Dear Editor,
It appears in all likelihood that we will be heading to the polls for both a Provincial and Federal election before the flowers are in bloom and the corn is planted in farm fields. I wonder if those folks that vote will consider the recent policies of our senior levels of government when it comes to growth management?
Municipalities face major financial challenges with maintaining and replacing existing infrastructure. There are now significant demands placed on local politicians from the Province and Feds to allow development and “build more housing” which normally means the need for even more infrastructure. We seem to chase growth by expanding linear infrastructure, constructing new recreation facilities, libraries and fire halls, offering new programming, etc. Unfortunately, this all comes at a cost to both the new taxpayer being courted and the existing taxpayer that somehow thinks growth will be the savior and reduce their tax bill. It also comes at the cost of the environment where resource extraction is necessary to support the ever-increasing construction, maintenance and operation of this public infrastructure.
I’m currently reviewing the 2025 draft budget, much like I have for the past decade, and recognize that along with a current proposed 10% tax increase, there are some very large projects on the horizon, like a $100M wastewater plant expansion, that will place enormous pressure on debt capacity and future tax levies not to mention the absolute need for development to continue for the next 30 years to pay off all the infrastructure required to support it.
I’m not against growth and increased economic wealth for the community. I certainly think it’s better to grow than shrink. The question is, however, does growth, as currently practiced and evaluated, really benefit the community? Is it making the community richer economically, socially or environmentally, or might it be increasing costs faster than it benefits and making us poorer? I’m certain that Trudeau, Singh, Poilievre, Ford, Crombie, Stiles or our local council members don’t know the answer. The reason they don’t is that no one is measuring costs as they only focus on the perceived benefits of growth.
As a society, should we not review our expectations and urge our local politicians and senior levels of government to abandon the relentless pursuit of growth in favor of steady-state economy? A steady-state economy seeks to find an equilibrium between production growth and population growth. One that would achieve a stable balance between supporting residents’ needs and preserving the environment.
Has anyone considered implementing a demand curve analysis into municipal government? The Municipality of Meaford isn’t trying to maximize profits like the private sector, but council and staff are hopefully trying to maximize efficiency and effectiveness of tax dollars that are used to fund infrastructure and offer programs for our users, residents and taxpayers. Big businesses like Walmart, Tesla and Home Depot determine the highest price they can charge before losing too many customers in an effort to maximize their overall profit margin. Using this approach would tell Meaford where the ‘sweet spot’ of a community’s size is based on the current capacity of its infrastructure. Council, staff and the general taxpayer would then be informed and could determine if there is any real value in expanding services to meet demand beyond that point.
If you combine the outcomes of Meaford’s Official Plan, Zoning By-law and recent Development Charges study the belief is that Meaford is expected to double in population in less than 30 years. This isn’t the municipality as a whole, but the growth and settlement area of the town proper from Muir Street to the new Loon Call development on Highway 26.
There’s already a push back on intensification and expectations of new residents and their desire for familiar “big city” services and programs. This will add even more financial pressure and increase the burden on the tax base. By placating the demands of upper levels of government and chasing its own desires for growth, has Council adequately communicated the long-term effects of current policies? Do they know if the existing residents understand that the town is expected to more than double in size? Would residents really be happy with Meaford looking more like Hanover, Kincardine or even a mini-Collingwood? Has Council considered how the fabric of the small-town feel, or how close-knit neighbourhoods might change, with a doubling of the urban population?
Everyone thinks that growth is the answer and that existing residents will see reduced taxes with significant development but that will never happen. Just ask your friends in the Town of the Blue Mountains that lived there prior to the boom in the Village. Those long-term residents haven’t seen a tax break or any reduction in tax levies. They’ve only seen intensification, new residents with high demands and expectations and an erosion of their sense of community.
When you vote, please consider the consequences of Federal and Provincial policies that are shoved onto the local politicians to deal with. Also take time to review the annual budget to understand what long-term direction this Council is steering the ship toward. If we don’t take an active role in how we want the community to look we can’t complain when the boat runs aground and is beyond repair.
Darcy Chapman, Bognor
