Let's talk about the Brantford Airport

Hi Christian. Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns in detail. The issues you raise about the pace of the process, farmland, natural heritage, community trust, and long-term intentions are important and deserve a response.

On the question of timing and meaningful consultation, the public engagement process related to this matter began on May 27^th and is not complete. The MOU has been signed, but no final restructuring agreement has been approved, and no boundary adjustment has taken effect. Public engagement through this engagement portal, the open houses, and statutory public hearings will be part of the formal record presented to both City and County Councils before any final decisions are made. Residents are also invited to participate directly in the statutory public hearings anticipated during the week of July 6. 

It is also important to provide context on how this process arrived at this point. Boundary adjustment discussions related to the Brantford Municipal Airport have been underway for several years. The MOU represents the outcome of that extended period of work and negotiation between two municipalities, both of which are equal parties to the agreement. 

On long-term development intentions, the City's Economic Development Strategy does identify long-term economic development potential at the airport, including a possible aviation business park. That is a matter of public record. What the proposed boundary adjustment does not do is approve, fund, or predetermine any of that. Any future rezoning, development proposal, or change to land use would require its own individual planning process, environmental assessment, and public consultation each time, with meaningful opportunity for residents to participate. Those decisions would lie with whichever Councils are in place at that time, including newly elected Councils. The boundary adjustment changes jurisdiction. It does not hand any Council or any developer a blank slate.

On farmland and natural heritage, existing agricultural designations and environmental protections remain in place unless and until a future separate planning process changes them. Provincial policy, including applicable land use policy frameworks, continues to apply to these lands regardless of which municipality holds jurisdiction. The boundary adjustment does not remove those protections.

On the question of who this proposal serves, the City's position is that aligning municipal jurisdiction with ownership of the Airport and operational responsibility for an asset the City has owned and operated for decades is a legitimate and necessary step for long-term planning and governance. We recognize and respect that not all people share our view. What we can commit to is that the concerns raised here about farmland, rural character, community voice, and transparency are part of the public record and will be presented to both Councils as part of this process.

We hope this response has provided clarification on the important issues you have raised.

Hi Jo-Anne. Thank you for taking the time to write and for attending the open house. Your concerns are noted and this submission will be included in the formal engagement record presented to Council.

We want to address several of the specific claims raised, as we believe the public record warrants clarification.

The characterization that the MOU was developed without County of Brant involvement or input is not accurate. The MOU is a document signed by both the City of Brantford and the County of Brant. It reflects terms that both municipalities agreed to through a process that involved staff and elected representatives from both sides. The County is an equal party to the agreement and retains an equal voice in whether a final restructuring agreement moves forward. No proposed restructuring agreement can proceed without County Council's consideration and agreement. To suggest the County was deceived or excluded from a document it signed is a characterization the City respectfully disagrees with.

It is also important to provide context on how this process reached this point. The boundary adjustment discussions related to the Brantford Municipal Airport have been underway for approximately six years. This discussion did not emerge suddenly or without foundation. Reaching the point of a signed MOU represents years of work, discussion, and negotiation between two municipal governments. 

On the question of democratic timing, current Councils on both sides are duly elected and carry full authority to make decisions throughout their term. That is how municipal governance in Ontario functions. The upcoming election does not suspend the responsibilities or legitimacy of either Council.

On concerns about generational farms, natural heritage, and what the future holds for these lands, we want to be clear that the proposed boundary adjustment does not approve development, remove agricultural protections, or change land use designations. Those protections remain in place. Any future proposal affecting farmland, natural heritage systems, or land use including any airport-related development would be subject to its own individual planning process, environmental assessment, public consultation, and Council approval. Each of those decisions would be made separately, transparently, and with meaningful opportunity for public input. Critically, those future decisions would lie with whichever Councils are in place at that time, including newly elected Councils. The boundary adjustment does not hand any future Council a blank slate but rather, it changes jurisdiction, not land use.

We hope this information has helped provide clarification on the important issues you have raised.

Hi Mike. Thank you for sharing your perspective. The values you are describing including farmland, greenspace, rivers, trails, and the character of a community are not in conflict with good planning, and your view matters in this process.

To be clear, the boundary adjustment does not approve the removal of farmland, the extension of runways, or any development on the lands you are describing. Existing agricultural designations and environmental protections remain in place. Any future proposal affecting those lands would require its own planning approvals, environmental assessment, public consultation and Council approvals. Nothing in the current proposal bypasses or predetermines those processes.

On the broader question of what kind of community Brantford should be, that is exactly the kind of conversation that long-term planning processes are meant to reflect. The City's planning framework includes policies intended to protect agricultural land, natural heritage systems, and greenspace. The perspective you are offering is a legitimate and important one, and it is the kind of input that should inform how future planning decisions are made. Thank you for your input. 

Thank you for taking the time to raise these concerns thoughtfully. There are several distinct questions here and each deserves a direct response.

On the question of how the Provincial facilitation process began, the City is not in a position to characterize the County's experience of that process as that would be a question best directed to County of Brant representatives. What we can confirm is that the Provincial facilitation process is an established mechanism under Ontario's boundary adjustment framework, and that the MOU now signed between the City and County reflects terms that both municipalities agreed to. The City is committed to ensuring that all affected residents, including those in the County have a meaningful opportunity to ask questions, raise concerns, and provide feedback through this public engagement process. 

On the map and the lands shown, the map accompanying the proposal shows the proposed transfer area, which includes the airport, surrounding lands, and a broader land area identified through the boundary adjustment review. Designations shown on the map reflect existing land use designations. To confirm, they are not a development plan or an approval for development. The lands you describe as family farms, woodlands, and conservation areas retain their current designations. Any future rezoning or development proposal would require its own planning approvals, environmental review, and public consultation entirely separate from this proposed boundary adjustment.

On the question of why the boundary adjustment is necessary if no immediate changes are planned, the airport is owned and operated by the City but sits outside City boundaries, which creates real and ongoing challenges for governance, financing, servicing, and the City's ability to plan and invest in the airport over time. The purpose of this proposed boundary adjustment is to align jurisdiction with ownership and operational responsibility. It does not trigger development but rather removes barriers that currently constrain the City's ability to plan responsibly for the airport's long-term future.

Your concerns about farmland, natural heritage, and community voices are important and are exactly the kind of feedback this process is designed to capture. Thank you for sharing your feedback. 

Thank you for your question. The proposed boundary adjustment would not affect the operations of Brant County Fire Station #2. Emergency services serving the area would continue to operate as they do today. Should the process move forward, existing service arrangements are addressed through the restructuring agreement and related agreements between the City and County to ensure continuity of service for residents.

Thank you for sharing your concerns. The values you describe are legitimate and important, and your concern about what the future may hold for this area is understandable.

To clarify, this process does not predetermine what comes next. The proposed boundary adjustment does not change zoning, approve development, or alter land use designations. Any future development on the transferred lands would require separate planning applications, rezoning approvals, environmental review, and individual public consultation processes. To clarify, none of these processes are predetermined by this proposal. Those future decisions would also require Council approval, and the public would have several opportunities to participate in public consultations related to any proposed future planning decisions that affect this area.

Thank you for your questions and the opportunity to clarify. 

On Provincial involvement, the Province is not driving this proposal and does not have a vested interest in the Brantford Municipal Airport. Provincial involvement is a legal requirement of the boundary adjustment process itself. Under the Municipal Act, any municipal boundary adjustment must ultimately be approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing through a restructuring order. This is standard procedure for any boundary change between municipalities in Ontario. 

On the sense of urgency, the timeline is structured around the steps required by the boundary adjustment process including public engagement, statutory public hearings, and formal consideration by both municipal Councils. These steps take time and follow a defined sequence. 

Regarding the public statutory meetings, what is anticipated during the week of July 6th are special open Council meetings and statutory public hearings to consider the restructuring agreement and related agreements. These are formal public proceedings and residents will have the opportunity to participate. Dates will be confirmed and communicated to both City and County residents once finalized. A statutory public hearing is a required step in the process, not the end of it, and Provincial approval would still be required before any proposed boundary adjustment takes effect.

It is also worth noting that the proposed boundary adjustment itself does not determine future land use, development, or investment decisions. Any rezoning, development approvals, or major planning changes would be separate processes requiring their own public consultation and Council approvals.

We hope this helps clarify the process. 

Thank you for raising these concerns. They touch on important questions about process, timing, and democratic accountability that deserve a direct response.

On the question of process, this proposal is not bypassing environmental review, financial due diligence, or public consultation as those steps are an integral part of the process. The MOU establishes proposed terms and a framework for moving forward. Public engagement through this engagement portal, open houses, and statutory public hearings is still underway, and that input will be part of the formal record presented to Council before any restructuring agreement is considered for approval. 

On the question of timing and the fall election, current Council members are the duly elected representatives of their communities and carry full authority to make decisions throughout their term of office. Furthermore, Councils regularly make significant decisions in election years. The timeline for this process is driven in part by Provincial requirements and the steps required to complete a restructuring agreement.

It is also worth noting that the proposed boundary adjustment itself does not determine future land use, development, or investment decisions. Any rezoning, development approvals, or major planning changes would be separate processes requiring their own public consultation and Council approvals. Those decisions would naturally fall to whichever Council is in place at that time, including a newly elected Council.

Your feedback, including the concerns raised here, will be included in the engagement record presented to Council as part of this public consultation process.

Thank you for sharing these concerns. They reflect real and understandable questions about what this proposal could mean for daily life in your community, and they deserve a direct response.

To be clear, the current proposal is a proposed municipal boundary adjustment only. It does not approve, fund, or commit to any changes to airport operations, runway configuration, traffic patterns, or land use.

No runway extension is proposed or approved as part of this process. Any future changes to runway infrastructure would require separate planning, environmental assessment, and approval processes, each with their own extensive public consultation requirements. Similarly, introducing scheduled passenger service is not part of this proposal. The airport's current approved vision focuses on general aviation, corporate and private aircraft, and aviation-related businesses. Any change to that would be a separate decision entirely, as would any growth in air traffic generally, which remains subject to Transport Canada oversight and applicable regulatory requirements.

Increased truck or vehicle traffic on Colborne St. W and Rest Acres Road is not an outcome of this boundary adjustment. If future development were ever proposed on airport lands, traffic impact assessment would be a required part of that separate planning and approval process. The same applies to noise. Current airport operations are subject to existing regulations, and any future changes to the scale or nature of operations that could affect noise levels would require separate assessment and consultation with affected residents.

On the question of property values, the proposed boundary adjustment does not change land use designations or zoning, and no development has been approved. Any future proposals would go through full public planning processes. We are not in a position to predict property value impacts, but the long-term vision for the airport does include economic development potential. What that ultimately looks like and how it balances community quality of life will be shaped by future planning processes that include public input.

Your concerns about traffic, noise, and neighbourhood impact are exactly the kind of feedback that needs to be on the record if that future planning unfolds. Thank you for sharing your input. 

Thank you for your question. The City is committed to transparent public engagement and welcomes questions and comments through this platform.

The City is working through submitted questions and providing responses as they are prepared by subject expert staff. Questions and responses are being posted publicly as part of that process. All questions and comments received through the platform, along with those submitted at the open houses will be included in the engagement summary delivered to Council for consideration. That record will be part of the public process.

Regarding the specific points raised:

This engagement platform is intended to collect and respond to questions about the boundary adjustment proposal, the MOU, and the public engagement process. Questions that fall within that scope are being answered on an ongoing basis. Questions outside the current scope, or those that raise matters governed by separate processes, are noted and will be reflected in the engagement record.

The City's approach to public information sharing is guided by applicable municipal policies, including obligations under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA). No questions are excluded on the basis of viewpoint. Privacy considerations may affect how individual submissions are presented publicly, consistent with the City's standard practice.

All questions and comments submitted to date will be provided to Council as part of the formal engagement record, regardless of whether a public response has been posted.