Pickering’s Next Council Must Be Ready for the Bill That’s Coming

By John Meloche Municipal budgets rarely make exciting reading. I know because I recently spent a considerable amount of time going through Pickering’s capital budget and long-term forecasts. But buried inside hundreds of pages of numbers is a conversation I believe Pickering residents need to be having now: how do we continue building the city we want without losing control of what it costs? Pickering’s approved 2026 capital investment is approximately $73.2 million. The City’s own financing summary shows that 17.7 per cent is financed through debt, with another 10.3 per cent identified as development-charge debt. Debt itself is not automatically bad. Cities borrow to build infrastructure that will last for decades. Roads, fire stations, recreation facilities and major civic infrastructure should not necessarily be paid entirely by the taxpayers who happen to live here in the year they are constructed. The concern is capacity. Pickering is growing rapidly, and our list of capital requirements is growing with it. The City’s Asset Management Plan identifies significant capital spending during the 2027–2029 period, including major renovations and rehabilitation of existing facilities. At the same time, we are undertaking major new projects. The Seaton Recreation Complex and Library is a perfect example. I support investing in recreation and community infrastructure. A growing city needs these facilities. But Council has already directed staff to seek additional government funding, naming-rights revenue, efficiencies and other funding sources specifically to reduce the project’s reliance on debt and property taxes. That tells us something important: affordability matters even when the project itself is worthwhile. Pickering has also benefited enormously from casino revenue. The City received $16.38 million from OLG during the 2025–26 fiscal year and nearly $76 million since the Pickering Casino Resort opened in July 2021. That is an extraordinary advantage, but advantages should be used strategically, not treated as an excuse to become less disciplined. My approach is simple. Before approving major expenditures, Council should be asking: What is the full lifecycle cost? What will we borrow? What will the interest ultimately cost? What other projects are coming behind it? What happens if a forecasted revenue source changes? Could grants, sponsorships, naming rights or partnerships reduce the burden? And most importantly, what does this decision mean for the taxpayer five or ten years from now? Residents should not need an accounting degree and several evenings of research to answer those questions. I want Pickering to provide far more accessible, plain-language financial reporting — including understandable capital forecasts, debt projections and explanations showing residents not merely what something costs today, but how it will be financed tomorrow. That reflects the broader commitment I have made to transparent government and measurable taxpayer value. Johns-Platform-ideas.txt Fiscal responsibility does not mean saying no to everything. It means knowing when to say yes, understanding exactly what that yes will cost, and making sure tomorrow’s taxpayers can afford the decisions we make today. Pickering has tremendous opportunities ahead of it. Growth can bring new homes, new employers, better amenities and a stronger tax base. But opportunity without financial discipline can become obligation very quickly. The next Council will inherit some consequential financial decisions. Residents deserve councillors prepared to read beyond the headline numbers, ask difficult questions and explain the answers clearly. That is the standard I believe every taxpayer should expect from City Hall.