Councillors discuss population growth figures, again
By ALAN LICZYK Staff Reporter

A lot of discussion has occurred at Caledon council in recent months concerning the costs of population growth, and some more clarification came at last Tuesday's meeting.

Nicola Ross, founder of the Caledon Countryside Alliance (CCA), said there's been some wonderful discussions going on regarding this issue and it's good to see democracy in action.

She's done some research and found property taxes don't cover the full cost of services. Every time a house is put up, the Town loses money, she said.

She added Caledon is a long way from achieving the 30 per cent industrial-commercial to 70 per cent residential assessment ratio it's seeking.

Currently the ratio is 10 per cent industrial-commercial to 90 per cent residential, she explained.

In looking at the Peel Region Web site, she believed development charges wouldn't cover the costs for things such as schools, recreation facilities and fire halls.

"That's regional," pointed out Mayor Marolyn Morrison, adding it's different for municipalities.

Councillor Richard Whitehead said this was the second time CCA has said new housing loses money, but he's read reports from the Town treasurer that indicated new housing is a net positive.

He noted Caledon has one of the lowest tax rates in the Greater Toronto Area. He added residential taxes do cover the cost of services.

"New development in Caledon is not a money loser," he said.

He also explained part of the cost for the Bolton arterial roads comes from development charges and DCs will provide some of the capital for a new fire hall.

Treasurer Sam Jones explained development charges can be charged for recreational components anywhere from 10 to 90 per cent. He added DCs can be put towards a fire hall.

As far as new housing goes, Jones noted estate residential homes do create a surplus of funds for the municipality. He told Ross and Whitehead they could both be right depending on the circumstances.

Ross replied estate residential is good for the economy but not good for the environment.