NVCA efficiency audit on hold for NGO input
Midhurst resolution gives staff, chair authority to settle at OMB
By Kate Harries AWARE News Network
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority board members postponed approval of a controversial efficiency audit last Friday following an outcry from citizens’ groups. They also passed a resolution to facilitate settlement of issues relating to the Midhurst Secondary Plan, presently before the Ontario Municipal Board.
The efficiency audit deferral was seen as a temporary victory for citizens who raised the alarm about the secretive way in which the audit was being discussed, with approval planned for Friday before the document had been made available for public input.
As for the Midhurst resolution, only one councillor had reservations about giving staff and Chair Nina Bifolchi the authority to settle OMB issues without first having to seek board approval. The others expressed confidence that environmental safeguards would be secured.
The Midhurst Ratepayers Association had previously got wind of the possibility that the board might be discussing its position at the OMB in a closed-doors session Friday, and a dozen members turned out with protest signs before the meeting started, talking to those councillors who would stop to chat.
Also on hand to observe the meeting were representatives of the Midhurst Landowners Group, the developers that have been driving the Midhurst plan, including Cheryl Shindruk, and Mario Giampietri of Geranium Corporation.
AWARE Simcoe had raised the alarm about the efficiency audit a week earlier, submitting an official complaint about the fact that discussion of this evaluation of NVCA procedures – with potentially serious implications for proper application and monitoring of NVCA rules – was taking place behind closed doors under the guise of “personal matters”, and that only landowners, developers, consultants and municipal and authority staff had been consulted during the audit process.
“The list of key stakeholders includes developers but excludes the real key stakeholders, the NGOs, who help the NVCA fulfill their mandate,” said the June 20 letter from AWARE Simcoe. “This startling omission skews the comments strongly in favour of those who will benefit from a weakened conservation authority.”
Friday’s agenda listed three resolutions to approve the secret efficiency audit’s 26 recommendations after a scheduled three and a half hour in camera discussion.
“They are going in camera to discuss the review and then approving it in an open meeting immediately after, at which time it becomes a public document,” commented Green Party member Karen Wallace in a widely circulated email. “HOW is this process transparent?”
On Friday, before the closed session, Bradford Deputy Mayor Rob Keffer questioned why stakeholders like the Rotary Club of Barrie, which contributes significant funds to the NVCA, were not consulted.
Chair Bifolchi asked consultant Gary Gazda, who is doing the efficiency audit, to reply. He explained that he worked from a list he was given.
When the time came to go in camera there were forceful comments from some board members opposed to behind-closed-doors discussion of the document. There is nothing in the report that “even in the loosest possible interpretation” justifies going in camera, said Melancthon Deputy Mayor Darren White, expressing strong disagreement with an approach that has excluded the public.
“I don’t agree with the way it’s being done and I certainly don’t agree with the recommendations,” White said. “It’s nothing more than an attack on staff, the way it’s been done, and an attack on democracy as well.”
Clearview Councillor Brent Preston said that of the 26 recommendations, at most four, and more likely only two, require in camera discussion.
It may be difficult to separate the items out from personal issues “because they are intertwined in some ways,” Preston said, but “we have a legal and moral obligation to make the separation.”
New Tecumseth Councillor Bob Marrs agreed, adding there was no reason to have gone in camera the previous month.
Bifolchi said it’s not necessarily the recommendations themselves that are confidential. “It’s the data that is used to make those recommendations that is confidential.”
A motion to go in camera was approved 14-10. How They Voted.
While the board was behind closed doors, consultant Gazda came out to talk to the citizens waiting outside, asking for a list of the groups they represented. Gary Christie of the Nottawasaga Steelheaders agreed to put a list together.
When the board reconvened in open session after two and a half hours behind closed doors, the resolutions approving the efficiency audit were not put forward. Bifolchi said they were on hold pending further review.
Commenting after the meeting Preston said he was glad no decisions were made at Friday’s meeting. “There’s going to be a process between now and the next meeting to make the recommendations public, to get input from people like AWARE,” he said.
As for the Midhurst resolution, it reads as follows:
“That staff continue to work with the County of Simcoe, Township of Springwater, the applicants, and the NVCA Solicitor to address NVCA’s key plan review interest in the Midhurst Draft Plan of Subdivision, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, Municipal Official Plan and the Secondary Plan, NVCA Strategic Plan and NVCA’s Development Review Guidelines and Technical Standards.
“Further that: upon receiving supporting technical and planning documentation, that ensures the NVCA issues are addressed to the satisfaction of staff, that the Chair (Bifolchi) and CAO/secretary-treasurer be authorized to sign the minutes of settlement including draft plan conditions.”
Some might wonder whether there are any conditions that will alllow the Midhurst Secondary Plan to be built out without compromising the Minesing Wetlands and the already degraded Nottawasaga River.
Bradford’s Keffer cast the only vote against the resolution. “Because we’re giving staff the opportunity to sign the minutes of settlement without coming back to the board on what the actual minutes of settlement are,” he explained after the meeting.
AWARE Simcoe has complained to Natural Resources Minister Bill Mauro about the fact that conservation authorities’ decisions to go in camera are not subject to review, as are municipal councils’, with a third party doing a full investigation to ensure there is no violation of Municipal Act requirements to do the public’s business in public, with a few clearly defined exceptions.
Advised that the only recourse was to file a complaint to the board, AWARE Simcoe did so, to receive a letter of rebuttal within a few hours from Bifolchi. It is not clear whether board members had input into Bifolchi’s reply.
AWARE Simcoe has asked Mauro to appoint the Ontario Ombudsman as the investigator of conservation authorities’ in-camera meetings.
Leave a Reply