Comment on Proposed…

Comment on Proposed Amalgamation of Ontario Conservation Authorities

As someone who works for a Conservation Authority, I am deeply concerned and disappointed by this proposed amalgamation.

This proposal was presented to Conservation Authorities with little to no advance notice. All the staff became aware of it through a public press conference rather than through direct engagement. For a change of this scale, the lack of early consultation raises serious concerns about transparency, process, and decision-making.

Misleading Claims About Job Losses and Capacity:

The statement that there will be “no job losses” is misleading. The proposal explicitly removes existing senior leadership positions, including General Managers. Beyond this, amalgamation creates a high risk of staff reductions through consolidation and attrition. As a result, Conservation Authorities will lose critical local conservation knowledge. These organizations rely on highly specialized, place-based expertise that cannot be easily centralized or replaced without service impacts.

Impacts on Housing Approvals:

Creating significantly larger service areas with fewer leaders and shared staff will likely slow, not accelerate, housing development. Fewer staff will be responsible for larger and more complex regions, resulting in longer review timelines and reduced local knowledge. Local managers who currently provide final sign-off on permits will be removed. This directly contradicts the stated goal of improving efficiency. If amalgamation is still being considered, smaller regional groupings should be explored instead of large-scale consolidation.

Loss of Community Trust and Relationships:

Conservation Authorities function effectively because of long-standing, watershed-specific relationships with their communities. These relationships and levels of public trust are not consistent across the province. This can be seen clearly in public reactions, including responses on Conservation Authority social media platforms regarding this proposal. Forced amalgamation risks transferring distrust into areas where strong community relationships currently exist. Once public trust is damaged, cooperation, compliance, and effective delivery of conservation and flood protection services are significantly undermined.

Serious Concerns About Conservation Authority Lands:

Many Conservation Authority lands were acquired through donations or public investment for the explicit purpose of long-term protection and community benefit. There have been no clear assurances that these lands will remain protected under a centralized structure. Without explicit safeguards, there is a risk that conservation lands could be reclassified or disposed of for development, including in areas that may not be safe to build. This would further erode public trust and damage relationships with local communities.

Specifically, clarification is required on how the province will ensure that:

- Historic and cultural assets are preserved.
- Campgrounds and recreational properties are not repurposed.
- Reserve funds are not redistributed away from the communities that contributed them.

Labour Relations and Workforce Stability:

The proposal does not address labour relations. Some Conservation Authorities are unionized, while others are not. It is unclear how existing collective agreements will be respected, whether unions will be dissolved or expanded, or how staff rights and working conditions will be protected during and after amalgamation.

Conclusion:

This proposal raises significant unanswered questions related to governance, public safety, land protection, community trust, housing efficiency, financial accountability, and workforce stability. Until these concerns are addressed with evidence, clear safeguards, and meaningful consultation with those directly affected, this restructuring should not proceed.