Land Compensation Board 2009 Report Message from the Chair... 7 Applications Filed with the Land Compensation Board for

Transcription

1 09 20 Annual Report

2 2009 Annual Report S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d L a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n B o a r d Table of Contents Surface Rights Board 2009 Report Message from the Chair Highlights and Achievements for Land Compensation Board 2009 Report Message from the Chair Applications Filed with the Land Compensation Board for Organization (Surface Rights Board & Land Compensation Board) Dispute Resolution Process (Surface Rights Board & Land Compensation Board) Note to Readers: Copies of this annual report are available on our website or by contacting our office. srb.lcb@gov.ab.ca Website: Phone: (Dial for toll free access outside of Edmonton) Fax: Mail: Surface Rights Board Land Compensation Board 18 th Floor, Phipps McKinnon Building A Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3G2

3 S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d 2009 Annual Report pg 1 Message from the Chair of the Surface Rights Board I am pleased to present the 2009 annual report of the Surface Rights Board. The following pages provide an overview of applications received during the past calendar year and how they were resolved. I have also taken this opportunity to provide a summary of the key improvements to the Board achieved during my tenure as Chair since my initial appointment in April Key improvements achieved are: 1. Providing better service to Albertans; 2. Dealing with increasing demand for Board services; and 3. Achieving stakeholder satisfaction with Board function. Highlights of the key improvements are discussed below and conclude with consideration of future challenges faced by the Board. Providing better service to Albertans Our 2009 Business Plan contained the goal of a 10% increase in resolution of applications. A 227% increase was achieved. The 2009 result is a 783% increase compared to These results compare the following key types of applications to the Board: Right of entry; Compensation reviews; Damage disputes; and Recovery of rental claims. The Board completes numerous other activities such as applications for Board review of existing Orders, maintaining all Orders made since the 1940 s, amending Orders and record keeping. The following chart illustrates the improvement in the resolution of applications since 2006: The results of 2009 were accomplished Surface Rights Board New Applications through the new dispute resolution conference 1000 (DRC) program. I began planning the DRC program after conducting my first hearings at the 900 Board. It was apparent that many of the disputes 833 going to hearing involved issues that could be better dealt with by discussion between the parties than by Board Order Initial steps included proposing legislative Applications change to authorize the implementation of the new program. The Surface Rights Act Rules of Procedure and Practice 196/2007 and the Surface Rights Amendment Act 2009 accomplished this.

4 pg Annual Report S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d In 2009, 856 applications (93%) were resolved without hearing. These settlements often included other issues not yet filed with the Surface Rights Board. Sixty applications (7%) proceeded to a formal hearing. Board processes are now speedier and can often conclude an application within four months of filing, a significant improvement from the 2005 expectation of a two year wait. Implementing improvements to service has not cost more money. The improved services have saved more than $250,000 from the 2009 budget. Dealing with increasing demand for Board Service The number of applications filed with the Board has increased from 240 in 1999 to 977 in The Board today has similar staffing and budget to what it had in 1999.This resulted in more applications than the Board could resolve in a timely manner. In 2009 the DRC program was fully implemented. This was the first year since the 1990 s that the Board resolved a similar number of applications as the number received. I forecast that the Board will continue this trend in 2010, resulting in a decrease of backlogged files. Achieving stakeholder satisfaction with Board function Stakeholder satisfaction has increased with the timeliness with which the Board deals with applications. As noted earlier, the Board can now often resolve an application within 4 months of filing, compared with the 2 year wait experienced before Equally important is the uncalculated saving of landowners and operators personal time and cost required to prepare for Board hearings. SRB Resolved Applications Brian Gifford is appointed (April 2006) Applications The emotional impact on our clients has also decreased. A resolution arrived at by agreement takes far less toll on our clients wellbeing than enduring an adversarial Board hearing. The fact that these improvements are achieved using existing resources and reduces the Board s budget requirement is a positive outcome. Both landowners and operators have expressed strong support for the changes made at the Board. Future Challenges 2010 will bring several challenges to the continued success for the Board. The challenges are outlined below: Several pending projects, such as electricity transmission corridors, coal mine development and other energy projects are expected in the near future. These projects will result in a dramatic increase in applications to the Board. The AltaLink transmission corridor between Edmonton and Calgary is an example of a high priority application for Board resolution of Right of Entry for operators and landowner compensation, neither of which can be delayed. All areas of Government are working to implement the Government of Alberta s plan for a strong economic recovery. The Board s budget for 2010 reflects the reality of reduced spending. This reduction will challenge the Boards ability to reduce the backlog of applications. The Board will be moving its office in late fall 2010 to south Edmonton, providing easier access for stakeholders. The current location in downtown Edmonton is not convenient for any stakeholder. The move will disrupt Board function and result in a delay of service during the move. The Board expects to deal with all future challenges with the same success achieved over the past four years. Staff and Board Member Appreciation I extend my appreciation and thanks to the staff and members of the Surface Rights Board. Their hard work is necessary to achieve the success of the Board to implement our new systems and processes. I look forward to working with the Board to continue this success. Brian G. Gifford Chair and Chief Executive Officer Surface Rights Board

5 S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d 2009 Annual Report pg 3 Highlights & Achievements for 2009 of the Surface Rights Board (SRB) Board Orders and Decisions Issued in 2009 With respect, I regard [the Board s] findings as justified, transparent and intelligible... Whitelock v. Conocophillips Canada Resources Corp., Court of Queen s Bench - Action , Honourable Mr. Justice E. P. MacCallum Board Orders and Decisions Issued in Applications Received in Right of Entry Applications Resolved in Compensation Review Applications Resolved in Damage Dispute Applications Resolved in Board Review Applications Resolved in Recovery of Rental Applications Resolved in Notice of Decisions 303 Decisions (Regular) 71 Decisions (Settlement of Compensation) 193 Right of Entry Orders 229 Compensation Orders 16 Full Termination Orders 171 Rescinding Orders 5 Amending Orders 734 Orders Determining Costs 5 Partial Termination Orders 7 Varying Orders 195 Varying and Amending Orders 85 Settlement Compensation Orders 193 Orders Confirming Compensation and Determining Costs 2 Damage Compensation Orders 5 Compensation Review Orders 34 Recovery of Rental Suspension Orders 38 Recovery of Rental Termination Orders 36 Total 2322

6 pg Annual Report S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d Highlights & Achievements for 2009 OF THE Surface Rights Board Applications Received 2009 Right of Entry Applications Resolved in 2009 Compensation Review Applications Resolved in 2009 Total: 1045 Total: 314 Total: 324 Right of Entry: 242 Compensation Reviews: 351 Damage Disputes: 41 Recovery of Rental: 360 Compensation Determined by Board: 16 Settlement Compensation: 193 Resolved Through Board (Right of Entry): 86 Resolved Through Board (No Right of Entry): 19 Resolved Through Board Processes: 285 Compensation Determined by Board: 39 Board Reviews: 51 *Board Reviews were not in the 2008 Annual Report

7 S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d 2009 Annual Report pg 5 Highlights & Achievements for 2009 OF THE Surface Rights Board Damage Dispute Applications Resolved in 2009 Board Review Applications Resolved in 2009 Recovery of Rental Applications Resolved in 2009 Total: 37 Total: 35 Total: 241 Resolved Through Board: 32 Compensation Determined by Board: 5 Resolved Through Board: 12 Determined by Board: 23 Paid by Minister: 221 Paid by Operator: 14 Withdrawn: 6

8 pg Annual Report S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d Highlights & Achievements for 2009 OF THE Surface Rights Board Applications for Right of Entry Applications for Review of Annual Compensation CYH Cypress Hills WCF Warner Coutts Foremost PCM Pincher Creek Cardston McGrath MDH Medicine Hat VXT Vauxhall Taber LSP Lethbridge Stavely Picture Butte EMS Empress Schuler BBS Brooks Bassano FCP PKR FTV FCP PKR FTV CSV AVC Calgary Strathmore Vulcan Acadia Valley Oyen Consort HDR Hanna Drumheller TRA Trochu Airdrie CBL Coleman Blairmore GPR VMB HPS GPR VMB HPS BDO SCC Black Diamond Okotoks Sundre Calgary Cochrane WEF WTA EDM SLS CVL SBC LME WEF WTA EDM SLS CVL SBC LME WPC LME SBC CSC Wainwright Provost Consort Lloydminster Mannville Elk Point St. Paul Bonnyville Cold Lake Camrose Sedgewick Castor CVL Camrose Sedgewick Castor WRI RWS CSC WPC WRI RWS CSC WPC SLS RWS Smoky Lake Lac La Biche St. Paul Red Deer Wetaskiwin Stettler SCC TRA HDR AVC SCC TRA HDR AVC EDM WTA Edmonton Westlock Thorhild Athabasca WRI Warburg Rocky Mountain House Innisfail BDO CSV BBS EMS BDO CSV BBS EMS WEF Wabamum Edson Ft. Assiniboine CBL LSP PCM VXT WCF MDH CYH CBL LSP PCM VXT WCF MDH CYH HPS FTV VMB PKR GPR High Prairie Smith Fort Vermilion Area Valleyview McLennan Berwyn Peace River Keg River Grande Prairie Rycroft FCP Fairview Cherry Point

9 L a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n B o a r d 2009 Annual Report pg 7 Message from the Chair of the Land Compensation Board (LCB) I am pleased to present the 2009 annual report of the Land Compensation Board. The report provides an overview of applications received during the past calendar year and how they were resolved. In 2009 we implemented the Dispute Resolution Conference (DRC) process for the Land Compensation Board. DRC s are used by the Board to assist in managing and resolving an application and acts as the first step in an application (unless the parties request that their matter go directly to mediation). The purpose of the conference is to discuss the issues, evidence, and likelihood of resolution, then set the next steps. Issues that come to the LCB are long standing, involve large sums and have not resolved from the many efforts expended on them by the parties prior to coming to the LCB. Accordingly, these issues typically proceed to a hearing before the Board and are not likely to settle without a hearing. The DRC process is valuable to focus the hearing issues and maximize the use of Board resources to resolve the matters brought before it. Benefits to Albertans are seen in easier access to Board processes, speedier resolution of issues, greater stakeholder satisfaction and cost savings. Future Challenges 2010 will bring further improvements to the LCB. The Board will be moving its office in late fall 2010 to south Edmonton, providing easier access for stakeholders. The move will briefly disrupt Board function. However, the end result will allow improved access and facilities for Albertans. All areas of government are working to implement the Government of Alberta s plan for a strong economic recovery. The Board s budget for 2010 reflects the reality of reduced spending. This reduction will challenge the Board s ability to continue its speedy and effective resolution of client issues but should be manageable with our improved processes. The Board expects to deal with all future challenges with the same success achieved over the past four years. Staff and Board Member Appreciation I extend my appreciation and thanks to the staff and members of the Land Compensation Board. Due to their hard work we were able to achieve our success. Brian G. Gifford Chair and Chief Executive Officer Land Compensation Board

10 pg Annual Report L a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n B o a r d Applications Filed with the Land Compensation Board for 2009 Applications Applications for Determination of Compensation (ADC) 16 Notice of Motion 5 Other (Costs) 2 Total 23 HEARINGS, DISPUTE RESOLUTION CONFERENCES AND MEDIATIONS Hearing 11 Dispute Resolution Conferences 7 Mediations 0 Note: Hearings breakdown were: 5 ADC, 5 Notice of Motion and 1 Other (Costs of ADC). Total 18

11 S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d L a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n B o a r d 2009 Annual Report pg 9 Organization of the Surface Rights Board Land Compensation Board Minister of Sustainable Resource Development The Honourable Ted Morton CHAIR and C.E.O. OF The Surface Rights Board Land Compensation Board Brian G. Gifford, BA, MSW, LLB, LLM (Osgoode) Grad. Dipl. Justice System Administration (Edmonton) Land Compensation Board* John Edward Logan, BA, MA, Vice Chair (Edmonton) E. Gordon Chapman, BSc, MPM, MBA (Edmonton) Morley Blanch, BSc, MAg (Edmonton) Leonard Dunn, P.Eng (Edmonton) Surface Rights Board* David Broda, Vice Chair (Redwater) John Edward Logan, BA, MA, Vice Chair (Edmonton) E. Gordon Chapman, BSc, MPM, MBA (Edmonton) Morley Blanch, BSc, MAg (Edmonton) Solicitor Surface Rights Board LAND COMPENSATION BOARD Karen Sinclair Santos, BA, LLB (Parkland County) Director Surface Rights Board Land Compensation Board Jill Mason, BScN, LLB, LLM (Sturgeon County) Karen R. Fraser, BA (Canmore) Leonard Dunn, P.Eng (Edmonton) Rodney Fong, BSc, LLB (Lethbridge) Karen R. Fraser, BA, Canmore Gregg Hook, B Comm, CGA (Edmonton) John Mah Q.C., BA, LLB (Edmonton) Rodney Fong, BS, LLB, Lethbridge Gregg Hook, B Comm, CGA (Edmonton) Board Officer Team Julian Martin, PhD, FRHistS (Edmonton) John Mah Q.C., BA, LLB (Edmonton) David McDonald (Rocky Mountain House) Don A. Sibbald Q.C., BEd, LLB (Edmonton) Julian Martin, PhD, FRHistS (Edmonton) David McDonald (Rocky Mountain House) Decisions/Orders/Legal Support Team Terry Usselman, B Comm (Calgary) Don A. Sibbald Q.C., BEd, LLB (Calgary) Edward V. Zenko, MSc (Smoky Lake) Terry Usselman, B Comm (Calgary) Edward V. Zenko, MSc (Smoky Lake) Records Team *Board Members are selected from across the province to provide a broad spectrum of representation. To be considered for appointment to the Board, candidates must have: an understanding of the essential elements for conducting a fair and objective hearing, excellent analytical, communication and interpersonal skills, a proven ability to work well in group settings, and the ability to read and understand government legislation Rental Recovery Team

12 pg Annual Report S u r f a c e R i g h t s B o a r d L a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n B o a r d Dispute Resolution Process of the Surface Rights Board Land Compensation Board Dispute between parties Negotiation Application to the Board Pre-Hearing Dispute Resolution Conference Mediation Formal Board Hearing Resolution (by parties) Resolution (by parties) Resolution (by parties) Binding decision (by Board) Parties are encouraged to use mediation as the primary way to resolve disputes that come before the Board. Unlike a formal hearing, the parties have control over the outcome and are more likely to be satisfied with mediated results than with decisions imposed by the Board. Benefits to Albertans are seen in easier access to Board processes, speedier resolution of issues, greater stakeholder satisfaction and cost savings. Brian Gifford, Chair and CEO, Surface Rights Board and Land Compensation Board