Feature article November 25, 2004
LAND O' LAKES NewsWeb HomeContact Us
FEP proposal touches nerves on all sides
by Jeff Green
It started off as a simple request by the Frontenac Environmental Partnership, an environmental group devoted to Lake Ecology. They have developed an online service that allows member lake associations to compile and share information about their lakes, from spawning beds to water levels and bird sightings. through an affiliation with CGIS, a company based in Perth that developed maps for Central Frontenac as part of its 911 project.
The Eagle Lake, Sharbot Lake, Kennebec Lake, Bobs and Crow Lake, Big Clear Lake, and Elbow Lake property owners Associations are among the FEP member Associations in Central Frontenac.
Back in June the FEP asked Council to approve the use of this information for the online service that it has developed for its membership, which includes most of the larger cottage associations within the township. Since the service is interactive, it has the potential of saving time and money as lake associations undertake lake plans. Individual volunteers can add various pieces of information to the database as they collect it.
This summer, both North and South Frontenac entered into agreements with the FEP, and the service has come on stream in both of those townships. In Central Frontenac, the process has been complicated by a concern the township has had over the use of one part of the electronic data, the parcel mapping boundaries of each specific lot within the township. The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) provided this information to the township for use in its electronic mapping process. However, the prospect of sharing that information with an outside group has proved problematic for the township.
Earlier this fall, the township contacted MPAC and asked if the information could be shared, and MPAC said no. The FEP then proposed to become a contractor of the township, noting that contractors were allowed access to the information, in accordance with MPACs agreement with the township.
At a Council meeting on November 23, Glenn Jackson of the FEP appeared. As well, Chris Matheson, the Information Technologist for the township, prepared a report to Council in which he recommended that Council deny the FEP proposal.
In his explanation, Matheson wrote Staff feel there is excellent infrastructure to support water quality monitoring put in place by the Province. Staff also feel that the current partnership proposal would not take advantage of this infrastructure. It is recommended that the FEP make further contact with provincial agencies involved in water quality monitoring (the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of the Environment, Quinte Conservation, Rideau Valley Conservation, and Mississippi Valley Conservation)
Glenn Jackson made reference to Mathesons report in his address to Council and disputed the claim that this would work. I am in frequent contact with Conservation Authorities and other partners and they see a need for volunteer organizations and support our initiative, he said.
I think the lake associations we represent would be very frustrated with the content of the staff report. My interpretation of the report is that all is under control in the area of water quality monitoring of our lakes. If I had been aware of the report earlier than yesterday, when I arrived home from work at 4:30, I could have obtained documentation from the Conservation Authorities supporting our initiatives, Jackson added.
Council then debated a motion to deny the request from the FEP for the use of township mapping information.
Councillor Smith was the first to express the main argument in support of the motion.
I dont think there is a question as to the value of he project. I think the main sticking point is the legalities of sharing information. But for us to share information that weve been told we cant share, I dont see how we can do it.
Glenn Jackson then said, The way around it is for FEP to become a contractor. It allows you to get around this.
Councillor Logan Murray said he had heard that MPAC had been taken to court on this issue and had lost several cases, so it might not be illegal to share the information.
I think MPAC has bigger fish to fry, I cant see them suing Central Fronenac over this, said Councillor Gutowski.
Councillor Bill Guigue then said I think we should check with our lawyer before deciding this.
Clerk Administrator Heather Fox then said, Council decided not to check with our lawyer because that would cost money.
Attempting to resolve what was turning into a divisive debate, Francis Smith said Can I propose what I hope is a friendly amendment, that we accept an agreement with the FEP, but exclude the parcel mapping until such time as we find out whether we can legally share the parcel mapping.
It was pointed out that switching from rejecting to accepting could not be considered a friendly amendment, and the debate carried on.
Councillor Gutowski asked Heather Fox if the township has shared parcel mapping data with contractors.
Heather Fox said the township planner had used the information, as had an engineering contractor.
Glenn Jackson then asked Heather Fox if MPAC had responded to a question about the township entering into a contract with the FEP.
Yes, she said, They said it was a back door way of doing things.
Councillor Gutowski asked again about which contractors had access to the information.
Heather Fox then left the meeting and Cathy MacMunn, of the township planning office, replaced her at the table.
In a recorded vote, the motion to deny the request from the Frontenac Environmental Partnership to enter into an information sharing agreement with the Township of Central Frontenac was passed 5 votes versus 4. Voting for the motion were Councillors Snyder, Smith, Guigue, Harvey and Mayor MacDonald, and voting against were Councillors Murray, Gutowski, Nicolson, and Deputy Mayor Putnam.
It was now the turn of the six members of the FEP who were in the audience to leave the meeting, mumbling to themselves.
Contacted later by the News, Art Dunham of the Frontenac Environmental Partnership said he was surprised at the resistance in Central Frontenac. He pointed out the Town of Perth, among other jurisdictions, posts the kind of data the Central Frontenac refused to share on its public website, so I dont know what Central Frontenac Council is afraid of, he said. He also disputed the claim that water quality is being monitored by anyone. Conservation Authorities monitor water once every five years. A system that encourages volunteers to report on water quality is in everyones interest, and thats what we are providing in South and North Frontenac.
He said he is still hoping that sometime soon a member of Council will propose that the township mapping be shared, excluding the disputed parcel mapping and that the Council will also look more fully at the legality of sharing the parcel mapping.
