Q. What do you see as key…

Q. What do you see as key factors to support a successful transition and outcome of regional conservation authority consolidation?

A. After decades of working successfully with CLOCA in Durham region, I feel strongly that diluting their regional specific and resident specific concerns into a conglomerate will NOT aid in the provision of service. Instead, in the guise of reducing duplication, amalgamation add a massive layer of bureaucracy to the job of addressing unique conservation and watershed issues meaningfully. Currently CLOCA carefully studies its specific issues (unique to each conservation area under its control) and delivers careful and considered solutions. As a resident within a CLOCA watershed zone, we have dealt with CLOCA co-operatively and successfully for over 2 decades. The changes proposed by the legislation will undoubtedly make communication worse and provide poorer solutions.
The legislation is tantamount to 'providing better customer service' by replacing a caring local grocer with a Walmart.

Q. What opportunities or benefits may come from a regional conservation authority framework?

A. As noted above, beyond political 'talking points', it is my view that the Regional framework will achieve 'consistency' of policies in a circumstance where simplistic common answers are inappropriate. Each watershed and conservation area often require tailored solutions as no 2 are alike. Amalgamation achieves a uniformity of policy that ignores that every plot of land in conservation area oversight is not uniform and requires specific consideration. The only opportunity is transparent political opportunism at the expense of effective environmental oversight and administration. Amalgamating CLOCA with the Toronto Region Conservation Authority for example co-mingles issues of urban parks and conservation areas and areas prone to flooding and pollution with areas where such issues are irrelevant- all in the name of efficiency. A larger corporate structure whitewashes issues in the name of equality in a situation where needs are very, very, very specific and unique.

Q. Do you have suggestions for how governance could be structured at the regional conservation authority level, including suggestions around board size, make-up and the municipal representative appointment process?

A. If the process is to be steamrollered into effect without concern for the effectiveness of the process, the only suggestion I would have would be to sub-divide the overall authority to account for region-specific needs and area-specific considerations (like the process currently does).

Q. Do you have suggestions on how to maintain a transparent and consultative budgeting process across member municipalities within a regional conservation authority?

A. The current process ensures that different funding requirements (e.g. some areas may be in greater danger or prone to flooding or requiring different protection than others) are considered on a specific, careful and regional basis. Amalgamating agencies with different needs under one umbrella will only impair funding fairness and conceal problems in a larger pool of funds and issues and requests- making the problem worse.

Q. How can regional conservation authorities maintain and strengthen relationships with local communities and stakeholders?

A. the current system provides for consultation on a local level that is critical. Consultation is currently effective. Amalgamation will only silence local voices, impair constituent access and bury funding problems into larger and larger budgets.

ERO number 025-1257
Notice type Policy
Act Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990
Posted by Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
Notice stage Proposal Updated
Proposal postedNovember 7, 2025
Comment period November 7, 2025 - December 22, 2025 (45 days) Open
Last updated December 9, 2025