The Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) is under review regarding its operation and the scope of planning matters that can come before the board.
A town hall meeting and workshop on Nov. 1 at the University of Guelph was one of a dozen offered by the province to obtain public feedback on the review.
The five key themes under review include:
– the OMB’s jurisdiction and powers;
– citizen participation and local perspective;
– clear and predictable decision making;
– modern procedures and faster decisions; and
– alternative dispute resolution and fewer hearings.
OMB review process
The OMB is a public body that allows citizens to appeal or defend land use decisions made by a municipality.
The decision made by the OMB is generally final unless the Minister of Municipal Affairs gets involved, according to Drew Price, senior program consultant for the Ministry of the Attorney General.
A public consultation document states, “The Ontario government sees a continuing need for the OMB in Ontario’s land use planning system.”
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and the Ministry of the Attorney General are coordinating the review.
“Land use planning is vital to development of Ontario communities; that’s why our government has been reviewing the province’s land use planning system to ensure that it’s evolving … and to best meet the needs of Ontarians,” said Lou Rinaldi, MPP and parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
“If the OMB wasn’t there … land use planning disputes will go to courts; that won’t make the process any easier or any simpler, [but instead] more complicated and more expensive.”
He explained the government knows the OMB needs to be improved.
“That’s why we’re exploring changes, to make sure the board’s role is appropriate, open and fair,” Rinaldi said.
Jurisdiction and powers
The government is looking to protect matters of public interest for the future – for example clean drinking water.
This means the government could specify:
– which parts of official plan decisions cannot be appealed;
– that decisions made based on new official plans and proposed official plan amendments where municipalities must implement a provincial plan are final; and
– that when the Ministry of Municipal Affairs applies zoning provisions through a Minister’s Zoning Order to protect public interests the minister can make the final decision on requests to amend the zoning.
One workshop group thought limiting appeals on an ad hoc basis after the fact was problematic. They suggested setting out defined limits in advance.
The government is looking to give municipalities a stronger voice. This could include giving local appeal bodies authority to deal with appeals related to site plans, clarifying the OMB can only deal with official plan matters the municipal council considered and requiring that the OMB send any significant new information from a hearing back to the municipality for re-evaluation of the original decision.
The government is also considering moving the OMB away from “de novo” hearings, meaning the case starts out fresh as though no previous decisions were made.
“A change here can either authorize the board to review a decision on a standard of reasonableness or it could overturn the decision made by a municipality only if that decision did not follow local or provincial policies,” explained George Soares, senior planner for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs.
The government has also looked at how to transition to new planning rules. The two schools of thought are:
– use the most current planning documents; or
– use the planning documents that were in place at the time of the application.
Citizen participation
“No matter what happens as a result of this review the government wants to make sure that citizens can stay involved in land use planning and the appeal system,” Price explained.
A few changes have been proposed. One is to increase public education such as creating a new user-friendly website.
Members of one workshop group explained they thought it was important to keep the process transparent from beginning to end.
Another possible change is either expanding the Citizen Liaison Office or creating a new office outside of the OMB, which would allow for more advice distribution.
The government is also looking at funding tools to allow community groups to retain their own planning experts or lawyers.
A workshop group talked about the challenge for community groups to raise enough money to go against a developer at the OMB.
Another group said people shouldn’t fear OMB participation because they don’t have the appropriate funds.
Decision-making
The government is considering increasing the number of OMB adjudicators and is looking to the government to identify necessary skills, qualifications and training.
The government is also looking at bringing back multi-member panels and is asking for public input about how big to make them and which cases they should be used to hear.
Another workshop group acknowledged there are advantages to multi-member panels but it could not come to consensus on when they should be used.
One group also suggested that a plain language summary or explanatory note be offered for difficult-to-understand decisions.
Procedures
The government is considering allowing active adjudication “so that the adjudicators play a more active role in the hearings,” Price said.
Another consideration is setting appropriate timelines for decisions and modernizing OMB procedures and promoting faster decisions.
Alternatives
Another consideration is how to use mediation. Possible recommendations include:
– more actively promoting mediation at the OMB;
– requiring mediation before any hearings;
– keeping the mediator available at all times through the application process so matters don’t reach the OMB; and
– creating timelines that include mediation.
Feedback
Anyone who missed the University of Guelph town hall workshop can find out about other town hall meetings in the GTA and/or submit comments at ontario.ca/ombreview.
