I am writing in response to…

I am writing in response to ERO posting #025-1257 regarding the proposed consolidation of 36 conservation authorities into seven regional bodies, including the creation of the Lake Erie Regional Conservation Authority. While I understand the Province’s intent to improve efficiency and coordination, I am concerned that the unique needs and priorities of the Kettle Creek watershed—and the municipalities that depend on Kettle Creek Conservation Authority (KCCA), including the City of St. Thomas—will be significantly diminished within such a large regional structure.

The Kettle Creek watershed represents only approximately 3% of the proposed new region, yet supports intensive development activity, major municipal infrastructure planning, and complex hydrological and floodplain challenges. The City of St. Thomas relies on KCCA’s local expertise to provide timely, predictable planning and permitting reviews; technical guidance on stormwater management; natural hazard assessments; erosion control; and support during severe weather and flood events. These services directly affect public safety, housing supply, development timelines, and municipal capital planning. Centralizing these functions across a region spanning 81 municipalities risks delays, reduced responsiveness, and the loss of local scientific knowledge that St. Thomas and surrounding rural communities rely upon.

Local representation is equally essential. A single governing board for a region of this size will inevitably dilute the voice of smaller municipalities. The City of St. Thomas—and other watershed partners—must retain meaningful, equitable representation to ensure that watershed-specific priorities are not overshadowed by larger jurisdictions.

KCCA also delivers valuable local programs that benefit residents across the watershed: tree planting, wetland restoration, agricultural best-management support, outdoor education, conservation area management, and trail stewardship. These programs are rooted in long-standing community partnerships and local relationships. Any consolidation must guarantee the continuation of these services without reduction, centralization, or redirection of resources to other parts of the region.

Funding fairness is another significant concern. Municipal contributions from St. Thomas and other watershed communities reflect local priorities, local assets, and locally delivered services. A regional funding model must not disadvantage rural or mid-sized municipalities or require them to subsidize unrelated work across a much broader geography.

Effective watershed management is grounded in local science, geography, and hydrology—not overly large administrative boundaries. The Province should ensure that restructuring maintains watershed-based decision making, with local staff and local offices able to respond quickly and effectively.

Given the scale and potential impacts of the proposed consolidation, I strongly urge the Province to engage directly with affected municipalities, including the City of St. Thomas, before making final decisions. Alternative models—such as shared-services agreements or smaller, more focused regional groupings—may improve efficiency without sacrificing the local knowledge, responsiveness, and accountability that are essential to watershed health and community safety.

For these reasons, I encourage the Province to reconsider the scale of the proposed consolidation and ensure that the priorities, programs, and identity of the Kettle Creek watershed—and the municipalities it serves—remain protected within any future governance structure.