The judicial review of the White Pines cultural heritage process, brought by Liz Driver and Edwin Rowse against wpd Canada and Ontario, will take place on Thursday and Friday, April 6–7, at Osgoode Hall, in Toronto. The hearing begins at 10 am each day.
It will be important to show the court that the community cares about the project’s visual impacts and construction vibrations on the County’s cultural heritage.
Osgoode Hall is at the northeast corner of Queen and University. There is Green P parking underground next door at City Hall or parking across the street under the Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts. Osgoode Subway Station is at the intersection.
Simcoe-Grey MPP Jim Wilson demands to know why wind power developers get a remedy hearing on endangered bats when harm has been proven. Minister Murray replied he would have to resign if he intervenes in the independence of the Environmental Tribunal process but it is the Green Energy Act that allows wind projects to be approved. Under the Green Energy Act the Minister has authority to intervene. The Minister to resign over the harm caused by wind projects? What an interesting idea!
Wednesday, March 1, 2017
Turbine Hearing Concludes
yet more submissions in long-running case
A hearing to do with a wind turbine proposal near Stayner took one day instead of three.
The Environmental Review Tribunal allowed WPD Canada to have a Remedy Hearing to present ways to reduce harm to natural heritage, mainly the Little Brown Bat.
The hearing, held in Collingwood council chambers, was originally to start on Monday, but that day was cancelled because a witness was unavailable. The hearing, on Tuesday, heard from three witnesses.
Dr. Scott Reynolds, presenting for WPD Canada, via Skype, says they would slow down the turbine speed when bats are in the air in an effort to decrease the number of bat deaths.
The second witness, Susan Holroyd, a wildlife biologist specializing in bats, appeared by Skype, on the appellant, Preserve Clearview’s side.
The third and last witness was Ecologist Sarah Mainguy, also for the opponent’s side. She told the hearing there are huge uncertainties in this application such as the number of bats and their exact route in the areas of the turbines. She added that the mitigation suggestions from WPD Canada are not good enough.
Witnesses and lawyers could not comment on the hearing proceedings, but Chuck Magwood of Preserve Clearview, was in the audience. He says he agrees with their witnesses that one dead Little Brown Bat, which is an endangered species, is too many.
WPD has until March 31st to make written submissions, the opponents have four weeks to reply and then another two weeks for WPD to rebut the reply, taking the latest round in the turbine discussions to May 12th.
Magwood says he expects a decision by the Environmental Review Tribunal in June.
The final oral submissions of the APPEC/Hirsch Environmental Review Tribunal ERT will be heard in the County. We encourage all to attend. Filling the hearing room to capacity for these final submissions will show the Tribunal that PEC cares.
The next major event of the White Pines ERT is Friday, January 27, 2017 when the ERT will convene in Prince Edward County to hear closing arguments. This will be our LAST opportunity to present our case to the Tribunal before it adjourns to make a final decision on the White Pines wind project.
This is also the last and ONLY day in over a year that the Tribunal has deemed to hold a public hearing, with the past ten months of this ERT taking place entirely behind closed doors. This is your opportunity to let the Tribunal know that County residents did not appreciate being left out of the appeal process. In order to make that point – and to make clear where you stand on the White Pines wind project – you will need to be there!
The hearing will be held as follows:
Date: January 27, 2017 Time: 10:00 a.m. Location: Wellington and District Community Centre, Highline Hall, 111 Belleville Street, Wellington.
On January 19, 2017 Shaun and Trish Drennan will continue to pursue the Constitutional Challenge against the Green Energy Act. Self represented this time- they will be bringing before the Ontario Superior Court a revised statement of claim seeking remedy found in the protections guaranteed in Canada’s constitution. Most importantly the action’s goal is to actively use the law to grant relief and prevention of harm from wind powered complexes.
WHAT: Constitutional Challenge WHEN: January 19, 2017 10 am
WHERE: Goderich Court House (Ontario Superior Court-Divisional)
Unite The Fight
In 2014 four families (Dixon, Ryan, Drennan, Koplein) acted as the appellants leading the novel case. Falconers LLP acted on behalf of the families. The Court’s decision failed to move the contested issues towards the desired resolution. Documents from the hearing can be reviewed at: http://www.falconers.ca/casestudy/wind-turbines-drennan/
The renewable energy approvals for K2 Wind, Amrow Wind and St.Columban Wind remain in the sights and cross hairs of law and legal argument. If the action succeeds it will impact statutory authorities enabling wind power.
Mothers Against Wind Turbinesjoined forces with other community- based interest groups that formed the Community Coalition (14 groups in total) which was accepted as interveners in the original hearing in 2014. (Lambton County was accepted as an independent intervener)
Please show your support to Shaun and Trish. Your seats in the seats would be appreciated.
Wpd will be given an opportunity to provide remedial action after a tribunal ruled wind turbines to be located near two aerodromes in Clearview Township threaten the health and safety of pilots, and little brown bats.
The Environmental Review Tribunal heard from parties during conference calls in December on procedural issues regarding the form and scheduling of the remainder of the hearing. It was determined the remedy phase of the hearing to be held in Collingwood from Feb. 27 to March 1.
The decision is in response to a request by wpd Fairview Wind Incorporated to submit evidence and make submissions on appropriate remedies to address the Tribunal’s Oct. 7 finding that engaging in the project in question in accordance with the impugned renewable energy approval will cause serious and irreversible harm to animal life, plant life or the natural environment. None of the parties has requested an opportunity to produce evidence or make submissions on the Tribunal’s finding of serious harm to human health.
As one of the appellants, the Township of Clearview will play a peripheral role in the upcoming remedy hearing, the extent of which has yet to be determined, said township solicitor Harold Elston.
Why wpd would want to address the former while accepting the latter, Elston said, “that’s The $64,000 Question”. He said there is some speculation that it could affect some other project where bats are a factor.
While WPD Canada has been granted a remedy hearing to present how the company plans to mitigate its eight-turbine Fairview Wind project from affecting the local population of the little brown bat, opponents to the project still hope the Environmental Review Tribunal will revoke the project’s renewable energy application.
The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change approved the REA for Fairview Wind last March, a decision that was immediately challenged by John Wiggins, Kevin and Gayle Elwood, and the residents’ group Preserve Clearview. They were joined by Collingwood, Clearview Township, and the County of Simcoe, which were concerned about the project’s proximity to the Collingwood Regional Airport.
In October, the ERT ruled Fairview Wind would cause harm to both human health and the environment.
The company asked for the remedy hearing to address the bat issue, while counsel for the opposition told the ERT it’s a moot point given the ERT’s decision regarding human health.
A remedy hearing has been scheduled for late February.
One of the skills acquired in fighting wind turbines is how to obtain and extract information held by the Ontario government using Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. Information that should be freely accessible without obstruction but is not. Knowledge is power and who controls the data controls the known story.
Details of wind projects, bird and bat kills by wind turbines, negative impacts to environment, and even how many people have filed complaints about adverse health effects are within the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change’s jurisdiction. Information and data held, protected and only released reluctantly in bits and pieces with persistent repeated requests. The process is convoluted, bureaucratic and most importantly time consuming. The time involved enables strict time lines applied in appeal hearings at the Environmental Tribunal Review. The government has an expected service response time of 30 days and if not met the delay must be given with a justified explanation. That is not what has happened.
“…auditors concluded dates “were systematically adjusted by staff” in the FOI office to show completion of requests within the 30-day requirement period.”
A recent audit shows the MOECC failed in its duties and has been changing the dates of FOI requests. The government has lied by falsifying the dates. MOECC has now been caught begging the question what else has also been falsified?
In mid-November the Tribunal issued its decisions on our motions. While some were unsuccessful, overall we were encouraged by the results and with two decisions in particular. We are very pleased that the Tribunal has ordered Dr. Reynolds, WPD’s expert on bats, to return for further cross-examination. The Tribunal is also permitting APPEC to produce documents through a qualified expert witness on the government’s recent policy reversal on renewable energy.
We are fortunate in having Tom Adams as our qualified expert witness. Mr. Adams has worked for several environmental organizations and has served on the Ontario Independent Electricity Market Operator Board of Directors. As an energy and environmental advisor and researcher he has given expert testimony before many legislative committees and regulatory tribunals in Canada. Among other things Mr. Adams will testify that Ontario currently has a significant oversupply of energy (more than 10 years’ worth) and that there is…
Mayor Higgins of North Frontenac has petitioned in Ontario court to be an intervenor in the Judicial Review (JR) application filed by CCSAGE Naturally Green (over the approval granted for the White Pines project in Prince Edward County). Green Energy Act removes Municipal government’s authorities over the placement and operations of renewable energy projects. Renewable Energy projects and installation of wind turbines have devastated rural communities in a manner that urban areas are not subject to.
The purpose of the JR is to ask Ontario Superior Court questions of law about the burden imposed, processes followed, biases and Constitutionality surrounding the Green Energy Act (GEA). The GEA is the legislation that creates Renewable Energy Approvals required to authorize wind projects. GEA: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/09g12
“The JR has the potential to help protect all rural Ontario from the continued onslaught of these industrial machines.If you are an organization, coalition or individual anywhere in Ontario who has suffered as a result of actual or threatened installation of turbine projects, you may be able to assist in one of two ways. One, by applying to the Court for status as an Intervenor for which a lawyer is required for those incorporated, and, two, by providing us with an affidavit containing information not otherwise already dealt with”.
TORONTO – Ontario’s Liberal government denies Opposition charges that it interfered with the witness list for a hearing into a plan to install at least six, 152-metre-high wind turbines near the Collingwood airport.
Progressive Conservative house leader Jim Wilson says the province decided at the last minute to call a witness from NAVCanada instead of an expert from Transport Canada at an Environmental Review Tribunal hearing.
NAVCanada is a private corporation that owns and operates the country’s civil air navigation service, while Transport Canada is the federal government department responsible for transportation policies and programs.
Wilson says the witnesses were changed because Transport Canada has concerns about putting industrial wind turbines between the Collingwood Regional Airport and the Stayner aerodrome.
He says the Ontario government refuses to acknowledge that putting giant turbines so close to the small airports pose a hazard to aircraft operations.
But Environment Minister Glen Murray says it would be against the law for him to play any role in determining witnesses or influencing the environmental tribunal.