By Pepper Parr

December 1^st, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

We are still on that budget.

Mayor Meed Ward’s original intention was to have Council endorse

Directing the Chief Financial Officer to prepare the draft operating and capital budgets for 2025 and 2026 whereby the city’s portion of the overall property tax increase is not to exceed 3.99% of which approximately:

• • 2.99% is for city services; and
  • 1% is for city infrastructure renewal funding;
  • and that the draft budgets be provided to the Mayor in preparation of the Mayor’s Proposed Budget in each year

but two Councillors wanted to ensure that the public had an opportunity to comment on the idea.

Sensing that she didn’t have the support she needed to proceed Meed Ward withdrew the 2025 and 2026 budget references and put the item on a future Council agenda.

The problem now is the item is not yet on the agenda for the series of meetings taking place next week.

In order to address Council delegators have to get their requests in before noon today.

Instead of working with the Clerk’s Office to get the agenda concerns taken care of Mayor Meed Ward chose to hold a drop in (on very short notice with no media notice) at City Hall on Thursday.  Mayor still has the cart before the horse on engagement with the public.

While all this is going on Eric Stern, one of the Aldershot citizens who delegated, wants people to fully understand what happened during the budget debates during November.

It is not a pretty picture.

Stern said that the “90s generation has called and they want their tax cuts back.

“We can’t go back in time, past mismanagement means future pain. It’s time for a zero-based budgeting approach. Every service, every position, “needs” have to be reviewed and “wants” eliminated. City Hall caused this mess – share the pain.”

Stern questions the hiring of somewhere between 50 and 90 new employees? “The province has a hiring freeze. Are Community gardens – volunteers, firefighters  what we can afford. Stern suggests expanding the existing volunteer force. Middle management? – promote internally. “Investing” in new hires does not improve reserve fund balances.

“City hall has created a world where “investment” means “spending”, “impacts” have to be doubled to understand increases, and Doug Ford “forced” the mayor to rush this process and limit citizen input. Ultimately we get a bill where the increase bears no relation to any of the information presented to us.

“Why is this so complex? ” asks Sterns. “Taxpayers trust city hall with OUR money. What has gone wrong? We are discussing $438 million dollars in spending, this is a major corporation, not an episode of Parks and Recreation.”

In the slides set out below Stern makes a number of very significant points where he believes the city failed to meet the Municipal Act – the provincial legislation that sets out the relationship between the province and the 400 municipalities in the province.  A couple of them are glaring.

Eric Stern delved into the data the city provided and came up with more questions and not enough in the way of an understanding how everything was going to be paid for – he could see a wave of tax increases coming and a community that he felt could not afford what the city wanted to do.

Stern presented slides that set out where he felt mistakes had been made. The budgeting process is complex but doesn’t have to be as bad as this. References were made to how much better the Oakville budget presentation is – changes are need said Stern along with several other delegations.

Stern pointed out where the data the Finance department didn’t make any sense.

Stern put together data with startling projections. City Manager Tim Commisso pointed out that for a nine year period there were 0 tax increases. Maintenance and planning for growth were not given the attention they deserved – now the city is playing catch up – and it is proving to be very expensive.

There is the sense that the process of putting a budget in place is not under control. The Mayor chose to use the Strong Powers that were available to her; that resulted in a rush to get the document completed and approved. Many citizens felt there was a rush that wasn’t necessary.

To add to the pace of things the city is now looking for a new City Manger. Tim Commisso announced a few weeks ago that he would not seek an extension of his contract.

By Pepper Parr

November 30^th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

Just in case you missed it – we did – not a word to media on this event.

Mayor Marianne Meed Ward is going to give anyone who wants to trot down to city hall ten minutes of her time.

Interesting to note that there is no place to register and pick a time that works for you.

It’s first come – first served.

Will there be line ups outside city hall stretching out to Civic Square?

By Staff

November 28th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

Starting this Friday, Lakeshore West rail service will run only between Union Station and Oakville to allow for critical track works and infrastructure updates.

What customers need to know:

Starting at approximately 10 p.m. on Friday, December 1, there will be no train service between Oakville GO and West Harbour GO stations until end of service on Sunday, December 3. Replacement GO buses will be available for customers and Oakville Transit will be running hourly shuttles to and from Oakville GO for customers wishing to access Appleby GO or Bronte GO stations.

In addition, our Friday 10:50 p.m. train to Niagara Falls GO will be adjusted to start at Aldershot GO. For customers travelling to Niagara Falls from Union Station, we recommend taking the 10:17 p.m. Lakeshore West train to connect with the Niagara Falls bound train departing at Aldershot GO.

Regular service will resume on Monday, December 4.

By Pepper Parr

November 29^th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

So it is done.

The budget for 2024 is cast in stone.

Tax bills will get sent out and people can then compare what their tax bill was in 2023 and compare with what they are asked to pay during 2024

This was a contentious budget – there were several dozen letters to Council and five very strong personal delegations that took Council to task.

Lydia Thomas

Dave Chapman

Dave and Vera Chapman spoke to Council in a way they have not been talked to in some time.

Lydia Thomas was very direct and showed Council time and again where they just plain got it wrong.

Eric Stern put data before Council to point out where the mistakes were made.

None of it made much in the way of a difference other than to show that there are people in the city who are prepared to speak out.

The Mayor continues to maintain that she had to use the Strong Powers – she did not have to – she chose to – which is fine but don’t try to convince the public that Doug Ford made you do it.

In the closing minutes of the Special Council meeting two members of Council took the Mayor to task when she set out to include the early drafts of the 2025 and 2026 budgets.

Council was being asked to:

Endorse a Mayoral Direction to the Chief Financial Officer for the 2025 and 2026 budget years as follows:

Councillors Nisan and Kearns wanted the mention of the 2025 and 2026 budget plans be discussed and not rubber stamped at a Special Council Meeting where the public had little warning that this was coming.

Councillors Nisan and Kearns didn’t want to go along with this and suggested that the matter be sent to a Standing Committee meeting where the public would be able to comment.

Councillor Nisan said: “I just want to suggest this go to committee next to next week and give the public more opportunity. We have to respond to but I think this will be better off that committee.

Councillor Kearns said: “Yeah, thanks. I feel like I just said I would try to do better and this doesn’t feel like me trying to do better so I’d like this to come to committee.

Mayor: “Alright, so in light of the feedback from committee and council, I withdraw the item and we will bring it through committee, having said that, the agendas for committee already are out.”

For those who want to ensure that the 2025 and 2026 elections are not a repeat of what took place this year – your chance to delegate is just a couple of weeks away.

By David Jones

November 29^th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

You aren’t going to get this kind of commentary from the newsletters that the two Burlington MP’s provide.

Policy Options, a think tank  produced the following which puts the housing situation in context and points to where the mistakes were made that got us into this mess.

Federal strategies must not inadvertently weaken provincial incentives to act, and they need to focus on housing that wouldn’t otherwise get built.

The federal government has announced considerable extra funding for housing in recent months: the GST rebate on construction of new rental units; the first beneficiaries of the $4-billion Housing Accelerator Fund; and additional low-cost financing through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. (the CMHC).

These recent announcements constitute a switch in government strategy from ”demand-side” measures (such as support for first-time buyers) to ”supply-side” measures – a welcome development because the former have likely buoyed property prices without addressing underlying supply issues.

While there are still plenty of supply-side factors outside the federal government’s control – interest rates being chief among them – there are two issues that require federal attention: ensuring a genuine additional housing supply and encouraging provincial leadership in the field.

The need for “additionality”

Additionality (or “incrementality”) refers to the additional housing supply generated by new funding over and above what would have been built without the funding.

For government funding to be effective – and offer good value for money – it needs to deliver this additional housing and not just subsidize units that would have been built anyway. In the context of rising federal government spending, taxpayer value-for-money cannot be ignored.

The challenge for these new supply-side measures is that money isn’t the only constraint on housing supply. In particular, there are shortages in the construction labour force, as well as expensive regulatory barriers

The new federal incentives do not guarantee a genuine additional or substantial increase in the housing supply.

For example, both the GST rebate and the extra CMHC financing cover all new units constructed, not just those considered to be additional supply. While these initiatives could ease financial constraints for development, the risk is that the financial incentives aren’t specifically earmarked for additional units.

The Housing Accelerator Fund provides more incentives because it targets funding only for proposed additional housing.

Yet there are also risks with that approach. Because municipalities are tasked with projecting the hypothetical supply of new housing without funding, there is an incentive to “‘lowball” that number: the lower the hypothetical supply without funding, the greater the calculated additional supply, resulting in higher Housing Accelerator Fund contributions.

Ultimately, it is impossible to say precisely what the housing supply will be without Housing Accelerator Fund contributions and it will be a challenge for the CMHC to determine what is genuine additional supply. Several approaches can help with that.

Delivering additionality

First, the CMHC needs to scrutinize the hypothetical (without-funding) supply projections from municipalities before agreeing to provide Housing Accelerator Fund money. There should be strong evidence that money from the fund will generate additional housing over and above the basic supply.

Housing Accelerator Fund disbursements are currently running behind the original budgeted proposal. If political pressure mounts to release funding to municipalities, the CMHC must be vigilant to ensure value-for-money by delivering a genuine additional housing supply.

Second, under the terms for the fund, the CMHC will make staggered payments to municipalities contingent on those municipalities reporting progress in meeting additional supply. It would be detrimental for the CMHC to set too high a bar for reporting – because that might prove a disincentive to municipalities – but there must also be a credible threat that CHMC will withhold money in the case of under-delivery.

Third, additional housing supply can be encouraged through investment in other sectors. For example, in the U.S. the Department of Transportation gives higher scores in its transport grant funding assessments to jurisdictions with land-use policies that promote density.

One way to implement this in Canada would be for the Canada Infrastructure Bank to favour investments that directly or indirectly support housing supply. For example, the bank recently announced a $7.9-million loan for investment in water, electricity and broadband connections in Netmizaaggamig Nishnaabeg, a First Nation in Northern Ontario, intended to help provide the infrastructure needed for housing development.

The need for provincial leadership

Federal parties are increasingly seeking to demonstrate leadership on housing. The Liberal government has issued a raft of new policies (as noted above), while the Conservatives recently announced that reversing the current “housing hell” is a headline priority.

On the one hand, there is a good case for some federal engagement. Ottawa has greater spending power and holds some levers that influence the housing market, such as immigration.

But ultimately, the provinces are constitutionally responsible for housing. As federal parties seek to assert control over how housing issues should be solved, that is crowding out the role of the provinces – at least in terms of political accountability – and possibly also in policy initiatives.

Of course, provinces are actively engaged in many ways. For example, in 2022, Ontario issued its housing supply action plan, and more recently announced measures to increase housing for homeless populations and to speed up planning approvals.

But crowding out is still a real risk. Political and public accountability creates strong incentives for governments to act, and the current federal strategies are inadvertently weakening provincial incentives by absorbing much of the political pressure. That must change.

Facilitating provincial leadership

First, the federal government needs to take a more balanced and consistent approach with its strategy and communications. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently appeared to “flip flop” around the federal role in housing – initially saying it was primarily a provincial responsibility, but then quickly announcing a series of significant policies.

Admittedly, the media’s coverage of the prime minister’s statements exaggerated the degree to which this appeared inconsistent. For example, he also stated that “it’s not just the federal government that can solve this” and that housing is an area that the federal government “can and must help with.”

Nonetheless, communications could be clearer. Ultimately, the federal government needs to remain committed to improving the housing situation but must leave ample space for the provinces to lead.

Second, Canada could learn from positive examples of intergovernmental collaboration from abroad. In Australia, a National Housing Accord was recently signed to “align for the first time the efforts of all levels of government, institutional investors and the construction sector to help tackle the nation’s housing problem.”

Let’s stop calling it a housing crisis

Ottawa picked the dicey road to lower rents; Quebec is right not to follow

Advancing a Team Canada approach to housing

In Canada, there is an intergovernmental housing forum. But whereas the Australian accord presents a detailed and specific action plan, including clear commitments for national and sub-national governments, the outcome of the most recent Canadian forum was largely vague, with only this statement issued: “Ministers agreed to work together to better align supportive housing and homelessness programs and explore further solutions.”

Third, for existing policies, the federal government should at least encourage provincial partnership. This is well underway for the GST rebate because the provinces have been encouraged to follow suit. However, the accelerator fund omits the provinces by design; its funds flow directly from the CMHC to municipalities. Provinces need to be kept in the loop to ensure housing actions are co-ordinated.

Canada is in the throes of a housing crisis and it is no surprise that significant federal resources are being targeted to address this. But success requires genuine provincial leadership and the creation of housing that would not otherwise get built. As the political pressure mounts, cool heads are needed at the federal government to ensure that its schemes deliver value for money and avoid inadvertently crowding out provincial accountability.

David Jones is a policy analyst and economist. He is a fellow at the Canadian Centre for Health Economics, a Telus research fellow and is studying public policy at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto.

This article is part of a series called How does Canada fix the housing crisis?

By Pepper Parr

November 28^th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

It was going to happen at some point and I suppose it made sense to do so at the point where a very difficult budget was passed by City Council.

As the meeting was nearing the end City Manager Tim Commisso indicated that he wanted to say a few words – but a Council member asked, on a point of order, if that was appropriate.  Why a Council member who lives in one ward and represents a different ward would take such a position was beyond most council members.

Council was forced to hold a vote that required a three quarters of the council members to vote for it.  That passed and Commisso got to speak.

Joan Ford: Thinking through questions when Staff used to hold “budget bazaars”

He thanked Staff, was generous in his praise and said he wanted CFO Joan Ford to have the last word.

Joan, taking part virtually thanked her staff, naming each Team Leader and the individual staff members and then added: “this will be my last budget.”

I don’t know how man years Joan has been the CFO.  When I first met her she was in the Finance department.  The City had decided to part ways with the City Treasurer at the time and Joan was put in place, realizing very quickly that many of her staff we a lot smarter than she was.

Jeff Fielding was the city manager at the time and he worked with Joan to get her into a classroom and earn a designation that would qualify her more clearly for the job.

There was never any question is as to whether or not she could do the job – she was doing it.

I’ve forgotten how long it took for her to earn the designation, don’t recall what the designation was.  Do recall the conversations we have over how hard she was finding the studying.

There were evening classes and the once a month weekend session when her staff, several who were half her age,  would work with her on the assignments and get the course material completed.

When she had earned the designation she showed me the scroll that graduates are given.  It was rolled up with an elastic around it.

“When are you going to have it framed” I asked.  It looked is as if she wasn’t going to frame it and hang it up in her office.

I think Jeff Fielding arranged to have it framed and put up in her office.

Then Director of Finance Joan Ford.

Joan Ford has served Burlington very well.

Several of the delegations complained about the 775 page plus budget binder that was prepared this year.  Joan didn’t create that process – she did build on what came before her.

There will be significant changes made in the budget process – those tasks will be carried out by team Joan Ford mentored and grew.

Using the occasion to give Joan a Round of Applause the Mayor had to once again ask for a vote.

They never make it easy.

No word on exactly when Joan will leave her office – it is a well-earned retirement.

By Pepper Parr

November 28th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

They aren’t there yet – lot of juggling numbers and looking for ways to spend providing they can fund the money – somewhere.

Lori Jivan the Budget guru reports.

This Council is doing what it can to send a message to the people who pay the taxes – it is going to take more than this to recover from the anger that excellent delegators made clear – change the way you create the budget.

By Pepper Parr

November 28^th, 2023

BURLINGTON, ON

The Mayor will be putting forward a Motion asking Council to:

Mayor Marianne Meed Ward will direct the CFO to draft operating and capital budgets for 2025 and 2026 as well.

Endorse a Mayoral Direction to the Chief Financial Officer for the 2025 and 2026 budget years as follows:

• Direct the Chief Financial Officer to prepare the draft operating and capital budgets for 2025 and 2026 whereby the city’s portion of the overall property tax increase is

not to exceed 99% of which approximately:

99% is for city services; and

1% is for city infrastructure renewal funding; and

That the draft budgets be provided to the Mayor in preparation of the Mayor’s Proposed Budget in each year

Background to 2024 Budget:

Under new provincial legislation, the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, 2022, introduced Nov. 23, 2022, and extended on July 1, 2023 to all municipalities that had already committed to a housing pledge, including Burlington, which unanimously committed to a housing pledge in March 2023, Mayors are now required to submit a budget for council review.

This responsibility cannot be delegated. Council has 30 days to amend the Mayor’s budget; the Mayor has 10 days to veto any amendments, and the Council has 15 days to issue and overrides to the veto, by 2/3 majority. At the end of this process, the budget is deemed to be approved. For the 2024 budget council deliberations are expected to conclude after council Nov. 28, and council will vote on whether to end the 30-day review period. I will not be exercising the ability to issue a veto, and will instead be issuing a mayoral decision at the end of council’s deliberations to end the veto period.

Once that is signed the budget will be deemed approved.

If the Mayor does not fulfill this obligation of preparing a budget by February 1 of a budget year, council can begin budget preparations at that time. However, it is not in the city or the community’s interest to wait, as we would not be able to take advantage of early procurement or preferred pricing by tendering projects months earlier. Waiting would cost the city, and residents, more, and risk being able to find bidders for capital projects.

Thus, the Mayor will work with staff, council and the community to prepare a budget by year end preceding each budget year (with the exception of an election year).

Planning for Budget 2025 and 2026

In fulfilling the obligation under the legislation to present a budget, the Mayor can provide direction to staff to prepare a budget.

There are a number of people who believe Sharman provided a lot more than support to the Mayor for her budget. Some believe has was the guiding force behind what was done.

The Mayor does not need to seek council endorsement of any budget direction. However, she said: ” by way of this motion, I am doing so because of a continued commitment to collaborative and democratic team leadership and decision-making. I have consulted with and have the support of Councillor Paul Sharman, the Deputy Mayor of Strategy, Budgets, Process and Performance, in this approach and staff direction.”

As indicated, the Mayor will work closely with staff, council and the community to seek suggestions to improve the budget preparation and approval process and the manner in which we communicate the budget.

Direction for Tax Increase of 3.99%

“We are thus both seeking council’s endorsement for me to issue a Mayoral Direction to staff to prepare draft budgets such that the city’s portion of the overall tax increase is no more than 3.99%, including a separate dedicated infrastructure levy per year for the capital budget.

“Council has heard from thousands of residents during the 2024 budget deliberations, expressing concerns about affordability, inflation on basic items like groceries, and rising housing costs and interest rates. We have heard a range of perspectives about what the community would like us to do, from a zero tax rate increase or a tax cut, 3% tax increase up to 4 and 5% increase. We have also heard from residents supporting increased taxes. The GetInvolved budget survey commissioned by the city showed 55% of residents support a cut to services to maintain current taxes, or a cut to services to reduce taxes.

“Separately, the statistically valid community survey found that 57% of residents support increasing taxes to enhance services or to maintain services at current levels. This survey is considered an accurate predictor of the majority of Burlington residents, 95% of the time, within a range of 3% either way.

“Additionally, 91% of residents on the GetInvolved budget survey said that it was “somewhat important” or “important” to set aside funding to replace infrastructure, such as roads, to ensure they meet community needs now and into the future. The second part of the Mayor’s Direction responds to this feedback by separating out a dedicated infrastructure with a minimum 2% commitment each year.

“We must consider and balance all this input, as well as the long term financial sustainability of the city and all its services in preparing annual budgets, this one as well as future ones.

“We want residents to know we have heard them, and are working to respond to all the input we’ve received.

“The hope in providing this direction is to provide some predictability to staff and the community about future budgets, and respond to the request to keep the tax increases as low as possible.”