The Sale of Government Lands
Contents |
Introduction
In our 1998 annual report, the ECO reviewed whether the Management Board Secretariat was in compliance with its Statement of Environmental Values (SEV) and with the Environmental Bill of Rights. We found that, contrary to commitments in its SEV, MBS was not meeting minimum requirements for consideration of the environmental significance of its activities and for public participation, particularly in its disposition of the Ontario government’s substantial land holdings.
During the reporting period for this annual report, the ECO has become concerned that the Management Board’s real estate agency, the Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC), has continued to market, rezone, subdivide, and sell government land holdings affecting environmentally significant lands – including lands in the Parkway Belt north of Toronto, the Oak Ridges Moraine, the Markham-Pickering Agricultural Land Preserve and the Rouge Park areas – all without adequate environmental study or public consultation.
1998 ECO Findings
Management Board Secretariat began to restructure and downsize ORC in the mid-1990s, privatizing many of its activities. Since 1995, MBS has also directed ORC to accelerate disposal of government land holdings to increase revenues. At the same time, MBS substantially revised its directives on real estate activities to include principles such as achieving “value for money” by “optimizing the use of the Government’s real property” and “maximizing the return to the Crown when disposing of surplus assets.”
In its 1998 review of MBS, the ECO found that, as a result of these new policy directions and the pressure to increase revenues, ORC had been selling environmentally significant lands without following the requirements of its Class Environmental Assessment under the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) – not carrying out, for example, the environmental studies required for land sales affecting environmentally significant lands.
The ECO also found that, contrary to commitments in its SEV, MBS was not meeting minimum requirements for public participation in its environmental decision-making. The changed MBS directives on real estate, for example, which apply to the entire Ontario Public Service, are environmentally significant policies. But these policies were substantially revised without public consultation on the Environment Registry, as required by the EBR.
ORC had also not been carrying out the extensive public consultation required by its Class Environmental Assessment under the EAA when selling environmentally significant lands. Nor had the agency submitted required annual reports to the Ministry of the Environment.
MBS Response to ECO 1998 Findings
In response to our 1998 annual report, Management Board Secretariat maintained that none of the decisions it made between 1995 and 1998 were environmentally significant, and that it had complied with the requirements of its Class EA. But at the same time, MBS also assured the ECO that it would improve its compliance under the EBR and EAA. For example, ORC quickly prepared and submitted annual reports to MOE under the Class EA for 1996 and 1997. And MBS committed to the following:
- to review and improve current practices related to the environmental assessment of sales of surplus lands.
- to post ORC’s annual Corporate Plan on the Environmental Registry as an information notice to let the public know what proper ties it is planning to sell, including a marketing plan highlighting the proper ties it plans to market actively for sale.
- to post a number of new or revised real estate policies on the Environmental Registry, including the MBS-led development of criteria for determining surplus lands, and the newly revised directive on government real estate, which contains policies all ministries have to follow.
- to ensure that specific commitments and responsibilities under the EBR and the EAA are reflected in the Memorandum of Understanding and Realty Service Agreement between MBS and ORC.
1999/2000 ECO Findings
During this reporting period, MBS took some of the corrective actions it promised the ECO, but its compliance with the Environmental Assessment Act and the Environmental Bill of Rights further deteriorated in many ways (see pages 123 and 126). Some of the MBS commitments to the ECO were prominently featured in ORC’s 1999/2000 Corporate Plan and in the 1999/2000 Realty Services Management Agreement between MBS and ORC. Unfortunately, none of these commitments were actually carried out in 1999/2000.
For example, one of the commitments was to include ORC’s annual reports on environmental activities in its corporate annual reports to MBS and the Ontario Legislature, and to make them available to the public. ORC’s annual reports are an essential tool for accountability, and will be even more important in the future, since the government passed legislation in 1999 making ORC more independent of MBS. However, as of March 31, 2000, the latest ORC environmental annual report covered 1997, and the latest publicly available corporate annual report covered 1996/97.
The ECO concluded at the end of this reporting period that most of the problems identified in our 1998 annual report continued through 1999/2000. MBS has continued to direct ORC to meet ever increasing annual revenue targets, and has changed the agency’s mandate to focus almost exclusively on selling lands. These policy directions from MBS are the root of the problem, causing ORC to pursue that mandate at the expense of environmental policies and legislation. Further evidence is seen in MBS’s business plans, which show that in the past few years, the sole criterion MBS has used to evaluate ORC performance is its achievement of sales revenue targets.
Municipalities, conservation authorities, the public, conservation groups and even other government ministries, such as Municipal Affairs and Housing and Natural Resources, have expressed concerns about ORC’s activities regarding particular land sales. In some cases ORC has sold portions of land parcels to municipalities or conservation authorities for protection, but divided up and sold the rest of the land to developers. In many cases ORC, sometimes in conjunction with development “partners,” has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board to over turn municipalities’ decisions to restrict development.
Conclusion
While our reviews found that ORC routinely carries out environmental site assessments for soil contamination, these site assessments are not equivalent to the comprehensive environmental study reports required by the Class EA for sales affecting environmentally significant lands. And although ORC usually consults with municipalities, conservation authorities and the Ministry of Natural Resources on proposed land sales, it does not consult as broadly as required by the Class EA, nor does it give the public and interested par ties notice that they are able to request further studies and consultation.
New ORC procedures for real estate sales, dating from January 2000, were not posted on the Environmental Registry for public comment. While the procedures refer to the requirement for “complete documentation” required by the Class EA, the necessary time to do the public consultation or environmental studies does not appear to be built into the procedures. MOE extended the MBS/ORC Class EA to June 2001, while the Class EA is being rewritten. Until a new Class EA is approved by MOE, existing rules remain in force. The ECO will continue to monitor implementation of the current rules and development of the new Class EA.
MBS informed the ECO that ORC’s in-house Environmental Services Unit will periodically audit marketing files for the Class EA activities. But after repeated warnings to MBS and MOE that the ECO has identified problems with ORC compliance, the ECO is skeptical that an in-house unit can ensure ORC compliance. Indeed, our reviews support the need for independent auditing and review of ORC compliance with the Class EA.
The ECO’s review over two years has found broad disregard of environmental legislation by ORC and MBS. The ECO continues to urge MBS, MOE and ORC to address these EBR and EAA compliance issues.
| Recommendation 8:
The ECO recommends that MBS, MOE and ORC review and revise the current practices relating to sales of government lands, and bring them into compliance with EBR and EAA requirements, especially with respect to completing environmental study reports, carrying out adequate public consultation, and publishing annual reports on environmental activities. |
| This is an article from the 1999/2000 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2000. "The Sale of Government Lands." Changing Perspectives, ECO Annual Report, 1999-2000. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 56-59.
