‘Overdue good sense’

Dear Editor:

RE: ‘Unfunded liability,’ April 23.

Not destroying productive farms certainly does not create an unfunded liability. Replacing productive farms with suburban developments just as certainly does. Both Ottawa and Guelph did studies to determine the long-term costs associated with building suburban housing versus building housing within their urban boundaries.

We are familiar with development charges that municipalities levy on developers to pay for the capital cost of providing municipal services to new developments. These costs must be paid by the developer or subsidized by municipal taxpayers. Discussion of development charges hides the real unfunded liability created by suburban developments.

Providing municipal services to suburban developments costs more than they contribute in municipal taxes. A 2021 study for the City of Ottawa found that low-density suburban development costs the city $465 per suburban resident annually. In contrast, high-density in-fill development provides a net benefit of $606 per resident annually. Guelph did a similar study and came to a similar conclusion.

The seriousness of the issue was brought home to those of us in Wellington County by a recent report of discussions before Erin’s council in this newspaper. Council learned that 20,000 of the municipality’s 36,000 acres of farmland had been lost to“development” between 2011 and 2021. As other letters to the editor have noted, Erin is having trouble working within its budget, which is to be expected given the replacement of productive farms with suburban developments.

The Protect Our Food Act 2025 is a collaboration between the MPP from a very Conservative rural riding and the Green Party leader, an MPP from an urban riding, and supported by farm organizations across Ontario. It provides for a reasoned, informed assessment before deciding to destroy irreplaceable productive farmland.

Imaginary unfunded liability or overdue good sense?

David Strang,
Fergus