LA CORPORATION DU VILLAGE DE CASSELMAN THE ......2015/06/23 · General Management / Finance / Clerk’s Office a) Rapports financiers pour les mois de mars et avril 2015 a) Financial

LA CORPORATION DU VILLAGE DE CASSELMAN THE CORPORATION OF THE VILLAGE OF CASSELMAN

ORDRE DU JOUR / AGENDA ASSEMBLÉE ORDINAIRE / REGULAR MEETING

LE 23 JUIN 2015 À 19 H / JUNE 23RD, 2015 AT 7:00 P.M.

1. OUVERTURE DE L’ASSEMBLÉE CALL TO ORDER

2. MODIFICATIONS DE FORME À L’ORDRE DU JOUR TECHNICAL AMENDEMENT TO THE AGENDA 3. ADOPTION DE L’ORDRE DU JOUR ADOPTION OF AGENDA 4. DÉCLARATION(S) D’INTÉRÊT DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST 5. DÉLÉGATION DELEGATON NIL 6. MOT DU MAIRE ET DES CONSEILLERS MAYOR’S & COUNCILLORS MESSAGE 7. ADOPTION DES PROCÈS-VERBAUX ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7.1 Réunion ordinaire tenue le 26 mai 2015 Regular meeting held on May 26th, 2015 8. ADOPTION DES RECOMMANDATIONS DES COMITÉS DU CONSEIL MUNICIPAL

ADOPTION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL COMMITTEES NIL 9. RÉCEPTION DES RAPPORTS DES MEMBRES DE L’ADMINISTRATION RECEIVING OF REPORTS FROM THE APPOINTED MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS 9.1 Direction générale / Trésorerie / Greffe General Management / Finance / Clerk’s Office a) Rapports financiers pour les mois de mars et avril 2015 a) Financial reports for the months of March and April 2015 b) Rapport administratif DG-012-2015 – entente de répartition d’incendie b) Administrative report DG-012-2015 – Fire Dispatch Agreement 9.2 Services récréatifs et loisirs Recreation and Leisure Services NIL

9.3 Services de l’environnement Environmental Services NIL 9.4 Services des travaux publics et aménagements Public Works and maintenance NIL 9.5 Service des incendies Fire Services NIL 9.6 Services techniques Technical Services a) Rapport administratif TEC-017-2015 – indexation des frais de redevances d’aménagement a) Administrative report TEC-017-2015 – indexation of the development charges 10. RÈGLEMENTS MUNICIPAUX MUNICIPAL BY-LAWS NIL 11. AFFAIRES DÉCOULANT DES RÉUNIONS PRÉCÉDENTES UNFINISHED BUSINESS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 11.1 Rapport administratif EN-009-2015 – développement de la lagune existante Administrative report EN-009-2015 – development to the existing lagoon 11.2 Rapport administratif RL-005-2015 – location – CTC Administrative report RL-005-2015 – rental – CTC 12. NOUVELLES AFFAIRES OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 Municipalité de La Nation – collecte de produits toxiques The Nation Municipality – household hazardous waste collection 13. CORRESPONDANCE CORRESPONDENCE 13.1 Conservation de la Nation sud – équipe d’intervention de l’eau South Nation Conservation Authority – Water Response Team 13.2 Bureau de l’Ombudsman de l’Ontario – bulletin du mois de mai Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario – newsletter for the month of May 13.3 Dystrophie musculaire Canada – remerciements au service d’incendie de Casselman pour leur dévouement et engagement Muscular Dystrophy Canada – thank you letter to the Casselman Fire Department for their dedication and commitment 13.4 Conservation de la Nation sud – déclaration d’un état de bas niveau d’eau de niveau 1 South Nation Conservation Authority – Declaration of Level 1 Low Water Condition

14. PÉRIODE DE QUESTIONS RÉSERVÉE AU PUBLIC CONCERNANT LES SUJETS DISCUTÉS À

L’ORDRE DU JOUR QUESTION PERIOD RESERVED TO THE PUBLIC PERTAINING TO THE SUBJECT MATTERS

DISCUSSED IN THIS AGENDA 15. AVIS DE MOTION NOTICE OF MOTION NIL 16. HORAIRE DES RENCONTRES SCHEDULING OF MEETINGS 17. HUIS CLOS CLOSED SESSION NIL 18. ÉVÉNEMENTS À VENIR COMING EVENTS NIL 19. RÈGLEMENT POUR CONFIRMER LES PROCÉDURES DU CONSEIL BY-LAW TO CONFIRM COUNCIL PROCEDURES 20. AJOURNEMENT ADJOURNMENT

96

VILLAGE DE CASSELMAN VILLAGE OF CASSELMAN ASSEMBLÉE ORDINAIRE REGULAR MEETING

LE MARDI 26 MAI 2015 À 19 H TUESDAY, MAY 26TH, AT 7:00 P.M. COMPLEXE J. R. BRISSON J.R. BRISSON COMPLEX

CASSELMAN, ONTARIO Conseil / Council

Maire Conrad Lamadeleine Mayor Conseillère Conseiller

Anik Charron Marcel Cléroux

Councillor Councillor

Conseiller Michel Desjardins Councillor Conseiller Denis Renaud Councillor

Personnes ressources / Resource persons

Greffière Marielle Dupuis Clerk

Trésorière Catherine Borelly Treasurer Directeur des services

récréatifs et des loisirs Christine Lavictoire Recreation and Leisure

Services Director Directeur des services

techniques Charles Bray Technical Services Director

Urbaniste

Sylvain Boudreault Planner

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-175 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud OUVERTURE DE L’ASSEMBLÉE

OPENING OF THE MEETING

Qu’il soit résolu que la présente assemblée soit ouverte.

Be it resolved that the present meeting be opened.

Adoptée Carried Résolution / Resolution no 2015-176 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Marcel Cléroux ORDRE DU JOUR

AGENDA

Qu’il soit résolu que l’ordre du jour soit accepté, incluant les modifications apportées séance tenante, le cas échéant : Ajout : 9.2 a) Splash Pad – réparation.

Be it resolved that the agenda be accepted, including the modifications made forthwith, as applicable: Addition: 9.2 a) Splash Pad - repairs.

Adoptée Carried

97

DÉLÉGATION DELEGATION

5.1

Sébastien Racine et Richard Gendron, Corporation de la revitalisation du Centre ville de Casselman – festival de Noël Messieurs Racine et Gendron présentent les objectifs de la présentation : 1) informer le conseil des activités de la corporation; 2) faire connaître l’historique de la corporation et les accomplissements; 3) remercier le conseil pour leur appuie et la collaboration habituelle et 4) demander d’entériner la résolution pour la fermeture de la rue Principale pour l’édition 2015. Une pétition des citoyens est déposée demandant que le Festival de Noël demeure sur la rue Principale.

Sébastien Racine and Richard Gendron – Corporation of the Casselman Downtown Revitalizaton – Christmas Festival Mr. Racine and Mr. Gendron present the objectives of the presentation: 1) inform the Council of the corporation's activities; 2) to share the history of the corporation and its achievements; 3) to thank the Council for their support and the usual collaboration and 4) request to approve the resolution for the closure of Principale Street for the 2015 edition. A citizen petition was submitted requesting that the Christmas Festival remains on Principale Street.

5.2

Marie Josée Boulerice, Bureau de santé – proposition d’un règlement contre le tabagisme au complexe J.R. Brisson Mme Boulerice propose agrandir le périmètre sans tabac pour le Complexe Brisson car présentement la loi 48-06 Ontario sans fumée s’applique seulement sur le terrain de tennis ainsi que certaines portions du complexe et du Centre Paul Émile Lévesque qui peut porter à confusion. Discussion concernant les préoccupations de certains membres du Conseil. Certains membres appuient le concept d’un règlement contre le tabagisme.

Marie Josée Boulerice, Health Unit – proposal of a regulation against smoking at the J.R. Brisson Complex Mrs. Boulerice proposes expanding the perimeter of no smoking at the Brisson Complex as the current Smoke-Free Ontario Act Law 48-06 applies only on the tennis court as well as certain portions of the complex and Centre Paul Émile Lévesque which can be confusing. Discussion regarding the concerns of some members of the Council. Some members support the concept of a regulation against smoking.

MESSAGE DU MARIE ET DES CONSEILLERS MAYOR’S & COUNCILLORS’ MESSAGE

6.1

i) M. Marcel Cléroux M. Cléroux invite à nouveau les membres à la marche des hommes mercredi le 27 mai.

i) Mr. Marcel Cléroux Mr. Cléroux invites Council members to the Men’s Walk on May 27th.

ADOPTION DES RECOMMANDATIONS DES COMITÉS DU CONSEIL MUNICIPAL

ADOPTION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL COMMITTEES

98

8.1 et/and 8.2

Corporation de la Corporation de la revitalisation – procès verbaux du 14 janvier et du 2 février 2015

Corporation of the Casseman Downtown Revitalization – Janaury 14 and February 2, 2015 minutes

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-177 Proposée par : / Moved by: Denis Renaud Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Marcel Cléroux RÉCEPTION DES PROCÈS-VERBAUX Qu’il soit résolu que les procès-verbaux de la Corporation de la revitalisation du Centre-ville de Casselman du 14 janvier et 2 février 2015 soient reçus tels que présentés.

RECEPTION OF MINUTES Be it resolved that the minutes of the Corporation of the Casselman Downtown Revitalization dated January 14th and February 2nd, 2015 be filed as presented.

Adoptée Carried

RÉCEPTION DES RAPPORTS DES MEMBRES DE L’ADMINISTRATION

RECEIVING OF REPORTS FROM THE APPOINTED MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS

9.1

Direction générale / greffe / trésorerie General Management / Clerk’s Office / Treasurer

a)

Rapport administratif DG-011-2015 – transfert du montant de 2014 du Night Watch aux services récréatifs

Administrative report DG-011-2015 – transfer of the 2014 amount for the Night Watch to the Recreation Services

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-178 Proposée par : / Moved by: Anik Charron Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud RAPPORT DE LA TRÉSORIÈRE

REPORT FROM THE TREASURER

Qu’il soit résolu que le Conseil accuse réception du rapport administratif DG-011-2015 de la trésorière et approuve les recommandations concernant le transfert de budget du montant de 2014 du Night Watch aux services récréatifs et des loisirs.

Be it resolved that Council acknowledges receipt of the administrative report DG-011-2015 from the Treasurer and approves the recommendations concerning the transfer of the 2014 amount for the Night Watch to the Recreation Services.

Adoptée Carried 9.2

Services récréatifs et des loisirs Recreation and Leisurel Services

a) Réparations – Splash Pad

a) Repairs – Splash Pad

99

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-179 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Marcel Cléroux RAPPORT DU DIRECTEUR DES SERVICES RÉCRÉATIFS ET DES LOISIRS

REPORT FROM THE RECREATION AND LEISURE SERVICES DIRECTOR

Qu’il soit résolu que le Conseil accuse réception du rapport administratif RL-013-2015 du Directeur des services récréatifs et des loisirs et approuve les recommandations concernant le Splash Pad.

Be it resolved that Council acknowledges receipt of the administrative report RL-013-2015 from the Recreation and Leisure Services Director and approves the recommendations concerning the Splash Pad.


Service de l’environnement Environmental Services

a) Rapport administratif EN-010-2015 – transfert de projets capitaux

a) Administrative report EN-010-2015 – transfer of capital projects

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-180 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud RAPPORT DU DIRECTEUR DES SERVICES DE L’ENVIRONNEMENT

REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

Qu’il soit résolu que le Conseil accuse réception du rapport administratif EN-010-2015 du Directeur des services de l’environnement et approuve les recommandations concernant le transfert de projets capitaux à l’intérieur du budget approuvé pour 2015.

Be it resolved that Council acknowledges receipt of the administrative report EN-010-2015 from the Director of the Environmental Services and approves the recommendations concerning the transfer of capital projects within the budget approved for 2015.


Services techniques Technical Services

a) Rapports administratifs i) TEC-011-2015 – servitude – B-045-2015

Administrative reports i) TEC-011-2015 – easement – B-045-2015

100

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-181

Proposée par : / Moved by: Denis Renaud Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Marcel Cléroux

RAPPORT DU DIRECTEUR DES SERVICES TECHNIQUES

REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES

Qu’il soit résolu que le Conseil accuse réception du rapport administratif TEC-011-2015 du Directeur des services techniques et approuve les recommandations concernant la demande d’autorisation B-045-2015 en ce qui a trait à une servitude.

Be it resolved that Council acknowledges receipt of the administrative report TEC-011-2015 from the Director of Technical Services and approves the recommendations concerning the authorization request B-045-2015 with respect to an easement.

Adoptée Carried

ii) TEC-012-2015 – servitude – B-046-2015

ii) TEC-012-2015 – easement – B-046-2015


Proposée par : / Moved by: Marcel Cléroux Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud





Adoptée Carried

iii) TEC-013-2015 – servitude – B-047-2015 iii) TEC-013-2015 – easement – B-047-2015


Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Anik Charron





Adoptée Carried

101

RÈGLEMENTS MUNICIPAUX MUNICIPAL BY-LAWS

10.1

Règlement no 2015-037 By-law no. 2015-037 Résolution / Resolution no 2015-184 Proposée par : / Moved by: Marcel Cléroux Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud RÈGLEMENT NO 2015-037

BY-LAW NO. 2015-037

Qu’il soit résolu que le règlement no 2015-037 pour interdire le stationnement sur certaines rues dans le village de Casselman soit lu et adopté en 1re, 2e et 3e lecture.

Be it resolved that By-law no. 2015-037 to prohibit parking on certain streets within the Village of Casselman be read and adopted in 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading.


Règlement no 2015-036 By-law no. 2015-036 Résolution / Resolution no 2015-185 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud RÈGLEMENT NO 2015-036

BY-LAW NO. 2015-036

Qu’il soit résolu que le règlement no 2015-036 pour adopter des normes pour l’entretien et l’occupation des biens dans le village de Casselman soit lu et adopté en 1re, 2e et 3e lecture.

Be it resolved that By-law no. 2015-036 to provide standards for the maintenance and occupancy of property in the Village of Casselman be read and adopted in 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading.


Règlement no 2015-038 By-law no. 2015-038 Résolution / Resolution no 2015-186 Proposée par : / Moved by: Denis Renaud Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Anik Charron RÈGLEMENT NO 2015-038

BY-LAW NO. 2015-038

Qu’il soit résolu que le règlement no 2015-038 pour adopter la politique de la location de la glace et de la surface de béton du Complexe Brisson soit lu et adopté en 1re, 2e et 3e lecture.

Be it resolved that By-law no. 2015-038 to adopt the ice and slab rental policy for the Brisson Complex be read and adopted in 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading.

Adoptée Carried

102

10.4 Règlement no 2015-039 By-law no. 2015-039 Résolution / Resolution no 2015-187 Proposée par : / Moved by: Denis Renaud Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Anik Charron RÈGLEMENT NO 2015-039

BY-LAW NO. 2015-039

Qu’il soit résolu que le règlement no 2015-039 pour adopter la politique des locations des salles du Complexe Brisson et du Centre Paul Émile Lévesque soit lu et adopté en 1re, 2e et 3e lecture.

Be it resolved that By-law no. 2015-039 to adopt the hall rental policy for the Brisson Complex and the Paul Émile Lévesque Center be read and adopted in 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading.

Adoptée Carried

NOUVELLES AFFAIRES NEW BUSINESS

12.1

Corporation de la revitalisation du Centre ville de Casselman – fermeture de rue pour le festival de Noël

Corporation of the Casselman Downtown Revitalization – street closure for the Christmas Festival

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-188 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Marcel Cléroux FERMETURE DE LA RUE PRINCIPALE - FESTIVAL DE NOËL Qu’il soit résolu que le Conseil du village de Casselman autorise la fermeture de la rue Principale durant le festival de Noël à partir du côté nord de la place publique jusqu’à la rue Dollard ; Qu’il soit aussi résolu que la rue Principale soit fermée à partir de 7 h le vendredi 4 décembre 2015 jusqu’à 16 h le dimanche 6 décembre 2015; Qu’il soit aussi résolu que le Conseil du village de Casselman demande l’approbation des Comtés unis de Prescott & Russell.

CLOSURE OF PRINCIPALE STREET - CHRISTMAS FESTIVAL Be it resolved that Council of the Village of Casselman authorizes the closing of the Principale Street for the Christmas Festival starting from the North side of the public place up to Dollard Street; Be it also resolved that the Principale Street be closed from 7:00 a.m. on Friday, December 4th, 2015 up to 4:00 p.m. on December 6th, 2015; Be it also resolved that Council of the Village of Casselman obtain the approval of the United Counties of Prescott & Russell.

Adoptée Carried

103

12.2

Corporation de la revitalisation du Centre ville de Casselman – hébergement du site Web La demande est reçue.

Corporation of the Casselman Downtown Revitalization – Web site hosting The request is received.

12.3

Mme Anik Charron – Coordonnateur de la gestion d’urgence communautaire suppléant

Mrs. Anik Charron – Alternate Community Emergency Management Coordinator

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-189 Proposée par : / Moved by: Marcel Cléroux Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud COORDONNATEUR SUPPLÉANT DE LA GESTION D’URGENCE COMMUNAUTAIRE Qu’il soit résolu que Mme Anik Charron soit nommé coordinatrice suppléante de la gestion d’urgence communautaire.

ALTERNATE COMMUNITY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR Be it resolved that Mrs. Anik Charron be appointed Alternate Community Emergency Management Coordinator.

Adoptée Carried

AVIS DE MOTION NOTICE OF MOTION

15.1

M. Marcel Cléroux – demande de fonds pour la construction d’un gazebo au parc Richelieu L’avis de motion de M. Cléroux est déposé.

Mr. Marcel Cléroux – fund request for the construction of a gazebo at the Richelieu Park Mr. Cléroux’s notice of motion is submitted.

CONFIRMATION DES PROCÉDURES DU

CONSEIL CONFIRMATION OF COUNCIL’S PROCEDURES

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-190 Proposée par : / Moved by: Michel Desjardins Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Denis Renaud RÈGLEMENT NO 2015-040

BY-LAW NO. 2015-040

Qu’il soit résolu que le règlement no 2015-040 pour confirmer les procédures du conseil à sa réunion du 26 mai 2015 soit lu et adoptée en 1re, 2e et 3e lecture.

Be it resolved that By-law no. 2015-040 to confirm Council’s proceedings at its meeting of May 26th, 2015 be read and adopted in 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading.

Adoptée Carried

104

AJOURNEMENT ADJOURNMENT

Résolution / Resolution no 2015-191 Proposée par : / Moved by: Denis Renaud Appuyée par : / Seconded by: Marcel Cléroux AJOURNEMENT

ADJOURNMENT

Qu’il soit résolu que la présente assemblée soit ajournée à 20 h 20.

Be it resolved that the present meeting be adjourned at 8:20 p.m.

Adoptée Carried

________________________

Conrad Lamadeleine Maire / Mayor

________________________ Marielle Dupuis Greffière / Clerk

\\SVRDC\Home\mdupuis\1. Ordre du jour\2. documents de travail 2015\10-23 juin ordinaire\9 monthly reports municipal officials\DG-012-2015_Renouvel.docx

RECOMMANDATION

Que le Conseil du Village de Casselman accuse réception du rapport administratif DG-012-2015 concernant le renouvellement d’entente de répartition d’incendie. Que le Conseil du Village de Casselman autorise l’administration à aviser la Ville de Hawkesbury de notre intention de continuer avec le service de répartition d’incendie de Hawkesbury jusqu’à l’échéance de notre contrat actuel, de rapporter au conseil toute demande de signer une nouvelle entente proposée avec la Ville de Hawkesbury; Que le Conseil du Village de Casselman autorise l’administration de procéder avec une étude avec Glentel, un consultant spécialisé dans le service de répartition afin de déterminer nos besoins et coûts. CONTEXTE Présentement notre service répartition d’incendie provient de la Ville de Hawkesbury, l’entente actuelle vient échue au mois de février 2016. Nous devions aviser la Ville de Hawkesbury de notre intention de renouveler pour une période de 5 ans pour le 1 juin 2015, par contre la date d’échéance a été reportée au 30 juin 2016. Suite à la demande des maires en 2014, il y a eu une étude préparée par la firme « Willow Falls Consulting » pour évaluer les coûts du service de répartition d’incendie avec la Ville d’Ottawa. Les résultats de l’étude démontraient une économie avec la Ville d’Ottawa, sur une base d’un montant de 3,25 $ par capita versus 4,55 $ par capita en demeurant avec le service actuel de la Ville de Hawkesbury. Les coûts du service sont actuellement déterminés sur la base des coûts opérationnels de la Ville de Hawkesbury; c’est-à-dire, 75% par les partenaires et 25% par la Ville de Hawkesbury. Les huit partenaires sont composés de La Nation, Alfred-Plantagenet, Hawkesbury-Est, Champlain, Casselman, North Glengary, Russell et North Stormont.

Corporation du Village de Casselman

No du rapport DG-012-2015

No de dossier

Sujet : Renouvellement d’entente de répartition d’incendie Date de la rencontre : 23 juin 2015

Annexes :


Il est important de noter que lorsque qu’un des partenaires du groupe quitte, notre portion du 75% va donc augmenter et ce à chaque fois qu’un partenaire quitte, et ainsi suite. ANALYSE Nous avons récemment appris que la Municipalité de Russell a déjà entériné la décision d’aller avec la Ville d’Ottawa pour leur service de répartition d’incendie. La Municipalité de Russell représentait environ 22% de la portion des partenaires des coûts avec le service de la Ville de Hawkesbury. Lors d’une réunion tenue à l’Orignal le 17 juin dernier, il est devenu claire que toutes les municipalités transféreront leurs services de répartition avec soit la Ville d’Ottawa ou ailleurs. Donc nous devons agir rapidement. Dans la prise de décision de Russell, il fut décidé qu’ils obtiendraient les services d’une firme de consultants spécialisés, Glentel, pour évaluer leurs besoins et coûts afin d’arriver à la conclusion de quitter le partenariat. Lors de la réunion du 17 juin 2015, le consensus des municipalités est que les municipalités obtiendraient les services de Glentel pour une étude. Afin de déterminer la meilleure position pour le Village de Casselman, il serait donc sage de procéder de la même façon. Nos coûts actuels par capita pour le service de répartition sans compter le fait que Russell quitte le groupe sont : Hawkesbury 2016 3,626 4,55 $ 16 498,30 $ Ville d’Ottawa 2016 3,626 3,25 $ 11 784,50 $ Si la municipalité décide de rester avec la Ville de Hawkesbury, nos coûts de répartition augmenteront considérablement à chaque fois qu’un partenaire quitte. Donc, il s’avère plus prudent pour le Village de quitter le groupe plus tôt que tard et de bénéficier de meilleurs coûts avec la Ville d’Ottawa.

IMPLICATIONS FINANCIÈRES ET IMPACT SUR LES EFFECTIFS Cet item est inclut dans le budget courant approuvé : Non Cet item est à l’intérieur du montant budgété : Non Montant total budgété en 2015 16 498 $ Montant du budget disponible 16 498 $


ALTERNATIVES Si le Village de Casselman décide de continuer et de renouveler avec la Ville de Hawkesbury, nous devrons assumer les coûts futurs et incertains suite au départ de chaque partenaire. Préparé, révisé et approuvé pour la considération du Conseil par: __________________ Charles Bray, CBCO Directeur des Services techniques

\\SVRDC\Home\mdupuis\1. Ordre du jour\2. documents de travail 2015\10-23 juin ordinaire\9 monthly reports municipal officials\Rapport TEC-017-2015 - indexation des frais de développement_v2.doc

RECOMMANDATION

Que le conseil, par voie de résolution, dirige son personnel à ajuster de +2,2 % les frais des redevances d’aménagement selon le taux d’indexation suggéré par Statistique Canada au cours de la période de 12 mois se terminant en avril 2015. CONTEXTE Le but de ce rapport vise à informer les membres du conseil de la possibilité d’appliquer l’indexation aux redevances d’aménagement. ANALYSE En 2011, le Conseil municipal du Village de Casselman a adopté un arrêté municipal By-Law 2011-094 afin d’imposer aux nouvelles constructions résidentielles et commerciales des frais de redevances d’aménagements. L’arrêté comprend des provisions qui permettent à la municipalité d’ajuster les frais de redevance selon l’indice de prix à la consommation présenté par Statistique Canada. Selon Statistique Canada, les prix à la consommation ont augmenté de +2,2 % au cours de la période de 12 mois se terminant en avril 2015. À cet effet, l’administration municipale recommande au conseil d’ajuster les frais des redevances d’aménagement afin que les argents récupérés par le biais du règlement des redevances d’aménagement soient représentatifs des frais perçus par les municipalités pour financer les dépenses d'immobilisations découlant de l'expansion des services municipaux requis pour répondre aux besoins en matière d'aménagement immobilier. Il est important de préciser qu’il n’est pas requis de modifier le règlement des redevances d’aménagement présent pour appliquer l’indexation. Par ailleurs, l’indexation peut-être mise en vigueur à partir du 23 juin 2015.


No du rapport TEC-017-2015

No de dossier

Sujet : Indexation - frais des redevances d’aménagement

Date de la rencontre : 23 juin 2015

Annexes : Annexe A - SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (Actual) Annexe B - SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (Proposed) Annexe C - Indice des prix à la consommation


IMPLICATIONS FINANCIÈRES ET IMPACT SUR LES EFFECTIFS Cet item est inclut dans le budget courant approuvé : S/O Cet item est à l’intérieur du montant budgété : S/O Montant total budgété en 2014 S/O Montant du budget disponible S/O L’impact sur les effectifs relié à cet effet est limité au personnel en place et à leurs fonctions de travail tel que déterminés par le conseil municipal. ALTERNATIVES Conserver le statu quo et ne pas appliquer d’indexage au règlement des redevances d’aménagement. Préparé, révisé et approuvé pour la considération du Conseil par : _________________________ Charles Bray Directeur des services technique


ANNEXE A

FRAIS EXISTANT

SCHEDULE “B” TO BY-LAW 2011-94

SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Service

RESIDENTIAL ($/dwelling unit) NON-RESIDENTIAL ($ per ft² of Gross Floor Area)

Single and

Semi- Detached Dwelling

Apartments - 2

Bedrooms +

Apartments -

Bachelor and 1

Bedroom

Other Multiples

Municipal Wide Services Roads and Related

2,219 1,508 893 1651 1.71

Fire Protection Services

985 669 396 732 0.29

Outdoor Recreation Services

168 114 67 126 0.01

Indoor Recreation Services

- - - - -

Library Services

254 172 103 189 0.02

Municipal Parking Services

105 71 42 77 0.08

Administration Services

262 177 106 195 0.20

Total Municipal Wide Services

3,992 2,711 1,607 2,970 2.31


ANNEXE B

FRAIS INDEXÉS +2,2%

SCHEDULE “B” TO BY-LAW 2011-94

SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT CHARGES

Service

RESIDENTIAL ($/dwelling unit) NON-RESIDENTIAL ($ per ft² of Gross Floor Area)

Single and

Semi- Detached Dwelling

Apartments - 2

Bedrooms +

Apartments -

Bachelor and 1

Bedroom

Other Multiples

Municipal Wide Services Roads and Related

2,268 1,541 913 1,687 1.75

Fire Protection Services

1,007 684 405 748 0.30

Outdoor Recreation Services

172 117 68 129 0.01

Indoor Recreation Services

- - - - -

Library Services

260 176 105 193 0.02

Municipal Parking Services

107 73 43 79 0.08

Administration Services

268 181 108 199 0.20

Total Municipal Wide Services

4,080 2,771 1,642 3,035 2.36

RECOMMANDATION

1- Que le conseil du village de Casselman accuse réception du rapport administratif EN-009-2015; et

2- Que le conseil du village de Casselman débute les démarches nécessaires pour

l’agrandissement de l’ajout d’une nouvelle cellule à son système actuel de lagunes. CONTEXTE Le village de Casselman s’était doté d’un système de traitement des eaux usées en 1976avec la construction de deux cellules au 224 rue Laurier. Au fil des ans, une troisième cellule fut incorporée en plus d’un système d’injection et d’un système d’aération pour satisfaire la demande croissante de construction dans les limites de la municipalité. Aujourd’hui, ce même système de traitement des eaux usées arrive à sa pleine capacité de production, donc une expansion est nécessaire pour répondre aux demandes des nouveaux promoteurs qui veulent développer dans la municipalité. La problématiquedes lagunes s’étale sur deux volets; premièrement sur la capacité et deuxièmement le taux de concentration d’ammoniac. Les deux problématiques peuvent être corrigées avec le même scénario choisi.

ANALYSE Vue la complexité de la problématique, plusieurs alternatifs sont disponibles sur le marché, mais nous avons limité notre choix sur trois scénarios plausibles. Les trois solutions proposées sont la construction d’une usine mécanique, de l’addition d’une cellule pour les besoins immédiats et les projets additionnels en attente d’approbation, et par la suite faire la construction d’une deuxième cellule dans le futur et pour conclure l’élaboration, la construction et l’implantation de notre propre solution par l’entremise d’un projet pilote sous la direction de Biopole Prescott & Russell et de l’Université de Guelph (campus d’Alfred). Vous trouverez ci-dessous un bref résumé des avantages et des désavantages ainsi que les coûts approximatifs pour chacun des scénarios proposés. La construction d’une usine mécanique demeure une valeur sûre, une technologie avancée et un rendement d’efficacité assuré. De plus, la construction d’une usine ne requiert


No du rapport En-009-2015

No de dossier Eaux usées

Sujet : Développement à la lagune existante

Date de la rencontre : Réunion du 12 mai 2015

Annexes : Nil

\\SVRDC\Home\mdupuis\1. Ordre du jour\2. documents de travail 2015\7-12 mai plénier\9 monthly reports municipal officials\recommendation EN-009-2015.doc

aucune étude environnementale, car celle-ci est construite dans l’espace vacant du site actuel. Par conséquent son coût initial est d’environ 14 millions et son coût ’opération annuel est de 400 000,00 $ à 800 000,00 $ dépendamment de la technologie utilisée qui pourrait être un désavantage volumineux à attribuer aux contribuables. Une demande pour un nouveau certificat d’approbation sera nécessaire. La conception de l’usine est basée sur une population d’environ 6,000 habitants. L’addition d’une cellule ne requiert aucun coût additionnel d’opération en plus de donner un rendement d’efficacité raisonnable. Ce procédé se fait tout simplement naturellement. Certains ajouts mécaniques devront être apportés pour rectifier la problématique de la concentration d’ammoniac retrouvé dans les cellules. Cependant l’achat ou l’expropriation de terre agricole à haut rendement sera requis. De plus une nouvelle étude environnementale et un amendement à notre certificat d’approbation seront nécessaires. Un délai de 2 à 3 ans doit être prévu pour voir la conclusion du projet. Les coûts pour cette option comprennent : l’achat de terrain (50 acres environ, requière 25 acres par cellules), l’étude, l’amendement au certificat d’approbation, l’ingénierie, les frais légaux, la construction d’une cellule et l’équipement pour l’aération à un coût approximatif de 1.5 million. Lorsque la phase 1 serait complétée, nous pourrions desservir une population de 5,000 habitants et de 6,500 lorsque les 2 phases seraient complétées. L’élaboration, la construction et l’implantation de notre propre solution ne requièrent aucun achat de terrain et pourraient être une solution alternative pour notre problématique d’ammoniac dans les cellules. Avant d’arriver à une conclusion, nous devrons procéder avec un projet pilote dans nos cellules existantes sur une période de deux ans avec un coût partagé entre le village, OCE et la FCM. Le coût évalué pour la portion du Village est d’environ 150 000,00 $ dépendamment des octrois qu’on pourrait recevoir. Le coût total du projet pilote est de 320 000,00 $. Il est impossible pour le moment de déterminer la capacité future, le rendement, le coût d’opération annuel et la population additionnelle que nous pourrions desservir tant et aussi longtemps qu’une banque de données sera établie par le projet pilote. Les désavantages majeurs avec ce scénario est qu’il faut l’approbation du Ministère de l’Environnement et les changements climatiques pour un déversement continu à la rivière Nation. À ce jour, le ministère a donné l’aval pour un déversement continu seulement pour les usines mécaniques. Le délai d’attente pour voir la réalisation de ce projet est d’environ de 3 à 4 ans. Pour voir ce projet à pleine échelle, un coût de 1.1 millions sera nécessaire.

IMPLICATIONS FINANCIÈRES ET IMPACT SUR LES EFFECTIFS

Cet item est inclus dans le budget courant approuver : Oui Non X S/O Cet item est à l’intérieur du montant budgété : Oui Non X S/O Montant total budgété en 2015 $ 0.00 Montant du budget disponible $ 0.00


L’impact sur les effectifs relié à cet effet est limité au personnel en place et à leurs fonctions de travail telles que déterminées par le Conseil municipal. ALTERNATIVES

La municipalité pourrait tout simplement rejeter les trois scénarios proposés et recommencer à nouveau avec une firme d’ingénieurs ce qui occasionnerait des frais additionnels de 40 000,00 $ à 50 000.00 $.

Préparé par: Révisé et approuvé pour la considération du Conseil par :

_________________________ __________________________ Alain L Castonguay Charles Bray Directeur des services environnementaux Directeur général par intérim


RECOMMANDATION

1. Que le Conseil du Village de Casselman accuse réception du rapport administratif RL-005-2015 et plus spécifiquement l’Annexe A – Entente de location entre la Corporation du Village de Casselman et la Fondation Valoris pour enfants et adultes de Prescott-Russell;

2. Que le Conseil dirige le personnel de préparer l’arrêté municipal nécessaire

pour renouveler ladite entente afin d’être à l’examen du Conseil à l’Assemblée ordinaire du 23 mars 2015.

CONTEXTE L’organisme CTC loue l’édifice situé au 738 rue Brébeuf du Village de Casselman depuis le mois de septembre 2011 pour leurs activités. Le Centre des Loisirs des Jeunes est l’activité principale et est emménagée dans cet édifice. Le 31 décembre 2014, l’entente de location prenait fin et en décembre dernier, les représentants de la Fondation avisaient l’administration de leur intention de poursuivre leurs activités pour la prochaine année au même endroit.

L’ébauche du renouvellement de l’entente pour la prochaine année est en Annexe à ce rapport administratif.

ANALYSE

L’entente de location pour les dernières années a permis au Conseil de constater que le CTC est un organisme fiable qui a réussi à opérer un Centre pour jeunes sans incident. Le directeur des services récréatifs peut confirmer qu’aucun incident n’est venu perturber les termes de l’entente de location de la dernière année. Cette dernière peut recommander au Conseil de procéder au renouvellement de l’entente. IMPLICATIONS FINANCIÈRE ET IMPACT SUR LES ÉFFECTIFS


N0 du rapport

RL-005-2015

N0 du dossier

Sujet : Entente contractuelle pour la location du Centre des Loisirs des Jeunes situé au 738 rue Brébeuf à Casselman au groupe C.T.C. de la Fondation Valoris pour enfants et adultes de Prescott-Russell.

Date de l’ordre du jour: Comité Plénier le 10 mars 2015

Annexes: Annexe A – Entente de location

Cet item est inclus dans le budget courant approuvé: Oui Non S/O X Cet item est à l’intérieur du montant budgété: Oui Non S/O X Montant total budgété en 2015 S/O $ (SVP noter que le budget de 2015 n’a pas été adopté) Montant du budget disponible S/O $

ALTERNATIVES Aucune alternative n’est proposée à ce moment ci. Le conseil municipal pourrait décider de ne pas accepter cette demande mais cela pourrait certainement contribuer à réduire l’image de collaboration communautaire à Casselman.

Préparé par : Révisé et approuvé pour la considération du Conseil par : _________________________ __________________________ Christine Lavictoire Marc Chénier Directeur des Services Directeur général/greffier Récréatifs et Loisirs

LA CORPORATION DU VILLAGE DE CASSELMAN 751, rue St-Jean, boîte postale 710

Casselman Ontario K0A 1M0

ENTENTE DE LOCATION

Entre

La Corporation du Village de Casselman Ci-après désigné le propriétaire

Et

Fondation Valoris pour enfants et adultes de Prescott-Russell Ci-après désigné le locataire

Les parties conviennent de ce qui suit:

1. Locaux loués : Le propriétaire loue au locataire l’édifice connu sous le nom Centre des Loisirs (CDL) situé au 738, rue Brébeuf de Casselman en raison de trois jours semaines, de 14 h 30 à 19 h, les mardis, mercredis et jeudis. Le propriétaire peut également louer l’espace à d’autre organisation afin de rentabiliser le manque de revenue.

2. Durée de la location :

a. du 1er janvier 2015 au 31 décembre 2017

b. si le locataire continue à occuper les lieux après l’expiration de cette entente, avec ou sans le consentement du propriétaire et sans aucun autre accord écrit, le locataire sera un locataire au mois à la location mensuelle ici mentionnées et sur les modalités et conditions énoncées dans la présente entente, sauf la durée de l’entente.

3. Coût :

a. Le coût du loyer sera de 400,00 $ + 52,00 $ TVH = 452,00 $ par mois

pour les mois de janvier à juin 2015 et de 550,00 $+ 71.50 $ TVH = 621,50 $ par mois pour les mois de juillet à décembre 2015. Le coût du loyer sera réparti pour les deux prochaines années selon les taux suivants : Pour l’année 2016 : 566,50 $ +TVH par mois Pour l’année 2017 : 583,50 $ +TVH par mois

i. Le loyer sera réparti en douze versements payables au début de chacun des douze mois commençant le 1er janvier jusqu’au 31 décembre de chaque année.

ii. Les paiements seront payables au Village de Casselman et seront remis en personne au Complexe JR Brisson au 758 rue Brébeuf à Casselman ou par la poste au casier postal 710 Casselman.

4. Le locataire défrayera les coûts :

a. de la location;

b. de réparations causées par négligence;

c. d'une assurance responsabilité d’une valeur minimale de 2 000 000 $

5. Le locataire s’engage à :

a. payer le loyer. Des chèques postdatés pourront être émis;

b. être responsable de la supervision des individus et des installations pour toute activité qu’il organise;

c. réparer les dommages causés par négligence lorsque le locataire est

tenu responsable des dommages;

d. n’effectuer aucun changement aux locaux sans l’approbation du propriétaire;

e. ne sous-louer les locaux;

f. ne pas installer d’articles sur les murs intérieurs ou extérieurs sans avoir obtenu auparavant l’approbation du propriétaire;

g. payer les frais de téléphone, internet ou autres frais pour son utilisation;

h. de laisser les locaux dans un état convenable au propriétaire lors de son départ ou à la fin du contrat;

i. faire preuve de son certificat d’assurance responsabilité minimale de 2 000 000 $ avant d’occuper les locaux;

j. de ne pas tenir le propriétaire responsable pour toute poursuite pouvant survenir contre lui résultant des activités que le locataire organise;

k. effectuer les travaux de conciergerie nécessaires à ses propres frais et

à la satisfaction du propriétaire;

l. indemniser le propriétaire contre toutes les réclamations par ou au nom de toute personne ou personnes, une entreprise ou des entreprises, ou de la société ou des sociétés résultant de la conduite ou un ouvrage quelconque, par ou par tout acte de négligence du locataire ou tout cessionnaire, agent, entrepreneur, fonctionnaires, employés ou le titulaire du locataire.

6. Le propriétaire s’engage à :

a. voir à l'inspection intérieure et extérieure du bâtiment et ceci en tout

temps;

b. voir à l’entretien du bâtiment et à effectuer les réparations qui sont nécessaires;

i. le propriétaire tentera d'avertir le locataire de toutes

réparations qui pourraient affecter l'horaire du locataire;

ii. le locataire ne sera pas éligible pour compensation si les réparations dérangent l'horaire;

c. voir à l’éclairage et au chauffage du bâtiment

d. voir à posséder une assurance couverture contre le feu et tout autre

péril.

7. Dommages : Le propriétaire ne sera pas tenu responsable des dommages causés aux biens du locataire pour bris d’eau ou dégâts naturels sur lesquels le propriétaire n’a pas de contrôle.

8. Conflit :

Advenant le cas où il y a un désaccord entre le propriétaire et le locataire au sujet de l’intention des articles dans ce document ou de l'horaire, le Directeur général de la Corporation du village de Casselman sera le seul arbitre dans sa résolution.

9. Durée de l’entente :

a. Cette entente a une durée de trois ans;

b. Cette entente devra être renouvelée ou modifiée par la suite.

c. Le locataire doit signifier au propriétaire qu'il veut renouveler l'entente de la façon suivante :

i. par lettre dûment signée;

ii. et 30 jours avant la fin de l'entente.

10. Conditions :

a. Le locataire pourra enlever à sa guise ce qu’il a installé à ses frais

durant la location mais devra dédommager le propriétaire pour toute réparation qui s’avérera nécessaire suite à l’enlèvement de l’objet installé

b. En cas de feu ou autre avarie qui obligerait le locataire à quitter le Centre des Loisirs, le loyer sera cancellé jusqu’à ce les réparations soient effectuées si le propriétaire décide de réparer ou reconstruire le bâtiment et le locataire ne tiendra le propriétaire responsable d’aucun dédommagement pour perte de loyer.

c. À défaut de payer le loyer le propriétaire pourra mettre fin au contrat du locataire et l’obliger à payer les montants de loyers qui lui sont dû par le locataire.

11. Disposition du texte :

a. Les titres et articles ci-haut ont été créés pour faciliter la lecture et

organiser les idées au sujet de cette entente;

b. Les articles ne limitent en aucun temps l'intention de l'entente de location.

12. Signatures :

Les parties à la présente y ont apposé leur sceau et signature en ce _____ jour du mois___________ de l'année 2015.

SIGNÉE, SCELLÉE ET DÉLIVRÉE

En présence de : La Corporation du village de Casselman Témoin : Conrad Lamadelaine, maire Témoin : En présence de : La Fondation Valoris pour enfants et

adultes de Prescott-Russell

Témoin : Par : Témoin : Par :

1

Marielle Dupuis

From: Jennifer Mitchell-Paquette [[email protected]]Sent: June-18-15 3:35 PMTo: Christine Lavictoire; Carole Patenaude-Granata; Laplante, MarioCc: Marielle Dupuis; Charles Bray; Catherine BorellySubject: RE: entente de location CDLAttachments: Bail révisé.pdf

Bonjour Christine, Bonjour Christine, En absence de Carole, j’aimerais préciser que nous ne sommes pas en mesure de signer ce document sans le changement nécessaire au point 1 : locaux loués. En pièce jointe je vous renvoie la version révisée. Merci d’apporter le changement. Si ce n’est pas possible, reviens moi avec une prochaine étape. Jennifer

JENNIFER MITCHELL-PAQUETTE Superviseur Centre de services Casselman Supervisor 1 800 675-6168 (poste/extension 4550) [email protected] www.valorispr.ca Ce message est confidentiel. Si vous l'avez reçu par erreur, svp l'effacer de façon permanente, sans le copier ni en dévoiler le contenu ni

prendre quelques mesures fondées sur celui‐ci et informer immédiatement l’expéditeur. Merci! This communication is confidential. If you receive it in error, please delete it permanently without making a copy, disclosing its content nor taking any action based thereon and immediately advise the sender. Thank you! NOTRE MISSION : Rendre service aux gens vulnérables de Prescott‐Russell en les soutenant dans leurs familles et en facilitant leur intégration dans la communauté OUR MISSION: To be of service to vulnerable persons in Prescott‐Russell by supporting them in their families and by facilitating their integration in the community.

From: Christine Lavictoire [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 9:50 AM To: Carole Patenaude-Granata; Laplante, Mario; Jennifer Mitchell-Paquette Cc: Marielle Dupuis; Charles Bray; Catherine Borelly; Christine Lavictoire Subject: RE: entente de location CDL Bonjour Carole, Veuillez trouver ci‐joint l’entente de trois ans. Suite à vos suggestions, nous avons discuté avec notre comité de finance et nous avons accepté et fait les modifications nécessaire. S’il vous plait me retourner votre consentement et j’imprimerais trois copies pour signature.

2

Sincèrement, Christine

From: Carole Patenaude‐Granata [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: June 11, 2015 3:16 PM To: Cindy Wennekes; Christine Lavictoire; Laplante, Mario; Jennifer Mitchell‐Paquette Subject: FW: entente de location CDL Bonjour Christine, nous avons regardé la copie de l’entente que tu nous as envoyé et fait les changements nécessaires .Svp faire la correction et nous le retourner le plus tôt possible

CAROLE PATENAUDE-GRANATA Coordinatrice CTC et bénévolat CTC and Volunteer Coordinator 173, ancienne Route 17\173 old Highway 17, C. P\P.O. Box. 248 Plantagenet (Ontario) K0B 1L0 1 800 675-6168\ 613 673-5148 (poste 4537)

[email protected] www.valorispr.ca Ce message est confidentiel. Si vous l'avez reçu par erreur, svp l'effacer de façon permanente, sans le copier ni en dévoiler le contenu ni prendre quelques mesures fondées sur celui‐ci et informer immédiatement l’expéditeur. Merci! This communication is confidential. If you receive it in error, please delete it permanently without making a copy, disclosing its content nor taking any action based thereon and immediately advise the sender. Thank you! NOTRE MISSION : Rendre service aux gens vulnérables de Prescott‐Russell en les soutenant dans leurs familles et en facilitant leur intégration dans la communauté OUR MISSION: To be of service to vulnerable persons in Prescott‐Russell by supporting them in their families and by facilitating their integration in the community.

From: Lucie Laplante Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:08 PM To: Carole Patenaude-Granata; Jennifer Mitchell-Paquette Subject: entente de location CDL

LUCIE LAPLANTE Assistante administrative Administrative Assistant Valoris pour enfants et adultes de Prescott-Russell Valoris for Children and Adults of Prescott-Russell 173, ancienne Route 17\173 Old Highway 17, C. P.\P.O. Box 248 Plantagenet (Ontario) K0B 1L0 1 800 675-6168\ 613 673-5148 (poste\extension 4501) [email protected] www.valorispr.ca From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:05 PM To: Lucie Laplante Subject: Message from KMBT_C364

38 rue Victoria Street, Finch, ON K0C 1K0 Tel: 613-984-2948 Fax: 613-984-2872 Toll Free: 1-877-984-2948 www.nation.on.ca

Water Response Team

Meeting Agenda Date: June 17, 2015 Time: 1:00 p.m. Location: Watershed Room, SNC Address: 38 Victoria Street, Finch, ON

Water Response Team

Meeting Agenda Jun 17, 2015 – 1:00 p.m. AGENDA Page Number

1. Chairman’s Remarks

2. Approvals of Agenda

3. General Discussion

4. Ontario Low Water Response Program – Amber 3-52

5. Water Response Team Terms of Reference and Membership – Sandra 52-56

6. Current Watershed Conditions – Sharif 57-59

7. WISKI and Data Management for Low Water Response – Amber Garrett Presentation

8. Low Water Effect on Groundwater – Sheila 60-61

9. Low Water Effects on Fish and Forestry – Naomi/Josee 62

10. Current Communications Tools – Lisa 63

11. Low Water Response in SNC’s New Jurisdiction – Sandra 64-65

12. Next Steps –Sandra Verbal

13. Adjournment


To: Water Response Team From: Amber Garrett, Water Resources Engineering Student Date: June 10, 2015 Subject: Ontario Low Water Response Program RECOMMENDATION: That the WRT receive and file this report.

DISCUSSION: A presentation will be provided that will outline the Ontario Low Water

Response Program (OLWR). The most recent version of this document has been attached for your reference.

_______________________________ Amber Garrett Water Resources Engineering Student Attachments - Ontario Low Water Response 2010

3

March 2010

ONTARIO LOW WATER RESPONSE

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

Ontario Ministry of the Environment Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation

Association of Municipalities of Ontario Conservation Ontario

4

i

PREFACE In the late 1990s, the Province of Ontario experienced extended periods of low rainfall and high temperatures resulting in some of the lowest surface water levels and driest soils recorded for several decades. A review of these conditions in 1999 led to the development of a response plan to deal with low water conditions. Ontario Low Water Response is intended to ensure provincial preparedness, to assist in co-ordination and to support local response in the event of a drought. Historically, periods of dry weather and low water levels or drought are relatively uncommon in Ontario (about every 10-15 years). However, studies on changing weather patterns indicate that low water levels may become more common, potentially compounded by the province’s steadily increasing demands for water and by climate change. Low water conditions since the inception of Ontario Low Water Response have tested the plan. These low water conditions, especially the low water conditions of 2007, brought new issues to light. Gaps and issues identified by conservation authorities, their water response teams, and water users were examined, and various recommendations and changes were made. Extreme low water conditions experienced in 2007 caused shortages of water in some watersheds, resulting in adverse socio-economic impacts and impacts to the aquatic ecosystem

5

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ontario Low Water Response is intended to ensure provincial preparedness, to assist in coordination and to support local response in the event of a drought. This plan is based on existing legislation and regulations and builds on existing relationships between the province and local government bodies. Ontario experienced lower than average precipitation and low water levels in 1998 and 1999. In May 1999, the Provincial Low Water Level Response Task Force was formed to coordinate an inter-ministry response to low water levels and make recommendations for long-term management of low water conditions. The task force recommended that the government develop a provincial low water level plan by March 2000. The ministries involved set up a project team to develop the low water response plan. Ontario Low Water Response was produced to ensure that the province is prepared in case of low water conditions. This plan recognizes the partnership between provincial and local authorities and that natural resource and environmental management must be approached at both the provincial and local levels. The province provides overall direction and coordinates policies, science and information systems. In extreme circumstances support is provided where local declarations of an emergency have been made. At the local scale, the emphasis of this response plan is directed to collecting information, interpreting policy and delivering programs to minimize the effects of low water conditions. This document provides definitions of drought and low water and describes the means for measuring and quantifying drought and the conditions leading up to it. Three condition levels are described: Level I (Conservation), Level II (Conservation, Restriction) and Level III (Conservation, Restriction, Regulation). Precipitation and streamflow indicators, used to determine the condition level for watersheds, are identified. Thresholds for these indicators are provided and the methodology for determining when an area of the province passes from one level to another is described. The roles and responsibilities of the province and its agencies are described. Under this plan the Ontario Water Directors’ Committee will form a standing Low Water Committee which will become active when any watershed enters a Level II condition. This plan also provides detail on the response process at the local level. This includes the creation of local Water Response Teams and their membership, roles and responsibilities. In response to dry conditions in several years since the inception of the plan, especially the extreme low water conditions during summer 2007, a provincial steering committee with representation from MNR, MOE, OMAFRA and MMAH was established to review concerns expressed in 2007 about the ability of local water users to achieve water use reductions at Level I and Level II and be able to provide sufficient information to recommend a Level III condition. Two pilot projects were undertaken to address these concerns. Some recommended changes to the program resulting from the review and the pilot projects are reflected in this document.

6

iii

ONTARIO LOW WATER RESPONSE TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE....................................................................................................................................... i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... ii

LIST OF TABLES & FIGURES ................................................................................................................................v

FIGURES..................................................................................................................................................................v

1. CONTEXT................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 The Spectrum of Water Management..................................................................................................................1

1.2 Provincial and Local Management.....................................................................................................................1

1.3 Existing Legislation and Information .................................................................................................................2

1.4 Emergency Response ..........................................................................................................................................2

2. LOCAL WATERSHED RESPONSE ................................................................................. 2

2.1 Water Response Teams ...................................................................................................................................2

2.2 Government and Non Government Agencies ..................................................................................................2

2.3 Scale ................................................................................................................................................................3

2.4 Water Response Team Membership and Roles ...............................................................................................3

3. MONITORING AND REPORTING ON DROUGHT ......................................................... 6

3.1Definition – Drought/Low Water.........................................................................................................................6

3.2 Indicators............................................................................................................................................................7

3.3 Moving from One Level to Another ....................................................................................................................8

3.4 Monitoring and Reporting ................................................................................................................................12

4. PROVINCIAL RESPONSE............................................................................................... 13

4.1 Principles ......................................................................................................................................................13

4.2 Agency Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................................13

4.3 Response Framework ....................................................................................................................................15

4.4 The Ontario Water Directors’ Committee (OWDC) Low Water Committee .................................................17

4.5 Priority Water Uses.......................................................................................................................................18

4.6 Long Term Management................................................................................................................................19

7

iv

5. COORDINATION AND ADMINISTRATION ............................................................... 19

5.1 Water Response Team Action Plan ...............................................................................................................19

5.2 Future Refinements .......................................................................................................................................25

6. SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 26

Appendix 1: Existing Legislation............................................................................................... 27

Appendix 2: Additional Technical Information....................................................................... 34

Appendix 3: Project Development Team (1999) ...................................................................... 41

LIST OF TABLES & FIGURES

TABLES Table 1: Summary of Indicators ...............................................................................................................................4

Table 2: Precipitation Thresholds ............................................................................................................................5

Table 3: Streamflow Thresholds ...............................................................................................................................6

Table 4: Summary of Levels and Thresholds............................................................................................................6 FIGURES

Figure 1: Information Flow......................................................................................................................................7

Figure2: Organizational Links ...............................................................................................................................18

8

1

ONTARIO LOW WATER RESPONSE 1. CONTEXT Fresh water is a natural resource crucial to the environmental, social and economic well being of Ontario. Water supports almost all aspects of human activity including health, industrial development, and recreation. Because water is critical to so much of our activity, it is managed from several perspectives and by many jurisdictions, groups and individuals.

1.1 The Spectrum of Water Management

Water management is a joint responsibility of the provincial government, municipalities, conservation authorities, and all water users. Ontario Low Water Response is a response plan that deals with the low water end of the spectrum of water management issues, which varies from flood through normal to low water conditions. It is not a disaster relief or emergency response plan. The plan is for mitigating the effects of drought through the implementation of both short- and long-term low water management strategies. Short-term strategies complement other long-term approaches that manage both water supply and demand. Long-term approaches include public education, one of the essential pieces to ensure the program’s success, as well as conservation, the development of appropriate land use policies, integrated water management on a watershed basis, and efficient water management infrastructures such as reservoirs and aquifer recharge facilities. 1.2 Provincial and Local Management

Ontario is large and geographically diverse. One area can have high water levels while another is dealing with lower than normal water levels. In the summer of 1999, for example, southwestern Ontario had near record-low water levels while above average rainfall in some parts of northwestern Ontario resulted in normal river and lake levels.

Natural resource and environmental management must be approached at two scales - provincial and local. The province provides overall direction and coordinates policies, science, information systems, and emergency support. At the local jurisdiction scale, the emphasis is placed on collecting information, interpreting policy, delivering programs, and responding to emergencies.

Ontario Low Water Response reflects this historical partnership between the province and local jurisdictions. Much of Ontario, organized on a municipality and Conservation Authority basis, has the institutions and the will to effectively deal with low water conditions at both scales. Municipalities and Conservation Authorities have a central role in managing water issues on a local level. Municipalities have the authority to provide “any service or thing that the municipality considers necessary or desirable for the public” and have broad powers to pass by-laws concerning the “economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality” and the “health, safety and well-being of persons”. They have specific authority, for example, to pass by-laws regarding the natural environment (i.e. soil or trees) as well as drainage and flood

9

2

control (in matters not within provincial jurisdiction).

1.3 Existing Legislation and Information

Ontario Low Water Response is based on existing legislation and regulations. This plan has been developed using existing science, data collection networks, and analysis processes. It can be implemented under established legal authorities (see Appendix 1) such as the Municipal Act, the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and the Ontario Water Resources Act. As is the case with developing and implementing any plan, especially one for unusual or emergency situations, this plan will be improved over time based on experiences. 1.4 Emergency Response Under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, there are five pillars of emergency management: prevention, preparedness, response, mitigation, and recovery. Ontario Low Water Response is a mitigation strategy, intended to reduce the effects of low water, and does not address “emergency” response measures or disaster recovery. The declaration of any Level condition and any subsequent response does not imply municipal or provincial compensation for economic losses. 2. LOCAL WATERSHED RESPONSE 2.1 Water Response Teams

Watershed-based water response teams (WRT) are proposed to coordinate local activities. Teams will consist of local water users and local and provincial water managers. Water response teams will use a combination of water data, provincial legislation and regulations and local regulations, communication techniques and local tools to advocate conservation. Success of any WRT depends on local support and commitment to abide by the team’s recommendations. In cases of extreme drought, the WRT will ensure that key local and provincial decision-makers participate actively in the process to see that water management decisions are understood, supported and enforced.

Water response teams are focused on reacting to current low water conditions. Long term drought prevention efforts must be developed and are the responsibility of existing water management agencies and users. Drought management will only be successful through this combination of long-term preventive strategies and shorter-term crisis management actions. However, Water Response Teams are encouraged to meet annually to maintain the team and ensure that the tools and information necessary for drought management are kept current.

10

3

2.2. Government and Non Government Agencies Several existing agencies, policies and statutes in Ontario address water management, including drought. Examples are provincial ministries (Environment and Natural Resources) and Conservation Authorities and municipalities. WRTs will not replace the functions of these agencies but permit coordination of response among these agencies, non-government groups and users. The WRT does not possess any unique legislative authority but can help by advising on the use of current regulations and tools, such as: the Ontario Water Resources Act, the Municipal Act 2001 and the Environmental Protection Act. See Appendix 1 for a list of relevant legislation. 2.3 Scale Normally, water response teams will be based on watershed boundaries. Conservation Authority boundaries will guide each team’s geographic jurisdiction. Where no Conservation Authority exists, the Ministry of Natural Resources will determine the appropriate watershed units. Several watersheds may be combined into larger units or divided into sub watersheds in order to address local conditions for low water response purposes. 2.4 Water Response Team Membership and Roles

The WRT will provide a coordinated response from provincial, Conservation Authority, municipal, private and special interest water managers and users. Members of the teams will work cooperatively, share all information and be accountable. WRTs will include provincial, municipal and Conservation Authority staff as well as representatives for local interests and users. Team membership will vary, but representation from the following sectors should be considered:

agriculture rural private industry business recreation resource management interests First Nations municipal government provincial government

Certain organizations are required members of the WRT as a result of their organizational mandates, legislative tools, communication abilities and background data. These include:

a) Municipalities

May monitor and control public water supplies and can provide useful data on watershed characterization,

11

4

Have the authority to provide “any service or thing that the municipality considers necessary or desirable for the public”,

Have broad powers to pass by-laws concerning the “economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality” and “health, safety and well-being of persons.” They have specific authority, for example, to pass by-laws regarding the natural environment (i.e. soil or trees) as well as drainage and flood control (in matters not within provincial jurisdiction),

Can promote strong water conservation messages, Implement restrictions on non-essential non-permitted water uses through municipal by-

laws, Maintain communication links with large local water consumers, specifically commercial

and industrial operations, Have specific responsibilities under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection

Act. b) Conservation Authorities

Municipally-based, local public sector organizations established under the Conservation Authorities Act

Implement a resource management program at a watershed scale on behalf of municipalities and the Province

May lead/co-chair Water Response Teams, Confirm or declare Level I and II conditions and recommend Level III conditions through

the Water Response Team, Maintain detailed water monitoring networks, which will enhance provincial networks

and better describe drought variations, Maintain strong links with local community groups, media and government and may

facilitate coordination of water conservation messages, Operate dams and reservoirs, Can verify MNR data and low water conditions in the field, Have agreements with DFO to review plan applications pursuant to S. 35 of the federal

Fisheries Act Monitor local stream health and water quality.

c) Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

Designated lead agency responsible for Low Water and Drought Management under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act,

Maintains a provincial network to monitor precipitation and low flow conditions. This data can be provided to WRTs. MNR will also analyze data to provide early warnings,

Administers portions of the federal Fisheries Act and has some legislative authority for maintaining baseflows to protect aquatic life,

Operates dams and reservoirs, Maintains links with local outdoor recreation groups, Administers the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and Conservation Authorities Act,

12

5

Participates as a representative of the province on WRTs to assist in the implementation and coordination of low water response activities,

Provides funding for Water Response Teams. d) Ontario Ministry of Environment

Maintain Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network, Maintain Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network, Maintains communication links with permit holders; provides contact information,

recorded water use data and information about water takings (e.g. source) of local permit holders to the Conservation Authorities to help quantify local permitted water use, as necessary,

Administers the Ontario Water Resources Act and the Environmental Protection Act and has legislative authority to prohibit the discharge of any material that may impair the quality of surface water and groundwater, and to require that no person shall take more than a total of 50,000 litres of water per day without a permit,

Administers the Permit to Take Water Program (PTTW) under the Ontario Water Resources Act to regulate permitted water use by: imposing conditions on every water taker that safeguard against unacceptable interference with other use of the water supply, restricting new or expanded water takings in high use or sensitive watersheds, requiring water use conservation measures to be identified and implemented, and ensuring compliance with permit conditions,

Provides training and formal communications on responsibilities and obligations of permit holders,

Participates as a representative of the province on WRTs to assist in the implementation and coordination of low water response activities.

e) Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs

Maintains communication links with agricultural water users and can advise groups of potential local drought conditions and water conservation recommendations,

Can coordinate local agricultural representation on the WRT, Participates as a representative of the province on WRTs to assist in the implementation

and coordination of low water response activities. The participation of other local groups and users is also necessary for success of the WRT. Examples include First Nation communities, dominant local industries (e.g. pulp and paper, aggregates, hydroelectric power generators), recreation users (e.g. Trent Severn Waterway, downhill ski facilities) or special interest bodies (e.g. Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, Ducks Unlimited). There is no distinction in decision-making power or responsibility among members of the WRT with the exception of provincial representatives, (the focus of provincial representatives is on advice rather than participating in the decision making process). Each representative should have equal opportunity for input, sharing information and accountability. It is therefore imperative

13

6

that the membership of the WRT accurately reflect the balance among the sectors within the watershed.

Responsibilities for team members include attending meetings, communicating back to their sectors, sharing relevant data, and implementing drought management tools (e.g. municipal by-laws, coordinated irrigation, signage, and public awareness communications). In certain regions, Conservation Authorities or municipalities may not exist, and the network of local users may vary significantly. For these reasons WRT membership is intended to be flexible.

Confirming membership and electing a chair/co-chairs and secretary will be done during initial meetings of the WRT. Teams should not be too big to function. Where they exist, local Conservation Authorities will take the lead in establishing the WRT. It is recommended that Conservation Authorities, or MNR districts in areas without Conservation Authorities, co-chair the Water Response Team with a local water user. Several watersheds in Ontario already have multi-stakeholder committees that address issues such as local water quality and natural heritage. These committees are encouraged to assume the responsibilities of a WRT if appropriate. They may need to add members.

3. MONITORING AND REPORTING ON DROUGHT

This section provides a definition of drought, the means of measuring and quantifying drought and the conditions leading to it. For additional technical information see Appendix 2.

3.1 Definition – Drought/Low Water

Drought is a complex term that has various definitions depending on individual perspectives. In this document, drought is defined as weather and low water conditions characterized by one or more of the following:

a) below normal precipitation for an extended period of time (3 months or more), potentially

combined with high rates of evaporation, can lower lake levels, streamflows and/or baseflows and reduce soil moisture and/or groundwater storage,

b) streamflows are at the minimum required to sustain aquatic life while meeting only high

priority demands for water; significant decrease in water level of local wells to the point where they become dry; surface water in storage allocated to maintain minimum streamflows, and

c) socioeconomic effects occurring on individual properties and extending to larger areas of a

watershed or beyond.

14

7

As larger areas are affected and as low water and precipitation conditions worsen, the effects usually become more severe.

Three Levels of Low Water Conditions The Level I condition is the first indication of a potential water supply problem. Level II indicates a potentially serious problem. Level III indicates the failure of the water supply to meet the demand, resulting in progressively more severe and widespread socioeconomic effects. Each level requires a water management response from the local Water Response Team or the province. The authority learning of the change in level will alert the other to the condition. 3.2 Indicators Measuring drought is a complex process requiring the collection of data for variables such as rainfall, streamflow, soil moisture, and water in storage. The Ontario Low Water Response indicators integrate a number of factors and functions, are based on readily available data, are useful over a range of time periods, and allow water managers to speak consistently about water supply. (Refer to Appendix 2 to understand the application of this section.) This plan currently uses precipitation and streamflow (surface water flow) measurements as the primary indicators for defining low water levels and drought, subject to field verification. Indicators to measure groundwater and aquifer levels have been developed and are being tested. Precipitation Indicators Precipitation is the most important and convenient indicator. Reviewing the precipitation data and comparing it to trends will warn of an impending water shortage. Precipitation Indicator 1 The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) will compare monthly data from each precipitation station to the average monthly precipitation for that station by calculating monthly data as a percentage of the average. These calculations will be made using averages from the previous 18 months (long-term), for the previous 3 months (seasonal) and, under a Level I condition or higher, for the previous month (short-term), with weekly updates. Precipitation Indicator 2

15

8

If a watershed is under a Level I or Level II condition, MNR will add up the number of consecutive weeks that register no rain (less than 7.6mm) (see Table 2). Streamflow Indicator Gauges in streams measure water levels and are used to provide indicators to show if streamflow meets the basic needs of the ecosystem and if water is available for other users. MNR will compare the monthly flow for each streamgauge station with the lowest average summer month flow for that station.

TABLE 1: Summary of Indicators Precipitation

Surface Flow

1) % of average = monthly precipitation/ average precipitation for that month x 100 (See App. 2) 2) Weeks with less than 7.6mm of rain (number of consecutive readings)

% of average precipitation = Monthly Flow X 100 Lowest Average Summer Month Flow (See App. 2)

3.3 Moving from One Level to Another

If the indicator for precipitation or streamflow crosses a threshold, then a watershed, or a portion of it, may warrant a change to a Level I, Level II, or Level III condition. Level III designation also requires documentation of ongoing and significant social, environmental and economic impacts and is further detailed in Section 4.3, Response Framework, Level III. A water response is required to be undertaken when a watershed condition changes from one level (or no level) to another. When a threshold is crossed, usually the Province alerts the Conservation Authority to the change. The values of thresholds have been set for precipitation and streamflow at selected stations. Indicators will be monitored and reviewed periodically to determine if the thresholds are set at the correct levels. WRTs are encouraged to develop local thresholds to augment the provincial thresholds. Conservation Authorities are encouraged to develop local minimum in-stream flow thresholds as indicators of aquatic ecosystem health (adequate water quality, healthy fisheries and biological communities). Such a threshold could then become the Level III indicator for that watershed.

16

9

Precipitation thresholds A watershed may warrant a change to Level I when its 3 month or 18 month total precipitation drops below 80% of the average 3 month or 18 month precipitation for those months. From an existing Level I or Level III condition a watershed may warrant a change to Level II when its 3 month or 18 month total precipitation is between 60% and 40%of the average 3 month or 18 month precipitation for those months or when its 1-month total precipitation is between 60% and 40% of the average precipitation for that month. An additional indicator is used when a watershed is already in Level I - a watershed may warrant a change to Level II if it has had no rain (less than 7.6mm) for 2 weeks in succession (high demand areas) or for 3 weeks in succession (moderate demand areas). From an existing Level II, a watershed may warrant a change to Level III when its:

3 month or 18 month total precipitation drops below 40% of the average 3 month or 18 month precipitation for those months or;

1 month total precipitation drops below 40% of the average precipitation for that month

TABLE 2: Precipitation Thresholds Level I

Level II*

Level III**

18-month precipitation < 80% of average precipitation

or 3 month precipitation < 80% of average precipitation

18 month precipitation < 60% of average precipitation


or 1 month precipitation < 60% of average precipitation Weeks with less than 7.6mm of rain – more than 2 weeks for high demand areas; more than 3 weeks for moderate demand areas

18 month precipitation < 40% of average precipitation



* A watershed can enter a Level II only from an existing confirmed Level I or Level III condition ** A watershed can enter a Level III only from an existing confirmed Level II condition

17

10

Streamflow In the spring (see Appendix 2 Spring Indicator), a watershed may warrant a change to Level I when its monthly flow drops below the lowest average summer month flow for that station (see Appendix 2 Streamflow Indicator paragraph 2). For the rest of the year the watershed may warrant a change to Level I when its monthly flow drops below 70% of the lowest average summer month flow. In the spring, a watershed may warrant a change to Level II (from an existing Level I condition or Level III) when its monthly flow is between 70% and 50% of the lowest average summer month flow. For the rest of the year, the watershed may warrant a change to Level II if its monthly flow is between 50% and 30% of the lowest average summer month flow. In the spring, a watershed may warrant a change to Level III (from an existing Level II condition) when its monthly flow drops below 50% of the lowest average summer month flow. For the rest of the year, the watershed may warrant a change to Level III if its monthly flow drops below 30% of the lowest average summer month flow.

TABLE 3: Streamflow Thresholds Level I

Level II*

Level III**

Spring: – monthly flow < 100% lowest average summer month flow Other times: – monthly flow < 70% of lowest average summer month flow

Spring:– monthly flow < 70% of lowest average summer month flow Other times: – monthly flow < 50% of lowest average summer month flow


* A watershed can enter a Level II only from an existing confirmed Level I or Level III condition ** A watershed can enter a Level III only from an existing confirmed Level II condition

18

11

TABLE 4: Summary of Levels and Thresholds Condition Indicator Precipitation (3 month or

18 month) Streamflows

Level I <80% of average Spring: – monthly flow < 100% lowest average summer month flow Other times: – monthly flow < 70% of lowest average summer month flow

Level II <60% of average Weeks with < 7.6mm


Level III

<40% of average


19

12

3.4 Monitoring and Reporting Figure 1 shows the participants, data sources, products and information flow for drought monitoring. Data is provided to MNR, which analyzes it and produces and distributes condition reports and maps. Feedback is provided to MNR on local conditions as well as when water management responses are undertaken. Conservation authorities also undertake monitoring in their watersheds and may have more refined local data and/or more locally applicable low water indices in use.

FIGURE 1: INFORMATION FLOW Sources of data CAs- Conservation Authorities WRT- Water Response Team EC – Environment Canada

MNR – Precipitation, streamflow, weather data, streamflow charts Internet Web Site -

includes maps charts and conditions reports, MOE – groundwater

levels, water well records, permitted water takings

OMAFRA - precipitation

EC – weather and climate data

CAs (& municipalities) - Precipitation, streamflow, weather data, confirm Level I, II or III condition

collects & analyzes data

identifies sensitive areas

calculates indices generates maps

(precipitation & streamflow indicators, sensitive areas

generates conditions reports

Conditions Reports, Maps and Charts

Stakeholders – data and conditions report

MOE, OMAFRA, MMAH –

WRT – response, local analysis, feedback (CAs initiate, MNR districts where no CA)

MNR Peterborough Data Analysis

Products

Destinations

Conservation Authorities

MNR field staff, senior management, communications

20

13

4. PROVINCIAL RESPONSE 4.1 Principles Ontario Low Water Response is based on three principles: the response process should be simple and straightforward; low water and drought response is a partnership; and planning is crucial.

a) Simple process

Experience from across the province suggests that effective response happens when there is a straightforward system that sets out clearly who is involved and what their responsibilities are. This plan details a response process for low water conditions. Section 2 covers local response. Section 3 sets out how low water information is to be collected and used. Sections 4.3 and 4.4 detail provincial level roles and responsibilities. Section 5 provides an action plan.

b) Low water and drought response partnership The response to low water conditions occurs on at least two levels – provincial and local. For

example, this plan indicates that the province is responsible for collecting and analyzing information on water levels at the provincial scale. At the local level, however, it is the Conservation Authorities, with their local knowledge and experience, who play the major role in providing and interpreting data that is more specific to each watershed.

c) Planning Low water conditions do not occur in a few hours or even days, but generally build up over a

number of weeks or months. This time factor usually allows advance preparation, at both the provincial and municipal levels. However, Water Response Teams should be ready to act quickly if necessary. Water Response Teams require data and information for decision making under Low Water Conditions. Much of this information can be gathered during the year before the onset of Low Water Conditions.

4.2 Agency Roles and Responsibilities The key provincial agencies in water management are the Ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs; Environment; and Natural Resources. They work in a cooperative, integrated fashion to develop and implement provincial water policy (see Section 2.4 for roles and responsibilities of representatives on Water Response Teams).

Efforts to develop and implement provincial water policy are directed by the Land and Resource Use Committee of Deputy Ministers and are implemented by the existing provincial Ontario Water Directors’ Committee (OWDC). This committee is co-chaired by the Water Policy Directors from the Ministries of Natural Resources and Environment. A project team reporting to this committee prepared Ontario Low Water Response.

21

14

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) is responsible for overseeing such legislation as the Planning Act and the Municipal Act, 2001. The Planning Act provides for and supports the control of land use and development throughout the province. The appropriate use of this legislation helps ensure that areas critical to the long-term ecological health of aquatic ecosystems are not degraded by changes in land use. The Municipal Act, 2001 provides municipalities with the authority to provide “any service or thing that the municipality considers necessary or desirable for the public”. Municipalities have broad powers to pass by-laws concerning the “economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality” and the “health, safety and well-being of persons” as long as they do not frustrate provincial acts and regulations. Toronto has the same broad powers under the City of Toronto Act, 2006 (COTA). The Municipal Act, 2001 provides specific authority, for example to pass by-laws regarding the natural environment (i.e. soil or trees) as well as drainage and flood control, in matters not within provincial jurisdiction. Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (MEDT) plays a leading role in promoting and explaining the government’s position and policies on water management issues that cross provincial or national boundaries. Previously, MEDT has represented the province in discussions about bulk water transfers and diversions from the Great Lakes. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) has an important role in the protection of aquatic ecosystems across the rural landscape of Ontario. The ministry supports programs for the agricultural sector that assist in maintaining potable water supplies, supports the use of appropriate irrigation and drainage methods and helps protect surface and groundwater quality.

Ministry of Environment (MOE) administers several pieces of legislation directed at environmental protection, conservation and stewardship of Ontario's resources. In particular, the Ontario Water Resources Act (and companion regulations) is directed at the protection of the quality and quantity of Ontario’s surface and groundwater resources. The legislation provides for prohibitions related to the discharging of pollutants to surface or groundwater and water quality standards. The legislation also provides for a permit system (Permit to Take Water) that governs the taking of large amounts of surface or groundwater (>50,000 litres per day). The Ministry of the Environment administers and is responsible for ensuring compliance with these permits. Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) has two primary focuses in water management: managing surface water flows and levels and protecting fish and wildlife habitat. In many areas MNR is directly responsible for operating water control structures. The major pieces of legislation this ministry oversees include the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (regulates location, design and operation of dams and other water structures), the Public Lands Act (authorization of water power sites), some aspects of the federal Fisheries Act, the Conservation Authorities Act (supporting legislation for the province’s 36 watershed-based Conservation Authorities), the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act and the Crown Forest Sustainability Act. Under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, MNR is listed as the lead agency for large-scale flood, fire and drought emergencies.

22

15

Although MMAH, MEDT, OMAFRA, MOE and MNR are the five provincial agencies with various leadership roles in water management, other agencies and organizations are also involved in water issues. The Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry has a responsibility for setting policy regulating mine waste control structures, and the Ministry of Transportation is involved with water crossing standards. In addition, the federal government has legislation, such as the Fisheries Act and the Navigable Waters Protection Act, which must be considered in any approach to water management.

Municipalities and Conservation Authorities also have discrete water management responsibilities, which require them to be included in any low water and drought response. 4.3 Response Framework This plan provides that:

a) In the organized areas of the province where Conservation Authorities exist, the local

Conservation Authority will establish a water response team (WRT) at the beginning of the season or if Level I conditions are confirmed. It is recommended that Conservation Authorities and MNR districts establish these teams prior to a Level I condition declaration as a precautionary measure and to ensure available information is up to date.

b) In organized areas with no Conservation Authorities, the district office of the Ministry of Natural Resources establishes a WRT at the beginning of the season or if Level I conditions are confirmed.

c) In unorganized areas, the Ministry of Natural Resources maintains responsibility for water management issues, and deals directly with local communities, First Nations, dam owners/operators and other stakeholders.

d) The Ontario Water Directors’ Committee (OWDC) shall set up a standing Low Water

Committee to interact with any watershed in a confirmed Level II (or greater) condition. The OWDC has designated the position of the Water Resources Section Manager (MNR) to serve as the “Low Water Committee Coordinator”. The principal members of the Low Water Committee will be the appropriate Field Directors and Water Directors (or their delegated representatives) of the Ministries of Environment and Energy, Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Municipal Affairs and Housing and Natural Resources. The OWDC through the Low Water Committee will be responsible for coordinating provincial response efforts.

23

16

Conditions Verification The Surface Water Monitoring Centre and Conservation Authority and/or MNR District Office will verify Level I or Level II watershed conditions based on monthly average streamflow and precipitation indicators, and local watershed conditions. If the leading agency (CA or MNR) chooses to confirm that the watershed(s) has entered a Level I or Level II condition the leading agency will make appropriate contacts and host a WRT meeting; the leading agency should verify the watershed conditions and convene a WRT meeting to discuss measures to be taken within one week. Prior to the first water response team meeting, the leading agency should collect or update appropriate information that characterizes the watershed. The local WRT should lead discussions with its local groups well in advance of a drought. These discussions would help establish priorities and set up mitigation strategies.

Level I - Initial Water Use Conservation The Level I condition will be managed through existing programs of the Conservation Authorities, municipalities and other key provincial agencies with leadership and direction provided by the WRT. The WRT, using a variety of communications tools, will emphasize the need for water use conservation with a target reduction of water use of 10 per cent. District or regional level provincial ministry staff will be part of the WRT. Level II - Conservation and Restrictions on Non-Essential Use As with a Level I condition, the local Conservation Authority and/or MNR district office will confirm that a watershed has entered a Level II condition. In this condition the WRT will continue in a leadership role, communicating a strong conservation message, and implementing restrictions through the municipalities on non-essential use. At this time, the OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator will advise the OWDC CoChairs and under their guidance, will activate the Low Water Committee to enhance and reinforce cross-ministry program support. The OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator will also notify the Provincial Emergency Response Coordinator (MNR) and request commencement of regular briefings with Emergency Management Ontario regarding any Level II condition. Level III - Conservation, Restriction, Regulation The OWDC Low Water Committee is responsible for making declarations of a Level III condition based on the recommendations of the local CA and WRT and advice of the provincial field representatives. A Level III declaration represents the most severe level condition and corresponding response is designed to mitigate the impacts of an escalated drought condition. These may include water use restrictions affecting a range of small and large water users. Consequently, prior to any declaration decision the OWDC Low Water Committee is obligated to ensure that:

24

17

1. The WRT has clearly implemented and documented the conservation and reduction efforts taken through the Level I and II strategies and can demonstrate that the majority of the water users have participated in these efforts (including bylaw restrictions by municipalities on non essential uses).

2. Any significant social, environmental and economic impacts arising from current low water

conditions have been documented and adequately described. 3. Recommendations have been provided on priorities for water use restrictions and other

reduction activities within the watershed. Following a level III declaration, the OWDC Low Water Committee is obligated to ensure that: 4. Any significant social, environmental and economic impacts arising from the recommended

water use restrictions have been documented and adequately described. The local WRT and the OWDC Low Water Committee will jointly discuss the range and type of implementation measures to be taken. The OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator will be the liaison with the local WRT Chair(s) as necessary, and with the OWDC CoChairs prior to the declaration of a Level III condition. 4.4 The Ontario Water Directors’ Committee (OWDC) Low Water Committee The Ontario Water Directors’ Committee (OWDC) has set up a standing Low Water Committee to interact with any watershed in a confirmed Level II (or greater) condition. The OWDC has designated the position of the Water Resources Section Manager (MNR) to serve as the “Low Water Committee Coordinator.” The OWDC Low Water Committee will be comprised of the following: i) The existing provincial OWDC membership of Water Policy Directors (or their delegated

representatives) from MOE, MNR, OMAFRA, and MMAH and; ii) The Field Directors (or their delegated representatives), of the MNR, MOE, OMAFRA and

MMAH in affected areas with confirmed Level II or greater conditions. The OWDC Low Water Committee will be linked to WRTs through the local provincial representatives who are members on each WRT team (see section 2.4). In addition, the Low Water Committee Coordinator will liaise with the WRT Chair(s) and the OWDC CoChairs when making joint decisions as required.

25

18

The primary tasks of the OWDC through the Low Water Committee will be to: Coordinate provincial response to WRT recommendations, Ensure that the provincial responsibilities are fulfilled, Address recommended water use restrictions (with the advice and support of the WRT). 4.5 Priority Water Uses

When low water conditions develop, water managers may have to deal with the question of priority use. Various approaches to this difficult situation have been proposed and used in Ontario and in other jurisdictions. A synthesis of these approaches suggests a basic model that can be applied. This model divides water uses into three classes: essential, important and non-essential. Decisions regarding priority water uses can be facilitated with input from local stakeholders. Ultimately, the goal is to balance efficient use, protection of the resource, and equity among users. For these reasons decisions on low water and drought response and potential water use restrictions are best made with the support and advice of local water managers and users. Priority water uses will be unique for each watershed and should be assessed by the Water Response Team, with consideration for the social, environmental and economic impacts of water use reductions and the effect of timing of restrictions on seasonal or periodic water uses. Essential Essential uses of water deal with human and animal life and health: a reasonable supply of water for drinking and sanitation, water for health care, water for public institutions and public protection (e.g. wastewater treatment, some fire protection, schools), water for livestock, and water necessary for basic ecological functions.

Important The second category deals with uses important for the social and economic well being of a particular area. This includes activities critical to industrial processes, commercial facilities such as hotels and restaurants and key agricultural crops. This category poses the most difficulty, as it may be necessary to rank priorities between activities and between groups within the same activity (e.g. between farm irrigation and a local car manufacturing plant or between food or non-food agriculture irrigation). Another factor is that priorities will vary between watersheds. The local water response team should lead discussions with their local groups well in advance of a drought. These discussions would help establish priorities and set up mitigation strategies. For example, depending on the nature of the business it may be economically viable to truck in water to maintain social and economic wellbeing, thus ensuring that ecological functions are not impaired by continued withdrawals from the threatened water system.

26

19

Non-Essential Non-essential uses can be interrupted for the short term without significant impact. These include private swimming pools, lawn watering, public and private fountains and vehicle washing. Many Ontario jurisdictions already have by-laws and other controls to deal with this category.

4.6 Long Term Management Restricting water use is only a short-term solution. Best management practices and integrated watershed management to ensure long-term management of supply and demand should provide the foundation for managing water resources in stressed watersheds and for climate change adaptation. Ecological health is considered essential and is covered under basic ecological functions. Long term economic health and welfare of the citizens are intertwined with ecological health. If natural water systems are consistently starved of water major negative effects will be realized. The resulting degradation of the water quality and quantity can have considerable effects on all users. In stressed watersheds a more proactive approach to water management should be considered. In order to reduce the potential for water systems to reach levels where ecological damage occurs, it is recommended that an integrated watershed management strategy be developed as a proactive approach to help prevent low water conditions from arising on these watersheds.

5. COORDINATION AND ADMINISTRATION 5.1 Water Response Team Action Plan

The Ministries of Natural Resources and Environment are responsible for monitoring low water conditions. Some conservation authorities also maintain their own monitoring networks which may be more sensitive, and may notify MNR of conditions. Generally, MNR will notify Conservation Authorities and MNR district offices of potential low water conditions. Conservation Authorities and MNR districts will verify this data with their own monitoring network, as well as considering other information sources in addition to their own monitoring network. The Conservation Authority and/or MNR will verify the conditions, taking into account predetermined watershed characteristics. Following this assessment, Conservation Authorities and/or MNR may confirm a Level I condition. If the leading authority chooses to confirm a Level I condition, it can then convene a meeting of its WRT.

1. Conservation Authorities and/or MNR Districts will arrange and host the first WRT meeting

in order to establish its goals and objectives. These goals and objectives should include: Establishing WRT structure, Characterization of the watershed, if not available or current,

27

20

Identification of any new local water supply needs and concerns beyond those already documented,

Establishing consensus building and decision-making process. Water Response Team members should also disclose any potential conflicts of interest (situations in which a person’s private interest or an organization’s interest may be seen to influence his or her objectivity as a member of the Water Response Team) at the first meeting, and these should be recognized by the team. If a low water situation has been confirmed, goals and objectives should include: Affirming severity of low water situation/condition, Implementing water conservation, preservation and restriction strategies, Evaluating effectiveness of local actions, Providing advice to local and provincial decision-makers,

2. Conservation Authorities and/or MNR Districts determine if the watershed is in a Level I or Level II condition based on the monitoring network data and local information and will confirm Level I or Level II conditions as appropriate. Watershed conditions should be verified and confirmed and a Water Response Team meeting convened within one week of notification of an existing condition.

3. The WRT is responsible for making recommendations of a Level III condition to the OWDC

Low Water Committee based on watershed conditions which must include information as outlined in Section 3.3. These recommendations can be presented through the Provincial Government Representatives or the local WRT Chair as necessary can communicate them directly to the OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator (see Figure 2).

4. WRT will complete its membership as suggested in Section 2.4. 5. The WRT will elect a chair or co-chairs from its membership (provincial representatives

excluded). It is recommended that Conservation Authorities act as co-chair of the WRT with another member of the WRT. The WRT will also elect a secretary from its membership (provincial representatives excluded).

6. WRT will develop its terms of reference, detailing mandate, membership, roles (chair,

secretary), meeting frequency, quorum conditions and team and external communications needs.

7. WRT will develop or update a brief summary of existing information that characterizes the

watershed, which generally describes supply and demand conditions. The summary will help the WRT to target their response and serve as a context for communications.

a) The local water supply information should include:

28

21

MNR’s, MOE’s and Conservation Authorities’ precipitation, streamflow and groundwater level data summaries if information is available,

General status of municipal wells, rural dug and drilled wells, Anecdotal information on local effects.

b) The water demand information should include: Summary listing of water takers based on MOE’s Permit to Take Water database plus

estimates of other takings < 50,000 litres per day. General assessment of water taking sectors e.g. agriculture (irrigation areas, livestock

demands), recreation (golf courses), industry (aggregates). 8. The WRT identifies the actions needed to manage the response to drought or Low Water

conditions and carries them out. The actions will maximize water supply, reduce demand, or do both. The recommendations offered here are the minimum. Teams should develop their own solutions to address local problems.

FIGURE 2: Organizational Links

Level I Response: Actions to Consider

Goal: Promote initial water use conservation and management among all users to reduce further water shortages

Target: 10% initial reduction in water use among all sectors

Ini ti ate s WRT & key support rol e for WR T(see exc ept ion be low)

OWDC

OWDC Low Water Committee & Local WRTOrganizational Model and Linkages - Level II and Level III Conditions

Field Organizat ions of Each Minis try

M OE

M M AH

Dir ector( s) M OE *

Director

M MA H

Director

M NR *

Director

OM A FR A

D ir ector

M EOI

D irector

M N DM

OWDC

Low Water Committee

F ield Director Representative (s)

M NR Wa ter R esource s Se cti on M anager

* OWD C CoChairs

N ote: Each ministry’s s tru cture will vary. This des ign allows the flexibility for each ministr y to establish an appr opriate an d effective communicatio n flow from their Provincial Repres en tative(s ) on each W RT throu gh any n eces sary M an agerial level(s) to a Director Level Field Repres en tative(s ) and auth ority figu re on the O WDC Low W ater Committee for that unit.

WRT

* Elected Team Chair (from membership; exclu ding P rov. Reps.)

* M ember

CH AIR

P rov. Rep. M ember(s )

CA S taf f Member( s)

M ember

T hrough t he WRT Chair - W RT accesses OW DC Com mit tee through Provi ncial Reps.

And/ or Chair m ay contact Coordinat ordependent on comm unicat ion required.

MN R

All Members are Local and/orProvincial Water Users and/orManagers

Provinc ia l Re presenta tion wi ll va ry dependen t on Area and nee ds

OMAFRA

MM AH

MNR

MO E

M ana ge rLe vel

Prov. Reps. a re WRT li nk t o OWDC Low Wate r C ommi tt ee

Se creta ri at

O M AF RA Coordinator

M ana ge rLe vel

M anagerLevel

Ma nagerLevel

Exce pt ion: Where no Conse rvati on Authorit y ex ist s the l oca l M NR Di stric t a ssumes th is responsi bi li ty

M ember

29

22

Action

Detail

Communicate

- each WRT member is responsible for contributing to developing and communicating water conservation messages within their sector - Include media releases, farm papers, newsletters, newspapers, radio, etc. - messages focus on

- watershed characterization information - statement of local conditions and near term prognosis - clear understanding of the need for initial water use conservation with 10% reduction target

Water Use Reductions

- target 10% reduction

Prepare for Level II

- develop a database of users based on Permit to Take Water database - prepare to inform the OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator of potential Level II conditions

Recommendations for water use conservation will be sector specific. Many examples are already in place and are to be used by the WRT where available. Residential examples include:

installing toilet dams using rain barrels repairing leaky faucets encouraging minimal use of non-essential water (car washing, lawn watering)

Other examples are in Green Tips, published by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment. For the agricultural sector, see OMAFRA fact sheets (1999) How to Prepare for Irrigation During Water Shortages and Private Water Well Owners – Dealing with Water Shortages.

30

23

Level II Response: Actions to Consider

Goals: Target further water conservation and management messages more directly

Publicize water use restrictions Ensure compliance with restrictions Consider priorities for water restrictions and other water use reductions at Level III

Target: Further 10% water use reduction (20% total)

Action

Detail

Communicate

- Strongly encourage water use reductions by contacting key users

identified from database developed during Level I Response - Contact includes mailings, personal contact, advertising, provincial

contact with permit holders and meetings - Messages focus on

o specific water conservation examples using fact sheets where available

o further 10% reduction target - Either the conservation authority or the Ministry of the Environment

may contact permit holders, at the preference of the conservation authority

- Inform OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator of confirmed Level II conditions

- OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator will initiate formation of an active Low Water Committee

Manage supply

- Modify flood prevention, flow augmentation and power generation

reservoir operations to minimize impacts of drought - Increase monitoring of compliance with effective water conservation

practices Water Use Reductions

- Further 10% reduction - Recommend that approvals of new water takings >50,000 litres per day

be limited - Discuss need for reduced water use by existing permit holders - Enforce or strengthen municipal water restriction by-laws - Monitor water takings for compliance with permits and by-laws

Prepare for Level III (Drought)

- Document conservation efforts taken through Level I and Level II - Record existing and potential social, environmental and economic

impacts

31

24

Action

Detail - Develop recommendations on water use restriction priorities (refer to

section 3.3) - Notify OWDC Low Water Committee and local decision-makers of

actions taken to prepare them for their involvement at Level III

Level III Response (Drought): Actions to Consider

Goal: Develop and implement priorities on water management strategies and water use reductions

Target: Reduce and manage water use demands to the maximum extent

Action

Detail

Involve senior decision-makers

- Involve senior local and provincial decision-makers directly in refining

and implementing water management proposals including potential reductions in water use

- Maintain regular contact with the OWDC Low Water Committee through provincial WRT representatives (WRT Chair may liaison with OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator as required)

Develop and implement priorities on water management strategies and water use reductions

- Continue to record and assess social, environmental and economic

impacts of low water conditions - Continue to record and assess water management strategies and water

use reductions - Confirm priorities for water use reductions among sectors through a

consensus building process - Continue to implement and enforce water restrictions using existing

tools such as municipal by-laws and provincial legislation (OWRA). - Record and assess social, environmental and economic impacts arising

from water use restrictions Water use regulation and related water management strategies become the focus during the severe shortages experienced in a Level III condition. Actions move from largely voluntary compliance to regulatory control. Strong local involvement and provincial support will be

32

25

necessary to assess options, confirm priorities and implement water use regulation and water management strategies. Heads of local municipal councils and Conservation Authorities as well as provincial field managers should now be directly involved in the process. Local team representatives of private groups are also encouraged to involve their senior provincial representatives. WRT should provide recommendations for water use reductions and potential restrictions to the OWDC Low Water Committee Coordinator. Existing legislation may be required to assist with implementing reductions in water use by large users (>50,000 litres per day). For example, the Ministry of the Environment has the authority to review and amend conditions on existing water-taking permits under the Ontario Water Resources Act. Municipalities may pass by-laws restricting water usage. During all three levels of response, MNR and MOE as well as Conservation Authorities and municipalities should continue monitoring activities and communicate results through their members on the WRT. This allows the WRT to anticipate and respond to changing conditions. 9. Communications

The WRT will maintain communication links with the province, Conservation Authorities, municipalities and special interest groups through its members. These communications are critical to generate awareness and support for local needs and WRT decisions.

The WRT has the primary responsibility for ensuring that effective communications are maintained with the local media and the citizens living and working within the watershed. The OWDC Low Water Committee will provide communications support for issues that have a broad provincial perspective.

10. Evaluation

WRTs will conduct annual self-evaluations during the drought and at the conclusion of the drought to assess equity, efficiency and effectiveness of communications, information, actions and monitoring.

5.2 Future Refinements A comprehensive low water and drought management plan for Ontario requires a combination of long term preventive strategies and shorter-term response to depleted groundwater and surface water resources during extreme dry conditions. Ontario Low Water Response is designed to protect existing water supplies and modify the demand for water during those extreme dry conditions. Long term preventive strategies are also needed.

33

26

6. SUMMARY Level Indicator Information

flow Decision Goal Target Communicat

ions Supply management

Imposed restrictions

I – potential water supply problems

Precipitation: <80% long or mid-term average Streamflow: <70% lowest average summer month

From: EC, MNR, CAs, MOE To: MNR for analysis Then: CA for confirmation

By province, in some cases by WRT chair Confirmed by CA or MNR

Voluntary conservation

10% reduction in water use

WRT members to own groups Media releases, newsletters, etc. Local conditions

II – minor problems, potential major supply problems

Precipitation: <60% long, mid-term or short-term average or more than 1 week no rain Streamflow: <50% lowest average summer month

as above By province or CA Confirmed by CA or MNR Set up a Low Water Committee of the OWDC

Voluntary conservation and restrictions

Additional 10% reduction

Direct contact with major users Sector-specific info on restrictions

Modify reservoir operations

Recommend Limiting new permits Implement by-laws Monitor and enforce compliance with existing permits

III – supply fails to meet usual demand, social and economic impact

Precipitation: <40% long, mid or short-term average Streamflow: <30% lowest average summer month

as above Joint decision by WRT and OWDC

Conservation, restrictions and regulation

Maximum reduction

Sector and user specific info on restrictions, regulations

Modify reservoir, water power operations Consider hauling water

Reduce permit levels Set and institute water use priorities Enforcement

34

27

Appendix 1: Existing Legislation

Summary of Water-related Legislation - Water Quality, Water Quantity, and Water-Related Land Management

SUMMARY OF MAJOR LEGISLATION ON WATER QUALITY

Legislation by Function

Administering Agency Description of Legislation Implementing

Agency

Provincial Legislation *Ontario Water Resources Act

MOE allows for the regulation of water supply

allows surveillance and monitoring of all surface and ground water in Ontario

regulates sewage disposal and controls water pollution

allows MOE to construct and operate wastewater facilities or require it be done by an industry or municipality

MOE

*Environmental Protection Act

MOE forbids discharge of any contaminant to the environment in amounts exceeding regulations

prohibits discharge of any substance likely to impair the environment

requires spills of pollutants be reported and cleaned up promptly and establishes a liability on the party at fault

MOE

Environmental Assessment Act

MOE requires environmental assessment of any major public or designated private undertaking

MOE

Pesticides Act MOE controls use of chemicals for the destruction of plant and animal pest and investigates possible harmful effects of pesticides on the environment

MOE

35

28



Agency

Conservation Authorities Act

MNR enables municipalities and the Province to create a conservation authority to implement a “program” in local resource management

enables conservation authorities to regulate activities that may interfere with a watercourse or wetland, and regulate development in areas prone to water-related hazards (floodplains, shorelines) for impacts to the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or conservation of land

allows conservation authorities to be involved in MOE led water quality monitoring programs: Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network

also enables conservation authority boards to approve programs or have agreements with municipalities for other water quality monitoring programs, i.e. for wetland monitoring, watershed plans or other studies for information about the aquatic health for resource management initiatives undertaken by the conservation authority

CAs

36

29



Agency

Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act

MNR ensures proposed water works do not adversely affect water quality or cause undue erosion and silting

MNR

Planning Act MMAH guides municipal planning activities (e.g. requires local governments to assess the impact of a proposed subdivision on existing water supplies)

Municipalities, MMAH

Municipal Act MMAH The Municipal Act, 2001 provides municipalities with the authority to provide “any service or thing that the municipality considers necessary or desirable for the public” and have broad powers to pass by-laws concerning the “economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality” and the “health, safety and well-being of persons”. They have specific authority, for example, to pass by-laws regarding the natural environment (i.e. soil or trees) as well as drainage and flood control.

Municipalities, MMAH

Federal Legislation

*Fisheries Act DFO protects fish habitat by prohibiting habitat disturbance and deposition of deleterious substances in water frequented by fish

DFO, MNR

Canada Shipping Act

Transport Canada controls pollution from ships by imposing penalties for dumping pollutants or failing to report a spill

Transport Canada

Canada Water Act EC authorizes agreements with provinces for designation of water quality management areas

EC

37

30



Agency

and other projects Canadian Environmental Protection Act

EC controls manufacture, transportation, use, disposal of chemicals and wastes not adequately regulated by other legislation

EC

Pest Control Products Act

Agriculture Canada

regulates products used to control pests via registration according to prescribed standards

Agriculture Canada

*Includes tools that can be used for drought management response within 24 hours.

38

31

SUMMARY OF MAJOR LEGISLATION ON WATER QUANTITY

Legislation by function

Administering

agency

Description of legislation

Implementing

agency

Provincial Legislation Conservation Authorities Act

MNR enables conservation authorities to regulate activities that may interfere with a watercourse or wetland, and regulate development in areas prone to water-related hazards (floodplains, shorelines) for impacts to the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or conservation of land

requires conservation authorities to implement a program in flood and erosion control, flood forecasting and warning, ice management.

allows conservation authorities to own over 900 structures including 256 dams, and numerous engineered channels, dykes, and erosion control along rivers and shorelines works with an estimated replacement value of $2.7 billion

CAs

Lakes and River Improvement Act

MNR empowers MNR to regulate the construction and operation of water works

requires that new water works be approved

MNR

Public Lands Act MNR authorizes MNR to construct and operate dams and acquire land for their purposes

authorizes power generation projects on Crown land

MNR

39

32


Administering

agency


Implementing

agency

Municipal Act MMAH The Municipal Act, 2001 provides municipalities with the authority to provide “any service or thing that the municipality considers necessary or desirable for the public” and have broad powers to pass by-laws concerning the “economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality” and the “health, safety and well-being of persons”. They have specific authority, for example, to pass by-laws regarding the natural environment (i.e. soil or trees) as well as drainage and flood control.

municipalities, MMAH

Public Utilities Act MMAH empowers municipalities to acquire and operate water works and divert a lake or river for their purposes


Ontario Water Resources Act

MOE requires the issuance of a permit for the taking of more than a total of 50, 000 litres of water in a day from a ground or surface source of supply

Allows the MOE Director to refuse to issue, cancel, impose terms and conditions in issuing a permit or alter the terms and conditions of a permit after it is issued.

requires the issuance of a permit for the construction of a well

allows municipalities to establish or replace water works with ministerial

MOE

40

33


Administering

agency


Implementing

agency

approval Federal Legislation Fisheries Act DFO protects fish habitat by

prohibiting habitat disturbance ensures construction of a

fishway around any obstruction in a waterway

DFO, MNR

Navigable Waters Protection Act

Department of Fisheries and Oceans

prohibits dumping of wastes that may interfere with navigation

prohibits construction in navigable waters

Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Canada Water Act EC authorizes agreements with provinces for the delineation of flood plains and hazardous shorelines for flood and erosion control

EC

International River Improvement Act

External Affairs EC

prohibits damming or changing the flow of a river flowing out of Canada

EC

SUMMARY OF WATER-RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT LEGISLATION


Administering agency

Description of Legislation

Implementing agency

Provincial Legislation

Drainage Act OMAFRA facilitates construction, operation and maintenance of rural drainage works

provides legal mechanism where riparian landowners can drain their lands and divide the costs among themselves

OMAFRA, municipalities

Tile Drainage Act OMAFRA provides for low interest loans to farmers from municipalities for tile draining their property


Planning Act MMAH provides for and governs land use municipalities,

41

34

planning deals with provincial administration

in land use planning and local planning

requires the planning decisions of municipalities and other decision makers to be consistent with the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement which sets out provincial interests related to land use planning

MMAH

Public Lands Act MNR authorizes MNR to manage and control activities on Crown land

MNR

Mining Act MNDMF registers mining lands and lands forfeited to the Crown

exempts lands and mining rights from taxes

MNDMF, MNR

Beds of Navigable Waters Act

MNR declares the beds of navigable waters as the Crown’s responsibility

MNR

Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act

MTO requires a permit for any work carried out within the right-of-way of a provincial highway

MTO

Conservation Authorities Act

MNR enables conservation authorities to regulate activities that may interfere with a watercourse or wetland, and regulate development in areas prone to water-related hazards (floodplains, shorelines) for impacts to the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or conservation of land

enables conservation authorities to own and acquire land and currently have the largest collective land holdings, (145,000 hectares or ~ 560 sq. mi), second to the Crown in Ontario, includes wetlands, hazard lands, shorelines, conservation land, areas of natural & scientific interest, recreational lands, natural heritage & cultural sites, forests

42

35

Environmental Assessment Act

MOE requires environmental assessment of any major public or designated private undertaking

MOE

Federal Legislation

Fisheries Act DFO controls erosion and sedimentation for the purpose of fish habitat preservation

DFO, MNR

43

36

EMERGENCY RELATED LEGISLATION Legislation by

function Administering

agency Description of

Legislation Implementing

agency

Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act

EMO may take action and make such orders as he or she considers necessary to implement the emergency plans to protect property and health, safety and welfare of inhabitants of the emergency area

MNR, Municipalities

MNR - Ministry of Natural Resources MOE - Ministry of the Environment DFO - Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada MTO - Ministry of Transportation of Ontario MNDMF - Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry OMAFRA - Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs EMO – Emergency Management Ontario EC – Environment Canada HWC – Health and Welfare Canada

44

37

Appendix 2: Additional Technical Information Distinguishing Between the Levels of Response Thresholds for Level I must be sensitive enough to give enough time for action but not so sensitive as to activate when problems are not likely to occur. Some areas may reach the threshold for Level I several years in a row. Indicators will be monitored and reviewed periodically to determine if the thresholds are set at the correct levels.

Indicators Research was done in 1999 to find out how precipitation and streamflow data might be used to quantify low water and drought conditions. Based on this experience, the project team has used precipitation and streamflow as the two primary indicators. Precipitation Indicator 1 For each station, MNR will compare the monthly precipitation with the average monthly precipitation for that station. For each month, the comparison will be made by using the total precipitation in the month divided by the average precipitation for that month. These calculations will then be averaged over the previous 18 months (long term) and the previous 3 months (seasonal). When an area reaches a Level I, or higher condition level, the comparison for the previous month for each station will also be used as an indicator. As well, on the 7th, 14th, and 21st of each month, a weekly comparison will be made of the accumulated 1, 2 and 3-week precipitation to the average precipitation for the current month.

Precipitation Indicator 2 When a watershed is already in a Level I condition or greater, the number of consecutive readings of less than 7.6mm (no rain) will be determined at each reading (on the 7th, 14th, 21st and at the end of the month). In sensitive watersheds (very high water demand or very sandy soils), two readings of less than 7.6mm will be the threshold to reach a Level II condition. In a less sensitive watershed, (moderate water demand and sandy soils or high demand and silty soils), three or more consecutive readings of less than 7.6mm will be the threshold. Streamflow Surface flow indicators demonstrate if there is enough streamflow in the river to meet the basic needs of the ecosystem and if there is additional water available for needs such as navigation, recreation, hydropower generation, irrigation, and other takings.

45

38

Baseflow response contributes to surface flow and indicates the state of the groundwater supply. After a rainfall or snowmelt, there may be an immediate surface runoff response in streamflow followed, sometimes after a delay, by a baseflow response from groundwater. In many cases, baseflow is relied upon to provide the needs of the ecosystem and to maintain the surface water quality at an acceptable level. Baseflow response will indicate if there is enough water to meet basic ecosystem needs. If baseflow is insufficient, water management authorities will have to manage the structures to provide water for surface water takings, where possible. In the spring, surface flows are much higher than at other times of the year. It is necessary to take this into account when determining streamflow indicators. As a result, thresholds were selected to reflect seasonal variability. It is also necessary to recognize that wide, flat streams and headwater streams (streams at the top of the watershed) are more sensitive to low flows. Representative streamgauge stations need to be selected to take account of varying stream channel conditions.

Streamflow Indicator Water level gauges provide data that is used for surface flow, or streamflow, indicators. An indication of streamflow approaching the minimum needed to maintain the ecosystem is the statistical flow value, 7Q20. (The minimum 7-day, 1-in-20-year flow that is calculated for individual gauges.) The historical average monthly flow for each month for each station is available from the Environment Canada streamflow historical archive HYDAT. For each station, the lowest average summer month flow will be the lowest average monthly flow for July, August or September. Comparing the value of the current flow with the historic low value will determine when the streamflow is approaching the 7Q20. All flow indicators will be expressed as a per cent of the lowest average summer month flow. On the 14th of each month, when a Level I or greater condition has been attained, there will also be a calculation of the flow for the first half of the month that will be compared to the lowest average flow.

Spring Indicator For the analysis at the provincial level, the criteria will be the same for all streamflow gauges. In April, May, and June, flows are expected to be higher, therefore, the indicator flows will be expected to be higher. This will be factored into the streamflow thresholds. While a low flow in the springtime may not indicate existing water supply problems, it indicates that potential low water conditions may develop in the summer.

46

39

Local Streamflow Indicator Streams in the headwaters or those having high width-to-depth ratio are expected to be more sensitive to low flows. An indication of streamflow approaching the minimum needed to maintain the ecosystem in these streams is the statistical flow value, 7Q2. (The minimum 7-day 1-in-2-year flow, which is also calculated for individual gauges.). At the local level, where this detail is known, the indicator flows can be higher than for the main channel streams or streams that are narrow and deep. The local WRT can factor this into the streamflow thresholds. Precipitation Thresholds Level I Condition A watershed enters Level I when its 3-month or 18-month precipitation drops below 80% of the average 3-month or 18-month precipitation for those months. The watershed leaves Level I when indicators that resulted in the watershed entering Level I have risen above the Level I threshold such that a 10% voluntary reduction in use is no longer required and it is anticipated that the watershed will not return to Level I condition over the next few weeks.

Level II Condition The threshold for Level II condition is 60% of the 1-month, 3-month or 18-month average precipitation. A watershed enters Level II when its 1-month, 3-month or 18-month total precipitation drops below 60% of the average 1-month, 3-month or 18-month precipitation for those months and it is already in a Level I condition.

OR

The threshold for Level II condition may also be more 2 or more consecutive weeks of less than 7.6mm precipitation (no rain). A watershed enters Level II when there is an existing Level I condition and a reading of cumulative precipitation less than 7.6mm in high-demand areas, or 2 or 3 readings in succession when the cumulative precipitation is less than 7.6mm in moderate-demand areas. At the local level, when precipitation is monitored daily, a watershed enters Level II if it has 7 to 14 days of less than 7.6mm in a sensitive area or 14 to 21 days of less than 7.6 mm in a less sensitive area. The weekly update to the monthly per cent of average (calculated on the 7th, 14th, and 21st) indicates improving or degrading conditions but is not used to determine a Level II condition. This measurement is only taken during an existing Level I or Level II condition.

47

40

The watershed reenters Level I when indicators that resulted in the watershed entering Level II have risen above the Level II thresholds such that the additional 10% voluntary reduction in use is no longer required. Level III Condition The threshold for the Level III condition is 40% of the 1-month, 3-month or 18-month average precipitation. A watershed enters Level III when the 1-month, 3-month or 18 month total precipitation drops below 40% of the average 1-month, 3-month or 18-month precipitation for those months and there is an existing Level II condition. The weekly update to the monthly per cent of average (calculated on the 7th, 14th, and 21st) indicates improving or degrading conditions but is not used to determine a Level III condition. This measurement is only taken during an existing Level I or Level II condition. The watershed reenters Level II when indicators that resulted in the watershed entering Level III have risen above the Level III threshold such that water use restrictions are no longer required and are not anticipated to be required over the next several weeks. Streamflow Thresholds Level 1 Condition

A watershed enters Level I when its 1-month flow drops below 100% of the lowest average summer month flow in the spring or if the flow drops below 70% of the lowest average summer month flow during other times. Level II Condition A watershed enters Level II when its 1-month flow drops below 70% of the lowest average summer month flow in the spring or if the flow drops below 50% of the lowest average summer month flow during other times. Level III Condition A watershed enters Level III when its 1-month flow drops below 50% of the lowest average summer month flow in the spring or if the flow drops below 30% of the lowest average summer month flow during other times. For Level II and Level III conditions, streamgauges known to represent more sensitive streams (streams in headwaters or wide and shallow streams) may have the comparison levels raised by 10%. For example, more sensitive streams may enter a Level II in the spring when the flow drops below 80% instead of 70% of the lowest average summer month flow. The WRT should

48

41

address this level of detail at the local level. A watershed can enter a Level II only from an existing confirmed Level I or Level III condition and a watershed can only enter a Level III from an existing confirmed Level II condition. Groundwater Baseflow Protection At present, baseflow indicators have not been identified. There are current efforts in place to develop such indicators in the future. Groundwater Aquifer levels To date, aquifer level indicators have not been identified. Well log data can be used to estimate representative groundwater elevations. A network for measuring the water table is currently being developed. Threshold water table levels will be subsequently developed and matched against demand. Water table levels near demand level would generate a Level I condition. Exceeding the demand level would generate a Level II condition. A Level III condition would occur when water levels drop below the level needed for high-priority demand. Critical water table heights for baseflow protection need to be determined. Monitoring and Reporting Data Acquisition precipitation and streamflow data is obtained through the MNR Water Resources Information

System (WRIS) computer located in Toronto and maintained through the MNR Sault Ste. Marie office

Climate data is obtained from Environment Canada through satellite connection and decoded by WRIS. This data is obtained through a cost sharing agreement between Environment Canada and MNR (including the Conservation Authorities) and MOE

streamflow data and precipitation data located at streamflow sites is collected by telephone modem and decoded by WRIS

historic streamflow and climate records are used to determine monthly average historical values for each station

Addressing Gaps MNR will continue to work with partners to improve the monitoring network to cover a

greater geographic area and to measure conditions for a greater variety of areas that are sensitive to drought (i.e. sensitive soils, differing stream types, high demand areas)

Groundwater indicators will be developed and applied to the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network data that MOE will provide to MNR Peterborough. This information will be included in the analysis and conditions reports.

MNR will continue to investigate the application of snowpack and snowmelt information to improve on the inadequacies of snowfall information.

49

42

A means of determining how much water is available for melting from the snowpack and whether it is replenishing the supply or evaporating is needed

SSM/I (Special Sensor Microwave Imagery) data from satellite imagery will be used to determine the snow water content of the snowpack across Ontario

Snowpack and the depth of snow on the ground will be measured and the snow pack density determined. This data will be used to augment and interpolate between the snow survey data collected by the flood program.

Assessment Process and Communicating Summary precipitation data and data from streamgauges is obtained manually from WRIS

over intranet Additional precipitation and streamgauge information unavailable through WRIS is obtained

by e-mail (e.g. from Conservation Authorities with gauges off line, from monitoring network of volunteers)

Additional sources of precipitation and streamflow monitoring networks will be sought out Data collected by MNR Peterborough, in text flat files and text email messages are entered

into spreadsheets and generate streamflow indicator plots Peterborough Geomatics Centre will continue to obtain fire weather data, run routines to

incorporate data into databases containing monthly precipitation averages and the lowest average summer flows where the percent of the average is calculated and generate precipitation plots and present these to MNR Peterborough for review.

MNR Peterborough will continue to verify data and information, determine corrected data where necessary and provide this information to Peterborough Geomatics Centre

Peterborough Geomatics Centre will produce contour maps using indicator thresholds as breakpoints on base mapping showing the watershed boundaries and provide these to MNR Peterborough in Adobe format for review.

MNR Peterborough will continue to verify data and information, determine corrected data where necessary and provide this information to Peterborough Geomatics Centre to update products

50

43

Appendix 3: Project Development Team (1999) Ron Running - Ministry of Natural Resources Ian Cameron - Ministry of Natural Resources Maxine Kingston - Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Jim Myslik - Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Jim Richardson - Ministry of the Environment Fred Fleischer - Ministry of the Environment Ian Wilcox - Conservation Ontario Gary Cousins - Association of Municipalities of Ontario Support provided by: Margaret Mack, Ministry of Natural Resources Pam Jeff, Ministry of Natural Resources Pat Inett, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs

Jim Clifford, Ministry of the Environment Jena Leavoy, Ministry of Natural Resources Rhonda Bateman, Ministry of Natural Resources

Jennifer Jacobson, Ministry of Natural Resources

51


To: Water Response Team From: Sandra Mancini, Senior Water Resources Engineer Date: June 10, 2015 Subject: Water Response Team Terms of Reference and Membership RECOMMENDATION: That the Water Response Team receive and file this report

DISCUSSION: A presentation will be provided that will review the Water Response Team Terms of Reference and the Water Response Team’s 2015 Membership. Both of these documents have been attached for your reference.

_________________________ Sandra Mancini, Senior Water Resources Engineer Attachments - Water Response Team – Terms of Reference - Water Response Team Membership 2015

52


WATER RESPONSE TEAM

Terms of Reference

OBJECTIVE The provincial government has prepared a response plan to deal with low water conditions. Ontario Low Water Response was created in 2000 and is intended to ensure provincial preparedness, to assist in coordination and to support local response in the event of a drought. The province provides overall direction and coordinates policies, science and information systems, and emergency support. At the local jurisdiction, the emphasis is directed to collecting information, interpreting policy, delivering programs and responding to emergencies. Three levels are used to determine low water conditions in a watershed:

• Level I (warning) - confirmed or determined by conservation authorities • Level II (conservation) - confirmed or determined by Water Response Teams • Level III (restrictions) - confirmed or determined by the province

PURPOSE Water response teams are focused on reacting to current low water conditions. Long term drought prevention efforts must be developed and are the responsibility of existing water management agencies and users. South Nation Conservation’s Water Response Team (WRT) will:

• Use a combination of water data, provincial and local legislation, communication techniques, and local tools to advocate for conservation;

• Provide a coordinated response from provincial, conservation authority, private and special interest water managers and users;

• Work cooperatively, sharing all information and being accountable; and • Ensure that key local and provincial decision-makers participate actively in the

process to see that water allocation decisions are understood, supported and enforced.

53

MEMBERSHIP The WRT will include provincial, municipal and conservation authority staff as well as representatives for local interests and users. Team membership will include representation from the following sectors:

• Conservation Authority - 2 members • Provincial government - 3 members (non-voting members)

o Ministry of Natural Resources o Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food o Ministry of the Environment

• Municipal government - 5 members o Stormont Dundas & Glengarry o Prescott-Russell o Leeds and Grenville o City of Ottawa o Outside of SNC Watershed

• Agricultural Community - 3 members (including 1 from SNC Clean Water Committee)

• Special Interest - 2 members (e.g. Industry, OCWA, Ducks Unlimited, Golf Courses)

• SNC’s Chair & Vice-Chair are ex-officio members Membership may increase or decrease based on approval of the WRT. SNC will appoint the WRT chair. OUTSIDE OF JURISDICTION The WRT is mainly setup for the South Nation Conservation’s jurisdiction and its member municipalities. However, the WRT could invite representation from municipalities, which are outside the SNC jurisdiction. Staff support for these municipalities will continue to be provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), Kemptville District Office. The MNR will be responsible for coordinating these activities. ROLE OF MEMBERS Responsibilities for team members include attending meetings, communicating back to their sector, sharing relevant data, and using drought management tools. Specifically, the WRT will:

54

• Characterize the watershed • Identify local water supply needs and concerns • Identify severity of low water situation/condition • Recommend water conservation and preservation • Evaluate effectiveness of local actions • Provide advice to local provincial decision-makers • Apply for provincial funding for drought related expenses and projects

MEETING FREQUENCY

• Level I - In consultation with the chair, once a Level I low water condition has been confirmed or determined by SNC, the WRT will be circulated information on watershed conditions and recommended action (i.e. press release, voluntary conservation). SNC staff will continue monitoring watershed conditions and keep the WRT informed.

• Level II - In consultation with the chair, when conditions warrant, the WRT will

meet to confirm or determine a Level II low water condition and appropriate action.

• Level III - In consultation with the chair, when conditions warrant, the WRT

will meet to discuss asking the province to confirm or determine a Level III low water condition.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

• Volunteer members of the Committee will be paid mileage in accordance with current rates of SNC. Mileage will be paid annually only if there is funding available from the Ministry of Natural Resources for drought related expenses.

• Decisions of the Committee will be reached by parliamentary procedure. • Minutes of all meetings will be recorded by SNC staff and distributed to the

Committee members for review 1 week prior to the next meeting (whenever possible).

• Meeting agendas will be distributed 1 week in advance (whenever possible), complete with appropriate background information of agenda items. The agenda will be prepared and distributed by SNC staff, with consultation with the WRT Chair.

• Telephone or written (fax, email) votes may be accepted at the discretion of the Chair in the case of straight forward decisions to be made which do not justify a meeting.

55


To: South Nation Conservation’s Water Response Team From: Golam Sharif, Water Resources Analyst Date: June 8, 2015 Subject: Current Watershed Conditions RECOMMENDATION: That the Water Response Team recognizes the level I low water condition, and promotes water conservation and preservation strategies within their municipalities, sectors, and groups.

BACKGROUND: On June 11, 2015, SNC issued a level I low water condition across its jurisdiction as precipitation was less than 80% of the average historical 3 month precipitation. At this time, the stream flows within watershed did not exceed the low water thresholds as described in Ontario Low Water Response. The thresholds for declaring a low water condition are described in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Indicators for Declaring Low Water Conditions

DISCUSSION: Current Watershed Conditions a) Precipitation: As per Table 2, precipitation for the previous three months in Cornwall, Brockville, and Ottawa were all in the 60% to 70% range of the historical three month average. This is

56

well below the threshold of 80% to declare a level I condition at all three stations. Table 2: Monthly and Three Month Precipitation Totals (mm) Compared to Historical Averages at Stations in Brockville, Ottawa, and Cornwall

Climate Station1 March April May 3-month

Total

3-month Historical

Total

3-month Indicator Percent

LW Level

Ottawa 24.5 61.5 65 151 213.6 70.7 Level I Cornwall 23.3 58.7 57.8 139.8 231.4 60.4 Level I Brockville 24.8 82.8 46.5 154.1 227.7 67.7 Level I

1Source: Environment Canada Climate Stations b) Stream Flows

Currently, stream flows at gauging stations in Plantagenet, Spencerville, Russell, and Bourget are above the threshold for a level I condition seen in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Stream Flows in SNC's Jurisdiction Compared with Lowest Average Summer Monthly Flow

Stream Gauge Station

LASMF* (m3/s) March April May LW Level

Mean Flow

(m3/s)

Percent of

LASMF

Mean Flow

(m3/s)

Percent of

LASMF

Mean Flow

(m3/s)

Percent of LASMF

Current Month

South Nation River at

Plantagenet

6.68 13.38 200% 172.46 2582% 19.53 292% None

South Nation River at

Spencerville

0.37 2.28 616% 11.09 2997% 0.70 189% None

Castor River at Russell 1 2.16 216% 19.35 1935% 2.57 257% None

Bear Brook near

Bourget 1.29 4.59 356% 25.90 2008% 2.53 196% None

*LASMF: Lowest Average Summer Monthly Flow

c) Weather Currently, Environment Canada’s 3 month forecast for June to August indicates above normal temperatures and normal precipitation around the South Nation watershed.

57

Furthermore, the spring-summer weather outlook prepared by the MNRF for May-September indicated above normal temperatures for the end of May through the beginning of June, but is expected to settle to normal summer temperatures by mid-June through September. As for precipitation, the two week forecast for Ottawa is showing little probability of precipitation; however, the MNRF indicated that Eastern Ontario should be receiving normal precipitation over the months of July and August.

___________ Golam Sharif Water Resources Analyst

58


To: SNC Water Response Team From: Tessa Di Iorio, Hydrogeologist Sheila Ball, Engineering Assistant Date: June 8, 2015 Subject: Low Water Effect on Groundwater RECOMMENDATION: That the Water Response Team receives and file this report

DISCUSSION: Effects of Low Water on Groundwater

Within the hydrological cycle, groundwater is normally the last to react to droughts. As precipitation decreases, runoff (overland flow) to stream decreases causing a decrease in streamflow. There is also a decrease in infiltration of water into the subsurface (groundwater recharge) which results in a decrease in groundwater levels and storage and eventually a decrease in groundwater discharged to streams (baseflow). The effects of drought are more prominent in shallow unconfined groundwater systems with short groundwater recharge times. In deep aquifers, there is generally a slow response by groundwater levels so only major droughts affect deep groundwater systems. Potential for Dry Wells

Variations in rainfall, as well as groundwater pumping affect groundwater levels in aquifers that supplies wells. If a well is pumped faster than the aquifer is recharged by precipitation or other underground flow, then the water level will decrease. A well is said to ‘go dry’ when the water level drops below the pump intake. The water level only increases again when the aquifer is recharged. The magnitude of water level variations in a well depends on a number of things such as the depth of well, the type of aquifer the well taps (confined or unconfined), the amount of pumping that occurs in the aquifer and the amount of recharge. Wells screened in shallow unconfined aquifers are more directly influenced by the lack of rain than those screened in deeper confined aquifer.

To minimize the potential effects of drought on private wells, residents should be advised to conserve water during extended periods of water use (lawn watering, pool use etc.). In addition, residents should know basic information about their private wells (shallow, deep, confined, unconfined) and be aware if their well is at higher risk of going dry during periods of drought. I.e. A deep well in a confined aquifer in an area of minimal pumping is less likely to go dry than a shallow water table well.

59

Importance of Baseflow

Baseflow is the portion of streamflow that comes from groundwater; also called groundwater discharge. During low water conditions, baseflow is the primary contribution to streamflow; therefore, baseflow is required to maintain the minimum streamflow necessary for economic purposes (i.e. extractions and wastewater assimilation) and to maintain the ecological function of streams. Identifying and sustaining baseflow is important for water resource management and environmental protection.

_________________________ _________________________ Tessa Di Iorio, Sheila Ball, Hydrogeologist Engineering Assistant

60


To: Water Response Team From: Naomi Langlois-Anderson, Senior Fish & Wildlife Technician Josee Brizard, Team Lead, Forest Resources Date: June 10, 2015 Subject: Low Water Effects on Fish and Forestry RECOMMENDATION: That the Water Response Team shares this information with their municipalities, sectors, and groups PURPOSE: To inform the committee about the potential effects of low water on fish and forests. DISCUSSION: a) Fish

When precipitation falls below normal, biological organisms become stressed. Water is critical to all organisms and when it’s abundance and availability are limited, there is more competition for access, it causes overcrowding that impacts predator-prey relations, causes changes to food supplies, and can lead to the depletion of oxygen and other chemical properties on which organisms depend for survival.

The consequences of low water can lead to fish mortalities, reductions in amphibian reproduction, increased potentials for algal blooms and other negative results. As a monitoring agency, we recognize that further data is needed to properly assess the impacts of low water events. Stream bathymetrical data would help identify the locations of critical pool habitat (refugia during droughts), where pools are needed and the volume they offer at specific water levels. Suitable funding opportunities continue to be pursued. b) Forestry

Drought can have short term and long term effects on trees. Short term damage (usually caused by one dry spell) can be characterized by leaf wilting, leaf scorch and some defoliation. Long term damage from drought happens over a number of years and can be shown as stunted growth, die back and possible death of the plant. This is due to the fact that the root system dies off because of lack of moisture in the soil and cannot sustain the large canopy thus creating die back. Pest problems can be another result of drought. Pests will attack drought stressed trees as their immune system is weakened. Risk of forest fire also increases during drought due to the dry leaf matter and woody debris on the forest floor that can be ignited either by human activities or lightning.

_______________________________ _______________________________ Naomi Langlois-Anderson, Josee Brizard, Senior Fish & Wildlife Technician. Team Lead, Forest Resources

61


To: South Nation Conservation’s Water Response Team From: Lisa Van De Ligt, Communications Specialist Date: June 8, 2015 Subject: Current Communications Tools RECOMMENDATION: That the Water Response Team receives and files the Communications Tools report. _ DISCUSSION: SNC will utilize the following public education and outreach tools to inform the public of the Level 1 Low Water Condition and encourage voluntary water conservation:

1. Media release 2. Social media 3. Website 4. SNC digital sign 5. SNC jurisdiction boundary signs – addition of low water signage 6. Memorandum to municipalities to post water conservation messaging on

their website and/or water conservation poster on their community boards Suggestions from the Water Response Team on additional education and outreach tools are welcome. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS/ADHERENCE TO SNC POLICY: Compliance with Budget: Expenses (including staff time) will be recovered from the Ministry of Natural Resources. SNC Policy Adherence: All expenditures will adhere to SNC’s Purchasing Policy. _________________________ Lisa Van De Ligt Communications Specialist

62


To: Water Response Team From: Sandra Mancini, Senior Water Resources Engineer Date: June 10, 2015 Subject: Low Water Response in SNC’s new jurisdiction RECOMMENDATION: That the Water Response Team receives and file this report DISCUSSION: South Nation Conservation has recently expanded its jurisdiction to include all of Alfred and Plantagenet. The extent of SNC’s jurisdiction can be seen below in Figure 1.

Figure 1: South Nation Conservation's Jurisdiction

63

SNC is currently working to acquire data within the new jurisdiction. Site visits will be performed to ensure this area is captured within the analysis of the watershed conditions. In addition, SNC is working with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) to establish other areas outside of our jurisdiction that may be beneficial to include in the SNC’s Water Response Team. _______________________________ Sandra Mancini, Senior Water Resources Engineer

64

1

Marielle Dupuis

From: Charles BraySent: June-04-15 7:39 AMTo: Marielle DupuisSubject: FW: Ombudsman Ontario - Le chien de garde e-bulletin, mai

PTI Charles Bray Directeur des services techniques | Chef du service du bâtiments Director of Technical Services | Chief Building Official From: Ombudsman Ontario [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ombudsman Ontario Sent: May 29, 2015 10:03 AM To: Marc Chenier Subject: Ombudsman Ontario ‐ Le chien de garde e‐bulletin, mai

Images not displaying properly? Add [email protected] to your address book now or Display this email in your browser.

L'Ombudsman préconise une refonte de la culture d'entreprise d'Hydro One et le maintien de sa surveillance

Problèmes flagrants de facturation et de service à la clientèle La compagnie « a perdu de vue qu’elle se doit d’agir dans l’intérêt du public » Le 25 mai, dans son tout dernier rapport intitulé Dans le noir, l’Ombudsman

MAI 2015

L’Ombudsman enquête sur les plaintes du public à propos des

organismes du gouvernement de l’Ontario. Son Bureau surveille plus

de 500 ministères, organismes, tribunaux, conseils, commissions et

sociétés de la Couronne du gouvernement provincial.

PORTEZ PLAINTE EN LIGNE

Ombudsman Ontario Bell Trinity Square

483, rue Bay, 10e étage, Tour Sud, Toronto, ON

M5G 2C9

Téléphone : 1-800-263-1830

2

André Marin a recommandé à Hydro One de procéder à une refonte de sa culture d’entreprise pour se concentrer sur sa clientèle et sur la transparence. Il a appelé le gouvernement à maintenir une surveillance indépendante sur cette compagnie d’électricité.

Lire le rapport Communiqué de presse Faits et points saillants

Mot d'ouverture Regarder la vidéo

Présentant son rapport sur la plus vaste enquête jamais entreprise dans l’histoire de son Bureau – à la suite de plus de 10 500 plaintes – l’Ombudsman a révélé une longue liste de problèmes flagrants de facturation et de service à la clientèle, résultant de la mise en place désastreuse d’un nouveau système d’information clientèle à Hydro One en mai 2013. Selon les estimations de l'Ombudsman, le nombre de clients qui ont souffert des répercussions a largement dépassé les 100 000.

Le rapport de l’Ombudsman montre en détail comment les problèmes nés de la transition vers le nouveau système ont entraîné des perturbations massives de la facturation, entre autres des cas de surfacturation (parfois de milliers ou même de millions de dollars), d’absence de facturation et d’estimations de factures, et un service à la clientèle exécrable durant la course effrénée à la résolution des problèmes techniques. Alors que la crise s’aggravait, certains à Hydro One « ont délibérément occulté la réalité de la situation », écrit M. Marin, « allant même jusqu’à tromper l’organisme de réglementation du secteur de l’électricité, mon Bureau et d’autres intéressés quant à l’étendue et la nature du désastre entourant la facturation et le service à la clientèle de la compagnie ». En savoir plus

Actualités

Hydro One: rapport dévastateur de l'ombudsman (Le Droit) La culture du déni (Le Droit) Hydro One blâmé pour des erreurs de facturation (La Presse

Télécopieur : 416-586-3485 ATS : 1-866-411-4211

Courriel : [email protected]

MANDAT DE L'OMBUDSMAN

PROLONGÉ JUSQU'EN SEPTEMBRE

Le 28 mai, l'Assemblée législative a voté à l'unanimité de prolonger le

mandat de l'Ombudsman de l'Ontario, André Marin, jusqu'au 14

septembre, ou jusqu'à la fin du processus de sélection en

cours. Plus d'info.

LES 25 AVOCATS LES PLUS INFLUENTS AU

CANADA

Pour la troisième année consécutive, l’Ombudsman André Marin figure à la liste des 25 avocats les plus influents,

dressée par le magazine Canadian Lawyer. « M. Marin continue d'aboutir à des résultats, en luttant contre des

problèmes épineux comme les questions de facturation et de service

à la clientèle à Hydro One, ou les directives provinciales en matière de

désescalade des situations conflictuelles pour les forces de

police », dit le site Web du magazine. Le scrutin pour les 25 avocats les

plus influents au Canada est ouvert jusqu’au 9 juin.

Votez pour les 25 plus influents

GARDER L’ŒIL SUR

3

Canadienne)

La surveillance de l'Ombudsman s'étendra bientôt aux municipalités, aux universités et aux conseils scolaires

Le public pourra se plaindre à l'Ombudsman de l'Ontario à propos des conseils scolaires à compter du 1er septembre 2015, et au sujet des municipalités et des universités à partir du 1er janvier 2016, maintenant que les dates d'entrée en vigueur des parties pertinentes de la Loi sur l'Ombudsman, la Loi sur la responsabilisation et la transparence du secteur public et des députés sera promulguées. Adoptée par l'Assemblée législative le 9 décembre 2014, cette Loi – aussi connu sous le nom de « Projet de loi 8 » – élargit la surveillance de l'Ombudsman au secteur appelé « MUSH », et ceci pour la toute

première fois dans les 40 ans d'histoire du Bureau. « Il nous tarde d'exercer sur les municipalités, les universités et les conseils scolaires le même niveau de surveillance que celui que nous appliquons depuis toujours aux organismes provinciaux », a dit l'Ombudsman de l'Ontario, André Marin. Le Bureau de l'Ombudsman a pris contact avec ces secteurs et communiquera plus de détails dans les semaines qui viennent.

NOUVELLES DES ENQUȆTES Directives de l’Ontario à la police sur le désamorçage des conflits : L’Ombudsman achève actuellement son rapport et compte le publier plus tard cette année. Adultes ayant une déficience intellectuelle, en situation de crise : Nous continuons de régler les dossiers individuels et de prendre les plaintes – nous en avons reçu plus de 1 200 jusqu’à présent. L’enquête systémique d'envergure se poursuit et l’Ombudsman compte publier son rapport plus tard en 2015. Quiconque a des renseignements pertinents au sujet de ces enquêtes peut appeler notre Bureau au 1-800-263-1830, déposer une plainte en ligne ou envoyer un courriel à [email protected].

HYDRO

Le 21 mai, l’Ombudsman André Marin et la vérificatrice

générale Bonnie Lysyk ont fait une présentation au Comité permanent

des finances et des affaires économiques, au sujet du Projet de loi 91, Loi de 2015 pour favoriser

l’essor de l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires). L’Ombudsman a plus

précisément parlé de la nécessité de maintenir une surveillance

indépendance sur Hydro One.

Regarder la vidéo

VENEZ TRAVAILLER AVEC NOUS!

Suivez-nous sur LinkedIn pour les offres d’emploi, les nouvelles des

enquêtes, les parutions de rapports et d'autres informations.

NOUS EMBAUCHONS! Jetez un coup d’œil à certains de nos

postes vacants, dont les suivants : enquêteur, agent de règlement

préventif, stagiaire en droit, agent des ressources humaines.

TWITTER EN FRANÇAIS

Restez en connexion avec notre Bureau dans les deux langues officielles! Suivez notre compte

Twitter en français : @Ont_OmbudsmanFR.

André Marin va twitter en français

plus souvent (L'Express)

RESTEZ EN CONTACT

4

L'Ombudsman compte maintenant plus de 3 703 fans sur Facebook et

31 823 sur Twitter ! Restez en contact avec nous grâce aux médias sociaux ou envoyez-nous un mot à

[email protected]

Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario | Bureau de l’Ombudsman de l’Ontario 1-800-263-1830 - Complaints Line | Ligne des plaintes | 1-866-411-4211 - TTY | ATS

Bell Trinity Square, 483 Bay St., 10th Floor, South Tower

Bell Trinity Square 483, rue Bay 10e étage, Tour Sud, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2C9, Canada

If you received this newsletter in French and would like to get it in English, send us an email.


La Conservation de la Nation Sud déclare un état de bas niveau d’eau de niveau 1

Dès le 11 juin 2015, la Conservation de la Nation Sud (CNS) déclare un état de bas niveau d’eau de niveau I pour l’ensemble de sa juridiction. Cet état de sécheresse est déclenché à cause de faibles précipitations. Il existe trois niveaux d’alerte de bas niveaux d’eau. Une alerte de niveau I est la première indication d’éventuels problèmes d’approvisionnement en eau si les tendances des précipitations et des débits des cours d’eau actuelles persistent; elle peut être gérée par la réduction de la consommation d’eau. Une alerte de niveau II indique un problème d’approvisionnement potentiellement grave, géré par la réduction de la consommation d’eau et l’établissement de restrictions sur la consommation non essentielle. Une alerte de niveau III indique que l’approvisionnement ne répond plus à la demande, géré par la réduction de la consommation d’eau, l’établissement de restrictions et la réglementation de la consommation. Le niveau de bas eau est calculé en fonction d’indicateurs de précipitations et de débit. Les jauges des cours d’eau de la CNS indiquent des débits au-dessus d’un état de niveau I. Les faibles précipitations au cours des derniers mois est le facteur principal de l’état de sécheresse actuel. Malgré la pluie pendant la dernière semaine de mai, la précipitation totale pour le mois de mai n’était qu’entre 60 et 70% des données historiques pour les stations climatiques d’Environnement Canada situées à Cornwall, à Ottawa et à Brockville. En outre, la région ne prévoit pas recevoir des précipitations importantes au cours des deux prochaines semaines. Dans le cadre du Programme d’intervention en matière de ressources en eau de l’Ontario, la CNS a formé une équipe d’intervention en eau (Water Response Team – WRT) en collaboration avec certains membres des gouvernements municipaux et provinciaux, le Ministère de l’Environnement et de l’Action en matière de changement climatique, le Ministère des Richesses naturelles et des Forêts, et des groupes d’intérêts spéciaux. Pendant l’état de bas niveau d’eau de niveau I, la CNS demande aux résidents, aux entreprises et aux autres industries situés dans le bassin versant de réduire leur consommation d’eau de 10% afin d’aider à atténuer les impacts de l’état de bas eaux. La consommation d’eau peut être réduite en limitant la consommation non essentielle (e.g. l’arrosage de gazon, le lavage de voitures). Le personnel de la CNS continuera de surveiller les conditions du bassin versant et fournira des mises à jour selon le besoin. Afin d’évaluer la gravité de la situation, les propriétaires fonciers, les entreprises et les autres industries sont priés de communiquer avec la CNS s’ils éprouvent des problèmes inhabituels liés à l’eau. Pour de plus amples renseignements, veuillez contacter Sandra Mancini au 1-877-984-2948, ext. 223.


South Nation Conservation Declares Level I Low Water Condition

As of June 11, 2015, South Nation Conservation (SNC) has issued a level I low water condition encompassing SNC’s entire jurisdiction based on a precipitation triggered drought condition. Of the three levels of low water conditions, a level I indicates that there is the potential of a water supply problem should current precipitation and stream flow trends persist. A level II condition indicates minor supply issues may be apparent and conservation and non-essential restriction is adopted, and a level III condition indicates the failure of the water supply to meet demand. The level of low water condition is calculated based on precipitation and stream flow indicators. The stream gauges within SNC’s jurisdiction are still indicating flows above level I condition. The lack of adequate precipitation in the last few months is the leading factor in the current drought status. Despite quite a bit of rain in the last week of May, the cumulative precipitation is still only between 60-70% of the historical values for month of May analyzed from Environment Canada climate stations in Cornwall, Ottawa, and Brockville. Moreover, within the next two weeks, the region is not expected to receive a significant amount of rain. Under the Ontario Low Water Response Program, SNC has formed a Water Response Team (WRT) in conjunction with members of the municipal and provincial governments, MOECC, MNRF, and special interest groups. The WRT will meet to discuss the severity of the situation and to ensure residents are informed of decisions that are made regarding conservation and restrictions efforts. While in level I status, SNC asks residents, businesses and other industries throughout the watershed to reduce their water consumption by 10% in order to help mitigate the impacts of low water conditions. Water consumption can be reduced by limiting non-essential uses (e.g. lawn watering, car washing). SNC will continue to monitor watershed conditions and will provide updates as required. In order to identify the severity of the situation, landowners, businesses, and industries are encouraged to contact SNC if they are experiencing any unusual water-related problems. Please contact Sandra Mancini at 1-877-984-2948 ext. 223 for more information.

Documents

LA CORPORATION DU VILLAGE DE CASSELMAN THE ......2015/06/23 · General Management / Finance / Clerk’s Office a) Rapports financiers pour les mois de mars et avril 2015 a) Financial