 |
|
Works & Emergency
Services
"SWM-MEP"
Government Agency Meeting
January 5, 1999
Metro Hall, Room 303
9:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Draft
Meeting Notes/Issues List
Attendance:
| Mary Ellen Warren |
Ministry of Energy,
Science & Technology |
| Peter Mancini |
Ministry of Energy,
Science & Technology |
| Dave Staseff |
MOE, Approvals |
| Dave Smith |
MOE, Approvals |
| Ray Valaitis |
Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Affairs |
| Chris Tschirhart |
Ministry of Natural
Resources, Aurora |
| John Malczak |
MNDM, Corporate Policy
Secretariat |
| Somei Quan |
Ministry of Municipal
Affairs |
| Dan Ionescu |
MOE, Waste Management
Branch |
| Richard Butts |
City of Toronto |
| Pat Scanga |
City of Toronto |
| Nancy Martins |
City of Toronto |
| Mae Lee |
City of Toronto |
| Lawson Oates, Project
Manager |
City of Toronto |
| Andy Pollock |
City of Toronto |
| Tracey Ehl Harrison |
City of Toronto |
| Erin Mahoney |
Proctor & Redfern |
| Michael Pratt |
Proctor & Redfern |
Meeting Format
Presentations were given outlining
the project background, key contents of the draft planning document,
and the consultation and communications program. After the presentations,
a question and answer session took place where a number of concerns
were raised by Ministry representatives.
Process-Related
Comments
- The document
that has been presented is a draft. When will it be finalized
and how? Will it go back to Council? Will the public have a say
and be able to suggest changes to the plan?
- Does this process detail compliance
requirements with provincial policies, or will it be left to the
proponent to see if the site complies with provincial policies?
This should be part of the primary package that proponents submit.
MNR is willing to participate in this process. This is outside
Torontos geographic working area and MNR can prevent Toronto
from being surprised with the proponents performance at a later
date.
- Is there any direction being given
to proponents to contact relevant provincial ministries regarding
compliance with their policies?
- Would Toronto consider one company
taking 100% of the waste (after diversion) for the 20 year period?
- Who will be conducting the contract
negotiations?
- Toronto needs a contingency plan
to deal with the instance that the final results are not acceptable
to City Council.
- If there is a new greenfield site
proposed which has to go through an individual Environmental Assessment
process, the timelines will not be met.
- What is the purpose of the 2002-2007
window? It may be safer to increase the timeline for interim capacity.
- Agencies suggested that they would
refer specific project-related questions from the public to the
City of Toronto and Proctor & Redfern.
REOI/RFP
Criteria Comments
- Has there
been any resistance to the Ontario based benefits criteria?
- How many responses to the request
for Expressions of Interest (EOI) are expected?
- Can one EOI response include multiple
sites?
- Who will provide the greenhouse
gas emissions measurement figures?
- What information will decide the
pass or fail of a proponent?
Consultation-Related
Comments
- What is
the next point at which the government review agencies and public
will be invited to comment?
- The City should communicate directly
with the agency staff involved, as well as through the formal
communications channels.
- Farm organizations should be informed
of project happenings.
- Other relevant ministries should
be informed of this project and invited to participate.
Diversion-Related
Comments
- What is
meant by diversion?
Partnership-Related
Comments
- What is
the range of involvement/partnership that the City will consider?
Other
Comments
- It was
suggested that the City meet with the MNR District Planners who
meet once every 6 months.
|
|
