City Budget, Lansdowne, and a Busy Council Schedule
This last week has been an incredibly busy one around the Council table. Not only was the draft 2024 budget tabled, but also Council has been debating the Lansdowne 2.0 proposal.
2024 Draft Budget
On Wednesday, Council received and tabled the 2024 draft budget. This document sets out the spending priorities for the City in the year to come. I would encourage everyone to review the budget and get involved in sharing you views on it.
As we have just received the budget, my office and I are still looking through it closely. Generally, the direction of the budget is encouraging: given inflation, a 2.5% tax increase at the City leads to a tight budget. It reflects the need to continue providing investments and services while also the need for the City to live within its means. Moreover, the Mayor has prioritized infrastructure, roads, and other core capital costs and services through the budget – priorities which require much greater investment in the coming years.
That being said, I still do have concerns, particularly given that many priorities within our communities remain unfunded. I will be diving into the budget to see what changes can be made to better reflect the needs of residents throughout our ward. For more information on what I believe should be included in the budget, check out the article that I prepared a few weeks ago on the matter. I will have more to say on this as soon as I have a chance to review the budget in detail.
Lansdowne 2.0
At the time of sending this email, after four days, 81 delegations, close to 40 different motions to amend the existing plan, Council is still debating the Lansdowne 2.0 proposal.
As many folks know, I have had serious concerns about the Lansdowne 2.0 proposal presented by City staff. My biggest concerns related to the cost of the plan and the fiscal picture. I have also shared serious concerns that the City should not be involved in the venture, mostly because of the risks associated and the fact that the costs were returning unclear benefits to the City. There is a clear need for public investment into programs and services that benefit the public; I have had concerns that the Lansdowne 2.0 did not meet that standard.
Even so, I have kept an open mind. From the beginning, I indicated my view that there should be a new plan for the site. I have been working behind the scenes with colleagues on changes to the 2.0 plan.
Additional housing density will be available on site; this helps make the plan closer to revenue-neutral for taxpayers and improves our housing supply. Additional funds from the sale of air assets on site will increase investments into affordable housing. Other motions direct staff to assess the costs and benefits of considering other ways to leverage City-owned assets, including through their sale, which effectively eliminates the financial risk to taxpayers.
Other changes, though not reflected in motions, are encouraging. For instance, I have received agreement that the estimated net-total annual cost to taxpayers of $5 million will be funded out of efficiencies found in the City rather than as new costs to taxpayers. This will save taxpayers roughly $150 million in savings over 30 years and will have the net effect of trading bureaucratic waste for a new facility at Lansdowne.
Moreover, through the debate process, City staff clarified that there will be several offramps available for Council before a final decision is made. That is to say that the decision before Council right now is a decision to move to the next step; it is not a final decision. By moving to the next step, Council will be provided a better idea of the actual fiscal picture.
Additionally, in reviewing the plan and partnership agreement in detail, I am reasonably satisfied that the financial plan – while beneficial to OSEG’s operations and the sports teams that use the facilities – will not result in undue private sector profit from public sector investments. The City’s equity investment is expected to be returned through revenues generated, and this will occur prior to any profits at OSEG.
These changes, clarifications, and directions are all encouraging. I will review what the report looks like on this Lansdowne 2.0 decision, but I will say that it looks much better than it did a few weeks ago.
Ultimately, there is still time to improve the plan before a final decision is made. If the final plan doesn’t benefit the City, it will not have my support. For now, staff will continue to refine the plan based on the motions that have come forward to improve the Lansdowne 2.0 project.