We are the owners of land in…

We are the owners of land in the Municipality of Clarington at Nash and Hancock Roads which under the provisions of the Regulation 567/22 of the Greenbelt Act was removed from the Greenbelt and are now subject to Bill 136, Greenbelt Statute law Amendment Act, which will restore this land to the Greenbelt. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments with respect to the provisions of Bill 136.

The land in question was purchased in 2003 and shortly thereafter, the owner submitted an application for an urban boundary expansion. At the time 60% of the property was not included in the proposed Greenbelt Plan Area. As a result of an obvious mapping error, the property in its entirety was included in the final version of the Greenbelt Area, without notice to the owner. Consequently, the owner was not afforded the opportunity to make submissions about the appropriatness of the inclusion of the property within the Greenbelt. The process for inclusion, adopted at the time, made it impossible for the owner to make representations. The government imposed a retroactive deadline without notice, which meant that the owner would never have the opportunity to make representations on this matter.The unfairness and the arbitrary adoption of the retroactive deadline was explicitly and strenuously protested by the owner, supported by the Regional Municipality of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington. These representations were ignored.

Between 2013 and 2016, the owner continued to make numerous submissions with respect to the 2015 Greenbelt Review process. These submissions were supported by council resolutions from both the Regional Municipality of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington. They were further supported and endorsed by local MPPs. Of the seven submissions made over this period, only one response was received by the owner. It provided that the Ministry would respond "as soon as possible". This never occurred. After a thorough and careful review, there is no evidence that the government followed up on its commitment to respond to submissions by the effected stakeholders. Clearly, the process was far from reasoned, balanced or transparent. After having endured twenty years of egregious failure by the government to acknowledge that it made a mapping error at the outset, we welcome having a fair, equitable and reasoned evaluation of our property. After this type of review it will become clear that our land should not be part of the Greenbelt.

We welcomed the government's announcement in December, 2022 to remove our land from the Greenbelt because it was a way for the government `76er finally cure an historically flawed process and evaluate the property appropriately. In addition, we wholeheartedly agreed with the government's view that Ontario was in the midst of a housing crisis. to this end, we acted to meet the deadlines and other requirements set by the government to undertake an expedited process to build new homes in 2025. We took special note and comfort with Minister Calandra's exhortation contained in a communication sent as late as September 6, 2023, entitled "Expectations and Commitments to Build Homes". As a direct consequence of the governments actions and further encouraged by the Minister we had engaged a number of professional consultants, met extensively with the non-partisan Provincial Facilitator, the Municipality of Clarington and undertook multiple conversations with Habitat for Humanity. We incurred approximately $1 million in professional fees for 600 hours of work. We did this based on our strong commitment to the government's goal to meet the high priority housing objective to provide 1.5 million new homes. We undertook these actions in good faith and in reliance on the government's statements about providing new housing for Ontarians. At present, we are in a position where our land will be reinstated to the Greenbelt and we will not receive compensation for our efforts to advance a critical policy of the Ford government. Bill 136 precludes any legal remedies we might have for seeking reimbursement for our expenses. there is no doubt that once again we have been the victim of a flawed and arbitrary process.

In conclusion, the lands are situated between an existing urban residential area and Highway 418. Full municipal piped services, having both capacity and availability are on the east boundary of the property.. As a result of a simple mapping error we have endured twenty years of failed process, lack of transparency and misplaced trust. We strongly recommend a transparent process that is open, equitable and includes a high level of accountably. We further recommend reconsideration of the proposals contained in Schedule 1, Section 3 (1,2,3 and 5), Schedule 2, Section 4, and Schedule 3, Section 2 of the proposed Bill 136. Blocking access to the courts of law effects the rule of law and raises the spectre of constitutionality.