Ken Petersen…

Ken Petersen
Manager, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Local Government and Planning Policy Division
Provincial Planning Policy Branch
777 Bay Street
Floor 13
Toronto ON
M5G 2E5

Re: 2016 Ontario Municipal Board Review, EBR File 012-7196

Dear Mr. Petersen,

Gravel Watch Ontario acts in the interests of residents and communities to protect the health, safety, quality of life of Ontarians and the natural environment in matters that relate to aggregate resources. We are a province-wide coalition of citizens’ groups and individuals.

Gravel Watch Ontario members all too frequently find themselves involved with Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) proceedings. These proceedings often involve decisions being adjudicated under both the Planning Act and the Aggregate Resources Act. The hearings can last for many weeks or months. They require an extreme investment of time, money and other resources from all involved. We speculate that aggregate hearings could represent some of the most complex hearings that the Board undertakes. All these factors provide Gravel Watch Ontario and its members with a perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the current Ontario Municipal Board based on this considerable experience.

Our perspective is that substantive changes are needed to ensure that the Ontario Municipal Board serves Ontarians as required and as expected. Reforms that support citizen participation are urgently needed. The imbalance between applicants and citizens along with their host communities needs to be addressed. The role that the OMB fills is essential, namely to provide a sober second review of contentious land use planning decisions, but the mechanics and processes within the OMB environment need to be adjusted to ensure fair access for all Ontarians that feel the need to access that secondary oversight.

Environmental Issues often embedded in Land Use Planning

As environmental issue are often major components of complex OMB hearings on aggregate land use planning matters, we strongly recommend that the Board adopt a multi member panel to adjudicate those cases and that the composition of that panel be compromised of members of both the OMB and the ERT (Environmental Review Tribunal).

Financial Support to allow full participation

Gravel Watch Ontario members have been told by their local municipalities on more that a few occasions that the municipalities will not deny an aggregate application because the matter will almost certainly end up in front of the OMB and that they, the municipality, can’t afford the costs associated with supporting their objections through the OMB process. If municipalities are finding themselves in that unfortunate and prejudicial situation, imagine what it is like for citizens. For them the costs of participating in the OMB process can seem incomprehensible.

The net result of this situation is that the system is weighted heavily in favour of those in the industry, who have the resources, knowledge and experience (and access to a stable of planning, environmental and other professionals with specialized expertise) to skillfully argue their case before the Ontario Municipal Board.

Intervenor funding similar to what exists for other issues in the province is needed to address the fundamental imbalance favouring industry. At the very least Sec. 69 of the Planning Act which allows applicants to pay for municipal hearing costs if the municipality supports the application need to be removed in order to level the playing field.

Transparency and Accountability

Currently Board hearings are not routinely recorded. Members of the public or legal representatives are often prohibited from recording any part of the proceedings. This is not consistent with the rules at other tribunals or court proceedings. In the reflecting on cases when hearings have be recorded by transcription, adhoc feedback indicates that the calibre of presentation and debate rises. Putting the OMB hearing proceedings “on the record” will raise the bar for all involved.

Qualifications of Board Members

Gravel Watch Ontario members report a wide spectrum of experiences with different Board members. Some of the experiences are very positive, but unfortunately some are not. The quality and consistency of Board members needs to be increased either by revised qualifications for new Board members or by improved training for existing staff. Performance management programs and formal complaint processes need to be established.

De Novo Hearings

Given the complexity of aggregate land use planning matters, and the unfortunate fact that these issues can at times be dealt with at the local level in a very superficial way due to the lack of municipal resources to completely study all the issues involved, a full exploration of these cases is required by the OMB. Eliminating de novo hearings and replacing them with de facto quasi-judicial review using a “reasonableness” or similar test could in many cases remove the single opportunity for thorough investigation and adjudication of the appropriateness of any particular proposal.

Gravel Watch Ontario appreciates the opportunity to add our feedback and perspectives on the ARA Review activities. We thank the government for the opportunity to input into this process and look forward to next steps. If you should have any questions or would like to discuss our comments in more detail, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Graham Flint
President
Gravel Watch Ontario

[Original Comment ID: 207251]