<div dir="ltr"><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">Hi All,</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">I thought this might be of interest to GREN and friends.</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:black;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">Sincerely,</span><br></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri, sans-serif">Patrick</font></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">________________________</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The provincial government is
looking at narrowing the scope of Ontario's conservation authorities, a move
environmental groups say could have significant negative consequences.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The government posted two proposals
to the Environmental Registry late on Friday. The sweeping changes would limit
the authority of Ontario's 36 conservation authorities, which currently have a
mandate to protect wetlands and other bodies of water, protect property from
flooding and erosion and deliver on an educational objective.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The proposed amendments to
the <em>Conservation Authorities Act</em> would see conservation
authorities — which are the second largest property holders in Ontario, after
the government — "focus and deliver on their core mandate, and to improve
governance," according to the preamble on the Environmental Registry.
Interested stakeholders have until May 20 to respond to the proposal.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">One amendment is on "<a href="https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/013-5018" target="_blank" id="gmail-LPlnk19498" style="color:blue"><span style="color:rgb(20,179,228)">modernizing conservation
authority operations</span></a>" while the other is on "<a href="https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/013-4992" target="_blank" id="gmail-LPlnk183478" style="color:blue"><span style="color:rgb(20,179,228)">focusing conservation authority
development permits on the protection of people and property</span></a>."</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The respective amendments would
shift the mandate to "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," and "will make rules for
development in hazardous areas more consistent to support faster, more
predictable and less costly approvals." That omits an educational
component and would also limit the authority conservation authorities have to
push back against real estate developments that could affect sensitive areas.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><strong><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">Laura Bowman</span></strong><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">,
a staff lawyer for environmental advocacy group Ecojustice, described what she
saw as the implications for the proposed amendments. "It looks potentially
like an attack on the jurisdiction of conservation authorities," she
told <em>QP Briefing</em>, adding that the details of the proposed
amendments are limited. She said the changes would largely affect areas outside
Toronto where there's farmland that isn't part of the Greenbelt.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The language "suggests that
they might be looking at getting rid of their authority to turn down
development applications that have their planning approvals," she added,
pointing out that conservation authorities can currently shoot down
developments on environmental grounds.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p class="gmail-xmsonormal" style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)"> </span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">She was also skeptical at the
language that suggested the <em>Act </em>is out of date, saying that
it was updated by the Liberal government in 2017. She suggested another motive
for the government to look at conservation authorities.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">"I think it's development
pressure. There's no reason to amend the act shortly after it's been amended
except that some stakeholders, like developers, maybe didn't get everything
they wanted in the previous consultation." Bowman added that she was
encouraged by the government looking at improving governance at conservation
authorities.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><strong><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">Tim Gray</span></strong><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">,
the executive director of the group Environmental Defence, also issued a
strong warning about the changes. "This looks like yet another effort to
make life easier for developers to build tract housing on farmland," he
said in a phone interview. "It's to try to back conservation authorities
out of the role that they have around development approvals. That means you
don't have qualified people looking at impacts on watercourses, floodplains,
wetlands, other natural heritage people you have there on the landscape."</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The government defended the
proposal as part of its mandate to spur economic development.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">"We're trying to streamline
the processes that are onerous and stand in the way of sensible economic
development," said Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry <strong>John
Yakabuski</strong>. "We're living in a province where we're
over-regulated. Too much duplication," he added. He proceeded to say that
the changes to conservation authorities are meant to focus their attention on
their core mandate, including flood protection. Asked to respond to the idea
that the changes could be developer-friendly at the expense of the environment,
Yakabuski said he looks forward to hearing feedback from the comment period.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">Opposition critics questioned why
the government would limit the scope of conservation authorities.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">"On the face of it, I would
say that they are getting ready to make the world safer for developers,"
charged NDP MPP <strong>Peter Tabuns</strong>. "I think the
reality is they went after the Greenbelt twice and lost on it, and they haven't
given up on looking after their friends," he said, referring to a
pre-campaign video where the premier promised a room of donors to open up the
Greenbelt, and then provisions of Bill 66 which would have allowed that to
happen. The government backed down from the move after facing criticism.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">Asked whether it's reasonable for
the government to follow through on its campaign promise of increasing housing
supply, Tabuns said there's more to the work of conservation authorities than
that.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">"It's a good idea to have more
housing supply but you don't have to build on critical habitat or encroach on
wetlands to do it," he said. He went on to describe the consequences as
"more endangerment" of environmentally sensitive wetlands areas and
species habitat. "If you want a functioning environment you have to
preserve those elements around us," said Tabuns, the former executive
director of Greenpeace Canada.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">Green Party Leader <strong>Mike
Schreiner </strong>also expressed skepticism. "We know that
conservation authorities play a particularly important role in preventing flooding
and here we are facing a climate emergency where we see increase flooding
levels and this government wants to reduce oversight of flooding. It makes
absolutely no sense to me," the environmentally-minded Guelph MPP said.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">Schreiner also made the case that
the amendments aren't a fiscally responsible approach.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">"The most fiscally responsible
approach is to restrict development in sensitive areas...in order to make sure
we prevent flooding and the costs associated with it."</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.25rem;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-family:"Roboto Slab",serif;color:rgb(1,2,18)">The Ford government has reportedly
taken an interest in conservation authorities previously, with the <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/02/04/chair-for-gta-conservation-authority-elected-after-behind-the-scenes-lobbying.html" target="_blank" id="gmail-LPlnk422433" style="color:blue"><em><span style="color:rgb(20,179,228);text-decoration-line:none">Star</span></em><span style="color:rgb(20,179,228)">reporting</span></a> in
February that a PC MPP lobbied a board member of the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority to back former PC staffer <strong>Jennifer
Innis</strong> to become chair over the NDP-aligned <strong>Maria
Augimeri</strong>. Innis won in an 11–10 vote.</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p>

<p class="gmail-xmsonormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"></span></p></div>