A tough decision gets tougher

A tough decision gets tougher

By Nicole O’Reilly ENVIRONMENT REPORTER

Friday April 25, 2008

WOODSTOCK - The Upper Thames River Conservation Authority sought legal opinion that may make it difficult for its board to say no to the Sally Creek Golf and Country Club’s proposal to build on its lands.

The chairman of the board is adamant board members follow the conservation authority’s mandate and disregard the advice.

Authority staff asked its lawyer to examine the management agreement signed between the City of Woodstock and the authority in 1981. The agreement outlines the conditions the lands sale from the city to the UTRCA in 1978.

The lawyer presented the findings in-camera at the board’s March meeting. Debate surrounded a section of the agreement that allows the "development of lands for public, park and recreational purposes."

"The legal opinion matches what the city said, that a golf course is identified under the definition of outdoor recreation," said Ian Wilcox, UTRCA general manager.

Without divulging what was actually said in-camera, Wilcox said the board could still decide the construction of the bottom nine holes of the golf course violates its mandate.

"This means the board needs to have a valid reason to say no," Wilcox said.

Peter Huitema, chair of the UTRCA board, said he believes the wording of the agreement is vague and should not affect the board’s decision.

"I’ve instructed the board not to let anything pertaining to that to influence their decision," Huitema said.

While the agreement may not explicitly eliminate golf courses as public recreation, it also does not include them, he said. The word "public" is also cause for concern because a golf course, owned by a private company, charges entry.

"Always at the end of everything is the fact that the board has the final say," Huitema said.

The mandate of the conservation authorities in Ontario, defined in section 20 of the Provincial Conservation Authorities Act, "to establish and undertake, in the area in which it has jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration and management of natural resources."

Violation of this act is paramount to the argument of citizens and community organizations such as the Friends of Pittock and Green Earth, who have argued for the preservation of natural green space.

"It’s still fee for service," said Bob Clark, longtime Friends of Pittock member. "That’s not public."

"It doesn’t say anything in there about golf courses," said treasurer Peggy Clark. "This is our land, paid for by tax dollars."

The Friends of Pittock, who were one of seven delegations to present at the UTRCA public meeting at Goff Hall April 22, believe the agreement does not and should not hold much weight because it was signed three years after the sale took place.

Their petition to stop the development of the area and to protect its trees and wildlife, garnered almost 2,200 signatures - with at least a handful added during the packed public meeting.

"Listen to the majority of the opinion of the people," said Bill Bes, Friends of Pittock chair. "We live in a democracy."