
non,Anon—Och
Urea
O
Newmarket
ssd<
C
tOfryO
® Balbmne Goodwood
MOnO Lenva
n
U Mono
Rhmmberg Avwa Glen Mai.
0
LaetlwNl O
Ov
v
C'
`1 whnehmM�twl(vllle
° G ormley Q
Omngevllle
,Q
Ring C.,
O
Noblemn i. Q
Ri and Hill,
Whitby Oshawa
C°u.ice
Mono Rood
L°Iw.
9# Markle
V�ghan . Plckering Ajax
° C O
In,
r91
MORtRIOR�
lrampt�
eedale Nall. Nele anowear0 M Q
TdPontO
C.
V
JE
Rockwood
Uo
sd..Mdla
MississalJa
s°wmh slaw
9�
Milton)?
a
o
O*-
Oakville
Figure 1. Map of YC member addresses based on postal code
3
Vaughan, 5% Woodbridge, 3%
Toronto, 33%
Thornhill, 2%
Stouffville, 2%
5%
North
Scarborough, 11N " pakviIle, 1%
Pickering, 1%
:)n, 1%
;oke, 3%
aple, 1%
Milton, 2%
Figure 2. Current address of YC members based on postal
code
0
Key Objectives
Objective #1: Identify Youth Perspectives
Objective #2: Create fun opportunities and
experiences for youth
Objective #3: Build capacity among youth and
build/strengthen youth network
Identifying Youth Perspectives
Gaining an understanding of what environmental issues
are important to youth
Shaping our initiatives and events around the issues most
important to them
A
70%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Top 10 Key Issues
Climate Change Wildlife and Sustainable Water Access to Green Education Renewable Biodiversity
Habitat Development Quality/Source Space, Parks and Energy
Conservation Water Protection Natural Areas
Figure 3.Top 10 key issues of concern by council members through online surveys
Waste food Security
Management
80%
70%
60%
50%
400/
30%
20%
10%
0%
Top 10 Key Issues - By Postal Codes
II TO ■ Outside TO
climate Wildlife and Sustainable Water Renewable Education Accessto Biodiversity Waste Food Security
Change Habitat Development Quality/Source Energy Green Space Management
Conservation Water
Protection
Figure 4.Top 10 key issues of concern by council members through online surveys by Toronto Postal
Codes and Postal Codes outside of Toronto
N
I prefer going to social/networking events that take place
outdoors in parks or other green spaces.
I prefer going to social/networking events that take place
indoors.
I prefer engaging with environmental issues through
advocacy and support, by making donations, taking part in
social media campaigns, etc.
I enjoy taking a hands-on approach to tackling
environmental issues, by getting involved in things like
litter cleanups and tree plantings.
I'm very comfortable with large groups of new people.
I'm more of an indoor person than an outdoor person.
-2 -1.; -1 -0.5 0 0 I. L.�...
. Agree
. Disagree
Figure 5. Preferences of forms of engagement activities by council members recorded from online
surveys
Al
Creating Fun Opportunities and Experiences
for Youth
Providing fun opportunities for youth to affect change in a
hands-on way
10
Meadoway Clean up
Date: Sunday April 28th
Location: Bendale Junior Public School, The Meadoway
Amount of garbage Collected: 271 lbs
People in Attendance: 9 people
11
Upcoming Events and Ideas
Presentation at Latornell
Conservation Symposium
Co -hosting summer
movie nights with Swim
Drink Fish
Large Event in Fall 2019
Details TBD
• Humber 20th Anniversary
• World Rivers Day
Session at Watershed
Forum
Y s AAZc: .
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 12
Building Capacity and Strengthening the
Youth Network
Create a broad network of youth in the region that is
interested in environmental and sustainability issues
Networking with other volunteer groups:
Emerging Leaders for Biodiversity
Swim Drink Fish
Toronto Community Benefits Network
among others
13
Quarterly Newsletter
Submissions from
members based on theme
Youth Council Events
Volunteer Opportunities
in TRCA's jurisdiction
Next Newsletter
Date: Summer 2019
Theme: Wildlife and
biodiversity
14
Thank you for listening...
Questions? Suggestions?
Toronto and Region
Conservation
Authority
RES.#7/19 - WORLD RIVERS DAY ACTIVITIES
To seek Regional Watershed Alliance (RWA) input on proposed TRCA
World River's Day outreach and engagement campaign focused at raising
awareness and communicating TRCA's accomplishments related to
watershed management.
Moved by: Lisette Mallet
Seconded by: Rosemary Keenan
WHEREAS World Rivers Day is a celebration of the world's waterways and is observed
by over 60 countries;
AND WHEREAS TRCA's jurisdiction spans nine rivers and watersheds across the region
and contains a population of over 3.5 million people;
AND WHEREAS TRCA has undertaken multiple initiatives over its history to improve the
health of the watersheds within its jurisdiction and to connect the public with these
rivers and creeks, and in 2019 TRCA is engaged in a year-long celebration to recognize
the 20t" anniversary of the Humber River's Heritage Designation;
THEREFORE let it be proposed that a TRCA outreach and engagement campaign for
World Rivers Day 2019 be received for Regional Watershed Alliance members' input;
THAT the final plan for proposed World River Day activities be shared with members of
the RWA and based on any input received be finalized and presented to the TRCA Board
of Directors;
AND FURTHER THAT Regional Watershed Alliance members consider ways in which
they can support TRCA's World Rivers Day campaign through their organizations and
networks and through the TRCF Look After Where You Live Program.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
On September 22nd, 2019, people from over 60 countries around the world will celebrate World
Rivers Day, an international event with the goal of creating greater awareness around caring for
our water resources and celebrating the many values of our waterways. World Rivers Day
originated in British Columbia, where BC Rivers Day has been celebrated since 1980. The first
World Rivers Day event was held in 2005 as a part of the UN Water For Life Decade (2005-
2015) and the event has been growing steadily each year. Other World Rivers Day events from
past years include a family -friendly river celebration event at Burnaby Village Museum in
Burnaby BC, a volunteer clean-up of the River Freshney in Grimsby, England, and a "March for
the River" in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
This year is the 15th annual World Rivers Day and an ideal opportunity for TRCA and the
Regional Watershed Alliance to join the celebration. For many years TRCA has delivered a
variety of events across its jurisdiction. Events have included workshops and a speaking series,
conservation area events and large-scale signature watershed and waterfront events that help
TRCA increase its presence in watershed communities, raise support, and help implement
TRCA strategic priorities and objectives. TRCA events also provide an excellent opportunity to
engage communities and build awareness and appreciation for the watersheds in our
jurisdiction.
This year also marks the twentieth anniversary of the Humber River's designation as a Heritage
River by the Canadian Heritage Rivers System. As a result, TRCA is developing a year-long
celebration plan for this anniversary, with the signature event, Humber by Canoe, being one
component of it. This is one example of an opportunity to combine this significant feature's
celebration into World Rivers Day activities.
In addition to watershed and waterfront events, TRCA has also conducted decades of work
improving the health of its watersheds and the waterfront. These include monitoring and
restoring the rivers and creeks in its jurisdiction, building trails, steering major projects through
to completion, and developing education and engagement initiatives for residents, businesses,
schools, municipalities and other audiences, all of which are achievements worthy of
celebration. Furthermore, through visits to conservation areas, recreation or other forms of
participation in TRCA initiatives, residents and visitors have been given an opportunity to learn
about and experience the rivers and creeks within TRCA's jurisdiction.
N A =I 4 1 k1l I 121 F-11 WA 914 IF -3I
Staff are proposing to develop an outreach and engagement campaign to celebrate the 151
annual World Rivers Day, with a focus on highlighting the stories of our nine rivers and creeks.
World Rivers Day also presents an opportunity to:
a) commemorate the work that TRCA has done, and continues to do, to improve the health
of our watersheds and waterfront, as well as the connection that residents, visitors and
other audiences have with them;
b) promote major accomplishments highlighted in TRCA 2018 Annual Report to be
published in 2019;
c) create opportunities for individual and corporate donations towards TRCA watershed
protection and enhancement activities.
Activities:
In addition to leveraging existing TRCA events listed below, staff are proposing an online
campaign leveraging TRCA's Your Say page (hftps://yoursay.ca/), a social media campaign, a
series of news articles and/or other approaches to solicit and share stories about TRCA's nine
rivers and creeks. Some key activities may include:
1. Compile existing content on TRCA rivers and creeks and craft key messages. Ensure
the Humber River continues to be profiled as a Canadian Heritage River;
2. Solicit local stories from the public about their rivers and creeks via the TRCA
engagement platform Yoursay.ca
3. Develop a series of blog, newsletters, social media postings and other stories;
4. Use the TRCA 2018 annual report to craft short river accomplishment messages;
5. Promote stories and key messages via TRCA and partner channels and existing events
throughout TRCA's jurisdiction;
6. Enhance watersheds/waterfront newsletters with special river content;
7. Utilize the World River Day social media network to promote TRCA nationally and
internationally;
8. Work with the Toronto Region Conservation Foundation to plan targeted outreach for
fundraising.
Promotions through existing events:
As TRCA already has multiple community, watershed and waterfront events planned, including
celebrations connected to the 20"' anniversary of the Humber River's designation as a Canadian
Heritage River, staff is seeking opportunities to align these festivities with World Rivers Day.
TRCA's scheduled 2019 signature watershed and waterfront events can be reviewed in the
agenda for the February 13, 2019 meeting (#1/19) of the Regional Watershed Alliance (See "8.2
2019 TRCA Planned Events that Celebrate Our Watersheds and Waterfront").
Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan
This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan:
Strategy 5 — Foster sustainable citizenship
Strategy 6 — Tell the story of the Toronto region
FINANCIAL DETAILS
It is anticipated that TRCA's 2019 World Rivers Day campaign will utilize previously funded
events, online resources and staff time so that no new funding will be required.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Pending any input received by RWA members to TRCA's proposed World Rivers Day campaign
activities, staff will work on a plan in consultation with Toronto and Region Conservation
Foundation on their Look After Where You Live Program. Also, staff will report to TRCA Board
of Directors on World Rivers Day campaign while sharing the final plan with Regional
Watershed Alliance.
Report prepared by: Victoria Kramkowski, extension 5707
Emails: Victoria.kramkowski@trca.ca
For Information contact: Victoria Kramkowski, extension 5707
Emails: Victoria.kramkowski@trca.ca
Date: May 13, 2019
Project Teams and Working Group Verbal Updates
RES.#8/19 - REGIONAL WATERSHED ALLIANCE WORKING GROUPS
PROGRESS UPDATE
To provide an update on the progress of the Regional Watershed Alliance
Working Groups, including achievements to date, current actions and
future priorities.
Moved by: Chris McGlynn
Seconded by: Lisette Mallet
THAT the work plan progress and priorities of the Regional Watershed Alliance Working
Groups, as appended, be received;
AND FURTHER THAT the RWA endorse the five working groups and their draft 2019
workplans outlined in their report subject to any input received at the meeting.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Working Groups of the Regional Watershed Alliance (RWA) play a key role in advancing
the mandate of both the RWA and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA).
Through the Working Groups, RWA members can also voice their interest in, and undertake,
activities that align with TRCA goals, as well as those of the partner organizations that members
represent. As subcommittees of the RWA, Working Groups are composed of RWA members
but can also invite local community representatives or experts to participate as needed. It is
intended that the Working Groups be focused on particular projects or issues including more
geographically focused specific sites or areas. All Working Groups report back to the RWA on
the activities being undertaken.
In order to identify RWA member interests and develop cohesive Working Groups, a
consultation process was conducted at the RWA meetings on November 17, 2017 (#1/17) and
February 21, 2018 (#2/17) during which members discussed interests, priorities and potential
projects. These potential areas of work were then consolidated by staff into several themes that
aligned with the collective interest of RWA members, as well as TRCA Leadership Strategies in
TRCA's Strategic Plan Building the Living City. These consolidated and aligned areas of
interest, along with subsequent discussions and identified opportunities, served as the basis for
the creation of five Working Groups:
1) Greenspace and Ecosystem Services
2) Integrated Planning and Civic Engagement
3) Flood and Extreme Weather Outreach (Please note that this Working Group has been
consolidated with the Integrated Planning and Civic Engagement Working Group. See
below for further details)
4) Watershed Engagement
5) Youth Council
Potential collective priorities and actions were identified for Working Groups and discussed at
the May 23, 2018 RWA meeting (#1/18), as well as in subsequent conversations. It should be
noted that as projects progress and new opportunities or issues arise, it is expected that the
priorities of Working Groups will similarly evolve. For example, due to an alignment of interests
and the desires of Working Group members, the Integrated Planning and Civic Engagement
Working Group and the Flood and Extreme Weather Outreach Working Group have agreed to
merge into a single Working Group, retaining the name Integrated Planning and Civic
Engagement. Selected workplan priorities for each group are provided in attachmentl.
Greenspace and Ecosystem Services Working Group (GESWG)
The GESWG seeks to increase the public's understanding of, and influence, the perceived
monetary and intrinsic value of nature and greenspace, both regionally and locally. This
includes increasing accessibility to nature, encouraging greening on private property and
improving the quality of greenspace in TRCA's jurisdiction.
Integrated Planning and Civic Engagement Working Group (IPCEWG) (formerly the Integrated
Planning and Civic Engagement Working Group and the Flood and Extreme Weather Outreach
Working Group)
The IPCEWG seeks to improve the integration of environmental protection and community well-
being in land use planning, design, growth management decisions and consideration of future
climate change impacts, including increasing the preparedness and protection of communities
from existing and future flooding and extreme weather events. This includes leveraging member
networks to help the public navigate the planning system, maximizing opportunities for public
consultation and engagement, and bringing together various stakeholders to achieve a common
understanding of integrated planning.
Watershed Engagement Working Group
The Watershed Engagement Working Group seeks to support the engagement and outreach to
stakeholders around key watershed themes through the design and development of an annual
Watershed Forum event. The goals for the Working Group within the context of the Watershed
Forum include providing new information on sustainability challenges and opportunities, sharing
ideas with community groups, creating networking opportunities and positioning the RWA as a
strong voice of civic leadership. Given that 2019 marks the 201" anniversary of the Humber River
being designated a Canadian Heritage River, this year the Watershed Engagement Working
Group will focus on carrying out these goals within the context of the celebrations surrounding
this anniversary.
Youth Council
The Youth Council is comprised of members aged 16 to 24 who either reside, or attend school,
within TRCA's jurisdiction. Youth can participate as either general members, or as executive
members who are selected through an application process for a term of one year. The goal of
the Youth Council is to engage, empower and inspire youth, to strengthen a youth network
across the Toronto region, and to provide a means for the voices of youth to be heard in the
development of plans, projects and programs. There is a Regional Watershed Alliance steering
committee for the Youth Council. This group developed the Youth Council Program Framework
and provides mentorship, as needed, for Youth Council members. They also act as a liaison
between the Youth Council and the Regional Watershed Alliance.
RATIONALE
The RWA Working Groups have established work plans, which are currently being carrying out.
Depending on priorities, various Working Groups are at different stages of work on associated
action items. Working Groups have also identified future priorities that will be taken on. For
example, it is expected that the Integrated Planning and Civic Engagement Working Group will
play a role in TRCA's Watershed Planning and Reporting Platform, once the project has
progressed to a phase when RWA involvement would be useful and meaningful. As mentioned
above, it should also be acknowledged that the priorities and projects taken on by the Working
Groups will evolve, deepen or broaden as new opportunities or issues present themselves. As a
result, the workplans below (Appendix 1) can be viewed of snapshots of the work being
undertaken and planned by the RWA Working Groups for the remainder of 2019 and into 2020.
Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan
This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan:
Strategy 5 — Foster sustainable citizenship
Strategy 7 — Build partnerships and new business models
Strategy 12 — Facilitate a region -wide approach to sustainability
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Items outlined in the Working Group work plans are part of TRCA work that is already funded.
No additional funding is proposed at this time to support this work.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
RW Working Groups will carry out the items identified in the attached work plans and will
identify further areas requiring attention, as needed.
Report prepared by: Victoria Kramkowski, extension 5707
Emails: Victoria.kramkowski@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Victoria Kramkowski, extension 5707
Emails: Victoria. kramkowski@trca.on.ca
Date: May 7, 2019
Attachments: 1
Attachment 1: Regional Watershed Alliance Working Group Work Plans
ATTACHMENT 1 — Regional Watershed Alliance Working Group Work Plans
GNWSPACE AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES JWKING GROUP
ACTION AND TASKS
STATUS
Objective #1: Support trail development and access
Review and provide comments on TRCA Trail Strategy
Completed
Involve members in updates and finalization of draft Trail Strategy
• Provide feedback on updated drafts
In Progress
• Participate in, market or host future workshops
Objective #2: Claireville Reactivation Process
Work with staff to develop the Claireville Conservation Area Action Plan
In Progress
• Receive updates on draft Claireville Action Plan and provide comment and direction
Winter — Fall 2019
• Identify communities and potential partners that could offer programming and/or audiences
Objective #3: Advocate for greenspace and healthy ecosystems
Promote the findings of the ravine ecosystem valuation study
Pending further
• Review and comment on messaging, marketing and engagement approaches to share findings from the study
review and circulation
• Circulate findings and messaging from the study through member networks
of study
Promote community engagement and knowledge of natural history and ecosystem function through promotion of events
• Identify and cultivate events that are, or could be, led by members, associated networks and organizations, and other complementary
Pending
organizations
Future Priorities
Encourage community involvement
• Recruit corporate groups to take part in and sponsor community-based restoration (CBR) events
• Recruit groups to take part in public CBR events
• Recruit and lead groups for citizen science initiatives
Encourage greening on private property
• Promote outcomes and initiatives identified through gap analysis of TRCA and partner work already underway
• Develop strategies to promote greening in areas of greatest need
• Promote existing TRCA and partner programs
Promote value of greenspace for public health and wellbeing (Ecohealth)
0 Utilize data compiled by TRCA and other organizations to promote links between greenspace and human health
INTEGRATED PLANNING AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT WORKING GROUP
ACTIONS STATUS
Objective #1: Work with TRCA staff to identify and fulfill opportunities for messaging and tools that emphasizes the links between environment, planning and
communities
Work with SNAP to identify opportunities to develop complementary or joint outreach tools or initiatives
Ongoing
Objective #2: Increase the preparedness and protection of communities from existing and future flooding and extreme weather events
Review/edit/comment on flood related outreach materials developed by TRCA Flood Risk Management team.
Ongoing
• Provide input on Flood Risk Assessment mapping, information and approaches for public outreach
• Work with Flood Risk Management Team and other TRCA staff to identify opportunities to develop complementary or joint outreach tools
Workshop to be held
May 2019
Additional materials
to be reviewed Fall
2019
Promote finalized outreach materials across existing networks
• Promote the Floods Happen brochure
• Promote TRCA Flood Messages through social media (@TRCA_Flood)
Ongoing
• Promote subscription to TRCA Flood Messages
• Promote further materials from Flood Risk Assessment process
Future Priorities
Involvement in development, review of and sharing TRCA's Watershed Planning and Reporting Platform
Develop a component of the 2020 Watershed Forum based on the priority themes and issues of the IPCEWG (e.g. a roundtable event, panel, workshop)
ACTION AND TASKS
STATUS
Objective #1: Celebrate accomplishments of TRCA, partners and community from past 20 years
Provide input to the Humber 20th Anniversary as a Canadian Heritage River Celebration Plan
Complete
• Prepare Draft Celebration Plan
Identify collaboration opportunities for RWA, TRCA, Indigenous communities, and other partners to implement the Humber 20th Anniversary
Celebration Plan (i.e., events, programming, etc.)
Complete
• Prepare a list of potential events and programs
Objective #2: Raise awareness around the natural, cultural and recreational values which merit the Humber's designation as a CHRS
Provide input to Humber Launch Event
Complete
• Prepare Draft Program by and Invitation list
Launch event held on
Aril 14
Provide input to Humber by Canoe Program and identify opportunities for programming Support at Humber by Canoe Event.
• Prepare draft program and invitation list
In Progress
• Members to identify potential ways they can be involved at Humber by Canoe
Provide input to Mobile Museum design
Complete
• Members to provide relevant content/information to staff
Develop key messaging around the Humber River's 201" Anniversary
Complete
• Prepare a media back rounder
Develop a media outreach plan
To be started
• Prepare a list of potential media outlets and networks to help promote the Humber's 201' Anniversary
Your Say Humber River stories
In Progress
• Members to submit their Humber River stories to Your Say Platform
Objective #3: Launch legacy ro'ects and new opportunities for futureicontinued recognition of Humber as a Canadian Heritage River
Provide input to Humber Discovery Garden design workshop
To be started
• Circulate draft workshop program to members for their input
Identify potential opportunities for collaborative fundraising for Legacy Projects such as Humber Public Art Project and Vaughan Heritage Tourism
To be started
Trail
• Prepare a list of potential fundraising opportunities for Legacy Projects and package for fundraising purposes.
Toronto Shared Path Signage
In Progress
• Convene project partners to determine an appropriate Ian to repair/replace Shared Path signage
Future Priorities
Develop theme for 2020 Watershed Forum
Coordinate involvement of TRCA staff and RWA Working Groups in 2020 Watershed Forum
YOUTH COUNCIL
ACTION STATUS
Objective #7: Build capacity among youth and build/strengthen youth network
Establish relationships with other NGOs/Youth Councils
Ongoing
• Share opportunities with the YC network
• Identify synergies with potential partner organizations
Create social media presence
Ongoing
• Use hashtag #TRCAYouth in lieu of social media accounts
Create Web Content
Ongoing
• Your Say website
• TRCA landing site
Create three newsletters
Ongoing
• e-blasts to go out in April, July, September
Objective #2: Identify youth perspectives related to environmental issues
Develop a map of key issues by locations
Complete
• Google map of primary interests of members based on postal code
Develop survey for wider public to better understand youth priorities across jurisdiction
Survey Has Been
• Develop survey, push survey through network and TRCA social media, analyze data
Developed
Remaining Items In Progress
Present at Latornell Symposium
In Progress
• Create Abstract and presentation
Objective #3: Create fun opportunities and experiences for youth
Earth Day event
Complete
• Clean up in the Meadows
Create big year end event
To be started
• TBD
Future Priorities
Organize a component of the 2020 Watershed Forum: Collaborate with Community Benefits Network to look into and share opportunities for youth involvement towards
environmental outcomes
Items for the Information of the Regional Watershed Alliance
RES19/19 - UPDATE ON LAKE ONTARIO WATER LEVELS
To brief the Regional Watershed Alliance (RWA) on TRCA role and
response to rising water levels of Lake Ontario.
Moved by: Deb Schulte
Seconded by: Andrew Vrana
WHEREAS members of the Regional Watershed Alliance have a potential interest in the
rising water levels of Lake Ontario;
WHEREAS the TRCA regularly reports on and issues warnings related to Lake Ontario
water levels;
THEREFORE LET IT BE PROPOSED THAT the Regional Watershed Alliance be informed
of TRCA's role and response to the Lake Ontario water level situation through this report
and an accompanying presentation by staff.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Lake Ontario water levels are influenced by several factors, including (unregulated) inflow from
Lake Erie, (uncontrolled) runoff from watersheds that drain into Lake Ontario, and the outflow
from the lake, which is controlled at Moses -Saunders Dam by the International Lake Ontario -St.
Lawrence River Board (ILOSRB) under the International Joint Commission. Regulation of Lake
Ontario outflows does not ensure full control of Lake Ontario levels or river levels downstream.
Regulation of Lake Ontario outflows is influenced by flows in the Ottawa River in order to
balance upstream risks (along Lake Ontario Shoreline) and downstream flood risks (below the
confluence of the Ottawa River and the St. Lawrence River. Ottawa River flows and drainage
into Lake Ontario will influence the water level response in Lake Ontario. As a result of the
continued high inflows from Lake Erie, decreased outflows, and additional runoff into Lake
Ontario from surrounding watersheds, there has been a significant and rapid rise in Lake
Ontario water levels over in late April and into May. The expectation is that water levels will
continue to rise into late May/early June.
As outlined in the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Flood Contingency Plan, TRCA
issues Shoreline Hazard Warnings specific to the Toronto Region when either of the following
criteria are met for Toronto:
1. Static water level equal to or greater than 75.50 m
2. Static water level equal to or greater than 75.10 m AND projected (offshore) wave
heights of 2.Om or greater.
These values were determined based on impacts to infrastructure and property during the 2017
event and were evaluated through the Toronto Islands Flood Risk Assessment study. Naturally
expected impacts to beaches (ie: shortened beaches, dynamic beach effects) may occur at
lower lake/wave levels. However, the above thresholds are based on impacts to infrastructure
and property, which were first observed at a sustained static level of 75.60m at Toronto Islands
in 2017.
CURRENT SITUATION
Lake Ontario water levels began rising in April as the snow melt and rain supplied increased
waterflow in the basin.
The lake levels and wave uprush have caused erosion and impairment of public infrastructure
and private property along Lake Ontario Shoreline and Toronto Island Park.
The International Joint Commission (IJC) manage control on water levels in Lake Ontario and
the St. Lawrence and follow the prescribed Plan 2014 to balance upstream and downstream
risks. As of May 12, 2019 flows to the St. Lawrence seaway from lake Ontario have been
increased to 7300 m3/s to decrease the rate of rise in Lake Ontario.
As of May 12, 2019 water levels in Lake Ontario have reached 75.64masl which is 17cm below
levels in 2017, however are 62cm above average.
On April 30, 2019 TRCA issued the Shoreline Hazard Warning, which remains in effect.
It is anticipated that Lake Ontario Water levels will crest at the end of May and will begin it
gradual decline in June. It is anticipated that lake levels will resume to normal seasonal levels
by September.
RATIONALE
TRCA receives communications from the International Lake Ontario - St. Lawrence River Board
(ILOSRB, established by the IJC) regarding water levels. Regarding any potential flooding in our
jurisdiction from riverine or shoreline, TRCA is an advisory agency.
Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan
This report supports the following strategy set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan:
Strategy 2 — Manage our regional water resources for current and future generations
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
E-mail updates to municipal partners and stakeholders, with a list of links to information and
forecasts from the ILOSRB and Environment Canada have been circulated and communication
with partners is ongoing. Additional steps completed and ongoing by TRCA include:
• Restoration and Infrastructure (R&I) is monitoring and tracking shoreline damage;
• R&I is working to protect TRCA and municipal partner assets;
• R&I has already been engaged by partners municipalities to assist with response
operations. R&I staff are prepared to undertake response and mitigation activities on
behalf of our municipal partners, at their commission (cost -recovery);
Government and Community Engagement and Marketing have prepared and provided
public and strategic partner messaging, including Councilors, MP's and MPP's (in
shoreline areas);
Media coverage for this event has been substantial in the last week, approximately 15
interviews in total completed by the Planning Chief/Liaison Officer and have included
radio, TV and print; and
Flood Risk Management and Marketing are monitoring social media.
Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313
Emails: Nancy. Gaff ney@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313
Emails: Nancy. Gaff ney@trca.on.ca
Date: May 13, 2019
Lake Ontario Water Levels
The Role of TRCA
Presented by, Nancy Gaffney, Government and
Community Relations Specialist.. Toronto
Watersheds
May 22, 2019
I omr-.n ani K'gkar
consefvation
Ajkl'.;rrifk
�1g��, �99xyl,�
h 4 � alk
�j
n
r
V i
ag ��� ryPl
What is the Issue?
• Lake Ontario water levels began rising in April as the snow melt
and rain supplied increased waterflow in the Great Lakes Basin.
• The increased lake levels and wave uprush have caused
flooding, erosion and impairment to public infrastructure and
private property along the Lake Ontario shoreline and Toronto
Islands Park.
• As per Plan 2014, the IJC have followed the prescribed plan to
balance upstream and downstream risks.
• On May 22 the Lake Ontario water levels in Toronto have
reached 75.82 masl.
Sault Ste. Marie
Sault Ste. Mane
A
N
Legend
Lake Superior Drainage Basin
Lake Huron Drainage Basin
Lake Michigan Drainage Basin
Lake Ontario Drainage Basin
Lake Eno Dram%W Basin
r
Petoskey
Great Lakes
Drainage Basin
Sudbury
Parry Sound
Lake /1u"t Oven BolandTrentonip
Trois Rivieres s
Montreal
e
Comwtl
a Massena
Traverse City 1
Green 9,iy ." P Torontg /Ae (btrario •Oswego
*Rochester Syracusc
Bay City • pagaraFal�ls
qr
Saginaw
Land"
Flint Sarnia
Mlhvaukees Grand Rapids
ldkF** •E.0
r
Toledo• 1
Chicago*
Lake Ontario
Water Levels
Current
Situation
• Lake Ontario outflows have been
increased to 8000 m3/s to decrease the
rate of rise in Lake Ontario.
• As of May 22, 2019 statc water levels in
Lake Ontario have reached 75.80 mast,
which is 6 cm below the level recorded on
the same date in 2017. Still 75 cm higher
above average for this time of year.
• The water level for Lake Erie is the
highest it has been in recorded history
and at a record rate of outflow.
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 4
Lake Ontario Water Level Forecast
for the weeks ending 24 May through 31 December 2019 (issued on 16 May)
76.4
This probalistic forecast is produced primarily from
historical 11900.2008) water supply scenarios.
250.0
Results represent water levels that would be
76.0S
a
Wo'
exceeded 5%, 50%& 95% of the time if similar wet,
average & dry conditions (respectively) were to occur.
201
l
249.0
753
*'
_
Historical Maximums
-� g�
248.0
_
75.4
ayJ
--_
-
i.2019
_
-
-
247.0
�'
----_
2018
-----__----
75.1
-
_____-----_
J
m
_
Average -
„(1918-2018)
246.0
v
1e
:••.
,_;��'�,
3
74.8
•''
-"
�'.;ritrnor-:
H'3
-�''`�'7n..ti
245.0
74.5
/
y ti
244.0
74.2
_
- -
-
Historical Minimums
- _
2430
73.9
-
-_---
_
_-_--
-- -- v -- --__
242.0
73.6
a M
m m
`m `m
`m
`a
a
m
m 'S >
> > 3 aai aai " t;o SQ " a
¢,
O O Z Z G
,d'y
N ti
N 6
d
N
xi
LA W N N
P'1
M N N N Of m f` N
1
M
N
N
.^•1 �-! N N
TRCA's Role
Based on the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority Flood Contingency Plan TRCA issues
Shoreline Hazard Warnings specific to the Toronto
Region when the static water level is equal to or
greater than 75.50 masl or when the static water level
equal to or greater than 75.10 m AND projected
(offshore) wave heights of 2.Om or greater.
Flood Risk Management provide technical advice and
information regarding shoreline hazards and flooding
to our municipal partners.
Restoration and Infrastructure staff monitor for
shoreline erosion and provide response services to our
municipal partners.
Government and Community Relations Specialist team
provide communication to political representative,
shoreline stakeholders and members of the public.
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 10
• Ongoing mitigation effort on Toronto
TRCA andIslands
• Closure and mitigation efforts along
Municipal
Toronto and Durham region waterfronts
Partners
• Communication and support to Ports
Toronto, Waterfront Toronto and other
shoreline stakeholders
Immediate
• Continual monitoring and reporting of
issues arising from increasing water
Response
levels, and information sharing with
partners, stakeholders and elected
officials
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 10
TRCA and
Municipal
Partners
Long-term
Mitigation
• Funding through Disaster Mitigation and
Adaptation Funding (DMAF) for enhanced
shoreline erosion protection
• Shoreline Erosion Monitoring Program
• Lake Ontario and river shorelines
• Toronto, negotiating expansion to
Durham
• Gibraltar Point Erosion Control Project
• Ashbridges Bay Landform Project
• Scarborough Waterfront Project
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 11
Questions?
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 12
RES.#10/19 - TRCA COMMENTS TO ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTRY OF ONTARIO
Modernizing conservation authority operations — Conservation
Authorities Act (ERO #013-5018); Focusing conservation authority
development permits on the protection of people and property (ERO
#013-4992)
To brief the Regional Watershed Alliance on Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority's (TRCA) response to the Government of
Ontario's proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act,
2017 and proposal for a regulation that outlines how conservation
authorities permit development and other activities for impacts to natural
hazards and public safety.
Moved by: Andrew Vrana
Seconded by: Heather Broadbent
WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has posted the proposed amendments to the
Conservation Authorities Act, 2017 (ERO #013-5018), as well as a proposal for a
regulation that outlines how conservation authorities permit development and other
activities for impacts to natural hazards and public safety (ERO #013-4992), for public
comment on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO);
THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Regional Watershed Alliance be advised
of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's responses to these ERO postings
through this report.
AND THAT staff circulate TRCA comments on Bill 108 once they are submitted to the
Province.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Conservation Authorities Act (ERO #013-5018)
On April 5, 2019, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) released a
proposed amendment to the Conservation Authorities Act, 2017, on the Environmental Registry
of Ontario (ERO), due May 20, 2019. This request for comments is further to a comprehensive
review of the legislation undertaken by the Province between 2015 and 2017. The ERO posting
did not include the proposed written amendments to the Act or its associated regulations.
The Province has stated that the proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act
(CA Act) are to help CAs focus and deliver on their core mandate and to improve governance. If
passed, the amendments would:
Clearly define the core mandatory programs and services provided by conservation
authorities to be, natural hazard protection and management, conservation and
management of conservation authority lands, drinking water source protection (as
prescribed under the Clean Water Act), and protection of the Lake Simcoe watershed
(as prescribed under the Lake Simcoe Protection Act);
Increase transparency in how conservation authorities levy municipalities for mandatory
and non -mandatory programs and services. Update the Conservation Authorities Act, an
Act introduced in 1946, to conform with modern transparency standards by ensuring that
municipalities and conservation authorities review levies for non-core programs after a
certain period of time (e.g., 4 to 8 years);
Establish a transition period (e.g. 18 to 24 months) and process for conservation
authorities and municipalities to enter into agreements for the delivery of non -mandatory
programs and services and meet these transparency standards;
Enable the Minister to appoint an investigator to investigate or undertake an audit and
report on a conservation authority; and
Clarify that the duty of conservation authority board members is to act in the best interest
of the conservation authority, similar to not -for profit organizations.
The Province is also proposing to proclaim un -proclaimed provisions of the Conservation
Authorities Act related to:
• Fees for programs and services;
• Transparency and accountability;
• Approval of projects with provincial grants;
• Recovery of capital costs and operating expenses from municipalities (municipal levies);
• Regulation of areas over which conservation authorities have jurisdiction (e.g.,
development permitting);
• Enforcement and offences; and
• Additional regulations.
Conservation Authority Development Permits (ERO #013-4992)
On April 5, 2019, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) also released for
public comment on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO), a proposal for a regulation
that outlines how conservation authorities permit development and other activities for impacts to
natural hazards and public safety. The Province's 46 -day commenting period for this ERO
posting ends May 21, 2019. The ERO posting did not include a proposed written regulation.
The government's proposal is to create a regulation to replace the current Ontario Regulation
97/04 that governs the content of individual conservation authority regulations pursuant to
section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. The government's intention is to further define
the ability of a conservation authority (CA) to regulate prohibited development and other
activities for impacts to the control of flooding and other natural hazards. The existing 36
individual conservation authority -approved regulations would be consolidated and harmonized
into a single Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry -approved regulation. The Province has
stated this measure will help to ensure consistency in requirements across all CAs, while still
allowing for local flexibility based on differences in risks posed by flooding and other natural
hazards.
For the purposes of this regulation the Ministry is also proposing to:
• Update definitions for key regulatory terms to better align with other provincial policy,
including: "wetland", "watercourse" and "pollution";
• Defining undefined terms including: "interference" and "conservation of land" as
consistent with the natural hazard management intent of the regulation;
• Reduce regulatory restrictions between 30m and 120m of a wetland and where a
hydrological connection has been severed;
• Exempt low-risk development activities from requiring a permit including certain
alterations and repairs to existing municipal drains subject to the Drainage Act provided
they are undertaken in accordance with the Drainage Act and Conservation Authorities
Act Protocol;
• Allow conservation authorities to further exempt low-risk development activities from
requiring a permit provided in accordance with conservation authority policies;
• Require conservation authorities to develop, consult on, make publicly available and
periodically review internal policies that guide permitting decisions;
• Require conservation authorities to notify the public of changes to mapped regulated
areas such as floodplains or wetland boundaries; and
• Require conservation authorities to establish, monitor and report on service delivery
standards including requirements and timelines for determination of complete
applications and timelines for permit decisions.
Once the Regulation is established, the Province is also proposing to bring into force un -
proclaimed sections of the Conservation Authorities Act associated with conservation authority
permitting decisions and regulatory enforcement.
RATIONALE
At Meeting #04/19, on April 26, 2019, the Board of Directors received a staff report and draft
comment letter on each of the above ERO postings (available here, see pages 64-99). TRCA
formally submitted comments to the ERO on May 8, 2019, (refer to Attachments 1 and 2).
On May 2, 2019, the Province introduced Bill 108 entitled the "More Homes, More Choice Act",
as part of its Housing Supply Action Plan. Schedule 2 of this omnibus bill contains proposed
wording of the amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act along with changes to several
other Acts that are relevant to TRCA's mandate. As such, TRCA staff are reviewing this new
information and will provide additional comments to the Province by separate cover.
Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan
This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan:
Strategy 2 — Manage our regional water resources for current and future generations
Strategy 4 — Create complete communities that integrate nature and the built
environment
Strategy 9 — Measure performance
Strategy 12 — Facilitate a region -wide approach to sustainability
FINANCIAL DETAILS
There are no costs associated with this report
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Staff will continue to circulate the Regional Watershed Alliance on TRCA comments on
provincial legislative, regulatory or policy changes.
Report prepared by Victoria Kramkowski, extension 5707
Emails: Victoria.kramkowski@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Victoria Kramkowski, extension 5707
Emails: Victoria.kramkowski@trca.on.ca
Date: May 10, 2019
Attachments: 2
Attachment 1: TRCA Response to Proposed CA Act Amendments
Attachment 2: TRCA Response to Proposed Development Permit Regulation
Attachment 1: TRCA Response to
Proposed CA Act Amendments
Toronto and Region
Conservation
AQthurity
May 8, 2019
BY E-MAIL ONLY (alo(Qontariv.ca)
Ministry -or tRe Envirunment, Conservation and PsMu
Great Cakes and Inland Waters Branch
40 St. Clair Avenue Wont, Fluor iu
I uruntu, uN M4v 1 Mz
Re: Response to Requvat Tor uvmments
Modernizing Conservation Authority Operations
Conservation Authorities Act (ERO #013-5018)
I nonR you for the opportunity to comment on the posting on the Environmental Registry of Ontario
(ERO) by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and ParRs (MtCF), ur the prupusal to amend
me t.:urnSonVafiurr Autnur$in Arrf. We understand the government is undertaking a review of the Act to
consider how conservation authorities can modernize and improve delivery of their core programs and
services, as outlined in The "Made -in -Ontario Environment Plan`. Pivase nute Mat tna tulluwing
uummums, as approved ay Resolutiun #Atiz/19 on April A5 6y the Board at Direcctors, were prepared in
advance of the release of the detailed wording changes identified in Schedule 2 of Bill 108, on May z,
2019. We may provide additional cum. naris 5y separate letter.
As the ERO posting states, extreme weather events increasingly threaten our homes, businesses and
infrastfuctura, and uvr ise, vaticii, authorities play a Rey undine role in nelping prepare for the cost and
laipaut uT climate change in their communities. We are encouraged that the posting references the
important role that conservation authorities (CAs) fulfill In Ontario's land use planning and
environmental protertiun pruuess Tui natural hacard management, source water protection and
cvnserving natural resources. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is pleased that the
Province continues to recognize the critical role that CAs ply in dealing wdn tRe impacts uT uGmate
unanyo as it related to prutauting public health and safety and the enviru-nment.
Further, TRCA supports the Province's intent to improve consistaney amung CAs, Board govcmanue ut
CAs, and increase trnspahrnuy in CA funding tnroagn partner municipal levy for mandatory and non-
mandatory programs and services. TRCA has already been working towards achieving these
objectives.
TRCA is further pleased that the Province is proposing to proclaim many of the un -proclaimed
provisions that were enabled through the amenaments to the Cunsarvafiun Aufhunl'ies ACT in 2011. As
the Province develops its sake of regulatory and policy proposals to support the proposed amendments
and proclamation of un -proclaimed provisions of the Act, TRCA looks forward tv baing invvlvea in the
uunaultetiun prueSs.
As you are aware; TRCA fins an ongoing interest in the proposed amandments to the Cunsarvstion
AUMOritias Auf (UA Act) given vur rules as:
t: 416.661.5600 1 1-:416.661.6898 I rnfa9btrca.on.ca 1 101 Exchange Avenue, Vaughan, ON L4K 5116 1 www.rrca.ca
A regulator under Section 28 of the CA Act;
• A public commenting Body under the Planning Act and the tnvirurrrnenta/ AbsesBRlerif Act;
A oclugated cummentiny Body to raprosont Me t ruvi%ial intunvot in natural fiazards;
A service provider to our municipal partners:
• A resource management agency operating on a local watershed Basis; and
• unc uT tfie largest iandum roes ii i the Greater i uruntu reyiun.
In these roles, and as stated in the Made -in -Ontario Environment Plan, CAs work in collaboration with
maniuipalit6s and otaRehuldars to prutoct pcup-ie ire ra property from flooding and tether riatural hazards,
and to conserve natural resources.
Our r3ponse to Me propusal enwnrpaosas seven yenerl Marr as to rmrudernize CA operations and
yuvemance, as tollows:
1. Defin6r-y cure manciatury pro-yrdo a al id services;
z. I ransparncy in levy tur mandatory and nun-manaatury programs and services;
3. Transition period for CA -municipal agreements' transparency:
4. Ministei appointea investigator for audits;
5. Duty of CA Board members;
6. Proclaiming on -proclaimed provisions of the 2017 CA Act, and
7. Additional proposed amendments.
I fie posting does not include the proposed written amendments to the CA Act or associated
regulations.
With TRGA's roles, responsibilities and experience in mind, we offer the following responses to the
proposed amendments.
PROP05E3GNANOE XII
Defining core mandatory programs and services
I fie Fruvieiva Nrpuses to amend tfie CA Amt to dvaaly deTina the our mandatory programs and
servluea provided By cunservatiun authorities to be:
Natural hazard protection and mairay�ment;
• Conservation and management of conservation authority lands;
■ DrinKiny water suurce protection (as pre5cri6ea under the Glvan vvatcr Amt); and
Protection of the LaRe Simcoe watershed (as prescribed under the Lake Simcoa Protection Act).
i RCA REsPuMbE
Fur tfie purpose or providing a cumpienensive c punse to this first prupused cnanya, I RCA:S
response is divided into seven sections, each with specific recommendations regarding potential ways
to further impT uve the Act.
A—arc ]a of CAs In a gra-wing and in ensying el y-radwn anMw Gra-tai GotourrRdre� r�
(GUH)
It is necessary to continue to recognize the importance of operational flexibility in the CA Act and the
impuffanuw of a watcrshad-Banca-yuvemai uv modal that Ras enablea innovation in develupiny
practical suiutiuns to uurrunt and emerying issues (a.y., fluud manageme it, drinKing water and Great
Cakes water quality; climate change, rapid urbanization/growth). This role of GAS has evolved over time
r oronto and neglon Conservation Authority 1 2
to Dowme uritical vii-tMe-ground implementers for a number of provincial and municipal gvais and
objectives related to natural resource management and prvtectivn ut the natuiai environment. In the
GGA: TRCA has played a crHival rule irr addressi-ng climate charge risks and the impacts of rapid
growth and urbanization within its area of jurisdiction and beyond through partnerslfips with other CRs
and municipalities. I his work to address climate change and mitigate Mir environmental impacts of
planned growth supports the Province's and muni6paiiiies efforts to address pressing environmental
issues such as LaRe Ontario water quality, tluud and erosion hazard management; stormwatar
Fnanagemont, natural heritage systems planning and source water prutecliun.
The posting and the Mada-In-Untariv Envirunmurd Plan affirm the important role of CAs in the land use
planning and anvironmental protection process. TRCA agrees given that CAS provide aignitluam
suppuFt to 6vtfi the Province and municipalities in the implemematiun ur tfie Provincial Policy Statement
(PPS) and the Provincial clans ier uurjurladictiun (i.e. ureenbelt Plan, oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan, uruwth Plan, Niagara Escarpment Plan, Central Pickering Davalupment Plan and
ParRWay Belt wrist Plan). Accordingly. CA core roles are linkea to other layislatiun such as the
Pinning Act and the Environmental Assesomant Aur, wherts we provide one -window review of natural
hazard issues related tv devclupment applications and relevant sections of implemematiun ut tfia PPS.
CAs wurk through the planning process with both private and public prup-unenta to touilitatee sustainable
developmentand infrastructure that is aduquataly set Davit trum, anorur pratectea trom, natural hazards
and/or from environmentally Sensitive areas. I RCA exercises all of its roles and responsibilities,
(wrTrmanting budy, regulator, resuarce management agency, service provider tv F-11unicipaiities and
other agencies (a.g. Metrolinx), and landowner), in acuumanue with the Provinces s ^Policies and
Procedures for Conservafivn Authunty Plan inview, and Permitting Activities" (2010). Furthermora, in
participating in Cunsatv�le tiun untariu's CA working group for all CAs to impruve client Servicv and
ouwuntAlly, increase speed at approvals, and reduce the nutiun ut 'red taps", staff recently reported
to TRCA Board of Directors on our own unguing streamlining -efforts for reducing regulatory burden and
meeting provincial priuritiea tavailame no , pages 42 to 49). Through this work, wo Move identified
addHiunal vppurtuniities for efficiencies in public agency review pruuossoa listed Below. I RCA suggests
Partner leveraging at CA expertise in natural ra-svurce management for facilitating timely reviews and
approvals for develupmont and intrestrduture, where such CA capacity exists (e.g., within the UUF1
contaxt). Ir i recent su6missiuns to the Province, the following racummandativns to enable more timely
reviews and approval were made by TRCA:
■ Streamline provincial approvals by having CA*- witfi axper[iss and capacity play a larger role in
undertaking wetland evaluatiuns and approvals, and staking at provincially wetlands;
• CAs could expand tfieir role in wildlife management by administering fisheries timing windows
and wildlife collection permits;
• CAs could play a role in the application of the Endangered 4NpB&V—s Act, which could include
habitat delineation, permit negotiation and issuance, timing window applications and Overall
Benefit Permit planning and implementation. Through experience, aiiv%v and monitoring
axpertise, CAs could assist in the development of a recuvery strategy; and
• Transfer Me review ut Environmental Compliance Approvals along with associated resuures
for sturmwater management ander the Ontario Water Resourva-S Act to GAs that have the
Iarordo and Region Conservadon Authority 1 3
expeRlsc in place and that fiavc completed watershed plans with set stumlwater management
targets to ensure provincial interests are protected.
CAs aad value to the gruwtfi pias ning prueess Dy BrInginy a reyiunal perspCtZive to cuss
Boundary/watershed issues and doss lagislative review and approval processes (high level]shategic
through to detailed design for Both development and Infrastructure). Where comprehensive
redevelopmenticvmmunity revitalization is proposed that includes areas of historical residential
development within the rluua fiazara,
CAs also work with our provincial and municipal partners to seek opportunities for remediation and
restoration to aduce risk and increase resiliency. IF, this way, increased housing supply is facilitated
while risk is roddoea end pruvir iciai and municipal policies tur growth and devewpaiont, puBlic satety
and environmental protection are upheld. Accordingly. It Is important to recognize in the Act the
important and diverse roles conservation authorities play as local implementation agents helping to
acfiieve a nom6er ur pruvindal ana municipal vbjeutives.
For example. TRCA's Erosion Risk Management Program foeases on the identification and remediation
of shoreline and valley land erosion hazards throughout TRCA's jurisdiction and encourages proactive
prcventiun, pruteutlun and manauumiiem -or ervslvii issues on pilvatc and puBliF, prvperty. undo, the
governing planning process Being the Class Environmental Assessment tui Kemedial Flood and
Erosion Control Projects (2013) or Class EA under the CA Act where TRCA is the proponent, and the
0iunicipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) where the municipality i* the proponent,
sumetimes with i RCA as a cu-prupunant, l RCA wurks with our ���oniuipal partner tv protect puBlic
safety, assamlal imrastructure, rcreatlunal trails and treasured grenspava. TRCA Is currently worTtiny
with Conservation Ontario to streamline TRCA's Class EA to mirror the MCEA where appropriate:
inJoding the development of Schedules that prescribe the type and extent of consultaiivn and repoRing
reyuirea Based on tnc scow, cost and other rectors that va, y widely Between prjuk- s.
We recommend that the Province maintain the broad mandate of conservation authorities; as currently
stated in the CA Au[. The objects and powers of CAs in the Act are written broadly and as such, allow
CAs to cundutt activities in response to lucal natural resuarce management needs and uhallengco,
even as these have changed, evolved and intensified since the Act was created. we anticipate that the
needs and challenges will continue to change over time, so the objects and powers should remain
Bruaaa iv whtinue to racilitato aoaptation tv emeryiny issues.
TRCA recommends that:
• The current purpose and objects In the Cu servation AuthurItlea Act remain Broad and
unchanged, to facilitate continued innovation and adaptation for local watershed -based
avlutions to %.urrnt and emerging issues;
• The role of CAs in the land use planning and environmental protection process, as linked to
legislation including the Planning Act, Environmental Assessment Act, and the CA Act in
ouppvrting the impiementativrr of pruviumial ana t"univipal prlurltiva, ba rbuvynized as a
core mandatory program and service; and
ioronco and Region Conservation Authority 1 4
Trio Pruvinue leverage the exPu flae of CAB in natural resource managemart, wriiory capacity
exists, for additional opportunities for efficiencies in puolic review p v esses to enable more
timely reviews and appruvols.
B. Natural Hazards Prutcctivn and Management
Conservatiun Authorities undeftRe watershed -based programs to pruteut people and property frum
flooding and other natural hazards, and TRCA recugnizns hazard management as a provincially
mandated program. I RCA watarfieas uuntain numerous special Policy Areas (SPA) and Tiuud
vulnerable areas (FvA) where lives and property can be at risk from fiwaing and erosion fiacaras,
well-developed flood forecasting and warning systems aro vital to Me safety and security of watershed
communities. Continued upeaiiun and minding ut the Feaeral-Provincial hydrometric network is critical
for doliveriny the wre fon aiuns of hazard management.
Additionally, several dams, reservoirs and utner nuoa control structures are in place that watershed
communities rely uir tui protection during tluod emergencies. CAs assist their m oniuipal paRners to
aEvelup dud pat in place emergency response plans and water management plans to jointly prepare for
climate cfiange. Having these plans in place assists the Province in aunieving outcomes in the Made -
In -Ontario Environment Plan 6y 6eing prepared for climate change and keeping people saTc.
Regulations to limit new development in fl000plains and utficr natural hazard areas are an important
pari of reducing longer term risR er nuioaing and other natural hazards. Many municipalities depend on
conservation autfiurities to piuvide technical information to support development ut municipal
wnuryenuy preparedness plans. Many other TRCA programs suppoff and enhance the natural hazard
program. Tree plaming, restoring natural areas and conservation services programs are examples of
conser-vatiun autnurity activities that improve the landscape and make the watershed mune resilient to
Me variations is precipitation patterns resulting from ufTrate �Aaiiye. As such, natai-al hazards and
natural heritage are intrinsically linked, al La host addressed in a holistic manner through integrated
watershed planniny. Further, tRu integration of natural hazard, natural heritage ana utner wattsrsfied-
based programs provides optinium cost savings and efficien�ioa.
It is of great concern to I KI:A tnat these watershed and natural resource functions have been tuft out of
the proposal to define a GA's cure mandatory programs. The govarnment'o recent Made-in-Untariv
tnvirunment Plan references the importance of wrservatiun in combatting climate change:
11
... we know that uimatn unanye poses a serious threat to Ontario's natur at areas aro rd that
wnservatiun of these areas can play an important role in mitiyatiny and adapting to climate change."
The Plan -guts uir to aeSuibc the cA rule in conserving natural resources as fulluws
"wurk in collaboration with municipalities and staKehuloers to ensure that conservation authorities fucas
and deliver on their cur mandate of protecting people and property from fluudiny and otfier natural
hazards and wnserviny natural resources'.
Additionally; the Consurvad—urs ADMurlURS Act purpose, as added to the Act in 20 t t, is not reTerenuea,
and reads:
r aronro and Region t.V,,,ervaUon Authority
"The purpose oT tris Act is to pruvide for tRo uryanizatiun and aelivary ut prugrams and services that
TurtRor the cvnrservatiun, resturation, development and management of natural resources in watersheds
in Ontario".
TRCA rer.ummenas tliat:
The core mandatory pwyramo or GAs Be conelstvnt with the purpoSe of the Act and the
MSOe-In-Untarlo Environment Plan to Include reference to the management and
conservation of natural resources.
U. Manciawmant of once a ionu on v an s
I RuA ayTbes that this is a core mandatory program of CAS.
TRCA owns and manages apprvArnately 1 B,uuu Mviutartm urs lana in its nine watersheds and along the
Lake Ontario sRureline. we alsu operate nameruus uunsei vation areas where user tees are collected to
help cuver operating costs. In addition to fee -supported conservation areas for public uses such as
recreation and education: many parcels of land were purchased for hazard FTiftigativu ur onvironme, ital
protection. With populatfun gruwtn in the watarsRca, iner iS additional pressure on these lands. user
cut ifliets and public safety issues arise, and resources are required to prepare and Implement
management plans for these lands. As noted in the Made -in -Ontario Environment Plan, T, oe
environmentalism begins with a sense of civic responsibility that we fifbtei thruuggR mcaningtal actiun
close to home`.
i he lands owned, operated and managed By conservation authorities provide opportunities for natural -
science and outdoor -Based education programs and community engagement opportunities that help
foster this sense of civic responsibility. These lands and prwi ams a a it der -linked and are important
tools withi, a wk's suite of proyrao s tnat neip aeliver on the important mandate of protecting, restoring
and errnanuing local watersheds and Keeping communities sate from natural hazards: such as flooding,
erosion and climate change.
Outdoor education programs and services m;, as Ontario are dalivarL-d by a range of providers
including st7fivol Boards, GAs and otRer not-Tor-prurits. under the Edm;ahun Acl (Section 197.7),
conservation authorities and school boards are enabled to enter into agreements for the provision of
lands, programs or services related to natural science or out -of -classroom exporienicos. i his pruvision
was intended to leverage the local onvir �nmontal Sciei n.e Knuwleaytl and yrenspace Systems of OAS
in providing uotauur oxperiumial leaminy upportonities tv Students and school Boards that were locally -
Based, partnership -driven and supported the mandate of CAS. Further, the value of public agencies,
such as school boards and conservation authorities, working collaboratively to leverage local
greenspace and adocation centres maA6i ifzws Me osa uT public assets and taxpayer funding.
Lands owned aro managed by UAs sarvc ae, impuffant public tunution for a diverse array or uses. The
identification of the management of cAs lands as a core mandatory function is supported and the
review should recognize the restoration. recreation; education and community onyayemont funiaivns of
CAS as supporting core mandatory programs dna services rlatea to CA land management.
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 1 6
TRCA recommends mat:
The identification of the management uT cunaervanun autfiurity lands as a core mandatory
function Is important to include In the GA Act. Ron -core functions such as restoration,
rot;aation, education and community engagement functions of CAs on CA owned lands
should be acknowledged as necessary to support theaa curb activities ire tfie aanendeq Act
and Implemendna mviiiationa; and
As school boards are enabled w enter into aar-eements with vonsurvattrrn autfiorines for the
provision of lanes, pruarama or servicaS elated to natural science or out -of -classroom
axperlencas under Section 197.7 of the Education Act, the Conservaffon Authodoos Act
should be amended to explicitly acknowledge and permit me impurtant rule that t;As play in
providing greenspace, selentific Rnuwtaage avid experianves for vntarlo students by
Incivaing a eerence to natural science and outdoor education in the Act.
D. Drinking Water Source Protection las presaril5da unoer Ulu clean water Act)
TRCA suppurts Inc EirinRiny water Suuruv Protection Prograrir as a core mandatory function of CAs.
I his legislates rule includes:
Establish and aaminister the Suurva vrutectiun committee (SPC) for local decision making (in our
case, this is the I pronto ana Region Source Protection Authority, or TRSPA);
Aaoiot the SPC in tncir powers and duties to be carried oat under the Clean Water Act. 2006;
a Provide scientific, technical and administrative a'uppuR and resources to the C I C SPC;
a Comply with an obligation to implement a significant threat policy or designated Gast LaKaa, policy;
Prepare annual prugrems repurts tur each souse protection plan; submit to the SPC first and then
to tHu uirector, MECP;
Prupuae ana prepans updated to source protection plan and undertake necessary consultations
lauding to a submission to the MECP;
IF Issue a Roti; to municipal rasiaential arinking water system owners: upon receipt and review of
necessary technical work, to support source protection planning for new or changing systems.
In addition to the 16961atad reyulremema under IN Cita-in wafTAct, 2006, Toronto and Region Source
Protectiun AutRurity (I RSPA) provides advice and program support to municipalities; the Province, and
other stakeholders to resolve issues with policy implementation. Fufther, I RSPA staff are intagral to thu
integration of Suurve prutentiun into iw al decisions in vulnerable areas identified in the CTC Source
Proteutiun Plan.
TRCA recommends that:
The Province maintain their financial and tecnmeal suppoit for the Drinking water
Suo.ce rrutectiun Program and that the Idontificcation of this program as a core
mandatory program include continued financial support from their Ministry of
Environment, Conservation and ParRa fur the ria of cunsarvetiuh Authuritles, as
preaudbud under the Ultran Water Act.
L. liruittruttun ot the LaKe binluou Wateished
Toronto and Region Conservatie„ Aatrrority 1 7
I his Clues not aiiecuy apply to I RuA, alifluuyh we ov support the importance or this a* a wits
mandatory program for the Cake Simcoe Region Conservation Autfiority.
F. watershed Fcuus
we note that the watershed focus of all CAs is not mentioned as a core role. This is a unique and
important attribute of managing natural resources, as well as contributing to natural hazard and flood
risk mana-yamant. i KCA undertakes watershed-t5'asaa pr ogrm* tnat previus a wine range of bonelets
to watershed residents. Conservation Authority programs and services protect water, provide natural
spaces and build resilience to extreme weather and flooding events. Investments in watershed based
prugrams can help avuia rutura vests arouno cnallenyas such as flvvo aemagaz, Business disruptions
ana puBlic heanfi issues. Kesiaents of all watersheas raly on clean and sustainable drinking water,
breathable air: green spaces and healthy rivers and streams for recreation, healthy soils, forests and
wetland* that provide nabitat fur wilalife, as wen as publit, health ano many other benefits. Being in
nature restores people and helps them to stay active aria healthy. I ne Conservation Authorities AU
established in 1946 was predicated on responding to local issues on a watershed basis. This role of
CA* in undanakiny pry -grams un a watershea scale should be corr*idarad in devaluping amanome,its to
the Act.
1 RCCA rauuMmands that:
Cvnslstent with the CA Act, the ability to manage Ivc'al veevirunmantal Issues on a
watersned Basis, Be maintainaa for all cunservation authorities.
G. Protection and Restoration of the Great Lakes
Additionally, the proposed amendments to the CA Act do not redact the role that many UAs play in the
protection and restoration of the Great Lakes. Tfie Made-in-Unfarib Envirunrrranf Plan includes a
commitment to review and update Ontario's Great Lakes Strategy to continue to protect fish, parks,
owacnes, cvastai wetlands are rd water By nzducii rag pia*tic litter, cxcass algae aria wntdmfiar its along
our stlulalinas, and reduciny salt entering waterways to proteut our agostie ecusystems. Since signing
the eighth Canada Ontario Agreement (COA) in 2014, Ontario has directly invested $15.3 million per
year in Great Cakes programs. 1 RQA ano other CA* have Dean long standing paRnars, helping the
Prvvince achieve its stated CUA objectives. I KCA helps the Province monitor water quality ano fish
communities in Cake Ontario and its tributaries. Further, TRCA has been providing administration,
cuvrdination and peufassiunal der vicar for the 1 pronto Remedial Action Plan Area for uver 2u years.
I his wont has resultea in some significant im�,provements in Great Cakes water quality over time, due to
efforts by governments and other partners. Given the many increasing pressures facing Ontario's Great
Lakes, such as population growth, rapid urban development, aging infrastructure and invasive species,
it Is impuRant that the YrovGwa formally rmuynize iony utandlny CA voritri5utiuns that help the
Province achieve its stated Great Lakes objectives.
i RUA racummunds that:
• I he Ray ruse that many UAs play in the protection and maturation of trig Groat Lake* da
Identified and acknowledged as one of their core mandatory programs and services.
PROPU5Eu C;RARuE ez
iransparunuy In levy for mandatory and non -mandatory proymma and services
Increase transparency in how CAs levy rinuni0palities for mandatory and non-mandatvey prayramzs
and survives.
r oronto and region uonser.ation Authority 1 8
• UPdate the currservafiurr A-0horrVes Act to conform to modern transparency standards by ensuring
that municipalities and CAs review levies for non-core programs aner a uertain period of time (e.g.,
4 to 8 years).
TRCA Ri sPvRaE
I RCA supports transparency in the levy to municipalities for mandator y survi�us aria programs tnruogh
annual detailed budget submissluns to miuniuipoliGes. vvcr time, levies have evolved to cover non-core
programs and services that cuala Be covered by Memorandums of Understanding (MOUS) and/or
Jervii,e level Agreements (SLAB), but because of the transparency of TRCA's levy pruua8s, nave
never been raised as a concern by our partner municipalities. Upun i atiticatiun of changes to the Act.
TRCA will work with ver panne, munidpalitics to develop these agreements and re -assess our levy
requirements.
wlih that being said; TRCA has never levied a partner municipality witfiivat their approval of the dollar
amount. Consistency with the administrative Invy has beeuume a distinct challenge, as our four central
famdiny partners (Burnam, Peel, I uronto and York) provide different annual funding enveiopes tv
I RGA, leading to challenges with apportionment of expenses utilizimy an ogOitablc metnuaulugy. I RCA
would like the Ministry's guidance up this matter to be addressed within the Act update: as we
empathize with tea cost uunslfaints fauiny our municipal partners, but at that same time, want to unsure
that potential inequity issues are resolved in a timely and sonsiblu manner.
Regarding the review of levies, TRCA onvourages cnanyas to the CA Act only permitting a UA to levy
for core programs aria *crones. All aaaitivrial funding provided should be governed by agreements,
which shuala Be reviewed a minimum of every four years, coinciding with Ine sewna year of our
partner municipality councils' four-year terms. TN uurrvm term of wuncil ends or, December 31 2022
but by that time, the buayet for the zuzs fiscal year is substantially complete and as such; the first year
of uvuncil duesrtt allow time for comprehensive review. Mandating a broad municipal review of CA
projects and programs is a welcome change and TRCA warns to ensure that sufficient time is permitted
to complete the under aKiny.
Aaadiunaily, wre piuyrams require administative/supporting functions and funds tv dolivar prvyrams
efficiently and effectively. 1 o achieve transparency and accountability in the funainy of core GA
programs and services requires tnat the uust of support corporate services such as Finance, Records
Managamcni, Ffuman Resources, I I IDIS (information technology/geographic information systumb),
artrTaet preservation and other functions: be included in the full cost acuuuntii rag —of providing all services
and programs. The province should cvnsidar updating the Aut in this ruyard with general principles,
such as requiring oust rouvvei y pricing tot core programs. based on transparent, full cost accountiny
and consultation with stakeholders, and require that all non-core prvgrarns Be ranpunsibiti fur paying
their portion of a CA's administration functiul s.
TRCA recvmmunaa tnat:
Increased t.—aaneparancy In now conservation authorities levy municipalities for mandatory
programs and Services Be supported;
The review of nvr,nandatviry programs occur every four years, coinciding with the second
year of vor partner municipality councils' four-year terms;
Toronto ano R�gi.,r� Furtoervat= Authority 9
Further guidance from the Ministry regarding the apportionment of levy be addressed within
the update to the Amt, to address vuat uonataints %—PT vur municipal paRriars wfiilu ensuring
equity and tirnvly resolution of disagreements; and
The Province update the Act with general principles Tum tranaparenuy ht levy Turraing, suon
as requiring oust muovcry pricing for mandatory programs, Based on transparent, full cost
accounting and consultatlun with stakeholders, and require that all non -mandatory
programs charge cost plus pricing to ensure they pay for their portion of a CA's
administratlun functions
PROPOSED CHANGE #3
Transition period for CA -municipal agreements' transpamancy
Establish a tranSliiun ptariva and prvuwss Eur GAS and ,n'unicipalitles to enter into agreen ents tur the
deiivtr y ut nun -mandatary programs and services and meet these transparency standards.
TRGA RESPONSE
TRCA currently has a range of MOUS/SLAB with upper and lower tier manUpaiities and is suppurtive ut
tRis ii rltiative. I RGA bclieveS tF1at IOIUus/ACAs sfiuuld 6e estaBlisned for all nun -cure programs and
se, vices. Fluwever, out to the anticipated timelines needed for ratifying agreements: TRGA suggests
that the transition period be extended to December 2022, to coincide with the existing term end of
municipal cuunuils.
TRGA recommends that:
Entering into agreements for the delivery of non-core programs and services Be mandatory
practice, and proposes that the transition period for entering into these agreements be
extended to December 2022, to coincide with the eAlsting term end uT municipal uui3n6ils.
PROPUSEu CHANGE #4
Minister appointed Investigator for audits
Enable the Minister to appoint an irvestiyatur to investigate ur urtdcrtaku an auaii and inpurt un a
cvnservatiun autnurlty.
TRGA RESPONSE
Transparency to oar funders and stakeholders is of utmost importance to TRCA. We accomplish this
through financial avuvumability clauses in MOUS/SLA*, in adaitiun to vor annuai tinancial statement
audit. vve prupuse adding wurdiny tv the Act alluwing either the Province or a GAS' partner
municipalities to, at their own cost, request a third party audit of special purpose financial information,
limited to the funding provided by the requesting organization. To do otherwise, could putentlariy read to
"fishing expeditions", increasing rod tape and uvsts tv CAS. 11`6 Svrutlui P, wfiiuR places unus on all
parties, pruvides the required level of assurance that tunas are Being expended in accordance with
sy reements/expectations.
Further, this approaefi would allow our Board uT Diret:tvrs to retain Muir riyfit to rdqudat additional
audita/ii ivostigatiuns By third parties as they deem necessar y, in actvrdanca with their fiduciary duties
to the organization, which have Been clarified through the subsequent proposea change to the Act. This
iota,aoe,,aRegion t,on�er�atianAntfiority i iD
propusaa avltaiun would provide, piece of mind to our partners, while respecting the vital rule that our
Board of Directors plays in governing our not-for-profit organization. Fortner to this point, if any
staReholder would like the opportunity tv request that a GA undergo another type of investigation, they
are able to anand a Basra meeting and explain their motivation and have the Board vuta on the
requirement fur such an examination in a transparent manner.
TRGA recommends that:
The Province or any partner muniuipallty oe slowed to request an audit of special purpose
financial infvrrnstion Waited atricuy to flow their fonds have been spent, at their coat, ano
that overall financial accountability remain as a fiduciary responsi6lRty of the GA's Board of
Directors.
PROPOSED CRANuE us
Duty of CA Board member
Clarify that the duty of conservation authority Board mtlmbtlrb is to act in the Best interest of the
conservation autnor ty, similar to nut-tur profit organizations.
TRGA RESPONSE
TRCA supports tha darification an the rule of Board members to act in the best interests of tRc
Cw1servetiun Authority. In tact, TRGA's Administrative By-law already clarifies that Board members
sRall act in the Best interest of the CA; rather than tRair own municipality.
TRCA farther anwuryes the Province to consider proposing additionai amer eaments to applicable
sections within the Act regarding the size of CAS Boards of Directors. I fie size of TRCA's Board has
notionally grown to 32 membor in aut:oroance with the existing legislation, However, has been Reid via
Board dirbction to 25 memBers, which remains considerable for a not-for-profit urganizatiun. I He size
will cuminae to grow in our jurisdiction due to planned grvwth. We recommend that Board size that is
end5led by legislation to be over 32 mem5esBe examined in tfie context of this review. TRCA staff
also recognize the outuume ur onguing governance reviews being undertaken by file Provint:e may also
tr rfluanca tSvara size and composition.
TRCA recommends that:
• TRCA suppofM this amanarnent to clarify that the duty of conservation authority board
membors Is to act In tfie Best interest of the CA; and
• The Province examine Ulu size of GAS' Board of Directors In the context of this reviaw and
uunwaer any amendments to the CA Act regarding the maximum numBer of Board members
that may Be appointed to a conservation autnurity by Panner municipalities.
PROPOSED CHANGE wo
Pruclaiminy un -proclaimed provisions of the 2017 CA Act
• Fees for programs and services
• Transparency and accuontability
I oronto and Region Conservation Authority 1 11
• Approval of projects with provincial grants
• Recovery of capital costs and operating expenses from municipalities (municipal bias)
Ragalatiun or areas over wflich %,unseivatiori autfiuritiea flava ja'noaictiun (mg.' develupmei-It
permitting)
• Enforcement and offences
• Additional regulations
I RCA RESPONSE
Regarding the proposal to proclaim un -claimed provisions of the Act, TRCA is suppoRive, but nutaD the
following:
no draft version of the proposed list of classes of programs and services in respect of which an
authority may charge a fee has Been provided for comment. A primary issue is that all uAa offer
different ufferin -yam and evan when they pruviao wmiiar utrerinnys, priuc� range depending on Thai,
geuggrapnic location, oust of pioviainy ifie services and otnei tacturs. Due to higher operating costs in
certain jurisdictions, it would Be difficult or inadvisable to provide a consistent price listing. TRCA offers
a variety of diverse programming, including initiatives at cur Parks ana Edueatiunai TauiiiGa� ana
engaye rn ent initiatives thrvuynvut our jurisoictiun. A prvindaily mandated tee struciana could have a
5o5stantial impact on I RCA's financial sustainability and create red tape for operating activities. TRCA
operates unique facilities which charge a wide variety of fees: such as Black Crack Pioneer Village and
Bathurst Glen Golf Course (opertad un behalf of the Provincia). in user to ganga revenue to
support wore uparetions, TRCA Ras appruximately au aitterent lines of Business charging Tor everything
Truro film pennits, to prugramlevent fees, to initiatives in which third parties charge users and pay TRCA
tees (i.e. weddings and events, escape rooms, high ropes courses, etc.). Rather than narrowly dictating
what a CA can . harye fur *pacific initiatives, i RCA pu �pusac Met ifia Province enuula cunsider
upoatiny tna A; -;tin tnis regard with general principles, such as requiring cost plus pricing for associated
tees, Based vn transparent: fall cost accounting and consultation with stakeholders. As one of the
largest landholders and property managers in the Greater Toronto Area, TRCA provides a substantial
share of the open 5Necc *ystems neadad to su, vice reaavaluping and intensifying communities.
Ruwever, onliKe municipalities, CAs do not nave access to development charges to fund the expansion
or strengthening of this infrastrucctdre. Current funding mechanisms are not sufficient to support the
public service demands resulting from the amount of yrwth that is occurring in TRCA's watarsficos.
Funding is naaaaa nut unly fur uperaidunii But lana sacaremcnt and a86et management, including luny
te[m land care.
TROA recommends that:
a FiexlBility Be provided to CAs in respect of the charging of tees for diverse programs and
services and that the CA Act Be updated with general principles to be followed Such as
royuldriv uvat Alas pricing for assvciatea Taos, Basad on trnsparent, tali cost accounting
and consultation witfl stalttanvidara.
PROPOSED CHANGE 97
Addidunal Amunaments:
To onto and Region Conservation Authority 1 12
isR Mandaemenv ndemnitica ion Clause
Althuuyh it is not included in the Ministry's proposai, i RCA vvvuia like to request additional wording oe
added to the Act regarding risk management.
TRCA has became aware vi the Piuvinue s proposed mademization of the Cmuwn liability framework
tnruuyn the irrtrduuod Crown Liability and Proceedings Act tCLPA) in Bill iuu. It is staff's
understanding that these updates aim to roduce time dna muney spent by both courts and ultimately
the taxpayer from frivviv'u5 claims against the Province.
While it is understuoCt that CAs are not Crown Ayencies, ana that Ulu language within CLPA will not
affect the CAs' operations; we dv nvtc tfiat, in a similar way to the Crown: the programs and serviues
offered by the CAs are also expusea tv frivolous litigation. Ultimately, thin oust vt tfiis expusufe is also
borne by 155 taxpayer.
We farther note that a similar wort.& ut litlyativn, tvmterly aimed at Ontario munl�ipalities as a result of
storm 5ewcr vperatiuns, was recognized by the Ontario Legislature as an unreasonable public burden.
I his public burden led to changes to the MuurriC-ipaf Acf, 5.449, effectively granting statutory immunity tur
certain classes of action again mst municipalities fur fruit operations. Similarly, and in sumo cases,
broader provisions nave alsu Feen legislated in other Canadian jurisaicGons, such as wording in s.95 of
Tne water Security Agdncy Act.
In the context of this suvn-y legislative precedent in multiple Canadian juri5dictivn5 arra the potential
public liability associated with CAs' programs and services, particularly in the areas of flood risk and
erusiun risk management: some form of statulum y immunity tur the guod faith operation of these
essential services: programs ammo it-rtrastructare is warranted.
rartiWany in the tate of increased liability expusures assuviatea with climate change, some form of
statatuiy immunity for the gooa faire uperatiun ut this essential infrastructure and vrvyramminy is
warranted. TRCA wvulo requc5t that a cause to this effect be added 10 the Act.
I RUA recommends that:
A clause of indemnification or 5ratutugy Immunity for the good faith operation of essential
flood and erosion control Inrrastructure, and programming be addod to the UA Act.
I RCA supports proclaiming un-pruclaimea sections of the Act for better deterrents to nun-wmpliance
with section 28 regulations. During the 2017 CA Act review and arae idments, l RUA was pleased to
see subsram ilial amenaments were made to the Aut to ennance enforcement mechanisms, i.e., if!"
ability to situp work, the ability to enter privately-uwnea land (for the purpose of ensuring uumpliance
with permit approvals ana wnditiurrs ana with reasonable grounds tv baiiove an uffence has occurred),
and the 5iynificantly fiiiyfier (unence) penalties than those currently identified in the Act. TRCA had also
recummended that Section 30 be amenaea to incluae:
■ An uraer to comply;
iron v ana Region Conservation Authority 1 13
• A stop work order be appealed directly tu the Minister;
■ ciaritication regarding 'after the tact" permits;
• And furtRor, that any new or apaalea regulations include a definition of an officer for
enturcement purposes.
TRCA would Gke to reiwrate these cumariunts and ask the Province to reconsider these matters
With respect to stop work orders, TRCA recommeidea that an aucumpanying "order to comply"
be added to the Act to facilitated immediate, aloeit interim, mitigation at the expense of the party
enuagoa in the unending activity. Moreover, it was noted that individuals wfio receive a mup work order
have the ability to appeal to the authority, are id if r ivt sanisfiaa, to the Minister of Natural Resources and
Forestry. TRCA Had nu u6jectiun to an appeal to the Minister. Rowever, it was suggested that an
appeal to the Autfiurily may result in the "apprefiension of bias" should tho indiviaual make application
to apply for a permit for the offending works, which waia nut meet the tests of the Kagulation and
would be subject to a nua, ing 6erure the Authority. I his scenario raised a further issue of "permits after
the tact'. I RGA pointed out previously that guidance on how authurities appruaufR theoe Sutsfiarius 6e
clarified in the Act, so as to avoid the potential Tur daplivaiive processes under the Act and through the
courts. Finally, TRCA flag recvmmenaea that the definition of an officer be included in any new or
apdatea regulation under section 28: as well as section 2a regulations yuveming (ands and pruperffy
owned by a CA.
I Fie immediate need tar improved deterrents to non-compliance is acute in I RGA's fiigfiiy urbanized
watersheds given current development aria population pressures, increasing risks to health and safety
and property aamaga motif illegal activities, trespass, dumping and extreme weather events.
I RGA recommends that:
Enfiancea provisions for enforcement and compliance ba addaa to the cA act, Including
stop work orders, orders to comply, clarifiaatiun tur "after the tact" permits and a definition
of an "officer" for entuh:eiriont purposes.
I hanK you once again for the opportunity to provide cummanr un this impuffant initiative. 1RCA would
be pleased to discuss these and uthor uppufianities Tor moaemizing conservation authority operations
and govemance thruuyn amendments to the GA Ata. Should you have any questions, require
clarification, Fir wish to meet to discuss any of the above remarks, phase cuntact the undersigned at
your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
9)e -
John MacKenzie: M.Sc.(Pij, MUP, RPP
Chief EAcwtive Unicer
Toromo and Region Conservation AWhorivy ' 14
Attachment 2: TRCA Response to
Proposed Regulation
May 8: 2019
BY E-MAIL ONLY (alex,mcleaclAontarlo.ca)
Iter. AicA M Xeud
Natural Resources Conservation Policy Branch
300 Water Street
Peter5ofuuyn, OR
K9J 8Mb
Dear Mr. mulaud:
Toronto and Region
'P Conservation
Authority
Re: Focusiny avn5arvat;wn autriririvrity development permits on the protection of people and
property (ERO ou73-4992)
Thank you for the vpNurtunity to vvmmtsnt on the Ministi y of Natural Resources and Forestry's prupvoal
to regulate Row conservation authorities permit development acid uthcr aalv'Ries Tur impacts to natu,al
hazards and public safety. We understand tRat the intention or the proposed regulation is to make rules
fur development in Hazardous areas more consistent to support faster, more prcdiUabie and less costly
approvals.
The Toruntv and Rcyiu, I conservation Authority (I RCA) protects people, property and infrastructure
tram naturai Hazards through management of the natural environment un a watcrsRed Hasid, given our
roles and responsibilities as outlined In tno MNRF Pulicics and Pruccoures Manual for conservation
authuritic6:
IF A mywator under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act;
A public cummentin-y 6uay under the Planning Acf and the Environments! Assessment Atet;
A body with delegated authority in plan review to represent the provincial interest for natural
hazards:
• A resource management agency operating on a local watencva 6asis;
One of the iarycst ianduwners in the I orunto region; and
A source protection authority under tnc Glean Water Act.
I Hese roles are consistent with the description of conservation autRuddes rules in tnc Made -in -Ontario
Environment Plan, whim states under the Redding or "support Conservation and Environmental
Planning" tu:
Work in collaboration with municipalities and maKehulders to ensure that conservation
autRurities focus and deliver on their core mandate of protecting pcvplc and property Crum
flooding and other natural hazards, and conscrvingg natural resources. (p.48, MF -(;P)
In carrying out our rules, I RCA auppuRs provincial and municipal partners in implementing tRe natural
Hazard, natural heritage and water resource policies of the Pruvimial Policy Staternrent, which align with
I RCA policies for implementing our s.2ts rcyulativn under the uonsarvatiun Atrfhon'ties Act. TRCA's
1: 2F16.661.66D0 I F: 416.661.6898 1infatmr, �a:.,r.�e 1 1D1 E.Odnge Avenue, Vaughan, ON OK 5R6 I ., v,.trcaxa
untadu Regulation 16oJuti was approved by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in 2006 in
conformity with the warrent content regulation, umario 97104. Where applioatiuns for new development
and/or servicing tall within TRCA rooggguiatvo areas, TRCA works with Both private and public proponents
to Tacilitate sustainable development and infrastructure that is adequately set back and protected from
natural hazards anorvr Crum environmentally s�� rsitive areas.
In addition, I RGA works routinely with provincial agencies, (e.g., l9latrulinx) utilities (e.g., EnBridge) and
vtRer public infrastructure providers, which may be exempt from I RGA's Regulation, to achieve shared
objectives for sustainaBle imrastructure planning that suppufls growth, redevelopment and
intensihoatiun.
TRCA;s "I he living City Puliuies: (Zu14) directs staff paHioipating in the review of applications ander
the Planning AU and the tnvirunmental Assessment Act, to ensure that tMe applicant and municipal
planning authority are aware of TRCA permitting requirements ander the Regulation, where applicable;
and Turther, our staff assist in the uuurdination of these applioatiuns to avoid ambiguity, uunnict and
unnecessary delay Fir duplication in the process.
TRCA JUdU lctlun
TRCA's is an active jurisdiction with a high proportion of historic development and infrastructure
networks located within flood and erosion prune areas. A number of municipalities in our jurisdiction aro
undertaRing comprehensive redevolvpmenuuurnmunity revitalization initiatives and many are proposed
in areas with existing risRs. In these instances: TRCA works with provincial and municipal partners to
reduce risk and increase resiliency through the planning, environmental assessment and permitting
review processes by seeking oppoRunities Tvr remediation and restoration. hr the last six years, I RGA
issued on average; just ovor l,uuu development permits annually fur applications that met the tests of
the regulation. Hawing* on appeal of applications reuumm-ended far refusal Rave Been imregaent as
TRCA maRes ever y effort to work with applicants and municipalities to facilitate proposals within
regulated areas that achieve compliance with TRCA reggulatury policies. Much of this oulla6uration and
negotiation is aunieved at the earlier stages our the planning process sv tRat I RGA assists municipalities
and proponents in meeting pruvin6al and municipal growth planning and environmental vbjeutivus from
approval in principle tRrough to detailed design.
I RGA supports ME provincial government's efforts to improve efficiencies and consistency for
regulating development and to streamline development approvals, as evidenced by TRCA's ongoing
streamlining initiatives fur our rules in the development and imiastruccture planning p,ucesses as well as
the regulatu y permitting process. Ultimately, TRE advisory and regulatory responsibilities of
wnsorvatiun authorities in the deveiupmivat process are not aouut slowing or preventing dcvclupment
and all its attendam euvnumic benefits. Rather, they arc abuut good environmental planning in which
the municipality, the conservation authority and the development indust, y take a comprehensive,
creative and collaborative appruatA Early in the process. TRCA Tinos that when these efforts are made
early and done well, it leads to innovative urban dosigns that resalt in shorter review rimes and cost
reductions in the shun and long term fur all staRehulders. This approach of uprrunting worn: including all
required studies to support Timely app, ovals, also helps to avoid tRe delay and uncertainty associated
with appeals to the Lural Planning Appeal Tribunal and ME Mining and lands Tribunal.
In partiuipating in Conservation untariv s GA working group to improve client service and accvuntaaility,
increase speed of approvals, and reduce the notion of "red tape', staff recently reooRoo (oa eo 42-49)
to TRCA Board or Directors on our own on-going streamlining efforts for reduuing rcgalator y Barden and
unculing provincial priorities. In addition, over the last year, TKCA Ras undertaken a comprehensive,
i o onto dnd Region Conservadon Authority 1 2
jurisdUiun-wide update to out regulation mapping, in which we Have consulted extensively with
munivipal partner, the public and stakeholders such as the Building and Land uovclvpnrwnt Inausu y.
These initiatives have helped inform our response to the governments ERu pusting on GA permitting
regulations.
We understand that Me Minisby is prupvsing tv create a regulation to replace Ontario 97104 that would
taRflut Berne tie ability of a conservation autfiority to regulate prohibited devclupment and utfier
activities for impacts to the comrvl of fluudin-y and vtficr natoral hazards. we fuffier understand the
government a intent is to cunsulidate and harmonize the existing 36 individual section 28 %,unaervatiun
authority regulations into one Minister of Natural Resources ana Forest, y regulatiu, I. I His update is
meant to ensure consistent reyuircments access all vvnservation authorities while still allowing for local
flexibility fur aitrerences in iisRs pusea by Tloudiny and other natural hazards.
TRCA suppoHM the uuneviiaatlun and flarmunizatiun of tfie existing 35 individual CA
ioyulativn'a Into une regulation. Nonetheless, eacfi CA must have the ability to anuffilan
individual, 6oar7-approved policies that Ivnv�t wuai wnaitivns.
At tRis time (at the time of writing and Board endorsement), the ERO pusti .y avcb not uuntain proposed
wording for new or amended legislation o re-yuiatiuns. we IuuR turwafa to seeing the details of the
proposed reyulatiun in a future consultatiun process and wvula be pleased to provide further input at
fiat stage.
As uutlinva in tie cortent ERu posting, for the purposes of this regulation the Minist,y Is prvpusing a
series of actions for defining, re-aefining and updating terms and prucesses used in the implementation
of the regulation. TRCA staff Have ieviewea tfie prvposed actions in consultation with the TRCA Bvard
of Director, a a witR neigiBuw ing conservation authorities and Conservation Ontariv.
For the government's consideration, TRuA vtters tfie tollvwing uumments to each of the proposed
actions iii the ERu pustiny.
TRCA suppvrts the PrvvinuG s aesire fur consistency and harmonization of terms and aetinitiuns within
pivvindai policy and regulations. These efforts should result in providing greater certainty to
landowners affected By the regulation ana enPfancea alignment ut provincial, municipal and
conservation authority implementativn appruaches affecting development and infrastructure planning.
ICvnetRebss, some ut the current detinitions of terms, although bruaa, Have stuud up well in tribunal
fiearings and in court. In TRCA's experience, there is a Tine Balance to Be sought between avoiding too
broad of a definition, wRicR HsRs inuunsistent interpretation; and too narrow: which hinders aaaptaBility
to Ivc—al cuntexts. ultimately, it is important for definitions to be Easy to unaerstana and to Be defendaBle
in Hearing and appeal scenarios. Supporting implementativn gaidance documents are also a helpful
tool in this regard, as descri6ea tRruciyh examples in our comments Below.
wetlands
TRCA recognizes that tRe aetinition ut a wetlano in the Conservation Authorities Auf (CA Act) is sligntiy
different than the definitiun of a wetland in the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS).
"Wetland" as definea in the Pry and Pruvincial Plans contains many of the critical elef dents ut the
Cvnsarv-dfivn Aulnurities Act definition; including:
• lands that are seasonally or permanci-itly uvvcrea By shallow water or where the water table
is close to or at tRe aufface;
Toronto ana Reglan Cun.ervation Auth0ii•y 1 3
the presence of hydric soils,
• the dominance of hydrophytiF vegetation; and
• exclusion of lands that are used for agricultural purpuses and no longer exhibit these
cRamwieristics.
Wnere the definitions diverye is with respect to hydrologic cunneutivity: unlike the PPS acTinition, the
GA Act's definition stipulates direct contribution to the Ryarloyiu function of a watershed through a
connection with a surface watercourse. I his distinction has been problematic from an implementation
perspective. The PPS uses the aetinition from the Omario wetland Evaluation System, which is used to
identify and evaluate wetlands. In the imerest of wrsistency and streamlining, dna given that the PPS
cennitiun is founded in the technical evaioatiun document for wetlands, we would support revising the
GA Ac4 definition to matcn the PPS detinitiun.
r Reretore, I RCA would support replacing the definition of a wetiand in the Conservation
Authorities A0 witR the PPS definition.
Watercourses
Watercourse is nut a terra that is used in the PPti or the Provincial Plans, althuugR tfiese documents
use a number of related terms, e.g., permanent and intermittent steams, nsfi habitat: etc. The
urvenBelt Plan defines intermittent streams as: "stream -related watercuarses that contain water urs are
dry at times of the year that are more or less predictable, generally flowing during wet seasons of the
year but nut the entire year, and wnert the water table is above the stream buttom daring parts of the
year."
In aadftion, the definition of "fisfi Rabitat' in the PPS and Provincial Pians is taken from the federal
Fisheries Act and cues not specify a type of water feature But rather refers to "spawning grounds and
other areas ... un wfiiofi fish depend directly ur inciirutly..."
We also note that the Pi S includes a definition of "river, stray and small inland lake systems that is:
.all waterwurses, rivers, streams, and suall inland lakets fir waterbodies that have a measurable or
predictable response tv a single runoff event." It could be aryuca that this definition would incluae
ephemeral strea, im, wRicfi is not defined in other pn,vincial policy.
Finally, the ase of the term "meariaer belt`' occurs in the oak Ridges Mvreine Conservation Plan and is
dunned as "the land across wnicn a stream may shift its channel tem time to time."
The terms awo within the definitions nvtea abuve, such as "stream", "waterworsutr and "channel" are
tfiemselves undefined within the PNS and the Provincial Plans. For the term "watercourse" user, ut
provincial pviivy cai i also reterence section 28(5) vt the GA Act, which defines waton uorse as: an
idontinaBle depression in the ground in wRiun a now of water regularly or cuntinuvusly occurs." TRCA
recognizes that this is a bruaa actinition that could capture many teatores on the landscape and fives
not provide guidance as to the source, timing or duiatiun of the 'flow of water". But while the current
definition is Broad, through the plan[nny ana/vr permit application review prooessrs, features within
I RCA's regulation mapping are yround-truthed to confirm the applicability of the regulation (to
determine wRetnei a permit will be required).
While a clear definition is impurlarrt, the establishment of tacRnical yuidanue documents to soppurt
updated acTinitiuns would also Be helpful in eaabliny consistent interpretation and to assist in tutdre
legal matter that may challenge definitions. For example, TRCA has a technical yoiaant:e tool widely
used By GAs in the Greater gulden Horseshoe, to assist in idi;ntinc;atiun and evaluation of non -
continuously vowing watercourses in a standardized way: the "Evaluation; Classification, ana
Management of Headwater Drainage Features uoiaeline", 2014, (the Guiaeline) uan Be applied to any
Toronto and regio-- Comur vation Authority 1 4
arainaye twatarc, a yrvcnawater seepage area or spring, a connected headwater wetland, or a
perennially flowing stream. identifying ana evaluating TCatUmig through the Guicialina puints to
management recommendations for the feature's location and function on the landscape. Use of the
Guideline uuuld alae we nance �ertainry for proponents interpreting the provincial definitions. TRCA has
partnered witn a number of stakeholders inuivaing the aeveiupment inaustT y and the WIIQKF in the
development of the Guideline for the effective protection and management of these features. A module
of the Ontario Stream Assaoemmem Protocol is applied in the evaluatiun section of the Guidalina, and
I KGA has worked with pruvinclal staff to exploits the possibility of recogniziny the Guideline as the
standard approach for assessment across Ontario.
It is TRGA's experience that policies and regulations are most effectively implemented when they use
well-defined terms (descriptive, informed by science/field work, but concise) augmented by clear
Implva-wntatiu, T yuiaanc;w tours.
TRCA recommends that the current definition of watercourse from the Conservation Aw-tnoritics
Act be maintainaa, but sfiuuld tfie Pruvinea update the aetinition, I KGA rewrtunends that it
include terminology from field-tested guidance and associated implementation guidance
dvcumanto. Updathiv tho acfinitiun of "watarovurao" tv 6a nrura daauriptiva ana airvt, andlvir
to harmunize terms with provincial policy, are initiatives that TRGA sappurTs, subject to review
of the pending definition from the Province.
Punution
The current CA Act definition of pollution is: "any deleterious physical substance or other contaminant
That has the putent a1 to oe ye Tcratca by aevclupment.- 1 Here is nu aennitiun, r Tur suostantive
reterence to pollution in the PPS or in Provincial Plans, so it is unclear how this term will be defined to
align with provincial land use planning policy. We acknowledge that pullutiun is iefcrencea in the
Orrfariu vtrfer Rdavore� Aur, however, the umy TTrention of puilutivn in the Provincial Plans is ander
the aetinitiun ut °low impact develupment" as it relates to mitigating stormwater pollution. The use of the
term pollution in the Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) differs slightly from the corecnt UA Act in
mat The vwi:M specifics rbuuurae We The Ministi y upon the ouuurrenue of pullutiun. S.zu (;i) of the
UWKA states:
Where any persun is disufiarging or uousing ui permittiny the discharge of any material of any
Rind into or in or near any waters that: in the opinion of the Minister, may impair the quality of
the water in such waters, the Minister may apply without notice to the Superior Court of Ziusticv
for an order prohibiting such discharge...
I fie CA Act contains no such provision for enforcement and compliance. In TRCA'a experience, major
spills of sediment generatea cvnstraurion ru-prusent The must cummun form of pullutiun impacting
watarwurses. 1 hese spins typically uccur at cunstruution sites atter large rain storms where erosion
ana sediment controls are either absent, inadequate, or poorly maintained. These suspended aulida
threaten water quality, tamperature, increase erusiun, ana can inTpaut fish habitat.
IGutwitfistanding the above noted omission for enforcement; the existing definition of pollution pruvidas
CAs with a broad range of disciativn in cvTarvlliny the releaaa ur hanftful substances that may be
asauciataa with a aevulupment activity. I he current detinition allows GAs to regulate pollution of
surface waters or soils and general ecosystem concerns within the waternea. Mureuver, where a
violation concerning puilutiun arisiny Trum human use t7 envirvnmentaliy sensitive arvas has been
raibea, the definition has been used to soccesstully defend decisions by a GA to regulate pollution.
Toronto dna Region Conservation Aurhorhy 1 5
THcrvfvre, TRCA reuummends that the currant CA Act definition of pollution be maintained but
that its occurrvnov be tied to the emurement and compliance provisions within the CA Act and
associated regulations.
Qefinina undefined terms as conaiZvnt with the natural hazard manaaament intent of the
reaulatiun
TRCA suppurts consistency oT terns and definitions within regulations for Better alignment of provincial,
rnoi-kipal and conservation authority implemvntatiun approaches. VON, we acknowledge the ERC)
Posting's asseRiun that the regulation's indent is with respect to natural hazard management, the
regulation alou takills the provinuial interest of maintaining natural features such as valleylanas and
wetlands on the landscape. Any definitions ut regulatory terms should recognize the relationship
Between natural hazards. the watat resuarue system ana the natural heritage system. I he natural
system pulicieti of the GreenBot Plan confirm the inter-aependency of lanaturms and ecological and
hydrological functions:
"I fie Natural System policies protect areas Fit natural heritayc, hydrologic and/or lanafurm
features, whiuH are often functionally inter -related and whiuh collectively prviae essential
ecosystem services, including water storage ana filtration, cleaner air, HaBitat, support for
Pollinators, carbon sturaye and resilience to climate change." (s. 3.2.1 )
And as Tuftner noted in the "Maac-in-untario Environment Plan":
"The uruenbult consists of uver two million acres of Mid in the GGH including farmland, forest*
wetlands and waterHvas. It includes the uaR Ridges Moraine ana the Niagara Escarpment,
and provides resilience to extreme weatnar events by proteutingg its natural systems and
features.' (p. 48)
Maintaining natural features and functions has several Benefits, inuluaing increasing resilienue on the
landscape aria tempering the negative effects of climate cMan-ge.
Finally, the stated purpose of the Act (s.0.1) and the objects on a tunservation authority as stated in
section 20 of the Act, also indicate the averrhing mandate for t;As as natural resource managers.
The section zu reyulation is a key mechanism for implementing tHis mandate.
TRCA supports the establishment of dennitions for undefined terms to address not only the role
of CA* Have in proteetiny life and property from natural hazards, but alsu in protecting naturi
features and their funutions (e.g. wetlands; valleylands) to ensure resilience on the lanasuape to
the effects of ullinate and land use change. 1 H regulation andlur its definitions sRvvaia
recognize the inextricable Iinit Between natural hazard management and natural resources
management (natural Heritage and water resouruvs).
Interferanue
under the Act, conservation authorities regulate the "straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in
any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream; wateruurse or the changing yr intuffering in
any way witfi a wetland." In oraer to apply the regulation in I RCA watersheds, TRCA'* puliuy
auuoment, The living City Policies, adopts the fuiluwing Conservation Ontario interpretation of
"intefference" from its 2U08 guidance document prepared to suppuff CAz implementing the regulation:
"any araMrupogenic act or instance whiufl Hinders: disrupts, degrades or impedes in any way the natural
faaturea or hydrologic and euuluyic functions of a wetland or watercourse.'
Toronto ana Region Conservation Authority 1 6
TRCA recommends that trio definition of "Interference" reflect trio vAisting guidance from
Conservation Ontario.
Conservation of lana
vvnile not defined in the Conservation Authorities Act, TituA s application of the "conservation of lana"
test as described in The Living City Pvduies (ana previous to that in TRCA's Valley and Stream Corridor
Management Program) is premised on the need to recognize the relationship netween landforms,
features and functions in order to protect, manage and robture natural resources within the watersHud.
I RCA has effectively administerea our section 2a regulation for close to ou year to protect public
health ana safety and Has successtally upheld and defended the regulation before the Mining and
Lanes cummissiuner (now the Mininy and Canes I ribunal) and the Ontario courts. witfi respeci to tfie
conservation of land test, 6otri Me MIL; and the courts have acceptea a 6ruaa interpretation of the
meaning ut uvnservation of land to include; "all aspects uT trio pfiysical environment, be it terrestrial,
agaatic, biulogical. botanic or air and Me raimionsfiip between them" (611428 Ontario Limited vs.
Metropolitan i vrontu and Region uunservation Authority, CA 00-92, Febraary 11, 1994 p. 38).
Conservation Ontario Has considered this ana otrier MCL; decisions to provide its own interpretative:
"the protection: management yr oesturation of lands within the watershea ecosybtem Tor tfie purpose of
maintaining or ennancing the natural features and ecological functions and fiyarological functions within
the waterfiea` (Conservation Ontario; 2008).
1fie above 1 lentivned interpretations reflect the importan%e of assessing impacts to the conservatiun ut
land Tvr both turm and function of natural features, at outfi the local and regional sealcb of Me.
watershed. It is important to note tfiat the natural heritage system pruviaes eculuyival and hydrological
funcuvns relatea to the conservation of land as well as the otfier reyuiation tests of the control of
rlooaing, erosion, dynamic beaches ana pullutiun. witfiin TRCA watersheds, aevelupment impacts on
Me five tests are considered ovtn incrementally and cumulatively in craer tv manaye the NsR to life and
property, ana to maintain, restore and enhance the ecolv-yioai ana hydrological functions of Me natural
systems euntribating to the conservation oT lana.
TRCA reuvmmvnds that the definition for the conservation of land be consistent with the 1994 -
MEM; decision, or at minimum, that it recognize the relationship between landtorms, features and
functions in order to protect, manage and restore natural rosvurvos within watersheds.
Tfiis is consistent with the mandate of CA* as outlinoa in tfie Act. in the Made-in-untariu Environment
Plan, and the regulated features ana areas tfidt L;AS are required to conserve unaer tfieir regulation
(e.y., river valleys (valley c;vn idur) are regulated not just for their Tloua plain but from stable top of bang
to a similar puint on the opposite side, plus an allowance on either side).
TRVA's umario Regulation 166/06 states tfiat, "no person shall undertake aevelupment or permit
another person to unaaitaRe development in or an the areas witfiin the jurisaiction of the Authority tfiat
are: other areas wrier development could interfere with the Hydrologic function of a wetland, including
areas within 120 metres of all pruvinuially sivnniticant wetlands and weaands on the uaR Ridges
Moraine: and within 3u mattes of all otfier wetlands."
i He ERU posting's reference to a severed Hydrological connection neeab to be made more clear in
urger to direct implementation ana compliance. TRCA suppurts streamlining permitting proeesseb By
reducing regulatvn y restrictions within the 3u to 12um ut a wetland contingent upun the restriction being
applicabie to quilt -up urban areas (e.g., witnin the Built Boundary of the GrowtH Plan) wfiere the
n oronto and Region Conser.aticn Aatfiority 1 7
Hydrologic connection has either already Beer i severea, or wetland water balance has already Been
addressed through review, approval and construction processes.
I hrugn our current comprehensive regulation mapping update, TRCA is consulting with otaRaMulders
to streamline review pruueases ana reauue regulatory restrictions for the area Between 3U and 120
metra or a wetland in built urban areas where there are no utner natural hazards (e.g., flood plain).
Nonetheless, TRCA maintains that tMe 1zu metre area of intefierence is warranted fur designetea
greenficla areas in uracr to assess a development proposal's potential impact on the hydrological
tunutiun of a wetland within its catchment (w.y., larye-suale redevelopment, major infrastructure, majur
till placement). This appruauh is similar to the 120 metre area of study in the "aajauent land*' to a
natural horitaye feature or area as prescribed within the PPS aid aucumpanying Natural Reritage
Reference Manual (MNRF, 2010). Notwithsta ding tfiis approach for proposed urban develupment ana
infrastructure in yreemlela areas, through our regulation mapping update cunsultatiun process, TRCA
staff Rave identified the need for streamlining precourts tur rural ana agricultural related developmcnt
activities within the 30 to i zu metres.
i RCA recommends a risk-based approach in whiuli reauuea regulatory restrictions between the
30 and 120 -metre area or interrranue around a wetland be limited to built-up urban areas, to
minor rural ana aurluuitural activities, or where the hydrologiu conneution nas either already
Been severed, or wetland water balance has aLeady Been addressed through review, appruvai
and construction processus.
txemot low-risk development autivitiea from reauirina a Permit includlna•
• uertain alterations and repairs to exi*-ting muniuipal drains subject to the Drainage
Act provided they are unaeff3Ren In accordance with the Drainage Aut alta
Uunavrvatiun Authorities Act Protocol
Allow consurvatiun authurities to farther exempt low-risk develzipmant activities
from requiring a permit provided in accordance witn conservation authority
policies
TRCA has 8uara-appruvea �Ticasures in place reflecting a risk mana-yumem appruauh in which
expeoiteo permit review and approval is based un the wale of prupusea autivities and the absence of
hazaros or otfier significant components of the niatural system, e.g., minor works applications. staff -
delegated approvals, routine infrastructOrc wun<s permits, etc. Further, there are activitioa that anoula
not be cinsidered low risk sucn as large scale development, rcdavclvpmcm, and till placement. while
we would support such an approach in urger tv fauilitate streamlining, we would welcome fuRhor
discussions with the Province in uider to be clear on the criteria that would constitute 'low risk" activities
Tor appropriate implementation and compliance.
TRCA is also supportive -or including in this approach the low risk activities outlinco in the uurrt nt
PrutvBol fur implementation coordination Between the Drainage Rpt a id t:uns&rvetrn AutnunYies Act.
TRCA supports enabling legislation Tor a low-nsR approach to permitting, subjeut to review of
datalls in the ToRhcoming regulation.
Require conservation authurities to:
• develop, consult on, maRe puBiiuly availaBle and periodically review internal
polluics tnat guide permitting decisions
• notify the public of changes to mappea regulated areas such as floodplains or
wetland Boundaries
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 1 8
establish, munitur ana repurtun service delivery standards including
reyulremants and timelines for determination of complete applruatiuns and
timelines for permit decisions
In aucuraanutl with its cure values concerning collaboration and accuumaoility, I RGA is making
unyuing efforts related to all of the above propusea reyuiromenY to increase efficiencies, expedite
planning and permit reviews, ana enfianue uustumer service. I hese efforts include:
• TRCA Board -approved permitting puliuies Have been in place since 1994 (Valley and
Stieam Gw,-riaur Planagement Program) ana subsequent to that, The Civing city Puliuies
(2U14);
• uunsukatiuir wim municipalities: the po6lic and stakeholders (c.y., BICD, ayriuultural
community, ER(3Os. etc.), consisting of aisti i6utiun tRruugh the I RCA website,
newspaper, puoiiu vpen fiuuses, stakeholder meetings and workshops on:
o regulated area mapping jurisdiction -wide update
o planning and permitting pulit y auuon ents, and
o suppurting teufinic;al guidance documents:
• hosting and leading municipal and industiy trahiiny sessions and workshops;
• regular tile "triage" and consultation meetings amvny municipal start and I KGA plan and
permit review staff;
• development of complete applivatiun unecklists tur Both planning and permitting:
• establishing expedited permit issuance protocols, including staff aeltlyatea permit
approvals, routine infrastructure wurk3 and emergency works permits
• reyuiar reviews of I RGA tee schedules and service doiivery tur pianning and permitting
in consultation with municipalities ana the Building industry.
TRCA Suppurts tfie pruvincially-proposed requirements fur curservation authority transparency
an consultation, as they are consistent witfi I RGA's uure values and current practices.
enforcement
I KGA supports proclaiming un-proelaimea sections iZ the Act Tor to deter non-compliance with scetiun
28 regulations. During the 2017 CA Act review and amendments, TRCA was pieasea to see substantial
amendments were mace to the Act tv enhance enforcement mechanisms, i.e., the agility tv stop work,
Ole a6i1ny to enter privately -awned land (for the purpuses vt ensuring compliance with permit approvals
and conditions and with reasvnabie yruanas tv Believe an offence has occurred), a, id the agility to
charge siyniftamiy fiigMur (uttence) penalties than those currently idemitied witRin the Act. I RGA had
alsu rvuummended that section 30 be amended tv inuiode an urcer to comply: a stop work vrder be
appealed directly to the Minister; ularinuatiun regarding 'atter the fact" permits (i.e., perrnissiuri tur
works undertakei i in a regulated area without the benefit of a CA permit); and turther, that any new or
updated regulations include a definition of an omuer.
TRCA would IiKe tv reiterte these comments and ask the Provi iue to rewnsioer these matters.
With respect to stop work orders, I RCA recommended that an accompanying 'uraer to comply,
be added to the AU tv tauiiitate immediate; al6eit interim, mitigabun at the expense of the party
engaged in the offending activity. Moreover, it was nutea tfiat individuals who receive a stop wum vrder
Have the ability to appeal to Me autnurity, and it not satistled; to the Minister of Natural Resuurces and
Forestry. TRCA Rad no 06ju tion to an appeal to the Minister. However, it was suggested that an
Toronto and Region Conser„atian AatRority 1 9
appeal to the Authority may result in the "apprhonsiun ut Biae should the individual make applicatiun
to apply for a permit for the uffonaing wurks that could not meet the testa of the Regulation and would
be ssu5jout to a Hearing Before the Authority. In Duch oa-acs, this raised a tuither issue of "permits atter
the tact", which TRCA pointed out previuusly By recummending flow authorities 5nuuio appruacfi these
scenarios (i.e., appiivations Tor 'atter the fact" permits that cannut it the tests of the Regulation) be
clarified in the Aut, so as to avoid the potential fur duplicative prucCsses ander the Act and ihruaggh Me
cuaffs. Finally; TRCA had recommonoea that the definition of an officer be incluaaa fi any new or
updated regulation under aci tiun 2a, as well as section 29 regula-huns yuverning lands and property
uwnca By a uunservation authority.
The immediate need tur improved deterrents to non-eompiianuc is acute in I RCA's highly urbanized
watersheds given current development pressures, increasing risks to health and safety and prupeffy
damage from dumping, illegal aulivities and extreme weather events.
TRCA supports enhanced pruvisiuns tur enforcement of CAs' permitting fun�dun tfiruuyh
Bringing into furue un-prucialmed sections of the CA Act but would wcluuma further
enhanuemcnt to deter infractions, inciudiny:
0 ordar to uumply
o stop work order appeals only to the Minister
a clarification for "anor tfic ret" permits
o dofrniYun .,t an utticer for enforcement purposes.
Thank you again fur the opportunity to review this posting. TRCA luURS Turwara to providing feedback
on the release of the prvpused regulations and amendments to the Act. We trust these u,mmcnts are
of assistance and we would Be pleased to meet with Ministry staff at their conve iieiwo to discuss any
of the above.
Sinuereiy,
John Mackenzie: .Sc. (Pr), MCIP, RPP
cfiiet Executive Officer
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority I 10
New Business and Good News Stories
10.3.
Announcement
Wai Ying Lam offered Youth Council volunteer services to the Regional Watershed Alliance and
its working groups.
RES.#11/19 - New Business and Good News Stories
Moved by: Kevin O'Connor
Seconded by: Joanne Nonnekes
THAT the Regional Watershed Alliance receives the New Business and Good News
Stories.
CARRIED
RES.#12/19
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Adjournment
David Pickles
Deb Schulte
THAT the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 22, 2019.
CARRIED