Listen Up! Is the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act good for Muskoka? | Commentary

In 2022, the Ontario government passed the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, which gave the heads of municipal councils stronger powers and the ability to veto some decisions of elected councillors. Initially, it was only for Toronto and Ottawa. Later, additional municipalities were added, most if not all, with populations over 100,000.

This month, the Act was amended to include 169 additional municipalities, including all six lower-tier municipalities in Muskoka. The purpose of the legislation is to give mayors more power over council and to veto certain decisions that may not align with provincial priorities. 

According to the province, “This significant expansion reflects Ontario’s commitment to streamline local governance and help to ensure that municipalities have the tools they need to reduce obstacles that can stand in the way of new housing and infrastructure development.”

I can understand the need for this Act in large municipalities where there is a plethora of elected representatives, in some cases with partisan political affiliations that often make it difficult to get things done. I have trouble, however, when it applies to smaller municipalities like those in Muskoka. 

The Act gives ten powers to the heads of council. Some of them, such as appointing committees and bringing forward matters for council’s consideration, they already effectively have, but some others, in my view, are more problematic for smaller municipalities.

The Act allows the mayor and not the council to prepare the municipal budget. The mayor must present the budget to council for their consideration but can veto any amendment to it, which allows that individual extraordinary control over the municipal budget.

As well, the mayor can hire or fire the CEO and some department heads without the consent of council and can also veto any bylaws passed by council, that he or she believes may interfere with provincial priorities.

This legislation especially gives power to mayors in relation to housing, infrastructure, and transit, although council can overrule some but not all of these powers with a two-thirds majority.

At this writing, it is unclear whether these new powers granted to 169 municipal mayors are mandatory, but they appear to be.

I had the privilege of serving as Mayor of Huntsville for six years. My second term was by acclamation. I learned early in that role that the first rule of politics, at least at the municipal level, was to know how to count. I still believe that.

My job was to provide leadership to council but also to respect their authority as the ultimate decision-makers. If I wanted to get something approved by council, I had to have five votes in agreement. That meant, in my view, better decisions more carefully considered and more representative of our community at large. I believe that process worked, and I believe it still does. I see no reason in Muskoka, where councils are relatively small, to dilute elected members’ power and authority. 

One of the major tasks of a council is to develop and approve an annual budget. It is the straight jacket within which all members of council must act. It lays out the agenda and priorities for a whole year (sometimes two). It cannot be a document that the majority of council disagrees with and would have the potential to create a dysfunctional elected body. 

A budget in Muskoka municipalities should, in my view, be developed, debated, and approved by all of council and not by a single individual with veto power. It is a process that all members of council should be fully involved in.

Also, providing the mayor with the sole right to hire and fire the CEO and some department heads could lead to favouritism on behalf of the mayor, resulting in senior officials that do not have the confidence of the entire council. It is also not quite clear what that has to do with building more homes, as the mayor and council should make those decisions and not staff. 

I understand that more housing and the infrastructure to support it is a top priority in many parts of Canada, including here. But in smaller municipalities, and that includes the towns in Muskoka, where and how (not whether) they are built is a critical part of the planning process.

This is especially so in communities with a high volume of recreational, lake capacity, and environmental issues. I find it hard to believe that a single individual could potentially have the final say over these matters, which could lead to decisions of a self-interest nature without proper scrutiny. 

Moreover, the Act could potentially undermine the collaborative spirit that is essential for small municipalities to function effectively. In communities like those in Muskoka, the ability to work collectively is crucial. A system that concentrates extensive power in the hands of a single individual could lead to divisions and resentment and a concern within these communities that their elected representatives have less power and influence than they now have. 

While the Act may have its benefits in larger municipalities, its application in smaller municipalities like those in Muskoka is questionable. The Act’s provisions here could disrupt the balance of power and hinder the collaborative decision-making process that is fundamental at the municipal level.

The Act cannot be all things for all people or for all municipalities. We are not all the same. I believe it is essential to consider the unique needs and dynamics of smaller communities before implementing such significant changes to their governance model.

 The Town of Parry Sound and some Township of Lake of Bays councillors have already expressed their disapproval of the Act, and I believe the remaining municipalities in Muskoka should do the same.

In Muskoka, the traditional system of shared responsibility and collective decision-making has proven effective, and it  should be preserved.

Hugh Mackenzie

NOTE: I have written this article about the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act and about nothing else. Those who want to comment for or against what I have written are most welcome and encouraged to do so. But those who wish to take the opportunity to take on the entire Ford Government will be disappointed as that is not the purpose of this article, and those comments will not be posted.  HKNM

Hugh Mackenzie has held elected office as a trustee on the Muskoka Board of Education, a Huntsville councillor, a District councillor, and mayor of Huntsville. He has also served as chairman of the District of Muskoka and as chief of staff to former premier of Ontario, Frank Miller.

Hugh has also served on a number of provincial, federal and local boards, including chair of the Ontario Health Disciplines Board, vice-chair of the Ontario Family Health Network, vice-chair of the Ontario Election Finance Commission, and board member of Roy Thomson Hall, the National Theatre School of Canada, and the Anglican Church of Canada. Locally, he has served as president of the Huntsville Rotary Club, chair of Huntsville District Memorial Hospital, chair of the Huntsville Hospital Foundation, president of Huntsville Festival of the Arts, and board member of Community Living Huntsville.

In business, Hugh Mackenzie has a background in radio and newspaper publishing. He was also a founding partner and CEO of Enterprise Canada, a national public affairs and strategic communications firm established in 1986.

Currently, Hugh is president of C3 Digital Media Inc., the parent company of Doppler Online, and he enjoys writing commentary for Huntsville Doppler.

Don’t miss out on Doppler!

Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!

Click here to support local news