This sounds pragmatic but there’s no substance behind it. Guelph’s budget pressures aren’t coming from drone studies or council stipends — those are rounding errors. The real drivers are provincially downloaded costs, infrastructure, growth, and inflation. A hiring freeze? That just creates backlogs and burnout. “Streamlining systems” and “promoting from within” are already happening. Cutting consultants sounds bold until you remember they handle specialized work the City can’t staff permanently. If you want to talk sustainability, show you understand what actually drives a municipal budget. Otherwise it’s just slogans dressed up as fiscal discipline.
@David GibsonThank you for commenting.I would suggest you look at the city staff size of single-tier cities of similar size.• Brantford - 1400• Kingston -1550• Barrie - 1100Guelph is over 2600!I would also sugfest looking at property taxes of these cities as well.• Barrie city council approved the 2026 budget, resulting in a 3.95% property tax hike.• For 2026, the City of Brantford proposed a 4.22% overall property tax increase under the Mayor's budget. • For 2026, Kingston homeowners are facing a 3.75% property tax increase.Guelph 2026 property taxes are 7.87%Same excuse of downloading, blaming others for mismanagement.Not "slogans" as you repeat regularly, just basic facts.
• High Property Taxes: Identified as the top concern in local polling, fuelled by infrastructure deficits “and shifted provincial responsibilities.”This is a red herring. High property taxes are fuelled by mismanagement at the municipal level. Other cities in the same province, bound by the same shifting priorities, have been able to keep their fiscal house in order and deliver better value to their taxpayers. We need to stop giving our politicians and bureaucrats a pass by letting them shift blame to upper levels of government.
Comparing raw staff counts across cities without context doesn’t tell us anything. Guelph runs its own transit, water, wastewater, paramedic services, and a growing suite of provincially downloaded responsibilities. Different service models = different staffing levels. Those tax numbers reflect infrastructure age, growth pressures, and provincial mandates — not “mismanagement.” Every Ontario city is dealing with the same structural cost drivers. If we’re going to talk sustainability, we need to talk about actual cost drivers, not cherry‑picked stats that ignore service levels, asset condition, and provincial constraints.
Anyone who takes a close look at City Hall’s books can see the current path isn’t sustainable. With ongoing hiring increases, council approving significant pay raises for themselves, and spending on non-essential studies like drone landing pads, the financial picture is becoming harder to justify. This kind of dysfunction puts existing jobs at risk—but it doesn’t have to mean cuts to jobs or services. If we act responsibly now, we can protect both. That means freezing future hirings, streamlining internal systems, prioritizing promotions from within, and putting an end to excessive consultant fees. It’s about getting back to basics and making sure resources are used where they matter most.
Is a pharmacist the best professional to be administering and evaluating these medications? Will they have access to the patients' medical history? Who is going to bear the risk of malpractice (I suspect it will only be the guinea pig er... patient} ?Why not just go all the way and have the vaccinations available at corner stores - right beside the beer section OR we could have a properly functioning health care system look after this.
Besides money, it would be good to compare the cities mentioned in terms of public safety, liveability and amenities. I didn't choose based solely on my tax bill.
Did the two employees hired using the Housing Accelerator Fund from the federal government ($250,000+ annually) sped up the construction of and improved the number of available homes in Guelph?Did they, through reducing time lines, start to resolve the affordablility issue?No to both!Drop them and start again.
Too many customer service clerks and clerical assistants? Need to get rid of the drag on the payroll. Remember that when you are on hold wishing to complain about your too high water bill or garbage missed.
City employees get 3 weeks vacation a year to start. 6 paid sick days a year. 4 paid personal days a year. That's 25 paid days a year after 1 year of service.They have a clause in their contract that allows them to bank overtime hours for more time off. It's capped at 120 hours a year. That is another 3 weeks/15 days off a year paid. Some how most employees get that 120 hours of overtime every year.All this adds up to FORTY Paid days off a year after 1 year of service.You have to hire 3 to 4 people for every 15 people in a department just to cover time off(those 3 to 4 people will also get 40 paid days off a year)?Every budget and report I can find says overtime is a problem. The city rewards people for working overtime.Get control of the overtime.
For every single election of my adult life (and several before) I've listened over and over again to candidates claiming that there must be mismanagement and waste and if you just vote for them they're surely going to find it and lower your taxes. And then they never manage to find it.At some point, we're going to have to stop trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
You know, Doug could stop spending all our taxes on site preparation for his Spa, the Island airport jets, the 413 highway to nowhere, the tunnel under the 401, and all the other vanity projects, an hire more doctors. Just saying.