2.             SOURCE WATER PROTECTION

 

PROTECTION DES SOURCES D'EAU

WITHDRAWN

 

Committee recommendationS as amended

 

That Council support the South Nation resolution, as follows:

 

1.         A land owner, as a result of a SWPC plan is prevented from growing the crops of his or her choosing on his land using the guidance of a Nutrient Management Plan developed under the Nutrient Management Act, resulting in a loss of net income, there should be Provincial Financial Assistance for any documented loss of net income; and

 

2.         A land owner is prevented from using any weed control program that is found in OMAFRA’s Guide to Chemical Weed Control that could be used on that crop grown anywhere else in Ontario, there should be Provincial Financial Assistance for any documented loss of net income resulting from lack of weed control.

 

 

RecommandationS MODIFIÉES du Comité

 

Que le Conseil appuie la résolution de Nation Sud, selon les modalités suivantes :

 

1.         les propriétaires terriens empêchés, en raison d’un plan de CPSE, d’effectuer les cultures de son choix sur leur terre et selon les directives d’un plan de gestion des nutriments élaboré conformément à la Loi sur la gestion des éléments nutritifs, et subissant par conséquent une perte de revenus nets devraient bénéficier d’une aide financière provinciale pour toute perte documentée de revenus nets;

 

2.         les propriétaires terriens empêchés de faire appel à un quelconque programme de lutte contre les mauvaises herbes décrit dans le Guide de lutte contre les mauvaises herbes du MAAAR et qui aurait pu être appliqué pour leur activité partout ailleurs en Ontario, devraient bénéficier d’une aide financière provinciale pour toute perte documentée de revenus nets résultant de l’absence de moyens de lutte contre les mauvaises herbes.

 

Documentation

 

1.   Chair, Rural Issues Advisory Committee’s report dated 19 August 2008 (ACS2008-CCV-RIA-0003).

 

2.   Extract of Draft Minute, 25 September 2008.

Report to/Rapport au :

 

Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee

Comité de l'agriculture et des questions rurales

 

and Council / et au Conseil

 

19 August 2008 / le  août 2008

 

Submitted by/Soumis par : Richard Fraser, Chair, Rural Issues Advisory Committee / Président du comité consultatif sur les questions rurales

 

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Carole Langford,

Coordinator, Rural Issues Advisory Committee /

Coordonnatrice, comité consultatif sur les questions rurales

City Clerk’s Branch/Direction du greffe

(613) 580-2424 x28934, carole.langford@ottawa.ca

 

West Carleton-March (5), Cumberland (19), Osgoode (20), Rideau-Goulbourn (21)

Ref N°: ACS2008-CCV-RIA-0003

 

 

SUBJECT:

SOURCE WATER PROTECTION

 

 

OBJET :

PROTECTION DES SOURCES D'EAU

 

 

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Rural Issues Advisory Committee recommend the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommend Council support the South Nation resolution, as follows:

 

WHEREAS the possibility exists that some Source Water Protection Committees (SWPC) Plans may prevent the owners of certain identified properties from growing certain crops or from using management practices that would be considered normal on any other land in Ontario;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that if a land owner, as a result of a SWPC plan is prevented from growing the crops of his or her choosing on his land using the guidance of a Nutrient Management Plan developed under the Nutrient Management Act, resulting in a loss of net income, they should be compensated for any documented loss of net income;

 

FURTHER THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that if a land owner is prevented from using any weed control program that is found in OMAFRA’s Guide to Chemical Weed Control that could be used on that crop grown anywhere else in Ontario, they should be compensated for any documented loss of net income resulting from lack of weed control.

 

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

 

Que le Comité consultatif sur les questions rurales recommande au Comité de l’agriculture et des affaires rurales de recommander à son tour au Conseil d’appuyer la résolution de Nation Sud, selon les modalités suivantes :

 

ATTENDU QU’il est possible que certains plans de comités de protection des sources d’eau (CPSE) empêchent les propriétaires de terrains désignés d’effectuer certaines cultures ou de faire appel à des pratiques de gestion qui seraient jugées normales sur n’importe quelle terre en Ontario;

 

IL EST RÉSOLU QUE les propriétaires terriens empêchés, en raison d’un plan de CPSE, d’effectuer les cultures de son choix sur leur terre et selon les directives d’un plan de gestion des nutriments élaboré conformément à la Loi sur la gestion des éléments nutritifs, et subissant par conséquent une perte de revenus nets soient indemnisés pour toute perte documentée de revenus nets;

 

IL EST ÉGALEMENT RÉSOLU QUE les propriétaires terriens empêchés de faire appel à un quelconque programme de lutte contre les mauvaises herbes décrit dans le Guide de lutte contre les mauvaises herbes du MAAAR et qui aurait pu être appliqué pour leur activité partout ailleurs en Ontario soient indemnisés pour toute perte documentée de revenus nets résultant de l’absence de moyens de lutte contre les mauvaises herbes.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The mandate of the Rural Issues Advisory Committee (RIAC) is to provide advice and input to the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and Ottawa City Council on issues affecting the rural and farming community, including agricultural organizations.

 

In discussing the matter on July 15, 2008, Chair Fraser provided an overview of his objectives in raising the item for discussion.  He referred to the motion that was approved at the Raisin-South Nation Source Protection Committee meeting, which requested that the Clean Water Act (CWA) be amended to include the principle of compensation for loss of income to private landowners resulting from source protection plan policies and urged RIAC to support the motion.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Planning, Transit and the Environment

 

The technical studies for the Drinking Water Source Protection process are not yet at the point of providing even a preliminary idea of what the impact on farmers might be.  It is therefore not possible to estimate the magnitude of any potential "compensation" at this time.  Indications to date are that the Province of Ontario expects municipalities to fund the implementation costs of Drinking Water Source Protection since it is municipal drinking water sources that are being protected.  For example the Financial Plan regulation under the Clean Water Act speaks directly to including the cost of source water protection.

The discussion of this resolution at the Town of Carleton Place made an important point.

"Compensation implies that a right is being denied.  Property owners should not have the right to discharge contaminates and should not be "compensated" if they are forced to restrict the discharge of contaminates.  However, there should be provincial stewardship funding available to any impacted property owner to assist with adapting to any restrictions."

 

Staff believe the Drinking Water Source Protection process must carefully consider the impact of proposed protection measures on farmers and other landowners. Staff recommend support for stewardship funding rather than compensation.  In deciding whether to support this resolution, Committee and Council should be aware that any funding may be a municipal cost.

 

Rural Affairs Office

 

The Rural Affairs Office has consulted with both the Chair of the Mississippi-Rideau Source Protection Committee and staff of Nation Township.

 

The Province has indicated clearly that they will not support the Terms of Reference for any Source Protection Committees if these terms include ‘compensation.’  For this reason, Source Protection Committees have supported requesting increases to the funding levels and timelines provided for grants and have sought clear demonstrations of the financial implications of any recommendation of the Source Protection Committees. 

 

If ARAC chooses to support the RIAC motion, the Rural Affairs Office would recommend that consideration be given to the use of the term ‘financial assistance’ versus ‘compensation,’ as well as clarifying that any funding provided should be from the Province.

 

Additional information will be circulated to the Committee Co-ordinator to have on file including:

Recent ‘Source Protection Report’ written by the Chair of the Mississippi-Rideau Source Protection Committee that addresses the compensation issue.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Estimated costs to compensate landowners cannot be determined until the scope of the regulations and their impacts have been clarified. There are no funds available for this initiative within the City’s budget.

 

DISPOSITION

 

The Clerk’s Office to inform the Rural Issues Advisory Committee of the Council decision.

SOURCE WATER PROTECTION

PROTECTION DES SOURCES D'EAU

ACS2008-CCV-RIA-0003                WEST CARLETON-MARCH (5), CUMBERLAND (19),

                                                                                                 OSGOODE (20), RIDEAU-GOULBOURN (21)

 

Chair Jellett advised that there was an amending motion to the recommendation replacing the words “there should be provincial financial assistance” with “they should be compensated” as it should be the provincial government providing the financial assistance to those who are disadvantaged and have documented net income loss. 

 

Councillor Hunter pointed out that he was in agreement with the amendment but the report recommendation was badly worded and makes a judgment on a hypothetical situation.  He explained that none of the conservation authorities have completed their source water protection studies; therefore saying that somebody might not grow a crop is hypothetical.

 

In response to a question by Chair Jellett, Ms. Christensen agreed that the technical studies are not at a stage where an assessment can be made on the impact of individual farmers as the City does not have that information yet.  She advised that it would be preferable to support stewardship rather than compensation because no one has the right the pollute water. 

 

Richard Frazer, Chair of the Rural Issues Advisory Committee elaborated on the principle of the concerns listed in the report and added that the Minister made it very clear in the legislation that there would be no compensation.  He explained that if a farmer owns a piece of prime land close to a well or a river intake that is restricted from applying nutrients at the level allowed on every other piece of agricultural property in Ontario, under the Nutrient Management Act, then he is put at a disadvantage and is going to lose money because of it. 

 

Moved by Councillor El-Chantiry,

 

That the following words: “there should be Provincial Financial Assistance” be substituted in each of the resolutions in the report recommendations for the words “they should be compensated”.

 

                                                                                                CARRIED

 

Councillor Hunter moved to defer the amending motion until more information is received. 

 

 

Chair Jellett advised that he was alright with deferring the motion but made clear that the intent of this committee is to make it clear to the source water protection committees that ARAC believes there should be provincial financial assistance, in whatever form that will take to compensate affected landowners.  Ms. Christensen assured that there was staff present at the meeting from both source protection authorities.

 

Moved by Councillor Hunter,

 

That Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommend the item be deferred until the Committee receives more information from both Source Protection Authorities.

 

                                                                                                CARRIED

 

YEAS (4) : Councillors Monette, Hunter, Brooks, Jellett

NAYS (3) :  Councillors Harder, El-Chantiry, Thompson

 

That the Rural Issues Advisory Committee recommend the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommend Council support the South Nation resolution, as follows:

 

WHEREAS the possibility exists that some source water protection committees (SWPC) plans may prevent the owners of certain identified properties from growing certain crops or from using management practices that would be considered normal on any other land in Ontario;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that if a land owner, as a result of a SWPC plan is prevented from growing the crops of his or her choosing on his land using the guidance of a Nutrient Management Plan developed under the Nutrient Management Act, resulting in a loss of net income, they should be compensated there should be provincial financial assistance for any documented loss of net income;

 

FURTHER THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that if a land owner is prevented from using any weed control program that is found in OMAFRA’s Guide to Chemical Weed Control that could be used on that crop grown anywhere else in Ontario, they should be compensated there should be provincial financial assistance for any documented loss of net income resulting from lack of weed control.

 

                                                                                                DEFERRED

 

DIRECTION TO STAFF:

 

Planning, Transit and Environment staff to provide the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee with more information received from both Source Protection Authorities.