Joe Gaetan

March 23, 2026

Part one of a four-part Series

The Made-in-Canada Housing Crisis

Ontario’s housing crisis – and the introduction of Strong Mayor Powers (SMPs) – did not emerge overnight. They are the product of decades of federal and provincial policy choices. Beginning in the 1980s, the federal government steadily reduced its role in social housing. In 1993, it ended funding for new social housing altogether. By 1996, responsibility for housing had largely been downloaded to provinces, many of which lacked the fiscal capacity to sustain previous construction levels.

Fast forward to the pandemic era: ultra-low interest rates and a record population surge collided with a depleted housing supply. In 2023, Canada added 5.1 new residents for every housing unit built – the highest ratio in modern history – transforming a long-standing shortage into a national emergency.

The Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Report

In 2022, the Ontario government struck the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force, which released its report on February 8, 2022.

The report contained 55 major recommendations, including:

• A bold target of 1.5 million homes over 10 years;
  • “As-of-right” zoning to allow housing to be built without discretionary approvals;
  • Uniform urban design standards;
  • Limits on abuse of heritage designations;
  • Restrictions on appeals used to delay projects
  • Creation of an Ontario Housing Delivery Fund to reward compliant municipalities and penalize non-compliance;
  • Improved municipal financing tools; and
  • Measures to address labour shortages.

Click HERE to access full report

Were Municipal Councils the Problem?

The Task force looked at a number of causes, effects and the possible solutions to the housing problem, from cutting red tape – to investing in municipal infrastructure – to fixing the Ontario Land Tribunal. The reports’ view of municipal councils’ role in housing approvals was largely negative – not because councillors oppose housing in principle, but because electoral incentives often push them to prioritize vocal local opposition over broader housing needs. It describes a politicized planning process in which even proposals supported by professional staff are delayed or rejected to appease existing residents.

While the report stops short of explicitly endorsing Strong Mayor Powers, it clearly points toward removing or constraining council discretion – through as-of-right zoning, mandatory delegation to staff, and cost consequences for overturning staff recommendations – as the preferred solution.

In effect, the report frames reduced council control, rather than enhanced council leadership, as the pathway to accelerating housing supply.

 Strong Mayor Powers – Genesis?

When voters went to the polls in 2022, they had no way of knowing that the mayor they elected would soon wield Strong Mayor Powers. The reason is simple: Premier Ford never disclosed his intention to fundamentally restructure municipal governance during the campaign.

The Housing Affordability Task Force made no mention of SMPs as a solution to the housing crisis. Nor did the province meaningfully consult local governments, municipal associations, or planning professionals before imposing these powers. In fact, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) urged the province to consult widely, warning that extending such powers could produce unintended consequences.

The concept of “strong mayor” powers in Ontario did not emerge by accident. It reflects a long-standing political view that municipal governance should concentrate authority in the office of the mayor rather than distribute it across council. As legal scholar Alexandra Flynn notes in her analysis of Ontario’s strong mayor framework, the argument has often been framed around the idea that accountability is clearer when power rests with a single elected leader. In 2014 Ontario Premier Doug Ford expressed this view directly when discussing municipal governance, stating:

 “If I ever get to the provincial level of politics, municipal affairs is the first thing I would want to change. I think mayors across this province deserve stronger powers. One person in charge, with veto power, similar to the strong mayoral systems in New York and Chicago and LA. I would want our mayors to have strong powers but to be held accountable; if the voters don’t like the job he or she is doing, they can fire that mayor in four years. That’s how it should work.”¹

 By 2022 that philosophy would form the foundation of Ontario’s strong mayor legislation – powers that have been granted to municipalities like Burlington, and whose practical use and implications will be examined in this series.

 Summary 

Strong Mayor Powers were introduced as a tool to fix housing. Whether they will actually do so – and at what cost to local governance – remains an open question.

This Series, will examine:
Will the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force’s fifty-five housing recommendations – or Strong Mayor Powers – actually result in more homes, or an erosion of democracy? The answer to these questions matter – not just for housing policy, but for the future of local governance itself.
Here is what’s next:

Article 2.  Strong Mayor Powers – How They Actually Work

Article 3.  Strong Mayor Powers – The Institutional Verdict

Article 4.  Strong Mayor Powers – A Burlington Case Study

¹ Alexandra Flynn, “Un-Democratizing the City? Unwritten Constitutional Principles and Ontario’s Strong Mayor Powers,” The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 115 (2024)

Joe Gaetan is a Burlington resident and a frequent contributor on civic issues.  He graduated from Athabasca University with a Bachelor of General Studies in Applied Studies.