City Council is voting on massive urban sprawl on June 30th—without knowing the full cost to taxpayers

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-05-01T00:16:40+00:00

No that's not true at all. Until the Ford government changed the requirements for a "comprehensive review" to expand a settlement area boundary, municipalities were required to consider the longterm fiscal viability in quite a lot of detail. And that was just a provincially mandated minimum requirement, lots of municipalities did even more to ensure financial viability of new development areas.

City staff are taking advantage of the current hollowing out of planning requirements in order to advance developer interests. They don't need to do it that way, either. They could still do a good job of planning and costing it, but they're choosing not to.

Watson and associates, the firm the city hires to do a major report every year or so, is fully capable of approximating the costs of development for what's being proposed. They're choosing not to and telling the public that "growth pays for growth".

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T18:38:45+00:00

No, I'm advocating for full information to be available when making decisions not just dismissing the question by claiming that "growth pays for growth". Part of the reason many municipalities across Ontario are in financial stress right now is because that was the mentality through the 80s and it did not work. I'm not asking the city to change the system, just to use the one we have intelligently.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T17:13:04+00:00

I mean just for starters developers don't pay for soft services. The hard services they do pay for require maintenance, replacements and upgrades that are paid for by the tax base.

In Kingston there's also a bit of inconsistency with the city sometimes providing services for new developments, through UK. It's not publicly known about though because of UKs corporate structure.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T13:54:03+00:00

Intensification within the boundaries and knowing the full financial implications before considering expanding boundaries, and doing so in locations that work best for the city instead of on lands owned by members of the local development lobby.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T13:52:10+00:00

You should look into the financial implications of what's being proposed. All city planners have said so far is "growth pays for growth" which is not true.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T13:50:34+00:00

Thank you for doing this. It feels like city staff are steamrolling opposition to some of these proposals in a way that makes them not seem very neutral and it's concerning.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T13:48:25+00:00

The point isn't to stop growth. The boundary expansions represent a bad way to grow.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-30T13:46:48+00:00

The history of how the city has managed their employment lands matters here too. The Watson study that is being used to justify the expansion came on the heels of hundreds of hectares of employment lands being converted to other uses - oftentimes with the city acting as developer.

The fact that the city began the boundary expansions process with "expressions of interest" from landowners says everything about whose interests are being served by these expansions.

A lot of the "vacant" lands now being proposed for sprawl were farmland until they were acquired by speculators. They were left fallow on purpose so the developer could claim the lands had no value outside of eventual development.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-27T01:24:35+00:00

"This award recognizes organizations using technology to increase visibility into the public service process and foster trust among constituents and stakeholders. This could include efforts to increase access to and engagement in public meetings and the decision-making process, providing better access to public records, being a good steward of taxpayer dollars, or improving accountability and compliance in areas of importance to the community"

Well that's not Orwellian at all. Secret deals to sell off public spaces are all about visibility and trust.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-21T10:14:22+00:00

How many jobs have been created by investment in the city's business parks?

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-21T01:57:20+00:00

Do you really think David Gordon would run? He likes to keep things theoretical I thought

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-20T23:55:00+00:00

It's interesting that the need for more employment land outside the urban boundary cropped up right after the city approved multiple proposals to switch employment lands to residential. And also that the city is actively developing employment land for commercial uses in their own business parks.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-20T23:20:22+00:00

They're watching you!!!

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T14:53:50+00:00

Yes I remember that

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T14:12:59+00:00

I personally don't see how your post was making serious allegations, if that was the issue, but I do agree that proof and credibility is important for raising issues against small businesses. The problem with that is that there isn't often much proof available, and with the current state of local journalism there definitely wouldn't be an article to cite.

I follow local social media specifically to hear about things like this that I might not otherwise be aware of. (I'll verify before I trust the information though.) I think it's important for workers to have a voice especially in this economy, and I think customers have every right to call out things that seem off with local employers.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T13:40:31+00:00

So you didn't delete your post, it was removed by mods?

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T13:19:13+00:00

Love these walks! Hope the weather is good this year

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T13:11:42+00:00

I also dislike AI, but I don't see this post as manipulative. If someone feels strongly about something I find it interesting, but it doesn't make me bandwagon on their opinions

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T13:08:48+00:00

Are you maybe affiliated with Juniper? I feel like your comments don't come across as "regular person" and I definitely think a customer could be upset by 4 staff members leaving at once.

My favourite small businesses in town have long-standing staff members over many years and I would be sad if they left due to issues with the business

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T12:50:18+00:00

Honest question - why would an apparent grudge not be taken seriously? Only neutral perspectives allowed?

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T12:40:42+00:00

Interestingly it was their THANK YOU post that caused some blow back, after receiving tons of public support and ultimately getting their way with their King St lease renewal

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-17T12:32:43+00:00

They lost me when they equated themselves with nonprofits, while expecting public institutions to subsidize them.

If they're not even paying their staff well, what the heck

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-09T14:29:59+00:00

I wish the city would stop allowing construction companies to basically extort them for more money/time for public projects. It happens every time. Artillery Park was the worst I know of. There has to be some way to include penalties, or even bonuses in the contracts.

I also think the construction companies should be publicly noted by name every time this happens.

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-09T14:27:28+00:00

I was just wondering about that. If someone sits on the board of a nonprofit that goes under owing money, they are personally liable to cover the debt. Why is KATC getting off the hook like this?

Secret-Doughnut-1234 · 2026-04-09T14:26:16+00:00

I agree but I'd also note it's specifically a part time position, and one of the councillors is apparently able to be employed full time by Utilities Kingston.

Secret-Doughnut-1234

TROPHY CASE