Council commitment to cost-cutting in doubt with possible service cuts worth $4 to average tax bill

With a property tax increase of 6.4 per cent next year, city councillors don’t want to cut services. CTV London’s Daryl Newcombe reports.

Councillors slammed the door on most of the potential service reductions and cuts brought forward by city staff ahead of 2026 budget deliberations.

Despite assurances from Mayor Josh Morgan that requesting additional information wouldn’t commit council to making a service reduction, the committee requested budget business cases for just six of 13 staff proposals.

“I’m disappointed that a number of councillors didn’t even want to see the business cases, in which there would have been details,” Morgan told CTV News after the budget meeting. “A number of these proposals could have been pulled apart in many different ways, or alternate sources of financing could have been found.”

Meanwhile, the potential service reductions that were referred for budget business cases would only provide Londoners with minimal property tax relief.

If all six are approved during budget deliberations this fall, spending would be reduced by $736,000—reducing the tax rate increase by about 0.1 per cent.

It would reduce the property tax bill on the average-assessed home by just $4 next year.

At the outset of the 2026 Annual Budget Update process, the anticipated tax levy increase for 2026 is 6.4 per cent.

In January, the mayor announced his tax target in 2026 is below five percent, requiring about $13 million in new revenue and savings.

“I think it’s too early to tell where we land on a number of fronts, but that means the work is focused on [doing] what we can within the things that we can control,” Morgan said about the likelihood he can still achieve the target.

To date this year, civic administration has found $6 million in permanent savings through “budget right-sizing” that will not impact services.

Municipally funded boards and commissions have yet to report back on their efforts to find savings as requested in a letter from Morgan and Budget Chair Elizabeth Peloza.

Meanwhile, one source of additional revenue will be considered during budget deliberations.

Staff estimate $800,000 could be generated by increasing Parks and Recreation user fees by 3 per cent to 15 per cent, bringing them in line with similar sized cities.

The budget committee supported getting additional information, but several members expressed concern about the possible impact on low-income families.

“I think that might be a pretty big hit for some of my [constituents]”, warned Coun. Hadleigh McAlister.

Currently, user fees only cover 63.7 per cent of the cost of delivering Parks and Recreation programming.

The remaining $13 million each year comes from property taxes.

“It’s really a discussion about the shift of how much the users of the service pay and how much should the general property taxpayer population pay,” explained the mayor.

Service Reductions recommended for Budget Business Cases:

Tree Planting Grants & Non replacement Tree Planting: Decrease funding provided to reimburse costs for tree planting on private lands. Decrease funding allotted to planting new, non replacement trees to increase the City’s canopy cover. ($150,000)

Resident Satisfaction Survey: Change frequency of resident satisfaction survey from annual to every other year. ($25,000 bi-annually)

Internships: Given our increased marketing efforts for the City and targeted recruitment, consideration may be given to reducing the number of internships. ($84,000)

Digital Transformation: Internal review has identified an opportunity to reduce costs associated ongoing corporate roll out of Microsoft Co-pilot and Fabric. ($85,000)

Eliminate Full Funding of New Streetlight Installations: Eliminate full funding of annual program to install streetlights to older neighbourhoods streets where they do not exist. This program was changed in 2023 to be fully funded by City. A Local Improvement Program 100 per cent funded by property owners would instead be implemented. ($200,000)

Climate Change Reserve Fund Contribution: Eliminate remaining annual ongoing contribution to Climate Change Reserve Fund. ($192,000)

Service Reductions not recommended for Budget Business Cases:

Reduced Summer Sidewalk Maintenance: Reduction to sidewalk maintenance through fewer summer sidewalk panel replacements. Instead, more lower cost asphalt patching and grinding with reduced service life would be conducted. ($200,000)

Reduced Road Network Improvements: Reduction to Annual Local Road Reconstruction Program, which is an annual lifecycle renewal program to repair and resurface neighbourhood local and secondary collector streets. This program has a current budget of approximately $11 million annually. ($114,000)

Reduction in Pathway and Trail Edge Brush Mulching: Restrict pathway and trail edge brush mulching to the Thames Valley Parkway only. ($100,000)

Closure of 5 Wading Pools: Close 5 of the 9 wading pools that are in parks by themselves, i.e. not in locations with pools. ($95,000, noting one-time capital costs for removal & restoration may be required)

Stop Multi Residential Green Bin Cart Pilot Project and Future Expansion: Council has adopted a pilot project to introduce Green Bin collection in multi-residential buildings. The provincial requirement indicates building owners are responsible for this service, not the City of London, so this pilot project could be stopped and future expansion not undertaken by Civic Administration. Civic Administration would continue to provide technical support and information to building owners to develop their own Green Bin programs. The original program roll-out was envisioned to be a cost-sharing arrangement with City operating budget not to exceed the existing $500,000. ($500,000)

Stop Collecting Blue Box Materials from Non-eligible Sources: According to provincial legislation (extended producer responsibility), producers are not required to pay for, or collect from, non-eligible sources (NES) such as home businesses, corner grocery stores, small business, etc. (this impacts about 600 locations in London). The City currently pays for this service through its existing recycling agreement. These small businesses would need to either pay for a recycling service provider directly or through a coordinated contract (and be charged for the service) or place recyclable materials directly into the garbage. Other options may be possible. ($250,000)

Maintenance of Local Road Traffic Circles, Gateway Features and Cul-de-sac Islands: Discontinue summer mowing and horticultural maintenance for subdivision internal traffic circles, subdivision gateway features and cul-de-sac islands. ($115,000)