- with readers working within the Technology and Construction & Engineering industries
- within Tax topic(s)
- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Inhouse Counsel
Ontario’s omnibus budget legislation, Bill 97, the Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures) (“Bill 97”), received Royal Assent on April 24, 2026,1 which introduces significant changes to the Conservation Authorities Act (the “CA Act”).2 Bill 97’s amendments continue Ontario’s multi-year effort to restructure conservation authority (“CA”) governance. The Province’s stated plan is to create greater consistency, less administrative duplication, and more streamlined planning and permitting processes.
As discussed in our prior bulletins, these reforms did not begin with Bill 97. They build on earlier legislative and regulatory changes discussed in our prior bulletins, including amendments narrowing conservation authorities’ roles in land use planning, the standardization of permitting under O. Reg. 41/24, and the Province’s announcement in late 2025 of its intention to significantly consolidate Ontario’s conservation authority framework.3 Bill 97 serves as the principal legislative vehicle implementing the previously announced consolidation strategy.
Key Changes Under Bill 97
1. Statutory Framework for Conservation Authority Amalgamation
Bill 97 establishes the statutory framework to consolidate Ontario’s conservation authorities by adding Part I.1 to the CA Act to transition the amalgamation of 36 existing conservation authorities into 9 new authorities on the “transition date,” defined as February 1, 2027, or a later prescribed date.4 Bill 97 also continues the Lakehead Region Conservation Authority under the new name “Northwestern Ontario Regional Conservation Authority.”5
Until the transition date, the legislation restricts:
- creation of new conservation authorities;
- enlargement of existing authority boundaries;
- amalgamations outside the Bill 97 process; and
- dissolution of existing authorities.
These restrictions reinforce the Province’s intention to manage restructuring through a single centralized transition process under the CA Act.6
2. Transition Committees, Ministerial Oversight and Binding Directions
Bill 97 establishes a structured transition process and assigns the Ontario Provincial Conservation Agency (“Agency” or “OPCA”) the obligation to establish a transition committee for each new conservation authority. Each transition committee is responsible for developing a transition plan, which may be shaped by Agency directions.7
The Minister of Environment, Conservation and Parks (the “Minister”) has broad transition powers to ensure conservation authority restructuring proceeds smoothly. During the transition period, the Minister may issue binding directions to an authority to support the move to a regional watershed-based framework. These directions may restrict certain authority decisions, require notice of decisions, require specified levy-related notices, and govern budgetary or apportionment matters.
Any such Ministerial direction overrides conflicting provisions of the CA Act or its regulations and can make a contrary decision by an authority of no force or effect.8
3. Watershed Councils and Mechanisms for Local Input
Bill 97 requires conservation authorities to establish one or more watershed councils. These councils are intended to identify local priorities for authority programs and services and ensure local interests are considered in authority decision-making. However, the Province may regulate council composition, powers, duties, and procedures.9
4. Labour, Contractual, and Operational Continuity Protections
Bill 97 includes extensive continuity and anti‑disruption provisions to ensure operational stability throughout the transition and deems that the amalgamation does not constitute a breach, default, force majeure event, termination, or frustration under existing agreements.
The new authorities assume all rights, obligations, assets, liabilities and employees of their predecessor authorities. Undecided permit applications, hearings, reviews, appeals, civil actions and prosecution proceedings under the Provincial Offences Act continue in the name of the new conservation authority, substituting the new authority for the predecessor authority. Because Bill 97 does not expressly provide that pending matters are to be decided under the pre-transition legislative framework, those matters would generally proceed under the legislation and regulations in force at the relevant time of the underlying event, subject to any specific transitional rule.10
Policy Direction: Efficiency, Consistency and Centralization
Bill 97 advances the Province’s stated objective of improving service delivery while reducing administrative duplication. While Bill 97 establishes the structural framework for consolidation, forthcoming regulations and implementation decisions will determine much of the practical design, governance, and operation of the new conservation authorities.
Project proponents may ultimately benefit from a more harmonized and predictable regulatory framework. As consolidating authorities into fewer regional bodies may support greater consistency across jurisdictions, more predictable permitting and approval processes, shared technical expertise and digital systems, and reduced duplication in administrative and regulatory review functions. However, in the near term, transition periods may introduce uncertainty related to jurisdictional authority, file transfers, and review timelines. In addition, it remains to be determined whether larger regional authorities can maintain the same level of responsiveness as their smaller predecessors.
Ontario’s watersheds vary significantly in geography, hydrology, and development pressure, which makes uniform application of province-wide standards complex (see our bulletin here).11 Achieving greater province‑wide consistency while preserving local expertise and responsiveness will be a central implementation challenge for the CAs and the Minister.
Looking Forward
Bill 97’s immediate significance lies less in day‑one operational changes than in the statutory framework it establishes for long‑term restructuring of the CA regime and the transition planning in the interim. It is important for proponents and landowners to understand the implications of these changes not only to future land use planning, but also existing rights and permits.
Municipalities should closely monitor how upcoming regulations and transition plans address board representation and appointment mechanisms, levy allocation and funding responsibilities, the governance and influence of watershed councils, continuity of services during the transition. and the interaction between municipal land‑use planning functions and the restructured conservation authorities.
Ontario continues to pursue a conservation authority model centred on efficiency, consistency, and centralized coordination. Whether these objectives can be achieved while maintaining local accountability and watershed‑specific expertise will determine the long‑term success of the reforms.
Footnotes
1 Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2026, SO 2026, c 2 (Royal Assent 24 April 2026) [Plan to Protect Ontario Act].
2 Conservation Authorities Act, RSO 1990, c. C.27 [CA Act].
3 McMillan LLP, “Bill 23: The More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, and the Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan” addressing amendments to the CA Act under Bill 23 narrowing conservation authorities’ roles in land-use planning; McMillan LLP, “Amendments to Ontario’s Conservation Authorities Act: Effective April 1, 2024” (10 April 2024) outlining the standardization of permitting under O. Reg. 41/24 and the reduction of conservation authorities’ permitting jurisdiction; Prohibited Activities, Exemptions and Permits, O Reg 41/24; McMillan LLP, “Let’s Get Together (Yay-Yay-Yay): What Ontario’s Consolidation of Conservation Authorities Means for Stakeholders” (November 5, 2025) discusses the Province’s October 2025 announcement of its intention to consolidate conservation authorities and create the OPCA.
4 Plan to Protect Ontario Act, Sch 3, s 2, adding CA Act, ss 1.2(1) “transition date”, 1.3(2), Table to s 1.3.
5 Ontario will go from 36 existing conservation authorities, 35 of which are listed for amalgamation into 8 new authorities, with 1 (Lakehead Region) continued under the new name “Northwestern Ontario Regional Conservation Authority”. This results in 9 regional conservation authorities total.
6 Plan to Protect Ontario Act, Sch 3, s 2, adding CA Act, s 1.4(1); CA Act, s 1.13.
7] Plan to Protect Ontario Act, Sch 3, s 4(1), adding CA Act, ss 1.6–1.12, especially ss 1.6(1), 1.10(1), 1.11(1), 1.12(1).
8 Plan to Protect Ontario Act, Sch 3, s 4(1), adding CA Act, ss 1.14(1), (5), (6).
9 Plan to Protect Ontario Act, Sch 3, s 10, adding CA Act, ss 18.1(1)-(2).
10 CA Act, s. 1.3(3), paras 1, 3, 20–22, 24–25.
11 McMillan “Let’s Get Together” Bulletin, supra note 3.
The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.
© McMillan LLP 2025
[View Source]
