/IS:1><121\ Town of Bracebridge ~ BRACEBRIDGE Council Correspondence The Heart of Muskoka

TO: Mayor G. Smith and Members of Town Council S. Rettie, Chief Administrative Officer

COPY: Management Team Media

FROM: L. McDonald, Director of Corporate Services/Clerk

DATE: December 1, 2020

CIRCULATION:

Item # Description SECTION “A” – STAFF INFORMATION MEMOS: Correspondence from Lower Tier Muskoka Municipal Clerks, dated December 1, 2020, A1 regarding Muskoka Modernization Committee – District Council Composition and Weighted Voting. SECTION “B” – GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE: Resolution from Raylene Martell, Director of Legislative Services/Municipal Clerk, Municipality B1 of Grey Highlands, dated November 18, 2020 regarding Bill 229 – Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act. Resolution from Cheryl Mortimer, Clerk, Township of Muskoka Lakes, dated November 24, B2 2020 regarding AODA Website Compliance Extension Request. Resolution from Jennifer Willoughby, Director of Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of B3 Shelburne, dated November 25, 2020 regarding Bill 229 and the Conservation Authorities. Correspondence from Linda Mathers, Climate Action Muskoka, dated November 25, 2020 B4 regarding Request to Phase Out Gas-Fired Power Plants. Resolution from Nando Iannicca, Regional Chair & CEO, Region of Peel, dated November 26, B5 2020 regarding Property Tax Exemptions for Veteran Clubs.

Page 1. lfiJ8Rt) ~ tt- ""~ GR;\:M;NIHUJ'.~f c.-11 ... .-., ·o ~u~11oic.- LAKE OF BAYS BRACE.BRIDGE

December 1, 2020

Amy Back District Clerk District Municipality of Muskoka 70 Pine Street Bracebridge, ON P1L 1N3

Dear Amy,

Re: Muskoka Modernization Committee – District Council Composition and Weighted Voting

Thank you for your continuing efforts to keep the lower-tier Clerks in Muskoka apprised of the Muskoka Modernization Committee’s ongoing work to meet the requirements of Section 218(6) of the Municipal Act to review the number of members that represent the lower-tier municipality at the upper-tier municipal level. We understand that the Municipal Act requires the review process to be completed within two years of the day the 2018-2022 District Council was organized (December 10, 2018). Given the approaching deadline, we note that a request has been made to the Premier of and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to extend this deadline to March 31, 2021, as directed by District Council Resolution R13/2020-MM.

Should an extension be granted, the lower-tier Clerks believe it is imperative that we are actively involved in the discussions regarding the District Council composition and any proposed restructuring. Even with an extension, the time-frame within which to complete the process and achieve approval for any change will still be quite short. With this in mind, the lower-tier Clerks have met to discuss the process under which we would bring forward any request from the upper-tier to restructure District Council in view of the triple majority process prescribed in the Municipal Act as well as its probable impact on the constitution of each of the lower-tier councils. To ensure a successful outcome both the District and the lower-tier municipalities have to be clear on process as well as the form and content of any request to restructure.

Upon our review of the relevant Municipal Act sections enabling a restructuring of the composition of both the upper and lower-tier councils, and given the significant implications of any recommended change to the governance and representative structure of the lower-tiers, we jointly engaged Legal Counsel to ensure that we could provide the best possible advice and guidance to our respective councils without undue delay. We are enclosing a copy of the November 30, 2020 Legal Opinion from James McIntosh, Barriston LLP, which is appended hereto as Appendix “A”.

In the interest of a collaborative and transparent process involving discussions on restructuring for both the upper and lower-tier councils and the public, the following provides an outline of the recommended process to be followed, and the form and content of any by-laws or resolutions based on our review and understanding of the legislation and legal advice provided. Additionally, lower-tier Clerks request an opportunity to be present at all District meetings regarding this matter in order to be available to provide clarification on lower-tier matters and processes and ensure that any changes that are coming will be dealt with seamlessly.

1 fTSJx12J:\ _l.;,;. ~ ~ GM mtmSf .I . BRACEBRIDGE (l,&ll°'/,-.y JO .. U1-"i01!i,a LAKE OF BAYS 111itl- ~ ......

Responsible Party Process to be Undertaken Requirements

1. Muskoka Modernization Provide recommendations • 2-year requirement from the date the District Council Committee (District to District Council to comply was organized (December 10, 2018). Standing Committee) with Council composition review requirements under • Must either: the Municipal Act. a) Pass a by-law to change, for one or more of its lower-tier municipalities, the number of the members of its council that represent the lower- tier municipality; or b) Pass a resolution to affirm, for each of its lower- tier municipalities, the number of the members of its council that represent the lower-tier municipality. • Content of By-law to change must provide clarity on: a) The proposed change in composition (i.e. reduction from 23 Members to 13 Members comprised of 1 Chair and 12 Members (2 from each lower-tier municipality). b) The manner in which Members form the upper- tier: • Direct election to upper-tier only; or • Direct Election to both upper and lower- tiers1; or • Appointed by individual lower-tier municipalities; or • Any combination of the above (i.e. one Member elected to upper-tier only and one Member elected to both upper and lower- tier). c) If desired, any specified Members to be elected or appointed as outlined above (i.e. the Mayor and one other Member). d) If directly elected, the manner in which Members are elected: • At large; or • Ward: or • Any combination of the above.

1 Current process in Muskoka as originally established by the District Municipality of Muskoka Act.

2 fTSJx12J:\ _l.;,;. ~ ~ GM mtmSf .I . BRACEBRIDGE (l,&ll°'/,-.y JO .. U1-"i01!i,a LAKE OF BAYS 111itl- ~ ......

Responsible Party Process to be Undertaken Requirements

2. Muskoka Modernization Provide recommendations • Although not required, the Committee could Committee to District Council to change recommend an alternative voting methodology (i.e. the number of votes given to weighted voting) for all or some votes. any member (i.e. weighted voting). Lower-tiers request that any change to the voting methodology at the District forms part of the aforementioned District Council composition review, by-law, and triple majority process to provide the lower-tier Councils an opportunity to consider all recommendations concurrently. 3. District Council Ratify2 recommendations • Majority of Members of District Council. from Muskoka Modernization Committee. 4. District Council Passes By-law (could occur • Before passing the by-law or resolution the District at same meeting as shall give notice of its intention to pass the by-law and ratification of Muskoka hold at least one public meeting to consider the Modernization Committee matter. recommendations subject to • District process). By-law must contain all details stipulated in Items 1 and 2 above and any other requirements prescribed in the Municipal Act or the Province. • By-law does not come into force and effect until: • Triple majority is achieved; and • Direction is provided by the Province (due to the missed deadline of December 10, 2020); and • The first regular election following the passing of the by-law (or if passed in the year of a regular election, the second regular election following the passing of the by-law).

2 District Council could also amend, refer, defer, vote down, etc. recommendation from Committee

3 fTSJx12J:\ _l.;,;. ~ ~ GM mtmSf .I . BRACEBRIDGE (l,&ll°'/,-.y JO .. U1-"i01!i,a LAKE OF BAYS 111itl- ~ ......

Responsible Party Process to be Undertaken Requirements

5. District Clerk Submits a request to each • lower-tier Clerks (working collaboratively) to provide of the Muskoka lower-tier reports to each of their Councils to consider the Councils to pass a request from the District. The report shall include, but resolution consenting to the not be limited to: by-law or resolution from the • upper-tier. History on the formation of the District of Muskoka and area municipalities (now upper-tier and lower- tier); • Summary of process to-date; • Governance implications (i.e. representation, wards v. at-large, standing/advisory committees, decision making, pros/cons); • Options to alter lower-tier Council Composition (i.e. could increase/decrease lower-tier Members on Council at the same time as or exclusive of District process); • Public input (i.e. some municipalities require local public meetings as part of their Public Notice Policies); • Compensatory considerations; • Administrative implications (i.e. required policy changes, communications, support functions, etc.). 6. Lower-tier Councils Considers resolution • May hold local public meetings or engage other consenting to the by-law or methods of public input if required or desired. resolution from the upper- tier and responds to District • May require District delegation/presentation. with result.

7. District Clerk Triple Majority • Must obtain: Determination and if • achieved, communication to a majority of all votes on the upper-tier council District Council, lower tiers, are cast in favour of the by-law or the Province. resolution; • a majority of the councils of all lower-tier municipalities forming part of the upper-tier municipality have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law or the resolution; and • the total number of electors in the lower-tier municipalities that have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law or the resolution form a majority of all the electors in the upper-tier municipality (requires 41,058 which can be achieved by a combination of any 4 of the 6 lower-tiers).

4 /1Sl5

Responsible Party Process to be Undertaken Requirements

8. Province Unknown • Presumably due to the missed deadline of December 10, 2020, some formal communication from the Province would be received no later than December 31, 2021.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with these recommendations and would be willing to assist in the development of any recommended resolutions to ensure a streamlined process. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can provide additional information or clarification.

Yours truly,

Karen Way Carrie Sykes Cheryl Mortimer Clerk Clerk Clerk Township of Georgian Bay Township of Lake of Bays Township of Muskoka Lakes

Lori McDonald Kayla Thibeault Tanya Calleja Clerk Clerk Clerk Town of Bracebridge Town of Gravenhurst Town of Huntsville

Copy: Township of Georgian Bay Council and Chief Administrative Officer Township of Lake of Bays Council and Chief Administrative Officer Township of Muskoka Lakes Council and Chief Administrative Officer Town of Bracebridge Council and Chief Administrative Officer Town of Gravenhurst Council and Chief Administrative Officer Town of Huntsville Council and Chief Administrative Officer District of Muskoka Chief Administrative Officer

5 fTSJx12J:\ _l.;,;. ~ ~ GM mtmSf .I . BRACEBRIDGE (l,&ll°'/,-.y JO .. U1-"i01!i,a LAKE OF BAYS 111itl- ~ ......

APPENDIX “A”

November 30, 2020 Legal Opinion from James McIntosh, Barriston LLP

6 BARRISTONLLP

RESPOND TO: 151 FERRIS LANE, SUITE 202 , BARRIE, ON L4M 6C1

November 30, 2020

BY EMAIL ONLY TO: [email protected]

The Corporation of the Town of Bracebridge 1000 Taylor Court Bracebridge, ON P1L 1R6

Attention: Lori McDonald, Director of Corporate Services/Clerk

Dear Ms. McDonald:

RE: DISTRICT COUNCIL COMPOSITION OPINION OUR FILE NO. 2020 BRACEBRIDGE GENERAL MATTERS

You have requested my opinion regarding the ability of the District of Muskoka to change the composition of its council and any restrictions that may impact its ability to do so including any requirement to respond to lower-tier municipal input into the process.

BACKGROUND

The District Municipality of Muskoka was established and continues to exist pursuant to the District Municipality of Muskoka Act, R.S.O. 1990, c D-14, as amended (the “DMMA”). The DMMA was comprised of six area municipalities as defined in Section 1 of the DMMA and consists of:

The Town of Bracebridge The Township of Georgian Bay The Town of Gravenhurst The Town of Huntsville The Township of Lake of Bays The Township of Muskoka Lakes

The area municipalities were continued in terms of names, status and boundaries as they had existed on December 31, 1990 but now formed part of the new District Area the inhabitants of which were continued as a body corporate under the name of The District Municipality of Muskoka (defined in the DMMA as the “District Corporation”).

The powers of the District Corporation are to be exercised by the District Council. The District Council composition was to be established in accordance with the DMMA. Section 4 of the DMMA was repealed in 1996. Prior to its repeal, Section 4 set out very specific provisions that dealt with:

SIMCOE COL,NTY • MUSKOK,A, • GEORGIAN 3AY rH 70; 792 92·)0 • TOLL FREE I 855 7)2 920~ • BARRISTONLAW.COM

m 1. The division of each area municipality into wards; 2. The continuation of existing ward boundaries; and 3. The representation on each local area municipal council.

The amendment to the DMMA in 1996 also amended Section 7. Prior to its amendment, Section 7 set out specific provisions that set the composition of District Council as being 23 members composed of a chair and,

a) the mayor of each area municipality;

b) three members elected as members of the council of the area municipality and of the District Council from the area municipality of the Town of Bracebridge by general vote;

c) two members elected as members of the council of the area municipality and of the District Council from the area municipality of the Township of Georgian Bay as follows:

i. Baxter Ward ……………………………………… One member

ii. Freeman Ward ……………….…………………. One member;

d) three members elected as members of the council of the area municipality and of the District Council from the area municipality of the Town of Gravenhurst by general vote;

e) three members elected as members of the council of the area municipality and of the District Council from the area municipality of the Town of Huntsville by general vote;

f) two members elected as members of the council of the area municipality and of the District Council from the area municipality of the Township of Lake of Bays as follows:

iii. Franklin Ward and Sinclair Ward ………… One member

iv. McLean Ward and Ridout Ward ……….... One member;

and

g) three members elected as members of council of the area municipality and of the District Council from the area municipality of the Township of Muskoka Lakes as follows:

i. Ward A ……………………………….……………… One member

ii. Ward B ….………….……………………….……. One member m

iii. Ward C ……………………………………………. One member

Section 8 of the DMMA provided for the election of the chair of District Council by its members at its first meeting after a regular election at which a quorum was present from among the members of the District Council, or any other person, to hold office during the term and until his or her successor was appointed or elected in accordance with the DMMA.

It is my understanding that the electoral structure based on this statutorily prescribed model remains largely in place today.

LEGISLATIVE CHANGE – MUNICIPAL ACT, 2001

The DMMA was repealed pursuant to Section 484 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 (the “Municipal Act, 2001”) and its repeal became effective January 1, 2003. With the repeal of the DMMA and the concurrent repeal of the former Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.45, the legislative statute governing the organization and affairs of the District of Muskoka and all other municipalities in Ontario became Municipal Act, 2001.

Rather than providing specific prescriptive electoral and organizational directives for individual lower-tier and upper-tier municipalities (which in Muskoka meant the area municipalities and the District municipality) in establishing the composition of council in each case, the Municipal Act, 2001 included a more generic set of guiding principles. Section 217 of the Municipal Act, 2001 dealt with the power of a local municipality to change the composition of its council while Section 218 authorized an upper-tier municipality to change the composition of its council. In each case the authority to change the composition of council was subject to rules.

In the case of lower-tier municipalities, subsection 217 (1) provides that the authority of a local municipality to change the composition of its council is subject to the following rules:

1. There shall be a minimum of five members, one of whom shall be the head of council.

2. The members of council shall be elected in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

3. The head of council shall be elected by general vote.

4. The members, other than the head of council, shall be elected by general vote or wards or by any combination of general vote and wards.

m 5. The representation of a local municipality on the council of an upper-tier municipality shall not be affected by the by-law of the local municipality under this section. [emphasis added]

It is important to note that a by-law that establishes the composition of a lower-tier municipality cannot affect or dictate its representation on the council of an upper-tier municipality. By-laws enacted by a lower-tier municipality pursuant to Section 217 are distinct from those enacted for an upper-tier municipality pursuant to Section 218.

In the case of upper-tier municipalities, subsection 218 (1) provides that the authority of an upper-tier municipality to change the composition of its council is subject to the following rules:

1. There shall be a minimum of five members, one of whom shall be the head of council.

2. The head of council shall be elected by general vote, in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, or shall be appointed by the members of council.

3. The members of council, except the head of council, shall be elected in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, to the upper-tier council or to the council of one of its lower-tier municipalities. [emphasis added]

4. The head of council shall be qualified to be elected as a member of council of the upper- tier municipality.

5. If the members of council are directly elected to the upper-tier council and not to the council of a lower-tier municipality, the members shall be elected by general vote or by wards or by any combination of general vote and wards. [emphasis added]

6. Each lower-tier municipality shall be represented on the upper-tier council.

It is worth noting that the authority that has been given to the upper-tier municipality is broad enough such that all of the members of the upper-tier council could be directly elected and need not be members of any of the lower-tier councils in order to hold office on the upper-tier council. This is reflected by the specific wording in rules 3 and 5 above to which I have added emphasis.

This is further reinforced when the powers to change the composition of council of the upper- tier municipality set out in subsection 218 (2) are reviewed and which include the power to:

a) change the number of members of its council that represent one or more of its lower- tier municipalities;

m b) change the method of selecting members of the council, including having members directly elected to the upper-tier council and not to the council of a lower-tier municipality, members elected to serve on both the upper-tier and lower-tier councils or members elected to lower-tier councils and appointed to the upper-tier council by lower-tier municipalities, or a combination of methods of election; [emphasis added]

c) have a member representing more than one lower-tier municipality;

d) require that if a member of council is appointed by the members of council as the head of the upper-tier council, the member is no longer entitled to hold office on the council of a lower-tier municipality or any other office on the council of the upper-tier municipality or both; and

e) require that if a member of council is appointed by the members of council as the head of the upper-tier council, the appointed member must hold office on the council of a lower-tier municipality.

It is clear from the powers that are included in the authority given to upper-tier municipalities to change the composition of the upper-tier council that the intent is to give the upper-tier municipality maximum flexibility to compose the structure of its council in the manner that is most suitable for the constituents. This includes the ability to form a council that consists of members who are completely independent of the lower-tier municipal councils through a direct election process. This is made clear in the wording of the power set out in paragraph 218 (2) (b) above to which emphasis has been added.

It should also be noted that the upper-tier municipality can require that the members elected to serve on the upper-tier council must have been elected as a member of a lower tier council. Alternatively, it can require that members elected to lower-tier councils are to serve on the upper-tier council by appointment by lower-tier municipalities. Again, the intent is to provide significant flexibility in changing how the upper-tier municipal council is composed.

The caveat to the authority to change the composition of council of an upper-tier municipality exists in Section 219 of the Municipal Act, 2001 which requires what is commonly referred to as a triple majority provision in support any by-law or resolution to initiate change. The process set out in Section 219 must be followed and the triple majority in support of the by-law or resolution must be achieved in order for it to be valid and effective.

The triple majority requirements needed to validate a by-law or resolution making any change are set out in subsection 219 (2) as follows:

a) a majority of all of the votes on the upper-tier council are cast in favour of the by-law or the resolution; m

b) a majority of the councils of all lower-tier municipalities forming part of the upper-tier municipality have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law or the resolution; and

c) the total number of electors in the lower-tier municipalities that have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law or the resolution form a majority of all the electors in the upper-tier municipality.

Subject to meeting the triple majority threshold in support of any proposed by-law or resolution to change the composition of the upper-tier council and, subject to conformance with the rules and the powers that may have been exercised, the upper-tier municipality has maximum flexibility to change its composition. While each lower-tier municipality must have representation on the upper-tier council pursuant to rule 6 of subsection 218 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, there is little in the way of a prescriptive framework that compels an upper-tier municipality to adopt a particular method to establish the composition of its council.

The ability of the upper-tier municipality to change the composition of its council is likely to have an effect on the existing composition of the lower-tier municipal council for each constituent lower-tier municipality. This is particularly so in the case of the lower-tier municipalities that make up the District of Muskoka due to the legacy council composition of District Council that has been continued from the now repealed DMMA especially if the change involves a reduction in the members of District Council.

Under the DMMA, the mayor of each area (now lower-tier) municipality was automatically elevated to a seat at the District Council table. That may not be the case if the composition of District Council is to be changed. In addition, balance of the composition of District Council was made up of elected representatives of council from the area municipality in a very prescriptive framework as noted above.

Under the old DMMA, with the exception of the chair, all members of District Council were also required to be members of the area or lower-tier council. This is no longer the case as Section 218 of the Municipal Act, 2001 makes it very clear that it is open to the upper-tier municipality to have all of its members directly elected and to preclude them from being members of the lower-tier municipal council, subject of course, to the triple majority approval threshold.

If District Council proposes to change its composition by reducing its members from the current 23-member composition to 12, this will necessarily reduce the number of members who are elected to and sit on each lower tier council. Presently, each lower tier council is made up of representatives who are elected to both the lower tier council and District Council. If a reduction to District Council is approved without coordination with the affected local council, the local council must then be adjusted to reflect the reduction in elected members. m By way of example, the Township of Muskoka Lakes council presently consists of 10 members including the Mayor. Under the current structure, the Mayor automatically occupies a seat at District Council. The remaining seats allotted to Muskoka Lakes at the District Council table are filled by members who have been elected to the local council for the Township of Muskoka Lakes and who individually represent one each of Wards A, B or C. If District Council is to be reduced to 12, then the local council structure will have to change as a result. The local council will have to consider restructuring to either align with the District Council and reduce its numbers or bring forward a by-law to maintain its current structure with two fewer representatives at the District Council table.

I understand that some discussion has taken place in connection with the proposed reduction to District Council to implement and approve a system of weighted voting. As this could have an impact on local representation at the District Council table, it is imperative that there is clarity and certainty in terms of how this will be structured and the change that it could bring to local representation on various issues at the District Council level. Without an adequate understanding of what weighted voting means and how it will work in the representation of local interests, it will be very difficult to achieve public support for such a change.

In view of this, the municipal clerks who are responsible for running the elections in the lower- tier municipalities have a direct interest in the outcome of any discussions regarding a potential change in the composition of District Council, the number of members who form District Council as well as the method by which the members of the upper-tier council are elected. It is therefore important for the local municipal clerks to be engaged in the discussions that are taking place and to understand the implications that any change in the composition of District Council may have on the local municipal election process during the next election cycle.

I trust that this will be of assistance to you. If you have additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours very truly, BARRISTON "'

7~t:_ l ~c,.,__ --:7~- -- ~ Per: James I. McIntosh JIM email: [email protected] encl.:

P a g e | 1

November 18, 2020

Doug Ford, Premier Legislative Building Queen's Park ON M7A 1A1 Sent via email: [email protected]

To whom it may concern:

Re: Grey Highlands Council resolution re: Bill 229

Please be advised that the following resolution was passed at the November 18, 2020 meeting of the Council of the Municipality of Grey Highlands.

2020-747 Cathy Little, Dane Nielsen Whereas the Province has introduced Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID 19 Act - Schedule 6 – Conservation Authorities Act; and Whereas the Legislation introduces a number of changes and new sections that could remove and/or significantly hinder the conservation authorities’ role in regulating development, permit appeal process and engaging in review and appeal of planning applications; and Whereas we, the Municipality of Grey Highlands, rely on the watershed expertise provided by local conservation authorities to protect residents, property and local natural resources on a watershed basis by regulating development and engaging in reviews of applications submitted under the Planning Act; and Whereas the changes allow the Minister to make decisions without CA watershed data and expertise; and Whereas the Legislation suggests that the Minister will have the ability to establish standards and requirements for non-mandatory programs which are negotiated between the conservation authorities and municipalities to meet local watershed needs; and Whereas these proposed changes will impact Ontario’s ability to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change by undermining the work of conservation authorities to keep development out of high risk areas and protect natural infrastructure; and Whereas municipalities require a longer transition time to put in place agreements with conservation authorities for non-mandatory programs; and Whereas municipalities believe that the appointment of municipal representatives on conservation authority Boards should be a municipal decision; and the Chair and Vice Chair of the conservation authority Board should be elected as per the discretion of the conservation authority Board; and

The Municipality of Grey Highlands  206 Toronto Street South, Unit One P.O. Box 409 Markdale, Ontario N0C 1H0 519-986-2811 Toll-Free 1-888-342-4059 Fax 519-986-3643  www.greyhighlands.ca  [email protected] P a g e | 2

Whereas the changes to the ‘Duty of Members’ contradicts the fiduciary duty of a conservation authority board member to represent the best interests of the conservation authority and its responsibility to the watershed; and Whereas conservation authorities have already been working with the Province, development sector and municipalities to streamline and speed up permitting and planning approvals through Conservation Ontario’s Client Service and Streamlining Initiative; and Whereas changes to the legislation will create more administrative burden and costs for the conservation authorities, and their municipal partners, and potentially result in delays in the development approval process; and Whereas the combined contribution of municipal levy and self-generated revenues support 93% of the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority budget; and Whereas the Provincial contribution to this budget is 7%, the majority of which is for Drinking Water Source Protection; and Whereas municipalities value and rely on the natural habitats and water resources within our jurisdiction for the health and well-being of residents; municipalities value the conservation authorities’ work to prevent and manage the impacts of flooding and other natural hazards; and municipalities value the conservation authority’s work to ensure safe drinking water; now

Therefore be it resolved that the Province of Ontario work with conservation authorities to address their concerns by removing Schedule 6 from Bill 229 which affects changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act; and That the Province of Ontario delay enactment of clauses affecting municipal concerns; and That the Province of Ontario provide a longer transition period up to December 2022 for non-mandatory programs to enable coordination of conservation authority-municipal budget processes; and That the Province respect the current conservation authority/municipal relationships; and That the Province embrace their long-standing partnership with the conservation authorities and provide them with the tools and financial resources they need to effectively implement their watershed management role. CARRIED.

Sincerely,

Raylene Martell Director of Legislative Services/Municipal Clerk Municipality of Grey Highlands

The Municipality of Grey Highlands  206 Toronto Street South, Unit One P.O. Box 409 Markdale, Ontario N0C 1H0 519-986-2811 Toll-Free 1-888-342-4059 Fax 519-986-3643  www.greyhighlands.ca  [email protected] P a g e | 3

Cc: Hon. Rod Phillips, Minister of Finance ([email protected]) Hon. , Minister of Environment Conservation and Parks ([email protected]) Hon. , Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry ([email protected]) Hon Bill Walker, MPP ([email protected]); Conservation Ontario ([email protected]); Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority ([email protected]) Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority ([email protected]) Grey Sauble Conservation Authority ([email protected]) All Ontario Municipalities

The Municipality of Grey Highlands  206 Toronto Street South, Unit One P.O. Box 409 Markdale, Ontario N0C 1H0 519-986-2811 Toll-Free 1-888-342-4059 Fax 519-986-3643  www.greyhighlands.ca  [email protected] TOWNSHIP OF P.O. Box 129, 1 Bailey Street, Port Carling, Ontario P0B 1J0 Website: www. muskokalakes.ca MU~~A Phone: 705-765-3156 Fax: 705-765-6755

November 24, 2020

The Honourable Minister for Seniors and Accessibility College Park 5th Floor, 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 1S5

Re: AODA Website Compliance Extension Request

Dear Minister Cho:

Please be advised that at the regular meeting of the General/Finance Committee held on October 14, 2020, the following resolution was passed and subsequently ratified by Council on November 11, 2020.

"Resolution Number GFC-2-14/10/20

Moved By: Councillor Jaglowitz - Seconded By: Councillor Kelley

Be it resolved that the General Finance Committee recommend to Township Council that the Township of Muskoka Lakes support the Town of Amherstburg Resolution # 20200914-281 in regard to seeking an extension from the Province of Ontario of the compliance deadline for AODA Website compliance stated in Section 14(4) of 0. Reg 191 /11 to meet the compliance standards, by a minimum of one (1) year to at least January 1, 2022 and further that the Province of Ontario consider providing funding support and training resources to meet these compliance standards.

Carried."

For your reference, please find attached a copy of the above noted resolution along with the September 21, 2020, Town of Amherstburg Resolution# 20200914-281.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Cheryl Mortimer, AMCTO Clerk cc. The Honourable , , MPP, Parry Sound - Muskoka Town of Amherstburg Muskoka Municipalities

Encl /kb GENERAL/FINANCE COMMITTEE. MEETING Agenda Item 6.b.

Date: October 14, 2020 GFC-__~_._._-14/10/20 MOVED BY: Councillor Jaglowitz

SECONDED BY: Councillor Kelley

Be it resolved that the General Finance Committee recommend to Township Council that the Township of Muskoka Lakes support the Town of Amherstburg Resolution# 20200914~281 in regard to seeking an extension from th.e Province of Ontario of the compliance deadline for AODA Website compliance stated in Section 14(4) of 0. Reg 191/11 to meet the compliance standards, by a minimum of one (1) year to at least January 1, 2022 and further that the Province of Ontario consider providing funding support and training resources to meet these compliance standards.

RECORDED VOTE: NAYS YEAS COUNCILLOR BRIDGEMAN D □ COUNCILLOR EDWARDS D □ MAYOR HARDING (Ex-Officio) D D COUNCILLOR JAGLOWITZ D D COUNCILLOR KELLEY □ □ COUNCILLOR MAZAN D D COUNCILLOR NISHIKAWA D □ COUNCILLOR ROBERTS D □ COUNCILLOR HAYES (Vice-Chair) D □ COUNCILLOR ZAVITZ (Chair) D □ DEFEATE~-

CARRIED TOTALS '7/ Recorded Vote Requested by: ~~ CHAIR )1./ r;;7

November 25, 2020

Hon. Solicitor General George Drew Building,18th Floor 25 Grosvenor St. Toronto, ON M7A 1Y6

RE - Bill 229 and the Conservation Authorities

Dear Honourable Sylvia Jones:

Shelburne Town Council passed the following resolution unanimously at its Council meeting held Monday November 23, 2020:

Moved By Councillor Walter Benotto Seconded By Councillor Kyle Fegan

WHEREAS the Province has introduced Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID 19 Act - Schedule 6 - Conservation Authorities Act; and WHEREAS the Legislation introduces a number of changes and new sections that could remove and/or significantly hinder the conservation authority’s’ role in regulating development, permit appeal process and engaging in review and appeal of planning applications; and WHEREAS we rely on the watershed expertise provided by local conservation authorities to protect residents, property and local natural resources on a watershed basis by regulating development and engaging in reviews of applications submitted under the Planning Act; and WHEREAS the changes allow the Minister to make decisions without conservation authority watershed data and expertise; and

203 Main Street East, Shelburne, Ontario L9V 3K7 Tel: 519-925-2600 Fax: 519-925-6134 Web: www.shelburne.ca

WHEREAS the Legislation suggests that the Minister will have the ability to establish standards and requirements for non-mandatory programs which are negotiated between the conservation authorities and municipalities to meet local watershed needs; and WHEREAS municipalities believe that the appointment of municipal representatives on Conservation Authority Boards should be a municipal decision, and the Chair and Vice Chair of the Conservation Authority Board should be duly elected; and WHEREAS the changes to the 'Duty of Members' contradicts the fiduciary duty of a Conservation Authority Board member to represent the best interests of the conservation authority and its responsibility to the watershed; and WHEREAS conservation authorities have already been working with the Province, development sector and municipalities to streamline and speed up permitting and planning approvals through Conservation Ontario's Client Service and Streamlining Initiative; and WHEREAS changes to the legislation will create more red tape and costs for the conservation authorities, and their municipal partners, and potentially result in delays in the development approval process; and WHEREAS municipalities value and rely on the natural habitats and water resources within our jurisdiction for the health and well-being of residents; municipalities value the conservation authorities work to prevent and manage the impacts of flooding and other natural hazards; and municipalities value the conservation authority's work to ensure safe drinking water; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Province of Ontario repeal Schedule 6 of the Budget Measures Act (Bill 229);

2. THAT the Province continue to work with conservation authorities to find workable solutions to reduce red tape and create conditions for growth;

3. THAT the Province respect the current conservation authority and municipal relationships; and

4. THAT the Province embrace their long-standing partnership with the conservation authorities and provide them with the tools and financial resources they need to effectively implement their watershed management role.

CARRIED, Mayor Wade Mills

This motion was passed unanimously.

Thank You

J. Willoughby

Jennifer Willoughby Director of Legislative Services/Clerk Town of Shelburne

CC: Hon. Doug Ford, Premier Hon. Rod Phillips, Minister of Finance Hon. Jeff Yurek, Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks , Leader, Official Opposition Steven Del Duca, Leader, , Leader, , Critic, Finance and Treasury Board , Critic, Environment , Critic, Climate Crisis

Email copies to: NVCA, CVC, TRCA, Canadian Environmental Law Association, AMO & all Ontario municipalities

From: Mathers To: Lori McDonald Subject: Letter for Mayor and Councilors Re Natural gas Fired Power Plants Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 12:47:36 PM Attachments: Municipal-Phase-Out-Resolution-July-14-2020[13417].docx

Dear Mayor Smith and members of Bracebridge Council,

Climate Action Muskoka is asking all our Muskoka municipalities to join Kitchener City Council, Halton Hills Town Council and Hamilton City Council to change the course of power delivery in our province in order to meet our climate responsibilities.

Just days ago. these three municipalities unanimously called on the Government of Ontario to phase out gas-fired power plants by 2030 in order to meet our climate targets. These municipalities are also asking all municipal councils in the province to join them in this call to the province, just as municipalities did in 2015, calling for the phase out of coal-fired plants.

The councils urge the government to invest in energy efficiency, wind and solar energy, rather than increasing production at these gas-fired power plants. They also urge the government to begin negotiations with the Province of Quebec to purchase clean, cheap and available hydro electricity from Quebec to replace power from the aging Pickering Nuclear station scheduled for closure in 2024. We ask you to take this opportunity to do the same to make Ontario’s grid even greener.

Dr. Gordon Laxer, Gravenhurst resident and Climate Action Muskoka Energy Lead has this to say about this fossil fuel: “Natural gas is not the clean transition fuel to a low carbon future that its promoters claim. Sure, it burns cleaner than oil, but that is offset by extraction methods, including fracking, and by substantial methane leaks. Ontario got off coal-generated electrical power. Now it needs to get off natural gas in order to reach Ontario’s net zero carbon goal.” Dr. Laxer is Professor Emeritus of Political Economy at The University of Alberta, founding Director of Parkland Institute, and author of After the Sands – Energy and Ecological Security For Canadians. (available from the Gravenhurst Library)

It is once more the work of the municipalities to lead the next step forward.

As our elected municipal government, we are asking you to request the Provincial Government phase out gas-fired power plants by 2030. A draft of the municipal phase-out resolution is attached to this document should you choose to use it.

Please call the province to action. Your municipal leadership makes a difference for our climate future!

Sincerely,

Linda Mathers and Climate Action Muskoka

Sent from ---Mail for Windows 10

Draft Resolution: Phase-Out Gas-Fired Electricity Generation Resolution for Ontario Municipalities

The Government of Ontario is planning to ramp up the greenhouse gas pollution from Ontario’s gas- fired power plants by more than 300% by 2025 and by more than 400% by 2040.

To help fuel this massive increase in fossil fuel electricity and climate threatening pollution, the provincial government recently purchased 3 gas plants at a cost of $2.8 billion.

Ontario is set to throw away more than a third of the greenhouse gas reductions it achieved by phasing- out its dirty coal-fired power plants due to a power plan built around ramping up gas-fired generation to replace the output of the Pickering Nuclear Station (scheduled to close in 2024).

Fortunately, there is a better way to keep our lights on. We can meet our 2030 climate target and lower our electricity bills by phasing-out our gas-fired power plants by 2030 and embracing lower cost and cleaner options.

Here is how we can do it:

- Reverse short sighted cuts to energy efficiency programs and stop under-investing in this quick to deploy and low-cost resource. We can ensure we maximize our energy efficiency efforts by paying up to the same price per kilowatt-hour (kWh) for energy efficiency measures as we are currently paying for power from nuclear plants (e.g., up to 9.5 cents per kWh). - Return Ontario to leadership in developing increasingly low-cost renewable energy resources. It makes no sense to ignore our lower cost options for keeping our lights on while investing in high-cost nuclear rebuilds. We should support renewable energy projects that have costs that are below what we are paying for nuclear power and work with communities to make the most of these economic opportunities. - Accept Quebec’s offer of low-cost 24/7 power from its massive water power system. Quebec has offered power at less than one-half the cost of re-building our aging Darlington and Bruce Nuclear Stations and Ontario can only benefit by making a long-term deal with its green energy- rich neighbour. Quebec’s system of reservoirs can be used like a giant battery to back-up made- in-Ontario renewable power, eliminating the need to use gas-fired power plants.

Therefore the City of X requests the Government of Ontario to place an interim cap of 2.5 megatonnes per year on our gas plants’ greenhouse gas pollution and develop and implement a plan to phase-out all gas-fired electricity generation by 2030 to ensure that Ontario meets its climate targets.

rr-Region November 26, 2020 II of Peel working with you The Honourable Rod Phillips Minister of Finance 95 Grosvenor St. Toronto, ON M7A 1Y8

Dear Minister Phillips:

Re: Motion Regarding Property Tax Exemptions for Veteran Clubs

Nando lannicca Each year on November 11th we pause to remember the heroic efforts of Regional Chair & CEO Canadians who fought in wars and military conflicts and served in peacekeeping missions around the world to defend our freedoms and secure 10 Peel Centre Dr. our peace and prosperity. One way that the Province and Ontario Suite A, 5th Floor municipalities have recognized veterans and veteran groups is by exempting Brampton, ON L6T 4B9 their properties from property taxation. 905-791-7800 ext. 4310

In late 2018, your government introduced a change to the Assessment Act that exempted Royal Canadian Legion Ontario branches from property taxes effective January 1, 2019. Veterans clubs however were not included under this exemption. While veterans’ clubs in Peel are already exempt from Regional and local property taxes, they still pay the education portion of property taxes.

To address this gap, your government has proposed in the 2020 budget bill (Bill 229) to amend the Assessment Act that would provide a full property tax exemption to veterans’ clubs retroactive to January 1, 2019. The Region of Peel thanks you for introducing this change in recognition of our veterans.

At its November 12, 2020 meeting, Peel Regional Council approved the attached resolution regarding this exemption and look forward to this change coming into effect as soon as possible after Bill 229 is passed. This would ensure that veteran clubs benefit from the exemption in a timely way.

I thank your government for moving quickly to address this gap and for your support of veterans.

Kindest personal regards,

Nando Iannicca, Regional Chair and CEO

CC: Peel-area MPPs Ontario Municipalities Stephen Van Ofwegen, Commissioner of Finance and CFO [FRegion II of Peel working with you Resolution Number 2020-939

Whereas each year on November 11, Canadians pause to remember the heroic efforts of Canadian veterans who fought in wars and military conflicts, and served in peacekeeping missions around the world to defend our freedoms and democracy so that we can live in peace and prosperity;

And whereas, it is important to appreciate and recognize the achievements and sacrifices of those armed forces veterans who served Canada in times of Nando lannicca Regional Chair & CEO war, military conflict and peace;

And whereas, Section 6.1 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A31 as 10 Peel Centre Dr. Suite A, 5th Floor amended, Regional Council may exempt from Regional taxation land that is Brampton, ON L6T 4B9 used and occupied as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds by 905-791-7800 ext. 4310 persons who served in the armed forces of His or Her Majesty or an ally of His or Her Majesty in any war;

And whereas, through By-Law Number 62-2017 Regional Council has provided an exemption from Regional taxation to Royal Canadian Legions and the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans Clubs that have qualified properties used and occupied as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds;

And whereas, local municipal councils in Peel have provided a similar exemption for local property taxes;

And whereas, Royal Canadian Legion branches in Ontario are exempt from all property taxation, including the education portion of property taxes, under Section 3 (1) paragraph 15.1 of the Assessment Act, and that a municipal by- law is not required to provide such an exemption; And whereas, the 2020 Ontario Budget provides for amendments to the Assessment Act to apply the existing property tax exemption for Ontario branches of the Royal Canadian Legion, for 2019 and subsequent tax years, to Ontario units of the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada;

Therefore, be it resolved, that the Regional Chair write to the Minister of Finance, on behalf of Regional Council, to request that upon passage of the 2020 Ontario Budget, the amendment to the Assessment Act be implemented as soon as possible;

And further, that copies of this resolution be sent to Peel-area Members of Provincial Parliament as well as to all Ontario municipalities for consideration and action.