I formally oppose the…

I formally oppose the proposal to regionalize Conservation Authorities. This will most definitely remove the local level of service in the long term and citizens along with their communities will become handicapped when it comes to environmental efforts.
Too many questions remain unanswered as to how local decisions will be made with a regional office. As with the example of closing offices of Natural Resources, with limited local representation, it will be impossible to know the communities Conservation Authorities work in intimately.
Local environmental programs are highly valuable and have increased substantially since 2006. Local partnerships and fundraising are vital for the local economy of smaller towns and villages within the Lower Thames Valley. Conservation Authorities are governed locally and are the professional teachers to lead students and citizens to learn and combat environmental issues. Any attempt to limit the Conservation Authorities reach to students, indigenous collaboration, and local environmental efforts is a step in the wrong direction.
The claim from the Provincial Government is that "nothing will change". If that is the case, why are we changing it? It is obvious there is an underlying agenda and any change to create a new agency will cost unnecessarily.
To address the claim that "developers need to streamline permit times to get housing in the ground"; this problem is misinformed. Conservation Authorities provide prompt service and any delays are most often proved to be missing or incomplete information submitted by the contractor/developer. This is a developer problem not a CA problem. It is in the report data.