PICKERING: BORIE on taxes

Mike Borie recently headed a delegation and spoke to the City Council regarding taxes:
___________

“My name is Mike Borie, and I have been an overtaxed and underrepresented Pickering resident for 46 years. I am here tonight to strongly oppose the Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 25-003P for the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan. Just as I was vehemently opposed to the inclusion of the Northeast Pickering lands in the Regions Envision study, the original 2019 Dorsay Veraine Community proposal and the 2024 Lakeridge Health hospital proposal I am even more incensed and overtly opposed to another developer driven Official Plan Application for the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan.

I have reviewed the reports, and it is clear that this developer-driven proposal is a “textbook example of urban sprawl” that will cause significant, irreversible harm to residents and the land itself. This plan is a commitment to a long-term future of higher taxes, environmental damage, and unsustainable urban sprawl. The proposal before us is unnecessary and is a “textbook example of urban sprawl” to meet the provincial growth targets.

In a recent CTV televised interview MPP Peter Bethlenfalvy stated that Pickering has exceeded its housing target by 174% and the existing Seaton area remains largely undeveloped. Pickering and its residents have already done more than their fair share and there is even more already approved planned major developments not concluded to date in Pickerings southern core.

I urge you to reject this OPA for the following critical reasons:

1. Severe and Unacceptable Financial Burden on Taxpayers

The plan is not financially viable without further increased taxing existing residents. The total growth-related capital program for the city is estimated at $1 billion. Only about $505 million will be recovered from development charges.

This leaves a remaining balance of approximately $498 million that must be funded through non-DC sources—This shortfall will inevitably be covered by existing taxpayers through higher property taxes and increased municipal debt, siphoning funds away from maintaining our current, aging infrastructure. Developers will not cover the full costs.

Concerns over a lack of cost analysis have been raised that Pickering council has not adequately demanded or received data on the full cost of the development to taxpayers, infrastructure, and the climate, demanding greater transparency and accountability. There certainly would be concerns that infrastructure and amenities will not be able to keep pace with the proposed housing development, leaving early residents without necessary services for years.

Furthermore:

• The Seaton Recreation Complex & Library, meant to serve these growth areas, will add an estimated tax levy increase of 11.71% over 20 years, costing the average homeowner around $255 extra per year, This is the starting point each year to be added to the Proposed Mayors Tax Budget.
• Electricity infrastructure alone is estimated at over $160 million, assuming no new transformer station is needed, costs largely passed onto new homebuyers but reflecting the immense cost of servicing this greenfield site.
• Rapid transit which will be necessary to link this new development with already existing areas of developed Pickering has not been individually itemized with a costing.
• The exact total added costs for education, fire, and policing specifically for the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan are not publicly detailed as a single, itemized sum. These substantial costs are handled by different levels of government and covered through a combination of development charges, tax revenues, and provincial funding models.  All monies ultimately come out of one pocket called the taxpayer! 

In summary, while specific figures exist within various background studies and charge schedules, a single, all-encompassing total cost for education, fire, and policing for this specific development is not a published figure, and a significant portion of the cost will ultimately be borne by existing and future taxpayers and the province.

2. Catastrophic Flood Risk

We are proposing to pave over the headwaters of Carruthers Creek, which acts as a natural sponge. The TRCA study said that there is a 77% greater risk that development of these lands will significantly increase stormwater runoff and directly raise the flood risk for thousands of existing homes downstream in Pickering and Ajax. This risk to existing residents’ safety is unacceptable.

• Infrastructure Costs are Integrated: The costs for stormwater management and flood control, i.e. retention ponds, are integrated into the overall growth-related infrastructure budget for Pickering. The total capital program required to accommodate growth (including Northeast Pickering) is estimated at $1 billion, with about $500 million potentially unfunded by development charges, meaning it could be a burden on taxpayers.
• Existing Dikes: There are ongoing, separate projects to rehabilitate the existing Pickering and Ajax flood control dikes, which have identified deficiencies. The costs for these are part of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s (TRCA) ongoing work and not directly part of the new Secondary Plan’s development budget, but the added costs will be born by residents’ taxes.

3. Irreversible Environmental Destruction

This plan sacrifices 1,600 hectares of vital green space, prime agricultural land, and critical habitat for endangered species like the Redside Dace. Concerns about the impact on species at risk, such as the endangered Redside Dace, whose critical habitat is in the watershed. This species is listed as Endangered by both the federal (under the Species at Risk Act) and provincial (under the Ontario Endangered Species Act) governments. In an era of climate crisis, we need these natural carbon sinks and local food sources, not more sprawl.

This is an outdated model of urban sprawl. We are facing a climate crisis and food security concerns; paving over our natural assets is short-sighted and irresponsible. The environmental damage will be significant and permanent.

4. Unnecessary Sprawl and Available Alternatives

The expansion into Northeast Pickering is simply not needed at this time. We are building from scratch in the middle of nowhere while the approved Community of Seaton, which can accommodate 70,000 residents, is only partially built and will not be fully developed before 2031 (market conditions along with a huge downturn in our economy will greatly delay the complete Seaton community build out even further). We should prioritize intensification and completing the planning for Seaton before sacrificing more greenfield land.. We must prioritize intensification within our existing boundaries before sacrificing more greenfield land.

Loss of Farmland: Northeast Pickering lands was planned for “whitebelt” and prime agricultural lands. Agricultural stakeholders oppose the loss of this farmland, noting how it could exacerbate food insecurity.

5. Lack of Transparency and Accountability

Council has failed to demand a transparent, itemized analysis, cost benifit of the full costs and long-term implications. Key costs for rapid transit, education, and full policing/fire services remain opaque. We need full transparency and accountability before a decision is made.

This process has felt rushed and developer-led, and all councillors and the public deserve full financial data before making such a monumental decision.

Mayor and Council, this OPA is a bad deal for Pickering. It will harm our environment, risk residents’ safety, and burden us with massive debt.

6. A Lack of Meaningful Indigenous Consultation and Treaty Rights Concerns

The process has failed to appropriately respect and engage with the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation (MSIFN), on whose traditional and treaty territory this land sits. Leaders have stated that proceeding without genuine consultation on these contested lands is “morally and constitutionally wrong,” and we must pause until treaty rights are properly addressed.  Mayor Kevin Ashe has proclaimed that there is an MOU with the MSIFN.  According to the MSIFN this MOU is not an agreement to develope Northeast Pickering Lands but only and agreement to further talks.  Chief Kelly LaRocca of the Mississaugas of Scugog has stated more than once that they are opposed to development of these lands without an agreement with all indigenous groups involved.  

• MSIFN emphasizes the need for development applications to demonstrate substantive reconciliation, avoid infringement on their Section 35 Constitution Act rights, and incorporate offsets or restorations where impacts occur.
• The First Nation prioritizes the “no net loss of environmental value” and ensuring developments do not compromise their abilities to harvest or perform cultural practices. The area in question includes the headwaters of Carruthers Creek, a sensitive watershed.
• there is no public record of all other Indigenous groups involved in the broader Williams Treaties (which also cover the area) explicitly supporting the development. The focus in public records has been on the concerns raised by MSIFN as the most local and vocal rights holder regarding this specific plan.

Mayor and Council, this OPA is a bad deal for Pickering. It will harm our environment, risk residents’ safety, burden us with massive debt, and ignore our responsibilities regarding Indigenous consultation. We request that you reject OPA 25-003P and focus on sustainable growth within our existing urban boundaries.

Thank you.

 

The proposed development of the Northeast Pickering lands is being advanced by a collective of developers organized under the Northeast Pickering Landowners Group Inc. (NEPLG). 

Members of the NEPLG, which manage approximately 51% of the parcels within the secondary plan area, include:

• Dorsay Development Corp.
• Armland Group
• The Brown Group
• Crown Hill Golf Club Inc.
• Coughlan Homes (Cougs (Lakeridge) Ltd.)
• Fieldgate Developments (Fieldgate Homes)
• Tribute Communities (Stonelake Developments Inc.)
• Canelli Heights Development Inc. (Greenpark)
• 2750 Highway 7 Inc. (Clark/Ravi)
• Pinebrown Salem Lands Ltd. (the Brown Group) 

These groups are working in partnership with the City of Pickering to create the secondary plan that would guide the residential, commercial, and employment growth in the area. The NEPLG acts as a unified body for these landowners to guide the development process collectively.

mikeborie@hotmail.com
_________

Return to previous article