Ontario’s ‘housing pledge’ is ‘political theatre,’ Hamilton councillors say
Minister asks city to put 47,000 units by 2031 in writing
Hamilton city councillors have rejected a provincial “housing pledge,” dismissing it as “political theatre.”
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Steve Clark has enlisted large and fast-growing municipalities to help reach his Progressive Conservative government’s goal of 1.5 million homes in 10 years.
“Our government requires a commitment from our municipal partners to do their part in providing housing for future population growth,” Clark writes in a letter to the city.
But that pledge is “hokey dokey,” Coun. Ted McMeekin said at Tuesday’s planning committee meeting.
“There comes a time when you’ve just got to stop playing games with this stuff and I think this is the time.”
The province’s target for Hamilton is 47,000 new homes by 2031 — 11,400 more units than the 35,600 enshrined in the city’s latest official plan.
That’s a “challenge” but doable, thanks to ongoing efforts to reform zoning and Hamilton’s “vast” capacity for intensification, Christine Newbold, manager of sustainable communities, told councillors.
The province’s “housing pledge” draws from its More Homes Built Faster Act, which aims to boost housing supply through streamlined approvals and development incentives.
But Bill 23 has also sparked pushback from municipalities, including Hamilton, where finance staff have estimated $14 million to $25 million a year in foregone development fees.
City planners have also warned the wide-reaching legislation will weaken environmental protection measures, while a controversial plan to remove land from the Greenbelt has led to demonstrations.
Another point of contention is Clark’s decision last fall to impose an urban expansion into farmland, overriding the city’s plan to corral growth within its existing boundary over 30 years.
The province forecasts that Hamilton’s population will hit 820,000 by 2051.
In his letter, Clark says the province “intends to use your pledges to monitor and track progress” to help municipalities remove “barriers to housing development.”
The “notion of a pledge” is something he hasn’t seen during his career, said Jason Thorne, the city’s general manager of economic development and planning.
Nonetheless, its goal isn’t “offside” with the work Hamilton is already doing, Thorne added.
A proposed — but ultimately rejected — draft response declared the city “accepts the challenge” of 47,000 units through council’s direction “for growth through intensification.”
That means within the “old urban boundary,” planning director Steve Robichaud noted.
Legal staff, however, also clarified there doesn’t seem to be any legal requirement to sign the pledge.
“So I just think this is a lot of political theatre and I don’t think we should do it,” Coun. Cameron Kroetsch said.
Coun. Tammy Hwang expressed concern not endorsing the pledge outright could see it “biting us in the butt” in the form of barriers to provincial funding.
“This may end up being a significant blow to how we look at our funding mechanisms in the future.”
Coun. Jeff Beattie also urged caution.
“If this is political theatre, then I want to be the playwright. And I think rejecting this altogether simply closes the curtains.”
McMeekin suggested the province could use the pledges for spin that purports municipal solidarity or lays blame on cities if housing targets aren’t realized.
“This reminds me of the kind of water-cooler talk that sometimes passes for intelligent conversation in a minister’s office,” added the former Liberal minister of housing and municipal affairs.
Signing the pledge is “just playing their game,” Coun. Craig Cassar agreed.
The city takes housing “seriously,” Cassar said. “We want to build vibrant communities, not ones that are sprawling, that are car dependent, that are going to cost taxpayers more.”
Planning committee voted 6-4 to reject signing the pledge. That awaits a final decision at council next week.
In an emailed response, Clark’s office argued councillors “have once again ignored the advice” of planning staff “by choosing not to commit to meet their growth targets.”
The past council “overrode” their “advice that the city’s existing urban boundaries do not have enough land to meet the long-term housing needs of residents,” press secretary Victoria Podbielski added.
That’s a reference to the past council’s decision to reject an initial staff recommendation to expand the urban area in favour of an official plan predicated on a firm boundary, a strategy Clark shot down in November.
Through studies, staff had confirmed the city could meet its longterm-growth targets without expanding into farmland.
“We 1,000 per cent, not 999, but 1,000 per cent commit to meeting our provincial growth targets,” Coun. John-Paul Danko told The Spectator.
But that’s 35,600 units, as mandated by the ministry and reflected in the city’s official plan, not 47,000 or 1.5 million, he said.
“That is just a political exercise by the province, but it’s not their own growth policies.”
The province, meanwhile, remains “ready and willing to work with Hamilton to meet its housing pledge,” Podbielski wrote.
“We are pleased to see that a number of other municipalities have already signalled their intention to both meet and exceed their targets.”