Thank you for taking the…

Thank you for taking the time to address these concerns:
1) Lack of Public Case studies: Is there any independent or expert analysis provided to demonstrate that amalgamation would improve efficiency or service delivery? My recommendation would be to test pilot at a smaller scale first to inform this bigger change.

2) Loss of local leadership: I am concerned about Lake Simcoe being combined with a massive region all the way to Lake Superior and Lake Huron which are geographically much different. I request that Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority be maintained as a unique region under this new plan.

A larger and widespread area would seem to lead to inefficiencies, increased cost/travel for staff and loss of local leadership or expertise to each specific watershed. Would satellite offices be maintained for current CAs? What is the plan to maintain LOCAL accountability?

3) Alternatives - Start Smaller: After speaking with a staff from Markham township and another friend who works at Nottawasaga Valley Conservation authority both pointed out alternatives like combining Georgian Bay or Lake Ontario shorelines together being a more reasonable starting point for amalgamation. Does the Provincial Government have an alternative option that isn't so drastic? A steps 1-3 plan for starting smaller, working out details then scaling up?

4) Funding & finances: I found out from the NVCA that 25-50% of their funding is municipal, while only 3% is provincial. If inefficiencies or lack of staff/financial support in CAs is leading to challenges I would recommend the province step up to better support existing CAs rather than taking away their leadership. Common training, resource sharing & digital efficiencies sound like they are already in progress from both Kawartha CA and NVCA but perhaps need coordination to smaller or further away CAs for improved procedures.

A change of this magnitude would likely cost a lot of money. Administrative and time wasted from actual development and conservation. How would this proposed change affect tax-payers? It seems like the priority behind this is developers, building homes and more construction not protection of the land/waterways which is the original purpose of conservation authorities.

Thank you for your time and public input.