January 17, 2019 Dear…

January 17, 2019
Dear Premier Ford and Members of Provincial Parliament,
As a constituent of Ontario, I have deep concerns about many aspects of Bill 66, Restoring Ontario’s Competitiveness Act, 2018. The proposed legislation would override critical requirements under several provincial laws and policies that are designed to protect water, farmland, natural heritage and human health. It would do so in a fashion that undermines fair, accessible and transparent public engagement in decision-making, and sets the stage for costly property tax increases to subsidize economically-inefficient, sprawling development. Also with our climate change crisis, Bill 66 undermines our ability to preserve natural green space and protect ground water and surface water resources, and will promote carbon intensive development. Let me ask you...do you have children or grandchildren? Do you think about the long term impacts of such reckless policy and development on future generations...your children and grandchildren? All the hard work over years to enact policies that are here to protect us...you...and safeguard public and private interests throughout Ontario cast aside to line the pockets of corporations that are only concerned about their bottom lines.
I urge you not to proceed with Bill 66, for the reasons outlined below.
Bill 66 would allow municipalities to pass “open-for-business” zoning by-laws that would circumvent fundamental protections for drinking water, farmland, natural heritage and human health set out in Ontario’s key planning laws and policies, and in municipal official plans. The potential negative impact is far-reaching and profound. For example, policies that would not apply in “open-for-business” zoning by-law areas include:
• Those addressing significant threats to municipal drinking water (e.g., landfills, sewage systems, and the storage or handling of fuel, fertilizers, manure, pesticides, road salt, organic solvents and other substances on lands near wells or surface water intake pipes used by municipal drinking water systems). Do you want another Walkerton?
• Those protecting farmland, provincially significant wetlands, woodlands, valley lands and habitat of species at risk. This is so important to preserve as part of our diverse habitat.
• Those supporting active transportation, affordable housing, green infrastructure and climate resiliency. So, so important!
• Those protecting key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features, natural core areas and natural linkage areas across the Oak Ridges Moraine;
• Those protecting two-million acres of natural areas and farmland across the Greenbelt;
• Those protecting fresh water and the ecological health of the Lake Simcoe watershed; and
• Those supporting smart, integrated, long-term planning for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, a heavily developed region facing intense development pressures.
These and other outcomes of Bill 66 would run contrary to interests and desires of the people of Ontario. A 2016 Nanos poll found that 90 percent of Ontarians believe the government is responsible to ensure a healthy environment for all, and 97 percent support the right to clean air and water. Is this not what you want? Is this not what you want for your children and grandchildren?
Our provincial laws and policies establish a fair and coherent rule set and system of governance that uphold the provincial interest, with needed flexibility provided locally through municipal official plans. In contrast, the outcome of Bill 66 would be a piecemeal, directionless approach to land-use planning and decision-making, leaving communities vulnerable to the whims of changing councils and influential developers. This is so sad!
The vulnerability of Ontarians is heightened by the fact that “open-for-business” zoning by-laws could be passed without any prior public notice or meetings and could not be appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. In other words, by-laws passed behind closed doors would trump laws, policies and municipal official plans developed through extensive and open public consultation. Compounding the problem, communities would have no recourse to influence or challenge them. Certainly not very democratic is it? Put the shoe on the other foot. You were voted in to represent us, not yourselves.
Contrary to the government’s contention that Bill 66 cuts regulations that are out of date, almost all the laws and policies affected were recently passed or updated with extensive public consultation. They include the Clean Water Act, 2006, the Toxic Reduction Act, 2009, the Great Lakes Protection Act, 2015, the Provincial Policy Statement (revised in 2014) and the Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and Growth Plan for the Great Golden Horseshoe (all revised in 2017). Municipal plans themselves are to be updated every five or ten years.
The modern land-use planning and land conservation framework now in place in Ontario was developed over the years by governments of varying political stripes. For example, early work to limit sprawl through Smart Growth, and the establishment and protection of the Oak Ridges Moraine were signature achievements of Progressive Conservative governments. Undermining that legacy would be a huge step backwards.
Finally, there is no evidence of a need to make more employment lands available for development of new businesses or associated commercial, retail or residential development, which is the ostensible purpose of “open-for-business” zoning by-laws. Since the introduction of Bill 66, many municipal councils and planners (e.g., Sudbury, Waterloo, Kitchener, Wilmot, Guelph, Aurora, Burlington, Bradford, Mulmur, Ajax, Wellesley, Puslinch, Whitchurch Stouffville, Barrie, Oakville, Hamilton, Toronto) have expressed serious concerns about its implications and/or have pointed out the presence of significant employment land surpluses within their respective municipalities. Many of these municipalities have also passed resolutions opposing this Bill.
Bill 66 would turn back the clock on many years of good planning, community input and strong, progressive government leadership. We should strive to be the role-model or set the bar for all other provinces and countries, for that matter, on how to live sustainably, protect our people, and protect our environments but unfortunately Bill 66 is regressive, dirty, and undemocratic. “Open-for-business” by-laws would sidestep laws and policies intended to protect the long-term health and resilience of our communities and would facilitate sprawling and unchecked development, threatening farmland, water resources and sensitive natural features upon which we all rely. I urge all Members of the Provincial Parliament to vote against Bill 66.