Our Question:
Many residents are concerned about the rising cost of living, including property taxes. How would you balance keeping taxes affordable while maintaining the services and infrastructure residents expect? What would guide your decisions?
Background:
The total property tax bill has increased by just under 27% over the last four years. The Burlington portion of the bill has driven that increase. Spending and taxation controlled by Burlington’s city council have increased by over 44%. The total bill contains taxes for Burlington, Halton Region and education.
| Time Frame | What the City Tells Us | Increase to the Burlington Municipal Levy box on the Tax Bill | Compounding Increase | $1,000 in Burlington, Municipal Levy Property Taxes |
| 2022 | — | — | — | $1,000.00 |
| 2022 – 2023 | 7.08% | 15.59% | 15.59% | $1,155.90 |
| 2023 – 2024 | 4.99% | 10.21% | 27.39% | $1,273.90 |
| 2024 – 2025 | 4.07% | 7.51% | 36.96% | $1,369.57 |
| 2025 – 2026 | 2.98% | 5.80% | 44.90% | $1,449.00 |
The numbers are confusing; this two-minute video clip from a city council meeting is worth watching. https://youtu.be/3ttezVSVheo
What the candidates said:
Mayoral candidate responses are listed alphabetically by first name (replying candidates only). Ward candidate responses follow.
Lisa Kearns:
Affordability matters to every Burlington household, and I believe the City needs to look first at how it manages the money it already has before asking taxpayers for more. My approach to the 2027 budget will be to scrutinize spending, protect the services residents depend on, rebuild reserve funds and ensure discretionary spending can demonstrate real value.
We also need to reduce pressure on the residential tax base by attracting new businesses and expanding Burlington’s non-residential assessment. I have also proposed creating a municipal sponsorship program and making better use of City assets and real-time financial information to improve value and reduce waste. Fiscal responsibility is not about cutting for the sake of cutting. It is about setting priorities, measuring results and ensuring residents receive value for every tax dollar we spend.
Marianne Meed Ward:
I’ve heard directly from you that affordability is a significant concern, and my commitment is to focus on needs, balance service delivery and infrastructure while finding efficiencies, which we do every year. Every council member has equal opportunity to bring budget amendments. I delivered the highest-value reductions of any council member this term that received council support. I worked with council to direct staff to bring options for the 2027 budget at a zero percent increase, and at inflation, so we can work with community on costs and tradeoffs.
The largest drivers of the city budget are community services, inflation and infrastructure. The largest driver of the Halton Regional budget, which all councillors vote on, is police services, representing 41% of the regional budget. For your total tax bill, the largest categories are community services, police, and infrastructure, in that order—all things residents asked for.
Link: How your taxes are used: https://www.burlington.ca/en/property-taxes/how-your-taxes-are-used.aspx
Rory Nisan
Every budget decision I make starts with the person paying for it. I voted against Burlington’s last three budgets because each one asked residents to absorb more than they should, at a time when housing, groceries and utility costs were already stretched. As Mayor, I will anchor budgets to inflation rather than letting spending drift upward on its own, and require every new program and position to demonstrate the value it delivers before it gets funded. That discipline protects, rather than threatens, the services residents rely on: libraries, transit, parks, road maintenance and public safety. It forces City Hall to find savings behind the scenes instead of cutting the front line. Keeping taxes affordable isn’t about doing less for Burlington; it’s about making sure every dollar collected is working as hard as the resident who earned it.
Click your Ward to view your candidates’ responses.
Cheryl Hurst
It is important to understand the impacts of taxes within the community, having access to how budget is spent and where the money is projected for future services, infrastructure, capital projects and reviewing current spending and making calculated, thoughtful changes where required. Also Working together with staff to complete a review into all the developments that have already been approved but have not begun or completed building, why and how can this be resolved. Reexamine Burlington’s policy regarding ‘stalled housing’ and ensure municipal property assessment corporation (MPAC) accurately assess incomplete or halted construction, so the neighbourhood tax base remains stable. My decision will be made with community and sustainability for responsible spending.
Gary Carr
I am Halton Region Chair. My record at keeping taxes low is one of the best in all of Ontario. Our taxes have been at or below the rate of inflation for 20 yrs. I want to bring that record of experience to the City of Burlington.
Sean Campbell
Rising costs are putting real pressure on Burlington families, seniors and renters. I believe the Council has a responsibility to treat every taxpayer dollar as if it were our own.
My approach would be to analyze every line of the municipal budget, looking for efficiencies, duplication, unnecessary spending and opportunities to deliver services more effectively. Before asking residents to pay more, we should demonstrate that we have exhausted reasonable opportunities to find savings.
At the same time, we must maintain the infrastructure and essential services Burlington depends on. My decisions would be guided by three principles: affordability, accountability and long term value. I would support investments that are necessary and sustainable, while challenging spending that doesn’t provide clear value to residents.
We can’t simply cut services to keep taxes low, nor should tax increases be treated as the automatic solution. We need a disciplined, transparent approach to both sides of the equation.
Katy Moore
With councilors walking into the 2027 budget I would like to propose that council withold the infrastructure transfer in order to prevent a tax increase. This will give the new counsil time to review current programs and be fully involved with the 2028 busget that starts in January. I am aware of the large deficit in infastructure that needs to be met. With the current economic situation that the city’s residents find themselves in a tax increase will cause more harm to the residents particularly those on fixed incomes then skipping 1 year of infastructure payments.
Kyle Hutton
Overall the goal would be to collect revenues in fair manner, while ensuring every tax dollar spent generates efficient value. As such, my primary approach will be to protect core services residents rely on while trimming and eliminating unnecessary bloat costs, such as the hundreds of thousands spent on consultants and outside management. I would also consider moving forward on implementing ideas such as a runoff-based stormwater fee, which would shift a tax burden from most residents to large property holders with non-absorbent surfaces, such as roofs or parking lots, which create most of the burden on the system.
Tony Brecknock
Balancing affordability and services requires prioritizing essential functions while curbing non-core spending. Decisions should be guided by taxpayer affordability tests and fiscal discipline, ensuring spending never exceeds revenue. Growing the commercial tax base through infill development near transit reduces per-unit infrastructure costs and increases per-acre property tax revenue. Additionally, targeted reforms like circuit breakers protect low-income residents without slashing local funding, allowing cities to maintain high-quality services and infrastructure responsibly.
Chris Carter
Affordability has to be a discipline, not a slogan. My starting point is that Burlington should aim to keep the City’s tax increase at or below inflation whenever possible, while protecting core services and maintaining the infrastructure we already own. That means separating needs from wants, testing new spending against measurable outcomes, and looking for efficiencies before asking residents for more. I would prioritize roads, parks, public safety, transit, community services and state-of-good-repair work, while challenging spending that does not clearly improve service or quality of life. I also want Burlington to strengthen its commercial and employment tax base so the burden does not continue shifting toward homeowners. I will approach every budget with a simple mindset: spend like it is your money, because it is.
Olivia Duke
Affordability starts with recognizing that municipal taxes are part of the household budget. When families are paying more for groceries, housing and everyday expenses, City Hall has a responsibility to be disciplined with every tax dollar.
I would start the budget process by challenging the City to hold the line on taxes, while protecting the core services and infrastructure residents rely on. That means examining spending before asking taxpayers for more, identifying efficiencies, reviewing whether programs are delivering measurable results, and distinguishing between what is necessary now and what can be deferred.
At the same time, simply cutting for the sake of cutting can create larger costs later. Roads, infrastructure, public safety and essential services need responsible investment.
My decisions would be guided by three questions: Is it necessary? Is it delivering value? And can we achieve the same or better outcome more efficiently?
Paul Sharman
Affordability begins with recognizing that taxpayers ultimately pay for everything government does. My approach is to protect the services residents value while continually challenging how efficiently they are delivered. Burlington needs disciplined long-term financial planning, clear priorities, and rigorous attention to strategy, process and performance. I introduced the City’s rolling five-year financial outlook seven years ago because decisions made today often create costs years into the future. We must also distinguish genuine spending increases from transfers between governments. When Ontario transferred planning responsibilities from Halton Region to Burlington, staff and costs moved with them: Burlington’s budget rose while the Region’s fell, without that transfer itself increasing the combined municipal tax burden. My test is straightforward: What value are residents receiving, and can we achieve the same or better result differently?
Bianca Bielski
I believe we can keep taxes affordable while maintaining the services and infrastructure residents expect by being disciplined about how we spend every tax dollar. My decisions would be guided by three things: value for taxpayers, essential services, and long-term planning. Residents deserve to know that Council has done everything possible to control costs before asking them to pay more.
Chris Bouchard
It’s hard to describe the balance required in 150 words or less. We need to get off our over reliance on residential property taxes to address budget shortfalls and focus on creation and sustaining of local businesses. Commercial property tax rates are essentially double the residential property tax rate. On top of the additional revenue generation the city receives with licenses, permits, fees etc. There is additional wealth creation by having these positions filled by Canadian youths, helping ease the burden for families. There are also cost centers that can be turned into revenue generators for ex. the city should not be footing the bill for public electric charging stations, the city is only charging 2.00/hr after offering electricity for free for 11 years. It costs 120,000 annually to maintain. Identifying the cost centers, turning them into assets and emphasis on local business generation will guide my decisions.
Frank Domenic
The baseline realities of any budget is the rate of inflation where you live. If you want services managed at the current rate, property taxes should be raised at the rate of inflation. Promising lower than that or tax cuts means service reductions, and no singular councillor has the power to do that. What I can promise is that I will aim to keep property taxes in line with inflation, and if the city pushes for higher than that, it must come along with a concrete increase in service or infrastructure for Ward 6 residents.
Osob Adus
Residents are facing higher costs in almost every area of their lives, so Council has a responsibility to manage property taxes carefully. At the same time, keeping taxes artificially low by delaying infrastructure or cutting essential services can create larger costs for residents later.
My approach would be to examine every major expenditure through three questions: Is it necessary? Does it provide value? Is it financially sustainable? I will prioritize essential services, infrastructure renewal, public safety, and long-term financial responsibility. Before asking taxpayers to pay more, I will look for efficiencies, responsible spending, and opportunities to do more with the resources we already have. As a starting point,
I will not support a property tax increase in 2027. Affordability is not simply about today’s tax rate. It is also about whether we are maintaining infrastructure, planning responsibly and avoiding decisions that leave future taxpayers with the bill.
Residents deserve both responsible taxation and responsible government spending.
Rowen Fraser
Property tax increases are the symptom of financial mismanagement here in Burlington. It is likely that in the coming budget we will be unable to fully mitigate the cost of the increase. To achieve a 0% budget we would need roughly $16M in cuts. About $3M for every 1% of tax increases. We are projecting a 2027 increase of between 4.58% and 5.77%. It would be my commitment to find a 1% reduction in total operating budget yearly, or roughly $3M. $41M in new debenture spending between 2022 and 2025 have left us in a precarious position. Worse is we are not paying down the principle and we have raided our reserves already. With rough times ahead we need someone who has the ability to make the hard choices and won’t indebt our future generations for mistakes we make now.
You can read all the answers we received here: https://www.focusburlington.ca/#2026surveys
Discover more from Focus Burlington
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I watched the video and followed the discussion about Burlington’s 2026 budget increase and, after watching the video explaining how the City gets from 5.8% to 2.98%, I think the city is missing the point. So to be clear, I am not disputing the mathematics.
The city explained how it arrived at 2.98%. Burlington represents roughly 52% of the residential property-tax bill. Take the City’s 5.8% increase and apply it to that portion of the bill and you arrive at approximately 2.98%. Mathematically, that works.
But that response doesn’t answer the question I believe taxpayers are actually asking.
How much did the City of Burlington increase its own budget? The answer is 5.8%.
The City’s own budget information says so. The City’s 2026 budget increased by 5.8%.
The 2.98% figure answers a different question: What portion of the increase in my total property-tax bill is attributable to Burlington, after combining Burlington, Halton Region and the education portion?
When taxpayers ask what Burlington’s budget increase was, telling us it’s 2.98% creates the impression that Burlington’s spending or budget increased by less than 3%. It didn’t.
The City’s own December budget discussion makes this distinction particularly clear. Staff confirmed that the 5.8% figure is the City’s budget and that 2.98% is the amount that increase translates into on the combined property-tax bill.
I believe the city should stop blending the numbers when discussing Burlington’s own budget.
We elect our mayor and councillors to make decisions about the City’s budget. Halton Region has its own elected council and its own budget. The school boards have their own budgets.
So why not report each one separately and let taxpayers see exactly what each level of government is doing?
For 2026, the numbers are straightforward:
Burlington budget increase: 5.8%
Halton Region budget increase: 4.6%
Education increase: 0%
Overall property-tax bill increase: approximately 4.5%
Burlington’s calculated contribution to the overall tax-bill increase: 2.98%
There is nothing wrong with reporting the 4.5% overall increase. That tells residents what happened to the total bill. But its also worth asking why Burlington’s own budget increased by 5.8%. That is a more useful number when evaluating the decisions made by Burlington Council.
If our grocery bill increases by 5.8%, we don’t normally calculate the increase by looking at groceries as a percentage of our family’s entire household spending. We compare this year’s grocery bill with last year’s grocery bill. The same principle should apply to municipal accountability. This is where the conversation should go next.
Rather than debating whether 2.98% or 5.8% is the “right” number, perhaps the better question is:
What should Burlington taxpayers expect their municipal government to deliver in future budgets?
The answer is simple candidates should tell residents, before they are elected, what limit they believe is reasonable for the City of Burlington’s own budget increase.
If a candidate believes the City’s portion should remain below 3%, say so.
If a candidate believes 4%, 5% or 6% is appropriate under certain circumstances, say so.
But let’s have a conversation using the number the elected council actually controls: the City’s budget increase.
MMW lacks fiscal responsibility. Saying she had the most cost savings approved at council is ridiculous when the yearly cost savings is negligible at less than 1/4% of the total budget spend. This lack of financial rigour has repeated for the last 4 years that she has led as Mayor and as she has led the budget process.
MMW’s goal of 0% per department and then asking Burlington residents to pay a cumulative 44% increase in property taxes over 4 years is not how a normal corporation or city should be run. Some departments should actually come back with a net negative budget based on cost savings and new spend. What department will voluntarily come back with that when the Mayor is setting the bar at 0%???
One obvious example of cost savings is the recent large $ investments in IT. This type of investment should only be undertaken if it will result in reduced costs and/or improved efficiencies. These savings should then be redirected and shifted towards departments with critical investment needs before asking the residents for increased property taxes. This means some departments could and should have a negative budget. This is only 1 example but given the lack of past rigour there should be a lot of pent up cost savings opportunities with the City of Burlington. Each department should be mandated to provide at least 2% and potentially 3% cost savings before asking for new $$.
A good best practice example is the City of Markham which has a special task force that attacks costs savings BEFORE reviewing new spend. The City of Markham has won many awards for their fiscal responsibility. That contrasts with Burlington and is why that in the last 4 years, BURLINGTON’S 44% CUMULATIVE TAX INCREASE IS MORE THAN 4X HIGHER THAN MARKHAM’S!!! Markham has uncovered over $35M in cost savings since 2009 which has resulted in 28% tax increase avoidance for their residents.
On June 10 2024, I delegated to Council regarding City of Markham as a best practice hoping that Burlington could create a similar task force. Unfortunately, no-one championed the concept, no explanation was given and nothing changed. MMW (Budget Director mandates city staff regarding tax targets and priorities such as capping property tax increases) and Councillor Sharmin (Budget Chair 2024-2026 – leads operating and capital budget review process) find it easier to take more money from resident’s wallets vs. doing the hard work of mandating targeted cost savings.
Both Rory Nisan and Lisa Kearns talk about cost savings in this article which I find encouraging but I did not see them advocate for this concept in any concrete way as a first step to budgeting during the past 4 years. However, they may not have had as much power as MMW and Sharmin to activate this change. I feel Lisa Kearns is the most capable and determined candidate to make this change happen, particularly as she has held the Audit Chair position (a budget oversight position) for the past 6 years- but only IF she expands on her promise and is willing to include an Independent Cost savings task force with a goal of 2-3% cost savings as a first step to the budget planning process prior new spend being considered.