• Section 6 – CA and MNRF…

• Section 6 – CA and MNRF are getting around the term “environmental appraisal” and asking for many studies / permits / approvals which increase the cost of the project and cause unnecessary delays. This section needs to be reworded to that CA/MNRF pay for these increased costs.
• Section 9 – add a subsection that allows the municipality to not invite landowners within a block assessment. Example: a village within an existing watershed will not be assessed. Why have hundreds of landowners at a meeting when they do not have information to provide to the Engineer and they will not be assessed for the work.
• Section 77 – the new streamlined process will have to outline many items in order to be effective. What need to be in the Eng. Report; design; cost; agency approvals; role of Council; by-law; appeals
• Simplified process to account for changes during construction. Who decides if the changes are required during construction? Do the D.S., Engineer and agencies all have to agree? Who pays for the cost of updating the report, plan and profile and by-law?
• Appeal to tribunal – fee for each appeal submitted or specific dollar value of assessment required. This would help minimize frivolous appeals from landowners.
• All monetary values in Drainage Act should be updated to todays dollar figures. Example: Sect. 65(11) increased amount to $2,000; Sect. 77 – increase amount to $50,000
• New protocols not only need to ensure environmental protections are maintained but also take into account the rights of the landowners who request this work and pay for it.