Bala Falls

The On-going Saga

March 2011

The Muskoka Ratepayers' Association has not taken a position on whether the proposed hydro power plant should be built or not, believing that it was largely in the hands of the provincial government. What we have sought is clarity of the process, and opportunity for all sides to be heard. There has been very considerable comment on the project, and much time has been devoted to delegations by the public at the Township and District Councils. We have all been waiting on the Ontario government (through the MOE) to make a decision on the Environmental Screen Report that Swift River (SREL - the developer) has prepared, and we have written to ministry officials to ensure the decision is made expeditiously so that the next steps can unfold.

The primary decisions to be made are:

  1. Should the project go ahead or not?
  2. If so, should it be developed on Crown Land only (Option 1)?; or
  3. Should it be developed using some land owned by the District and the Township (Option 2) with its associated benefits or deficiencies?

Obviously if there is to be no power plant, the situation for many can go back to normal, victory can be declared, and the cleanup can be left to the lawyers for all parties.

This past week, the MOE did announce its decision regarding the Environmental Screen Report (ESR), and that after extensive review, they find that "an individual EA (Environmental Assessment) is NOT required". The MOE response is about 20 pages in length, and may be viewed by following this link. Bala Falls - MOE Decision - March 25 2011

The response provides for a 15 day appeal period, and it is likely that one or more groups will appeal.

The MOE decision states that the decision on Option 1 or Option 2 is up to the Township and District, and that the option chosen does not affect the decision to deny the elevation request. Note that SREL has stated that they are prepared to proceed with Option 1 if the District land is not available to them.

We will be closely monitoring the situation, and will keep you informed with any appeals or decisions.

April 12, 2011 Update

Muskoka Lakes Council has decided to appeal the decision of the Ministry of the Environment regarding Bala Falls, and request an “Individual Environmental Assessment”.

May 2011 Update

  • The District has now taken steps to initiate the transfer the land required for “Option 2” from District ownership to Township ownership.
  • Swift River has challenged that land transfer, as well as Mayor Murphy's impartiality in the matter of Bala Falls.
  • The Save the Bala Falls citizens' group presented Township Council with a cheque for $10,000 on May 16th, but Council did not accept the money.
  • Delegations for and against the Bala Falls project continue at both Township and District Councils.

June 2011 Updates

Township Council is now looking at designating a number of properties in Bala as “Heritage Sites”. This could present the developer with additional challenges.

Council also backed a plan to meet with the Ontario Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing about “the effect that the Green Energy Act has on local municipal planning authority”, and the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

At Council this week (June 27), Swift River made a formal request to the Township to lease a small piece of land (recently transferred from the District) to facilitate the so-called “Options 2” development of the Bala Falls proposal. Council indicated that the request was “premature” and would require further study.

Summer 2011 Updates

Events surrounding Bala Falls continued during the summer months. Some of the more notable include:

  • Swift River confirmed that it would not make use of the Margaret Burgess Park lands in the construction of Option 2
  • The Ministry of Natural Resources denied the Township‘s request to transfer 2 parcels of Crown (Ontario) land to the Township
  • The Township stated that it would not consider Swift River‘s request to lease land until the project‘s potential impact on the local community and environment is resolved to the Township‘s liking
  • Swift River responded to 156 questions that had been posed by various community groups and individuals - read their response here ... ; supporting documentation can be found on their web site - see link at top right
  • The Ontario Government made it more difficult for any future government to cancel green energy contracts (ref The Globe and Mail - August 2, 2011)
  • The Township issued a press release indicating their disappointment with Swift River‘s “unwilling(ness) to work with the Township ... ” read the release here ... they also asked for public input on the Swift River responses to the 156 questions (by August 31); see the Township web site at the top right for more information
  • For information on the opposition to the proposed hydro-electric station at Bala Falls, please see the web site at the top right.
  • In the August 17th edition of the Bracebridge Examiner, the Township announced its intention to designate 6 sites (including 2 pieces of crown / provincial land) around Bala Falls as “Heritage Sites”, thereby impeding the ability to develop the plant;
  • Council approached the Ministry of Natural Resources to transfer the two parcels of crown land to the Township, but the MNR refused

Fall 2011 Updates

Since the summer update (above) an number of other events have unfolded, including:

  • On August 29th, Township Council heard from 9 delegations regarding the Bala Falls Hydro proposal (by our count, this brings the number of delegations related to this matter to 37 so far this year); 4 of the delegates urged Council to prevent any development at the falls, and 5 delegates urged Council to seek the best option for Bala and the Township should the province decide to move forward with the plant. The so-called “Option 2” plan is generally viewed as the better plan, but requires leasing a small piece of Township land; The “Option 1” plan can be developed on Crown (provincial) land only, but is viewed by most people as less desirable. The 5 delegates urged Council to develop a plan that would be best for Muskoka should the plant go ahead.
  • One of the delegates asked to know how much the Township had spent so far on the Bala Falls situation. In a report to the Committee of the Whole on November 1, 2011, the Townshp Treasurer stated that approximately $71,000 had been spent on legal and consulting s ervices (that of course does not include any costs for Council or staff, nor the time spent in Council or similar meetings).
  • October 6 - Provincial election; Liberals elected to minority government; Minister of the Environment defeated and replaced in new Cabinet
  • On October 17, Swift River wrote an Open Letter to the Bala Community stating that they were abandoning their plans to develop the “Option 2” plan and moving ahead with the “Option 1” plan that did not require any Township land; SREL needs to file an “amendment” with the appropriate authorities.
  • Since that time, little has been heard.

That‘s it to November 18th - keep tuned.

Last Updated: November 18, 2011