Growth numbers released as part of the 2019 operating budget show Hamilton is becoming even more of a bedroom community strongly skewed to greenfield sprawl and with insufficient jobs. Last week’s budget meeting also revealed some city savings because the Ford government cancelled minimum wage increases and personal emergency leave days.
In 2018 building housing attracted more than thirty times more spending than industrial expansion. That makes the city even more financially dependent on the property taxes of homeowners rather than businesses. “We are still reliant on residential taxes so we’re not yet moving that yardstick in the direction we want to move it,” lamented finance chief Mike Zegarac.
Since the industrial sector attracted less than three percent of growth dollars, new jobs are not keeping pace with the climb in population. A survey three years ago showed nearly four in ten of Hamilton’s work force was already employed outside the city.
Zegarac reported a $900 million increase in the city’s tax assessment base in 2018 with the vast majority from residential expansion in upper Stoney Creek, Waterdown and Ancaster. New housing units climbed to 2500 last year, according to Zegarac, but only 300 of those were in downtown Hamilton where the city offers multiple subsidies to encourage development.
The continuing dominance of suburban greenfield growth leaves Hamilton well below its objective of at least four out of ten new residences inside the built-up area, and the province is pushing that target up to six in ten. Zegarac confirmed that the city’s overall growth rate is also still well behind provincial forecasts and again warned that spending on growth infrastructure must be cautious.
“We’re at 70 percent of predicted residential in terms of Places to Grow [predictions] and 50 percent for non-residential development, so that’s something we need to be very mindful of ensuring that we don’t put ourselves in a vulnerable financial position.”
In response to Chad Collins, planning head Jason Thorne said only an average of “about one-third” of new housing is inside the built-up area. “That number has been going down in the last couple of years,” reported Thorne, “and it’s getting harder and harder to achieve that because the sites that are still available … are not quite where the market would want them to be.”
Terry Whitehead wondered why cities like Burlington are attracting downtown development without providing the subsidies like Hamilton. Maureen Wilson also wanted to know why growth is still mainly taking place on greenfield sites.
“Municipal planners for the last forty years have talked about and recognized that infill development and development within the urban envelope is the most cost effective way to develop because we’re not having to put our investment into infrastructure that creates more capital and operating costs,” she observed. “What has been puzzling is that we’ve recognized that but why isn’t it occurring … if we are serious about being financially prudent and environmentally sound?”
The new assessment numbers allowed an additional cut in the projected 2019 property tax hike of a fifth of a percent. Zegarac identified a similar municipal savings from the provincial cancellation of a $15 minimum wage and paid personal emergency leave days that the city had expected to cost $1.236 million.
Tom Jackson was pleased with the latter tax relief because of the numerous seniors in his ward “many of them hanging onto their homes” in the face of other cost increases. “I like to always give additional benefits and wage increases where necessary, but I’m also thinking of the ability of my constituents to pay,” he said.
But new ward three councillor Nrinder Nann suggested those “savings” should be re-allocated to providing a minimum living wage of $15.85 an hour to city employees. Zegarac calculates that will cost about $700,000 if approved at the February 28 budget meeting.