By Pepper Parr
November 5th, 2023
BURLINGTON, ON
When Aldershot resident Lydia Thomas delegated at City Council earlier this week she ran out of time and wasn’t able to include all that she wanted to say in the five minutes allocated to her. Ward 6 Councillor Angelo Bentivegna asked if she would send him the information. Bentivegnia doesn’t share information with the Gazette.
Ms Thomas sent what Bentivegna and added some additional content
Some of the facts that were not part of the delegation Lydia Thomas made due to the time limitation are set out below. She said: “I feel the public needs to be aware that:
Here is what Ms Thomas sent us.
Lydia Thomas
– 39% of people in the survey want 0% tax and 31% want 0-3% (likely most want the low end of that); this is very different than what councillor Nisan was stating
– how much did the city pay for renovations in the last 2 years and why do they want to spend more this year; this despite the fact that the offices are empty because of a hybrid work model which I also disagree with – they should be available in person to the residents they are serving
Richmond Hill will have a 0% tax increase for the 2nd year running and still find a way to hire 16 firefighters and make significant infrastructure changes – maybe we should be asking them what they are doing.
Meanwhile Burlington is planning the following further tax increases:
Results from a city survey
– the fact that the city hired over 100 + positions last year and want to hire 40 + more this year and it is not clear what all these roles responsibilities are or why they are needed now so urgently.
-This supposedly represents $4M in new salaries (according to another delegation), – they need to do more with less (cut headcount) and pass that $4M back to us all.
Would those over 65 prefer free bus transit (new city initiative) or a reduction in their property taxes?
Would we all rather have a reduction in property taxes or winter maintenance for 20 new park paths and parking lots
The City spent millions on digital efficiency tools which should result in reduced head count but instead they want to adding 40 more people as per this year’s budget
They spent millions on salaries last year and have another increase of $5.674 million planned for this yr (additional 4.04 m in salaries, 226K in health and dental, and 1.68 m in pension, employer contributions).
Remember the city has generous benefits package including pension so you’re not just paying for huge salaries. Over 10 m to salaries btw 2023 and this budget? The average salary in Ontario is 56K. At city hall its 104K.
In 2022 Oakville paid about 1.5 m more in salaries than us but they also have about 500 more people. Oakville also paid about 19K less per person on average than we did. Also, Oakville spent 30% of their total revenue on salaries and wages whereas Burlington spent a whopping 55.7%, a 5% increase from 2021.
So we are spending 25.7% more on salaries for less people than Oakville is. Yet Mayor Meed is claiming we aren’t paying enough and aren’t compatible with other municipalities. Mayor Meed Ward is being paid over $200 000.
The Robert Bateman building investment was 2.937 million. Previously approved capital projects which includes Skyway and Mountainside ($3.84 Million). It includes more transit but what they don’t say is that’s also more salaries.
They want to spend $ on refreshing the look of the CIVIC square. Not necessary after they spent millions updating Burlington City Hall while most employees are working at home with the Hybrid model. Note they never floated the idea of renovating City Hall by residents last year so we never had a chance to provide our opinions. We can stop this if we feel the money could be better spent elsewhere
– Burlington Food Bank stats show that our community is being hurt across all demographics and income levels due to financial instability (including these unaffordable property taxes)
– quote some of the 711 comments from the survey of which 211 said that they wanted reduced taxes.
– the fact that the 3 Mayor budget themes (Provide Essentials, Frontline Services, Planning for Growth) are too vague and do not align with what the residents have said that they want in their survey. (Reduced traffic congestion, reduced property taxes and City Hall cost cutting)
Results from a city survey
– the fact that the City’s recent budget survey results indicate that more people want services cut and property taxes decreased than they want them increased and yet they feel the need to grow for the 50 year future. The fact is we did not elect them for 50 years. That is not their job. They need to be sensitive to the current economic climate and help residents keep their homes and stay out of the Foodbank lines.
– some of the details of the proposal are missing and I would like to see more info regarding exactly how the new money will be used and what the new hires are needed for with facts and #’s to justify. There is too much focus on the benefits and risks of not doing it rather than the exact details of what the money will be spent on or what exactly the new roles will be doing and why this is necessary.
According to the people of Burlington in the recent survey, the #1 priority for City Council should be reducing taxes and yet they are doing the opposite.
Here is a link to the survey:
https://burlingtonpublishing.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=72258
Here is comment from Wendy Fletcher on Next Door regarding the results
“As I read through the comments, the number one theme by far is taxes. You can see the results of that survey below. And if MMW can’t see just from the comments how people feel about the taxes then her position is wilful.”
So here are 3 things to do to save us all thousands of $’s and keep us in our homes:
- Give the mayor your feedback on November 7th 7-8:30 (virtual)
** start calling at 6:45; keep trying and don’t give up because the lines will be busy
Phone number 1-800-785-1654. – call in and if you agree, say:
“ My name is … and l not be voting for you if real tax increases are not kept below 3%”.
I “if other cities can do it so can you. Cut the fat or you will be voted out”. “I don’t agree with your budget.”
Keep your call short so others can say the same thing
- Attend your Ward Meetings and/or send an email make a phone call to your Ward Councillor saying something like :
My name is …and l will not be voting for you if real tax increases are not kept below 3%”
In addition to anything else you want to say.
Ward 1 Kevin Galbraith Aldershot Thurs Nov 16th 10:30 to noon
Mapleview Mall Food court upper level near the elevator
kelvin.galbraith@burlington.ca. Tel: 905-335-7777, ext. 7587
Ward 2 Lisa Kearns – Central West lisa.kearns@burlington.ca
Tel: 905-335-7777, ext. 7588
Ward 3 Rory Nisan Nov 9 TBC- Brant Hills Community Centre rory.nisan@burlington.ca
Tel: 905-335-7777, ext. 7459
Ward 4 Shawna Stole. shawna.stolte@burlington.ca
Tel: 905-335-7777, ext. 7531
Ward 5 Paul Sharman Orchard Millcroft No meeting scheduled paul.sharman@burlington.ca
Tel: 905-335-7777, ext. 7591
Ward 6 Angelo Bentivegna angelo.bentivegna@burlington.ca.
Tel:905-335-7777 ext. 7592
Attend the Budget Council meeting on Nov. 21st and Nov. 23rd 9:30 am in the Council chambers at City Hall in person or join online
The purpose of the meeting is to Review and approve the proposed 2024 Budget, including delegations from the public. You can attend to support or Include a delegation submission to say your piece.
Let your voices be heard!! At a minimum email and make a phone call and then
Please cut and paste and PASS this note on to 8 Burlington residents.
It will take you 5 – 10 minutes maximum to make a few calls and emails.
Without people making noise, Mayor Meed Ward will pass this budget and we will pay 32 % more in property taxes.
The figures Lydia Thomas uses are hers. This is an opinion piece to which we have added two pie charts from the Financial Needs report produced by the City Treasurer.
This data comes from the Financial Needs document prepared by the City Treasurer.
Related news story:
A delegation that raised a lot of questions and support from Gazette readers
Narrowing of the roads is consistent with what Burlington Council does, not widening to accommodate growth. You need look no further than a good portion of Brant Street and the ridiculous narrowing of Lakeshore Rd in front of Spencer Smith. I simply cannot see the logic of bringing in thousands of new residents to the downtown core and leaving this configuration in place.
Lydia and fellow Burlington families: we have delegated for the most part at every time the Procedure By-law was changed from before 2014. In 2016 it became apparent that changes were being made that affected all of us in terms of our ability to engage with our Council as we previously had The changes for the most part were not addressed at Council and called housekeeping changes. The public were duped into overlooking these “husekeeping changes” by MMW bringing attention to the reduction of 10 mins at Council to 5 mins. There were huge line ups to delegate on this and it never changed as a result, however we lost so much more as Anne said to The Bay Obvserver reporter at the time,
Judge for yourselves whether this was the beginning of the trend to reduce engagement, including candidates for election. Item 17 under accountability in the 2014 Bylaw under Transparency and Accountability contained the following: “Encouraging public access and participation to ensure that decision making is responsive to the needs of its constituents and receptive to their opinions.” The 2016 Bylaw review team that did not keep any minutes or notes was lead by MMW and Amber LaPointe Clerk. It removed transparency and accountability and made it a corporate policy approved by Council April 2017. It is the responsibility of the Clerk to ensure a timely review. Due Q2 2022 and no call by any Council members or the City Manager as to why the Clerk is not handling the review as he should of “Transcparency and Accountability” as demanded by 270 (1) Municipal Act according to the policy. It is on the City web site.
Removed or not from the Procedural By-laws, the Municipal Act clearly requires Transparency and Accountability and always will. Thank you for anything you do that contributes to stopping this very dangerous dictatorial trend taking over from what we had back in 2014.
David, how is any of that legal? What is extremely alarming in all that you stated was “this was the beginning of the trend to reduce engagement, including candidates for election.” Are you suggesting that deliberate mechanisms have been put in place in an attempt to prevent removing this mayor and council from office? Because that, cannot stand.
I’m not sure if I’ve remarked previously, but I am quite new to this. Before Oct 30 there seemed to be a lack of transparency on many fronts, despite claims on the city’s website of pursuing it. But it has become rapidly apparent to me since Oct 30 that transparency is not only lacking but there appears to be deliberate attempts to circumvent it. At lengths quite disturbing to me.
I’m a numbers person, not a language person, so most of what you written about procedure and housekeeping is way over my head. The question therefore is, what can be done about all of this? My experience with the Integrity Commissioner recently left me feeling they aren’t working at arm’s length with city hall and that expectations they would set things right would fall flat. So who then, and what? The Ombudsman?
Burlington is Broken.
Covid-19 killed resident engagement.
This council failed to properly engage the residents on Bateman.
The Community Engagement Charter has no teeth.
Read the Code of Good Governance to see why.
Agree but I’d say Council killed it, not COVID. They then used COVID to help keep it dead.
Which came first the chicken or the egg?
Does it even matter? The fact is the 2022 election showed how unengaged the residents of Burlington are.
As I watch my tax bill go up I am getting more and more engaged (and enraged).
Wendy,,understand most people are not aware of legislation compliance issues.
We are not numbers or digital tech people but our careers included auditing noncompliance with legislation and in Anne’s case corpotate governance legislation.
We have yet another plan to deal with the issues many of which have been ignored by the appropriate authorities and are very serious and harmful issues. We again may not succeed but we will not give up trying until we are no longer able. Keep your eye out for a media release,
I have been discussing the changes in Procedural Bylaws that reduce engagement for years. One such change discussed with Kearns as soon as she was elected was used to prevent a candidate in the 2022 election from making a delegation. It was reported at length in the Gazette.
Correction – email to Pre-register is: getinvolved@burlington.ca
Again – an excellent delegation that would have benefited everyone to have been given the opportunity to finish. BTW, I believe that originally delegations were permitted 10 minutes but that this Council abbreviated that to 5. Apologies if I am in error. But it reflects a certain impatience with hearing what the public has to say.
What speaks volumes to me is the long list of names in the critical remarks, the comments and on the Fletcher petition that I recognize from the 2018 campaigns of Meed Ward, Kearns and Nisan. There are many disenchanted people who were part of ‘the parade’ and now just feel like the whole band is wrong. The degree of disappointment is something that this ‘political junkie’ has rarely seen.
Editor’s note: Delegations get 10 minutes at Standing Committee and 5 minutes at Council meetings. When this was set up then ward 1 Councillor Rick Craven tried to get it kept at 5 minutes for every delegation
Editor; Thank you for the correction. I was uncertain.
Ahh yes, Rick Craven – the absolute nemesis of Meed Ward. Not the most gentle of colleagues for her but he certainly had her number as the last 5 years have shown.
Residents can pre-register with the City to have their phone number added to the Mayor’s Telephone Town Hall meeting by emailing: gettogetherburlington@burlington.ca
They will call you. The Mayor’s Town Hall is on Tuesday, November 7, 2023 from 7 to 8:30 pm.
Excellent information again Lydia. Does this mean that nobody on council gave you the opportunity to finish your remarks? Because they do so often, where they will ask a delegate a question where they say what else did you want to say? The Mayor did this all the time as a councillor when she wanted her peeps to speak more, she did it not long ago so her pal Nick Leblovic could finish his remarks. But, once again, not all delegates and not all residents are created equal, it seems. If your message isn’t what they want, you’re shown the door. If you’re telling them what they want to hear, they’ll let you keep going on for ages. I made this point at the Engagement Charter workshop too.
The telephone town hall is all fine and dandy but we shall see the frustration it causes when people can’t get through, can’t ask what they want, don’t get answers and realize it’s not really a town hall at all. A real town hall and real engagement would be an open forum in person where the Mayor actually has to answer questions unscripted and on the fly and people can ask what they want and others can hear their questions and the answers.
Question 6. of “What do Burlington Residents Say”, Sep 30 ,2023 has a range of 1% to 7.8% and 6% of respondents agreed to that range. Asked a different way and the answer may have been ZERO %. Still, 6% is telling.
Burlington survey questions always leave a lot to be desired.
In the 1993 re-issue of the book “How to Lie With Statistics” Darrell Huff relates a comment from someone at the American Statistical Association regarding the title. “Not chicanery much of the time, but incompetence.”
This is a variation of Hanlon’s Razor “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
I used to prepare patient surveys for a hospital Committee Chair’s approva; the information collected helped improve patient care. I was shocked when the City started hiring consultants to do this job rather than an employee. It seemed the city preferred the consultant surveys where the questions always produced answers the city wanted.
Every new condo tower brings in significantly more tax dollars for the city to spend. Look at this fantasy listing on realtor.ca https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/26218532/2060-lakeshore-road-unit-1703-burlington The property taxes for this single unit are $11,371.00 a year. So a responsible city, like Richmond Hill, can get by with the increased revenue from new homes and condos. Yes these buildings need water and sewer but those services are provided by Halton Region. Burlington provides roads but have we noticed any new roads or widenings to help with traffic around these new buildings? So not only is Burlington increasing our taxes on the city’s portion of the tax bill by 10.21% (impact on the total bill is 4.99%) they are also spending far more money than last year because of new tax revenue from brand new houses and condos.
Eric
The long freeze on development (ie Interim Control Bylaw) in the downtown area means that the tax revenue hasn’t been growing.
The city only gets the increased revenue when projects get competed. Many haven’t even started yet because of everything getting appealed to the OLT.
The assessment growth under this council has been anemic.
One of the arguments used by proponents of the property tax increase is the loss of revenue from developers charges as a result of Ford’s Bill 23. But those charges have nothing to do with lost revenue. I’ve only downloaded the financial statements back to 2017 so far. But fairly consistently from 2017 forward, development charges have only accounted for roughly 2.5% of the city’s total revenues. There have been 2 yrs it was slightly higher and then dropped back down. So its not about lost revenue since we really haven’t been getting much from that for quite some time.
Like assessment growth you don’t get development fees or park charges unless there is actual development.
Burlington’s development fees and park charges were too low in comparison to other Municipalities.
The council voted to substantially increase them last year. The province bigfooted all the municipalities ability to collect development charges with the more homes built faster legislation.
Because Burlington wasn’t collecting enough in development charges to cover the actual costs of development the cities property taxes need to rise to cover the short fall.
When the amount developer fees contribute to total revenues is only 2.5%, that’s a weak argument for raising taxes.