Committee of the Whole · March 04, 2026 · Item 8.1
Lobbyist Registry One Year Review report, dated March 4, 2026, be received.
Main motion under the agenda item Lobbyist Registry One Year Review - 2026-54
Carried (11 to 0)
11 in favour, 0 against — unanimous
What was voted on
The motion in its exact words, as recorded in the minutes.
That the Lobbyist Registry One Year Review report, dated March 4, 2026, be received.
Moved by Councillor Caron, seconded by Councillor Richardson.
How the room voted
In favour (11)
- Allt
- Billings
- Busuttil
- Caron
- Caton
- Chew
- Downer
- Goller
- Hauser
- Klassen
- Richardson
What council was given
The staff reports and correspondence attached to this item. The summaries are written automatically, so you can tell what a document is without opening a ninety-page PDF.
- Lobbyist Registry One Year Review - 2026-54.pdf
A one-year check-in on Guelph's lobbyist registry, which Council is asked simply to receive. As of January 20, 2026, 79 lobbyists had registered and 62 instances of lobbying were reported. Surveys of lobbyists, councillors and staff, plus input from the Lobbyist Registrar, produced few suggestions, and staff recommend no changes. The next review comes with the governance review in early 2027.
A summary is this site’s description of a document, not the City’s. Open the document before relying on one.
What was said
4,330 words from the meeting recording, transcribed automatically. Times are from the start of the recording.
Read the debate(click to open)
1:25:17Just if if there is anyone opposed or have any questions
1:25:22Okay seeing none. I think that carries them. Thank you
1:25:30Thank you so much chair Busuttil
1:25:33So we've recorded that as a unanimous vote
1:25:35To approve the report for the law is registry year one
1:25:40Then we're moving along on our agenda. We're going over to chair
1:25:45Tehran for item 11 the administrative development charge by lab. I'll turn things over to you
1:25:52Okay, thank you chair Goller got two fairly major items today and that is the administrative development charge by law
1:25:59And the property tax policy, so I'm going to turn it over. We have a presentation for the first item
1:26:05Shana O'Dwyer and Justin way in our
1:26:09Finance department over to you for our presentation
1:26:13Good morning members of council. My name is Justin way and I'm the manager of financial strategy and reporting
1:26:25I'm pleased to be before you today to present an overview of the administrative updates to the DC by-law that are recommended in the staff reports
1:26:35I'll then turn it over to Shana to provide an update on what other municipalities are doing with DC incentives
1:26:41So over the past 20 months or so there have been three major pieces of legislation that have impacted the DC act
1:26:51There are bills 185 bill 17 bill 60
1:26:54If you recall our DC by-law was last updated in November 2024 for some of the changes made through bill 185
1:27:01That had a special transitional pathway in timeline
1:27:04The remaining change related to updating the rate freeze provisions is being made through this update as it was not included in that previous
1:27:11special process
1:27:12The second item is bill 17 which received real assent in June 2025
1:27:16This was followed by an order in council on October 23 for changes in effect as of November 3rd and
1:27:23The impact of this was a deferral DC payment timing from building permit issuance to occupancy
1:27:29Then lastly bill 60 which received real assent in November November 2025
1:27:33While while there are a few administrative updates that go into effect right away most of those changes
1:27:39And impacts require some future work ahead
1:27:42So the DC by-law update before council for approval today is administrative in nature
1:27:50It primarily includes changes that align our DC by-law with legislation
1:27:55Some minor housekeeping items to clarify definitions and it does not alter growth forecast capital requirements or any DC rates
1:28:02The first change is related to bill 185 which limits the timeline for a DC rate freeze to 18 months
1:28:08Prior to this DC rates were frozen at the time of a complete site plan application
1:28:12We're zoning by-law amendments and they're frozen from two years from that date of application approval
1:28:18Going forward. They'll be frozen for 18 months interest continues to accrue on the frozen DC rates from the time of the planning application
1:28:24And that has not changed and really the objective of this change is to speed up development once planning approvals are in place
1:28:31The second and biggest change was from bill 17 which has updated the timing of payments from building permit issuance to occupancy
1:28:37And this will have a substantial impact on the timing of our DC collections and we'll look into that estimate of this impact on the next slide
1:28:45It's also important to note as interest is no longer to be charged from the DC's owing from building permit dates to occupancy
1:28:52We see the time value of money also erode from this change
1:28:55Nevertheless the building community strongly advocated for this change as it will reduce the carrying charges
1:29:00They have on a development's ultimately improving the proformers
1:29:03So looking at the financial impact at payment at occupancy. There's several items to note
1:29:11The delayed payment timing will result in cash flow pressures for the city
1:29:16Decrease present value of our DC revenues loss interest earnings or greater interest costs from increased requirements debt finance and greater uncertainty in time
1:29:24your receipt
1:29:25For this analysis the finance team were closely with the building team to pull data on the average number of months between building permit issuance and occupancy
1:29:33For residential development at the city by type
1:29:36So the first table on left shows that the average range is for from nine nine months
1:29:4117 months and 14 months for low medium and high density respectively
1:29:44We then apply this data to the forecast DC collections, which was prepared previously when collection was at building permit issuance
1:29:52So with the chart you see what they tried on the right you'll see that this estimated impact
1:29:56Will be in the range of 10 to 20 million over the next three years
1:30:00Staff will continue to track and report on this impact through a quarterly budget monitoring reports
1:30:05But it's very likely that additional capital deferrals will be required through future capital budget updates in order to manage these impacts
1:30:11And then lastly we'll look at bill 60
1:30:17So there's two changes
1:30:19Effective immediate immediately upon royal assent and these are primarily related to reporting an oversight
1:30:24So firstly there's a new requirements have the annual DC statements go to council by June 30th and submitted to the minister by July 15th
1:30:31Secondly the minister may request copies are DC bylaws and background studies at any time
1:30:36Overall happy to report these changes are not a concern as we're already producing these documents within those required timelines
1:30:42So we have no problem submitting them to the province through the required deadlines
1:30:45And then there's two major changes or sorry two main changes that require some future work ahead for the city
1:30:51First local service policy or LSPs
1:30:54So bill 60 introduced a requirement to include LSP as part of the DC background study
1:30:59While some municipalities don't have LSP in place
1:31:02Well, DC background study does and only a minor only minor updates would be needed to bring it fully into compliance with the new requirements
1:31:09However, the city's last major review and update of the LSP occurred with the 2018 DC background study
1:31:15So staff I recommend a more fulsome review and update to be completed and brought back to council for approval by May
1:31:212027 and that timelines in alignment with the transition timelines provided for in the legislation and
1:31:26Really this review would help identify any opportunities to improve clarity and predictability around the LSP and ultimately support the next
1:31:33comprehensive DC background study update, which is currently planned to begin in 2027 for council approval in 2029
1:31:40Secondly it's an is a new land acquisition class
1:31:43So bill 60 and introduced a requirement to separate land costs
1:31:46Into a separate class of service in DC bylaws and as part of this to remove land values from the historic service level standards for each individual service
1:31:55And the transition timelines require this work to be done as part of the next comprehensive DC background study update
1:32:00Which as mentioned slated to begin in 2027 and coming to council in 2029
1:32:06And with that I'll hand it over to Shannon for the last few slides
1:32:14Thank You Justin and good morning council
1:32:17So these days there is always a lot going on with development charges and that includes legislative changes
1:32:24Lobbying by the building community
1:32:26Analysis being undertaken by think tanks and initiatives being undertaken by municipalities
1:32:31So while we're in front of you on this topic. We wanted to take the opportunity to update you on what we're seeing out there from other municipalities
1:32:47So last year we brought you information in the March housing and wealth semi-annual update
1:32:52About what some municipalities had done with respect to providing discounts or exemptions from DC's
1:32:58Since then some of those discounts have been expanded and others have begun to explore incentives
1:33:04For example last year we reported to you that Mississauga had partially discounted their DC rates
1:33:09And since then they have expanded that to a full grant in lieu for some types of residential building
1:33:15Peel region has matched this initiative with both set to expire at the end of this council term
1:33:20The city of London is currently in the process of exploring a community improvement plan to provide support for first-time home buyers and
1:33:27Last fall the city of Burlington directed
1:33:30Their staff to bring back options for DC incentives
1:33:34These approaches vary in scope duration and fiscal exposure
1:33:38Some have funding commitments from other levels of government to support their changes and others do not
1:33:44We are providing this update to let you know that we are monitoring what others are doing and why we do not recommend going down this path in Guelph
1:33:57As a reminder DC rates are set to recover the capital costs of infrastructure that support growth within
1:34:03Legislated constraints
1:34:05The rates are a mathematical calculation that spreads the eligible capital costs across forecasted growth
1:34:12Providing an exemption from paying DCs creates a gap because it does not make the infrastructure cost less
1:34:18It simply provides less funds to pay for it
1:34:22The exemption gap must be filled and municipalities have very limited options for how to do that
1:34:27namely property taxes and utility rates
1:34:31Guelph has highly prioritized growth enabling capital works in our capital budget and forecast
1:34:36Even in the face of low DC collections using debt financing and inter-reserve fund borrowing
1:34:43This means that the city is committed to DC debt payments that non-eligible capital work has been deferred to accommodate
1:34:50Inter-reserve fund borrowing this puts pressure on older infrastructure and increases the risk of service disruption
1:34:56And that is a trade-off for moving infrastructure that supports growth forward in the face of limited capital funds
1:35:03There are also significant statutory discounts and exemptions already required
1:35:09Targeted at development that the province has prioritized
1:35:12Rental housing affordable and nonprofit housing and additional dwelling units
1:35:17Making up for these exemptions is already diverting a significant amount of property tax and utility utility rates supported capital funding
1:35:25to help pay for growth
1:35:27The development community has been very
1:35:30Active in advocating for DC related changes and reductions and have become very effective at it
1:35:36They recently successfully advocated for moving payment of residential DCs from building permit to occupancy as you just heard from Justin
1:35:44This has been in place since November 3rd, but so far we have not seen this result in increased building permits
1:35:51We are hopeful that will change
1:35:59Zeroing in on Burlington for a moment this slide shows what services are included in Guelph single-tier DC
1:36:06Versus Burlington's lower tier and Halton's upper tier DCs
1:36:10Burlington has not finalized their direct direction forward at this time
1:36:14But one option that was moved forward at a vote of their committee of the whole in February was a broad-based residential DC exemption
1:36:22Earlier this week they voted instead to direct their staff to pursue a potential CIP option
1:36:28With funding from another source aside from property taxes
1:36:32While Burlington's ultimate decision on this matter is uncertain
1:36:35We wanted to show you some of the differences between Guelph and Burlington a
1:36:40Burlington exemption would only apply to the lower tier portion of the DC
1:36:45The Halton region DC would still be applicable to development in Burlington and even with a full lower tier exemption
1:36:51The cost of building a single detached residential unit in Burlington would be just under
1:36:57$7,000 less than the undiscounted rate in Guelph
1:37:00The other thing to point out is that some of the core enabling services like water wastewater and storm water
1:37:06Would not be impacted as those services are provided at the regional level
1:37:11So what if Guelph did that?
1:37:14Based on planning application status there are 654 units ready and fairly likely to move ahead to building permit in
1:37:212026 and
1:37:23171 more units with the potential to do so if
1:37:27Guelph implemented a blanket residential DC exemption similar to that which Burlington was considering at one point
1:37:34That would require municipal tax and ratepayers to make up for over 46 million dollars in DC exemptions a
1:37:40Property tax impact of 8.85 percent
1:37:44plus increases to water rates and that would be in addition to the nearly 18 million of
1:37:49statutory DC exemptions and discounts that would already need to be funded
1:37:54For the rental and affordable or nonprofit units included in those estimates
1:37:59So this is a chart that you've seen before and this version was updated for us last August by Watson and Associates
1:38:11The green arrow shows you where Guelph's residential DCs are in comparison with other municipalities all in including the school board DCs
1:38:19We felt it was important to show this given recent inaccurate reports that Guelph's DCs are at the higher end
1:38:26That is simply not true
1:38:33The reality is that limited municipal revenue tools combined with high a high level of responsibility for infrastructure is
1:38:41creating an untenable financial situation if
1:38:44DCs are reduced the city's options are to defer growth
1:38:49Infrastructure investment indefinitely
1:38:51constraining growth and working against our responsibility to build infrastructure to enable
1:38:56legislative growth targets to be met or
1:38:59To remove amenity based infrastructure from our DCs and only deliver core infrastructure
1:39:04Which puts pressure on the municipal infrastructure that makes a community or?
1:39:09Shift additional cost to the property tax and rate base
1:39:13Over the past several years the province has made dozens of changes to DC and planning legislation
1:39:20Every time it requires analysis
1:39:23Quantification of impacts reporting communication adjustments to financial strategies
1:39:29adjustments to administrative processes and systems and bylaw updates
1:39:33Every time there's an announcement from any level of government about an intent to look into or do something related to reduce DCs or
1:39:41Other changes to make development conditions more favorable
1:39:45The effect is to freeze up development plans until that policy is either implemented or determined not to be moving forward a
1:39:53New approach is needed
1:39:55Attempting to incentivize development through constant legislative changes has not had the desired effect
1:40:01We need an approach that is administratively efficient and does not place all the risk and financial burden on municipalities
1:40:09We need new
1:40:11Stable predictable funding for growth infrastructure from other upper levels of government
1:40:16I have emphasized or underlined the word new on the slide
1:40:20Because I don't mean the repurposing of existing infrastructure funding such as federal gas tax
1:40:25Which we already rely on for capital infrastructure renewal work
1:40:30Stable and predictable means a long-term commitment to annual allocations that we do not have to submit applications for
1:40:37With uncertain outcomes and unknown approval timelines
1:40:41Upfront means that upper levels of government do not require municipalities to take on risky decisions to provide
1:40:48time limited exemptions
1:40:50Underwritten by property tax and ratepayers and hope for that money to come
1:40:56It means new dedicated funding for growth infrastructure that municipalities can count on
1:41:02With that kind of commitment we could update our DC study
1:41:05Reduce DC rates without jeopardizing our capital plans and without pushing the cost on to property taxpayers
1:41:13so that's
1:41:14everything I have to
1:41:16Share and we're happy to take any questions from council
1:41:22Thank you so much for that presentation and that call to action for for legislative stability was really really hit
1:41:28It was I'm glad you added that to your slide as
1:41:32a call to action at the end
1:41:34Before we go to council questions, I recognize councillor Allt as the first question
1:41:40We are under a public meeting under section 12 of the development charges act
1:41:45So I do need to call for anyone in the audience
1:41:48If you are here to delegate and there will be a number going up on the screen if there's anyone watching from home
1:41:54Who would like to delegate on this matter now is the time to call in so we'll take a
1:42:00few minutes to pause and wait for any
1:42:04Calls to come in is there anyone in the gallery who wishes to delegate on this item?
1:42:09Seeing none, we'll just wait one moment
1:42:12We've had no incoming call. So we're going to move to discussion
1:42:50Councillor Allt you have the floor
1:42:52Thank you very much chair Caron
1:42:55through you to to our staff and in particular to
1:43:00Mizzow Dwyer with first of all a shout out
1:43:03I want to compliment our staff and particularly Mizzow Dwyer on perhaps the most blatantly
1:43:11Political financial report that I have ever seen at City Council and one that is both direct and forthright and founded in fact
1:43:21Mizzow Dwyer, I think you might be my first financial being counter hero
1:43:26It's something that we need to hear and it's something that every municipality in Ontario needs to state
1:43:33Because Doug Ford does it again with that I'd like to go to some of the particulars
1:43:38I originally only had one question
1:43:40But as the as the report went on more grew first of all, I'd like to focus on bill 17 and interest versus carrying
1:43:48Charges some comments were made about capital deferrals and this strikes me as a vicious cycle that we're now entering into
1:43:56Could we please comment on what kind of capital deferrals we might have to address?
1:44:02Will these be infrastructure and will these interestingly enough therefore lead to fewer building permits possibly being
1:44:13Approved because we just don't have the infrastructure. I don't know whether that's to our
1:44:18Financial staff or whether our planning staff needs to address it
1:44:24through the chair, I'll start
1:44:26and so I think
1:44:28the level of deferrals of
1:44:32Capital works through the next budget cycle and future budget cycles will really be dependent on how those estimates bear out in reality
1:44:40in terms of the
1:44:42Delayed collections and how that impacts what we had projected
1:44:47And so we will take you know the usual methodical approach that we take to updating the capital forecast
1:44:54We'll update those projections. We will
1:44:58make other changes if we get any
1:45:01Grants or if we end up closing out capital projects at under budget and are able to return money to the reserve funds
1:45:09So all of that will factor into that next update
1:45:12And then we will rely on our capital prioritization framework
1:45:16to figure out which
1:45:19projects to
1:45:20push out
1:45:22Thank you. I wanted to comment on what I consider to be the incredible irony that this could actually
1:45:29lead to a
1:45:32Hesitation of builders to actually consider large-scale developments because the infrastructure or
1:45:39Other amenities just aren't there. Is that a correct assumption and is the the promise of the three million homes actually
1:45:48That we've heard
1:45:50Really just dust in the wind
1:45:55Thank you through the chair. I'll start and then others to my left may have thoughts on that
1:46:00I think that absolutely that there's a cycle there to look at with infrastructure
1:46:08We need to build enabling infrastructure to allow development to happen and we're doing our best to move that forward
1:46:14In the face of all of these changes recognizing the need for that development
1:46:19But there is a time that will come that that high priority items
1:46:24We are we have we've deferred all the medium priority
1:46:28We started to defer some of the
1:46:31Medium-high priority last year and so there's not that much further to go in the future
1:46:37Besides high priority deferrals. I think so there there's absolutely a circular effect that will will happen now
1:46:44We do have our
1:46:46Municipal service and financing agreements policy in place so that if we've deferred
1:46:52Infrastructure out in our capital budget, but a developer is ready to move something forward
1:46:57ahead of that timeline there is a pathway for them to do that and so
1:47:02So we've we've tried to balance that impact
1:47:05Are there comments from the other side? I don't know I can't see
1:47:13Through through the chair, I think I just say that
1:47:17In terms of the prioritization already done we were prioritizing city-wide projects that would
1:47:24advance city-wide growth
1:47:27Rather than site specific and so
1:47:30I think that that would be the first place that you would that we would see a bit of a change is that we would
1:47:38We would
1:47:40Potentially be impacting specific developments if we had to go any further than we are right now. So hopefully that that helps
1:47:48Kind of round out the the question
1:47:51If I might carry that on then
1:47:54Quite often there are
1:47:58I'm chair quarterbacks, I guess I'll say who are constantly talking about libraries and rec centers
1:48:05We're not talking libraries and rec centers here. Are we we're talking about the very foundations of building it? Are we not?
1:48:15Through the mayor or sorry rather the chair
1:48:18we are talking about all of the
1:48:22Infrastructure that supports growth and so there's different priority levels for different types of infrastructure and that enabling infrastructure as
1:48:31CAO Baker mentioned that serves the whole city
1:48:35such as water
1:48:36stations
1:48:37Waste water facilities that are needed that would constrain growth across the whole city if they weren't moved forward is what we've prioritized
1:48:46Thank you. I think that's very important for people to hear
1:48:49I want to go to bill 60 land acquisition
1:48:53Class the new class system
1:48:56There's a
1:48:57It's implied and I think that you stated it that there is a reduction of the cost to the actual
1:49:03Builders and developers and that this is going to be passed on to the to the taxpayers
1:49:09Do we have any idea because this is a huge issue?
1:49:13We have a you know an 8% or more tax increase this year
1:49:18What you're telling me is that the new normal is 8% and beyond and I was wondering if you could comment on that please
1:49:27Through the chair, I might have to help you might have to help me parse that question apart a little bit counselor alt
1:49:33So the land acquisition class
1:49:36So that is that essentially will take land costs for growth and separate them out of the existing
1:49:44Services like services for a highway or recreation and parks take those out and put them in their own class
1:49:50And so the impact of that overall is we don't know what that is at this time
1:49:56We don't expect it to be a very significant impact actually because we still will be able to
1:50:02Collect DCs for land
1:50:04But we have to do that analysis and that will happen through the next development charge background study update
1:50:11And thank you essentially you answered the question
1:50:14I'm a little relieved by your answer to be perfectly honest because I'd expected it to be greater
1:50:21So again, thank you very much to our financial staff for this and I I cannot
1:50:28Say anything more than
1:50:30Residents concerned about taxes need to remember Doug Ford does it again
1:50:36Thank you counselor out for your questions. I have on the speaker's list counselor busatil and goller
1:50:43That's a busatil. Thank you through the chair
1:50:45I have most of my questions have been asked by a counselor alt
1:50:49But I do also want to say ditto in terms of appreciation
1:50:53For the staff this report was excellent in in fact really making the connection between
1:50:58The centralized provincial kind of regulations and the impact locally
1:51:03Tax base and our capital planning
1:51:06As well. I did have a question and it's a clarification
1:51:10I wasn't clear in the report for mr. Way when when we talk around bill 60 and the reporting cycle
1:51:17I know we do the reports here at city council, but I'm curious about whether or not or not
1:51:22This is a new centralized requirement to report to the province
1:51:28Because I don't recall that
1:51:30Yes through the care. I believe it is a new centralized
1:51:34Report and requirement to the province that being said there's been no
1:51:39Details fully released yet as to how we submit our reports
1:51:44But we are confident that you know within those timeframes we already generate those reports
1:51:48So as soon as we know when and where we need to submit it, we'll do a no problem
1:51:53Thank you. And if the chair will allow me a comment, I you know
1:51:57Uh
1:51:58Just from other areas
1:52:00In the in the province. I guess for me this is where is this trend line going in terms of centralization and planning in the g
1:52:08RCA environmental protection and so on this reporting and I and I come from a highly regulated
1:52:14ministry of education where
1:52:16Everything is centralized and improved from capital to everything else and as we see the
1:52:22Infrastructure pilot project happening next door with brampton. I'm concerned about the centralization
1:52:28And the increasing control and monitoring
1:52:31Not only downwards in terms of the regulation in the acts but upwards in terms of who determines
1:52:37What are the priorities here in guelph? What are the capital priorities as we heard and so on?
1:52:41So just a little bit of concern about where is this trend line going? Thank you
1:52:46Thanks, councillor Busuttil. Uh, councillor Goller over to you. We don't have the recommendations on the floor yet
1:52:50Would you be willing to place us on the floor seconded by
1:52:53councillor hauser
1:52:56Floor service. Uh, thank you and through you chair Caron
1:52:59Um, I really appreciate this report and the explanation you gave that it is very clear to me
1:53:05I do have one outstanding question from some of the the
1:53:09One letter from the the constitution that wrote in and some of the messages I've received from the home builders
1:53:16Um, you sort of debunked the idea that if we lower these things we would actually see more builds
1:53:22But just so that I fully understand if we were to reduce or eliminate
1:53:28Development charges for residential and if they were to be those those buildings that are built
1:53:34um, I understand that
Automatic transcription is imperfect. Treat quotes as a guide and check the recording before relying on exact wording.
The motion, the vote and the debate come from the City of Guelph’s published record, reproduced rather than interpreted. The document summaries above are the exception: those words were written for this site.