Council BooksBeckwithOntarioSign inSubscribe
Not the full picture. Built from public records, which leave things out.Read by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date. Check the sources, and tell us if you spot a mistake. What this site can't tell you
Read by hand. We read Beckwith's own documents for this site in October 2026; the Sources page lists which ones. The comparisons with other places still come from the Province's yearly reports.

Questions · 8 so far

Things worth asking about

We read Beckwith's financial reports and meeting minutes, and compared its numbers with 46 similar Ontario towns. These are the things that stood out.

What these are, and what they are not. A question here means a number or practice is unusual, or harder to see than it should be. It does not mean anyone did anything wrong. Most unusual numbers turn out to have ordinary explanations, and every question lists some. The only way to know is to ask.
Needs an answer

Needs an answer

These are unusual enough that residents deserve a clear answer from council.

Worth asking

Worth asking

There may well be a good reason. It is still worth asking what it is.

Worth askingSpending level

Why does the $10,000,000 municipal office appear in both the 2024 and 2025 budgets, paid for in different ways?

$10,000,000municipal office redevelopment, listed in both the 2024 and the 2025 capital budgets

A capital budget lists the big one-time jobs (buildings, roads, trucks) and says where the money for each comes from. The Reeve's 2024 presentation lists "Municipal Office Redevelopment" at a project cost of $10,000,000: $3,800,000 from reserves (savings), $350,000 from development charges (fees on new building), $850,000 from grants, and $5,000,000 under a column headed "Other /UCO". The 2025 presentation lists the same project name at the same $10,000,000, now paid for with $2,200,000 from reserves, $2,000,000 from development charges, $800,000 from grants and the same $5,000,000. The project is not on the 2026 list. Worked out by us: between the two years the reserves share fell by $1,600,000 and the development charges share rose by $1,650,000. The slides do not say whether this is one project shown in two budgets because the work ran over two years, or two separate amounts. They also do not say what "UCO" stands for.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources

Worth askingMoney health

How is the municipal office loan being repaid, and how much of that rests on investment earnings?

$5,000,000listed under "Other/UCO" for the municipal office in both the 2024 and 2025 capital tables; the loan size is not stated

The Township's asset management plan (February 13, 2026) says the yearly debt payments it forecasts leave out the payments on money borrowed to build the new municipal office, because those payments are expected to be paid in full from earnings on the Township's investments in guaranteed investment certificates (GICs, which are savings that pay a fixed interest rate). The budget slides list $5,000,000 under "Other/UCO" for the office in 2024 and 2025, but none of the documents we had gives the size of the loan, its interest rate, how long it runs, how much the GICs hold, or how much they are expected to earn each year. We could not tell whether the $5,000,000 is the borrowed amount.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources

Worth askingMoney health

Is Beckwith setting aside enough each year for its roads, buildings and equipment, when its own asset plan puts the gap at $2.92 million a year?

$2.92 millionyearly gap in the asset plan, between a $5,002,000 target and $2,081,000 in the 2025 budget

An asset management plan says what a town owns, what it will cost to keep it in shape, and whether the town is saving enough. Beckwith's plan (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) puts the cost of replacing the Township's assets at $179,306,000 and says the yearly amount that should be set aside is $5,002,000. The 2025 budget set aside $2,081,000, so the plan states a yearly funding gap of $2.92 million. To close it gradually by 2035 the plan says the tax levy (the part of the budget paid by property tax) would have to rise 9.15% a year, from about $4.89 million in 2025 to about $11.73 million. The Township's 2026 levy is $5,097,937 and the tax rate rose 2.75%. Worked out by us: that yearly rise on the 2025 levy of $4,885,852 would give about $5,332,900 for 2026, about $235,000 more than the levy adopted. The part of the levy that pays for capital work directly was $763,980 in 2025 and $758,826 in 2026.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 6 sources

Worth askingOpenness

Why do the same projects come back in the budget presentation year after year, and which have been finished?

$50,000for the same four heritage jobs, from reserves, in each of the 2024, 2025 and 2026 presentations

A capital budget lists one-time jobs and how each is paid for. In all three of the Reeve's presentations (2024, 2025, 2026) the same four heritage jobs appear, all paid from reserves (savings): a Cow Byre in Heritage Park $20,000, a Prospect Church floor $15,000, monument irrigation $7,500 and a monument walkway $7,500, a total of $50,000 each time. The Beckwith Recreation Complex dehumidifier is listed at $60,000 from reserves in all three years. Trails are $150,000 ($75,000 from reserves and $75,000 from development charges, which are fees on new building) in all three. A pickleball court ($130,000) and a toboggan hill ($25,000) appear in both 2024 and 2025 with nearly identical figures, and the 2025 slides also list a basketball court ($25,650). Ashton Station Road is $500,000 in both 2025 and 2026 with the funding split changed. If each line were a new purchase, the dehumidifier would cost $180,000 and the heritage jobs $150,000 across the three years (worked out by us). The slides give the Township's own explanation for one repeat only: the 2024 slide marks Brunton Side Road as a "Possible a two (2) year project", and 2025 shows it again, paid by grants.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources

Worth askingSpending level

Why did recreation's share of the levy rise in 2026, and why is turf in the budget again after $800,000 in 2025?

$100,000"Replace MPSF Turf" paid from the 2026 levy, after $800,000 listed in 2025

The Reeve's slide "Share of Taxation by Department" shows Recreation & Cultural at 15.7% in 2025 and 18.0% in 2026, and Public Works at 34.1% in 2025 and 30.7% in 2026. The capital tables show where part of the shift comes from. The levy paid straight into recreation capital work was $80,000 in 2025 and is $234,502 in 2026; for public works it was $586,075 in 2025 and is $404,324 in 2026. Worked out by us, recreation is up $154,502 and public works is down $181,751. Of the $234,502, $130,000 (worked out by us) goes to two turf items paid entirely from the levy: "Replace MPSF Turf" $100,000 and "Design Concept Plans for Multi Use Turf Building" $30,000. The 2024 presentation lists "Replace the MPSF - Turf" at $395,000 from reserves, and the 2025 presentation lists it at $800,000 ($395,000 from reserves, $340,000 under Other/UCO and $65,000 from the levy). The slides do not spell out "MPSF" or say whether the 2026 $100,000 is more work or a savings contribution. The asset plan says a new indoor turf building is planned for 2031.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 4 sources

Good to know

Good to know

Background that helps make sense of the rest.

Good to knowRising costs

Why did the municipal levy rise about 4.9% and 4.3% when the Township's tax-rate increases were 3.75% and 2.75%?

$5,097,937Township levy for 2026, up from $4,885,852 in 2025 and $4,655,649 in 2024

The levy is the part of the budget the Township collects through property tax. The Reeve's presentations give it as $4,655,649 for 2024, $4,885,852 for 2025 and $5,097,937 for 2026. Worked out by us, that is a rise of about 4.9% in 2025 and about 4.3% in 2026. The tax rate rose 2.2% in 2024, 3.75% in 2025 and 2.75% in 2026. The Township explains the difference on its last statistics slide each year: new residential growth (new homes adding to the tax base) was 2.93% in 2023, 1.15% in 2024 and 1.55% in 2025. The rate rise plus that growth comes to about the levy rise in 2025 and 2026 (worked out by us), so the gap is explained. For context, the 2026 levy apportionment slide shows Beckwith's share of the Lanark County levy at $6,361,331, more than the Township's own levy.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources

Good to knowRecord-keeping

Do the 2026 budget slides agree with each other and with the 2026 totals?

$50,000 vs $15,000heritage jobs on slide 15, against Community Development in the 2026 capital summary on slide 16

Two things in the 2026 presentation do not line up on their face. First, the Heritage slide (slide 15) lists four jobs totalling $50,000, but the Capital Summary (slide 16) shows Community Development at $15,000, and its total of $3,268,018 is the sum of its five rows as printed. In 2025 the same row was $50,000. Second, the "Sources of Revenue" pie charts for 2025 and 2026 print the same figures for five of seven slices: Taxation 26.3%, Reserves & Reserve Funds 27.1%, Other Revenue 25.8%, Other Municipalities 4.5% and Unfinanced 0.9%, yet slide 4's total revenue fell from $17,593,085 in 2025 to $7,574,260 in 2026 (about 57% lower, worked out by us). Also worked out by us: on slide 4 in both 2025 and 2026, total revenue plus the levy equals total expenditures, so the "Total Revenues" figure leaves out the levy, while the pie includes Taxation as a slice. We do not know what base the pies use.

Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources

Each question in full

Needs an answerFound automatically from financial reports

Why does Beckwith spend more than most similar towns on council?

$107per home on council, 2025

Beckwith spent about $107 per home on council in 2025. The typical similar town spent $50. Only 4 of 46 similar towns spent more.

Why it matters

Spending more than neighbours is not wrong by itself. It might buy better service. But it is the first place to look for costs that could be lower, such as contracts that were not competitively bid.

It could be because…

  • Geography: more roads, more snow, a bigger area or a landfill of its own.
  • Accounting: some towns record the same cost in a different category.
  • A one-time cost in this year.

Questions you could ask

  1. What makes this cost higher here than in similar towns?
  2. When were the main contracts in this area last put out to competitive tender?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Council per home: Beckwith $107; typical similar town $50; ranked 5th highest of 47.

    Ontario Financial Information Return (FIR), 2025, 46 similar municipalities · Schedule 40 and Schedule 2 · archived copy

↑ All questions

Worth askingFound by reading the town's documents

Why does the $10,000,000 municipal office appear in both the 2024 and 2025 budgets, paid for in different ways?

$10,000,000municipal office redevelopment, listed in both the 2024 and the 2025 capital budgets

A capital budget lists the big one-time jobs (buildings, roads, trucks) and says where the money for each comes from. The Reeve's 2024 presentation lists "Municipal Office Redevelopment" at a project cost of $10,000,000: $3,800,000 from reserves (savings), $350,000 from development charges (fees on new building), $850,000 from grants, and $5,000,000 under a column headed "Other /UCO". The 2025 presentation lists the same project name at the same $10,000,000, now paid for with $2,200,000 from reserves, $2,000,000 from development charges, $800,000 from grants and the same $5,000,000. The project is not on the 2026 list. Worked out by us: between the two years the reserves share fell by $1,600,000 and the development charges share rose by $1,650,000. The slides do not say whether this is one project shown in two budgets because the work ran over two years, or two separate amounts. They also do not say what "UCO" stands for.

Why it matters

The office is by far the largest line in three years of budget slides. Total spending on the first slide was $20,903,965 in 2024 and $22,478,937 in 2025, then $12,672,197 in 2026, a drop that roughly matches the office leaving the list. If one building is counted in two budgets, those totals look about $10 million bigger than what was spent. A resident also cannot tell from the slides how much of the building came from savings, from fees on new development, from grants or from borrowing.

It could be because…

  • A building that takes more than a year to finish is usually shown again in the next budget until it is done, with the funding mix updated as grants and development charges are confirmed.
  • Only part of the $10,000,000 may have been spent in 2024, with the rest spent in 2025.
  • The switch from reserves toward development charges may reflect a new view of how much of the building serves growth, which development charges can pay for.
  • The Township may have posted a project report or a final cost that we did not have. We only had the Reeve's slides.

Questions you could ask

  1. Is the $10,000,000 office one project shown in two budgets, or two separate amounts? How much was spent in each year, and what was the final cost?
  2. Why did the share paid from reserves go down and the share paid from development charges go up between the 2024 and 2025 budgets?
  3. What does "UCO" stand for in the funding tables, and how much of the $5,000,000 listed under "Other /UCO" was borrowed?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Slide 8, Administration: "Municipal Office Redevelopment", project cost $10,000,000; reserves $3,800,000; development charges $350,000; grants $850,000; Other /UCO $5,000,000; levy required $0. Slide 16 (Capital Summary) carries the same Administration line, with a capital total of $13,023,755. Slide 4: Total Expenditures of $ 20,903,965.

    2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024 · 2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024, slides 4, 8 and 16

  2. Slide 8, Administration: "Municipal Office Redevelopment", project cost 10,000,000; reserves 2,200,000; development charges 2,000,000; grants 800,000; Other /UCO 5,000,000; levy required 0 (Admin TOTAL $10,061,365). Slide 16 (Capital Summary): capital total $14,039,252. Slide 4: Total Expenditures of $ 22,478,937.

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slides 4, 8 and 16

  3. Slide 8, Administration: only two lines, Irrigation System 16,000 and Building Signage 15,000 (Admin TOTAL $31,000). The office is not listed. Slide 4: Total Expenditures of $ 12,672,197.

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slides 4 and 8

↑ All questions

Worth askingFound by reading the town's documents

How is the municipal office loan being repaid, and how much of that rests on investment earnings?

$5,000,000listed under "Other/UCO" for the municipal office in both the 2024 and 2025 capital tables; the loan size is not stated

The Township's asset management plan (February 13, 2026) says the yearly debt payments it forecasts leave out the payments on money borrowed to build the new municipal office, because those payments are expected to be paid in full from earnings on the Township's investments in guaranteed investment certificates (GICs, which are savings that pay a fixed interest rate). The budget slides list $5,000,000 under "Other/UCO" for the office in 2024 and 2025, but none of the documents we had gives the size of the loan, its interest rate, how long it runs, how much the GICs hold, or how much they are expected to earn each year. We could not tell whether the $5,000,000 is the borrowed amount.

Why it matters

If loan payments depend on investment earnings, a fall in interest rates, or a change in what the investments hold, could leave a gap that falls on the tax levy (the part of the budget paid by property tax). Residents should be able to see the loan, the investments and the earnings side by side.

It could be because…

  • Borrowing for a building while holding savings in GICs is a common way to match what the loan costs with what the savings earn.
  • The loan, the by-law that approved it and the investment schedule may be in council reports or the financial statements, which we did not have.
  • The $5,000,000 under "Other/UCO" may not be the borrowed amount. We only note that the slides do not say.

Questions you could ask

  1. How much was borrowed for the municipal office, from whom, at what interest rate and for how many years?
  2. How much do the GIC investments hold, and how much interest are they expected to earn each year compared with the yearly loan payments?
  3. What happens to the loan payments if interest rates fall or the investments mature before the loan is paid off? Where do the loan payments and the investment income show in the budget?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Section 4.5 says annual repayments on external debt are expected to rise from approximately $262,000 in 2025 to approximately $591,000 by 2035, and that these amounts exclude repayments on funds borrowed to support the construction of the Township's new municipal office, since those repayments are expected to be fully funded through revenues from the Township's investments in guaranteed investment certificates (GICs). The key to Figure 4-4 lists "Investment Income (to fund debt payments for Municipal Office loan)".

    Asset Management Plan, Final Report (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) · Section 4.5, page 4-8 (PDF page 53); Figure 4-4 key, page 4-10 (PDF page 55)

  2. Slide 8, Administration: "Municipal Office Redevelopment", project cost 10,000,000, with 5,000,000 in the column headed Other /UCO. The slide does not explain the column heading or say whether the amount is borrowed.

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slide 8

↑ All questions

Worth askingFound by reading the town's documents

Is Beckwith setting aside enough each year for its roads, buildings and equipment, when its own asset plan puts the gap at $2.92 million a year?

$2.92 millionyearly gap in the asset plan, between a $5,002,000 target and $2,081,000 in the 2025 budget

An asset management plan says what a town owns, what it will cost to keep it in shape, and whether the town is saving enough. Beckwith's plan (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) puts the cost of replacing the Township's assets at $179,306,000 and says the yearly amount that should be set aside is $5,002,000. The 2025 budget set aside $2,081,000, so the plan states a yearly funding gap of $2.92 million. To close it gradually by 2035 the plan says the tax levy (the part of the budget paid by property tax) would have to rise 9.15% a year, from about $4.89 million in 2025 to about $11.73 million. The Township's 2026 levy is $5,097,937 and the tax rate rose 2.75%. Worked out by us: that yearly rise on the 2025 levy of $4,885,852 would give about $5,332,900 for 2026, about $235,000 more than the levy adopted. The part of the levy that pays for capital work directly was $763,980 in 2025 and $758,826 in 2026.

Why it matters

Roads and buildings that are not renewed get more expensive to fix later, and a big yearly gap tends to turn into large tax jumps or debt in later years. Residents (and the next Council) should know whether the plan's path has been adopted, changed or set aside.

It could be because…

  • The plan calls its strategy a suggested approach to be re-examined every budget, and it was finished in February 2026, two months before the 2026 budget was presented. Council may not have adopted the 9.15% path.
  • The plan expects part of the cost to be met by about $6.4 million of new borrowing and by grants (the plan names two funds), not only by the levy.
  • Beckwith has a low local tax rate compared with its neighbours on the Reeve's own chart, so Council may judge that gradual increases are enough, or that it can phase the catch-up over more than 10 years.
  • Much of the gap is a modelled "target" (average yearly cost of replacing everything over its life), not bills that are due now. The plan says it has not yet assessed building condition and that road condition is estimated from a 2019 study.

Questions you could ask

  1. Has Council approved the asset management plan, and has it adopted, changed or rejected the 9.15% a year levy path? If changed, what is the new path?
  2. How much of the $2.92 million yearly gap does Council expect to close in each of the next five budgets, and from what sources (levy, grants, borrowing)?
  3. When will building condition be assessed and the 2019 road study be updated, so the target rests on measured condition?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Table 4-4 gives the annual lifecycle funding target (2025 dollars): roads $2,681,000, bridges $75,000, facilities $1,105,000, fleet and equipment $781,000, parks and recreation $360,000, total $5,002,000. Table 4-5 gives capital funding budgeted in 2025: total $2,081,000 (including $764,000 from the tax levy). The plan states the Township is facing an annual infrastructure funding gap of $2.92 million and aims to close it gradually by 2035. Table 1-1 puts the current replacement cost of all assets at $179,306,000.

    Asset Management Plan, Final Report (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) · Section 4.4, Tables 4-4 and 4-5, pages 4-7 and 4-8 (PDF pages 52 and 53); Table 1-1, page 1-1 (PDF page 6)

  2. Section 4.5 says that to eliminate the gap by 2035 the tax levy would need to increase at an annual rate of 9.15% from 2026 to 2035, increasing from approximately $4.89 million in 2025 to approximately $11.73 million by 2035. Section 4.3 says the strategy proposes approximately $6.4 million in additional debt financing.

    Asset Management Plan, Final Report (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) · Section 4.5, page 4-9 (PDF page 54); Section 4.3, page 4-4 (PDF page 49)

  3. Section 4.1 describes the financial strategies as suggested approaches to be examined and re-evaluated in the annual budgeting process. Section 5.1 recommends that the plan be received and approved by Council, and that consideration be made in the annual budget to ensure enough capital funding is available to carry it out. We did not find in these documents whether Council has approved it.

    Asset Management Plan, Final Report (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) · Section 4.1, page 4-1 (PDF page 46); Section 5.1, page 5-1 (PDF page 59)

  4. Slide 4: Total 2026 Municipal Levy of $ 5,097,937. Slide 22: "The Township Tax Rate increased 2.75% in 2026". Slide 16 (Capital Summary): the Levy column total is $758,826.

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slides 4, 16 and 22 (slide 22 is PDF page 21)

  5. Slide 4: Total 2025 Municipal Levy of $ 4,885,852. Slide 22: "The Township Tax Rate increased 3.75% in 2025". Slide 16 (Capital Summary): the Levy column total is $763,980.

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slides 4, 16 and 22 (slide 22 is PDF page 21)

  6. Slide 19, "Residential Tax Rates by Municipality for 2025": on the Reeve's chart of eight Lanark County municipalities, Beckwith has the lowest total residential rate, and the lowest local (municipal) share of it. The figures are in a chart image.

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slide 19 (image)

↑ All questions

Worth askingFound by reading the town's documents

Why do the same projects come back in the budget presentation year after year, and which have been finished?

$50,000for the same four heritage jobs, from reserves, in each of the 2024, 2025 and 2026 presentations

A capital budget lists one-time jobs and how each is paid for. In all three of the Reeve's presentations (2024, 2025, 2026) the same four heritage jobs appear, all paid from reserves (savings): a Cow Byre in Heritage Park $20,000, a Prospect Church floor $15,000, monument irrigation $7,500 and a monument walkway $7,500, a total of $50,000 each time. The Beckwith Recreation Complex dehumidifier is listed at $60,000 from reserves in all three years. Trails are $150,000 ($75,000 from reserves and $75,000 from development charges, which are fees on new building) in all three. A pickleball court ($130,000) and a toboggan hill ($25,000) appear in both 2024 and 2025 with nearly identical figures, and the 2025 slides also list a basketball court ($25,650). Ashton Station Road is $500,000 in both 2025 and 2026 with the funding split changed. If each line were a new purchase, the dehumidifier would cost $180,000 and the heritage jobs $150,000 across the three years (worked out by us). The slides give the Township's own explanation for one repeat only: the 2024 slide marks Brunton Side Road as a "Possible a two (2) year project", and 2025 shows it again, paid by grants.

Why it matters

The slides show budgets, not what was built. When the same line returns, a resident cannot tell if the work was finished, delayed, carried forward or dropped, and the capital totals on each year's first slides may include money that was not spent in that year.

It could be because…

  • Projects that take more than a year, or that wait on grant approval or contractors, are normally re-listed until they are finished.
  • Trails may be a yearly program (an allowance spent each year on new sections) rather than one project.
  • Unspent money from a year is often carried forward into the next budget, and the slides may show the carried-forward amount again.
  • Grants can take more than a year to arrive, so the funding mix on a project can change from one year to the next.

Questions you could ask

  1. Which of the heritage jobs, the dehumidifier, the pickleball court, the toboggan hill and the basketball court have been finished, and what did each cost in the end?
  2. Does the Township publish a yearly report that compares each capital project's budget with what was spent and what was carried forward? If so, where?
  3. Is the $150,000 for trails a yearly allowance, and if so, how much has been spent on what in each year?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Slide 15, Heritage: Build a Cow Byre - Heritage Park 20,000; Prospect Church Floor 15,000; Monument - Irrigation 7,500; Monument - Walkway 7,500; total $50,000, all from reserves. Slide 14, Beckwith Recreation Complex: Dehumidifier 60,000, all from reserves. Slide 13, Recreation - Parks: Trails 150,000 (reserves 75,000, development charges 75,000); Toboggan Hill 25,000 (reserves 2,950, development charges 22,050); Pickleball Court 130,000 (reserves 6,000, grants 124,000). Slide 10, Public Works - Roads: Brunton Side Road (Micro-surface with pavement patches) "Possible a two (2) year project", 190,000 from reserves.

    2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024 · 2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024, slides 10, 13, 14 and 15

  2. Slide 15, Heritage: Build a Cow Byre - Heritage Park 20,000; Prospect Church Floor 15,000; Monument - Irrigation 7,500; Monument - Walkway 7,500; Heritage Total $50,000, all from reserves. Slide 14: Dehumidifier 60,000, all from reserves. Slide 13, Recreation - Parks: Trails 150,000 (reserves 75,000, development charges 75,000); Toboggan Hill 25,000 (reserves 2,950, development charges 22,050); Basketball Court 25,650; Pickleball Court 130,000 (reserves 6,000, grants 124,000). Slide 10, Public Works - Roads: Brunton Side Road (Micro-surfacing) 181,756, all from grants; Ashton Station Road (Culverts with City of Ottawa) 500,000 (Other/UCO 250,000, levy 250,000).

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slides 10, 13, 14 and 15

  3. Slide 15, Heritage: Build a Cow Byre - Heritage Park 20,000; Prospect Church Floor 15,000; Monument - Irrigation Around Monument 7,500; Monument - Poured Cement Walkway 7,500; Heritage Total $50,000, all from reserves. Slide 14, Recreation: Facilities: BRC - Dehumidifier 60,000, all from reserves. Slide 13, Recreation: Parks: Trails 150,000 (reserves 75,000, development charges 75,000). Slide 10, Public Works: Roads: Ashton Station Road 500,000 (reserves 250,000, Other 250,000).

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slides 10, 13, 14 and 15

↑ All questions

Worth askingFound by reading the town's documents

Why did recreation's share of the levy rise in 2026, and why is turf in the budget again after $800,000 in 2025?

$100,000"Replace MPSF Turf" paid from the 2026 levy, after $800,000 listed in 2025

The Reeve's slide "Share of Taxation by Department" shows Recreation & Cultural at 15.7% in 2025 and 18.0% in 2026, and Public Works at 34.1% in 2025 and 30.7% in 2026. The capital tables show where part of the shift comes from. The levy paid straight into recreation capital work was $80,000 in 2025 and is $234,502 in 2026; for public works it was $586,075 in 2025 and is $404,324 in 2026. Worked out by us, recreation is up $154,502 and public works is down $181,751. Of the $234,502, $130,000 (worked out by us) goes to two turf items paid entirely from the levy: "Replace MPSF Turf" $100,000 and "Design Concept Plans for Multi Use Turf Building" $30,000. The 2024 presentation lists "Replace the MPSF - Turf" at $395,000 from reserves, and the 2025 presentation lists it at $800,000 ($395,000 from reserves, $340,000 under Other/UCO and $65,000 from the levy). The slides do not spell out "MPSF" or say whether the 2026 $100,000 is more work or a savings contribution. The asset plan says a new indoor turf building is planned for 2031.

Why it matters

Spending by service moves with one-time projects, so a small total change can hide a large shift in what the levy buys. A third year of turf money, after $800,000 the year before, deserves a plain explanation of what was done and what is still to come.

It could be because…

  • Capital projects are lumpy: public works had more levy-funded capital items in 2025 than in 2026, so its share fell.
  • The $100,000 for turf may be a yearly contribution to a replacement reserve, like the $10,000 reserve lines on the same slide, rather than more spending on the 2025 project.
  • Design plans for a turf building in 2026 could be early work for the building the asset plan places in 2031.

Questions you could ask

  1. What was done with the $800,000 budgeted in 2025 for turf, and what is the $100,000 in 2026 for?
  2. Why did recreation's share of the levy rise to 18.0% in 2026, and is that level expected to continue?
  3. How does the 2026 design work for a turf building fit with the asset plan's date of 2031, and what is the expected cost?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Slide 13, Recreation - Parks: Replace the MPSF - Turf, project cost 395,000, paid entirely from reserves (395,000); levy required 0.

    2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024 · 2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024, slide 13

  2. Slide 7 (image), Share of Taxation by Department: Recreation & Cultural 15.7%, Public Works 34.1%. Slide 16 (Capital Summary), Levy column: Recreation 80,000; Public Works 586,075. Slide 13, Recreation - Parks: Replace the MPSF Turf, project cost 800,000; reserves 395,000; Other/UCO 340,000; levy required 65,000.

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slides 7 (image), 13 and 16

  3. Slide 7 (image), Share of Taxation by Department: Recreation & Cultural 18.0%, Public Works 30.7%. Slide 16 (Capital Summary), Levy column: Recreation 234,502; Public Works 404,324. Slide 13, Recreation: Parks, levy required: Replace MPSF Turf 100,000; Design Concept Plans for Multi Use Turf Building 30,000; Micro Surface Park Entrance 59,672; Parks TOTAL $218,172.

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slides 7 (image), 13 and 16

  4. Section 3.3 says that, based on its 2024 Development Charges Background Study, the Township plans a new indoor turf building, a growth-related project, planned to occur in 2031.

    Asset Management Plan, Final Report (Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., February 13, 2026) · Section 3.3, page 3-5 (PDF page 39)

↑ All questions

Good to knowFound by reading the town's documents

Why did the municipal levy rise about 4.9% and 4.3% when the Township's tax-rate increases were 3.75% and 2.75%?

$5,097,937Township levy for 2026, up from $4,885,852 in 2025 and $4,655,649 in 2024

The levy is the part of the budget the Township collects through property tax. The Reeve's presentations give it as $4,655,649 for 2024, $4,885,852 for 2025 and $5,097,937 for 2026. Worked out by us, that is a rise of about 4.9% in 2025 and about 4.3% in 2026. The tax rate rose 2.2% in 2024, 3.75% in 2025 and 2.75% in 2026. The Township explains the difference on its last statistics slide each year: new residential growth (new homes adding to the tax base) was 2.93% in 2023, 1.15% in 2024 and 1.55% in 2025. The rate rise plus that growth comes to about the levy rise in 2025 and 2026 (worked out by us), so the gap is explained. For context, the 2026 levy apportionment slide shows Beckwith's share of the Lanark County levy at $6,361,331, more than the Township's own levy.

Why it matters

A bill paid by one household can rise by less than the Township's total levy because more homes share it. Residents also pay a County levy and school taxes on top of the Township's, and the County's share is set by County Council, not by the Township.

It could be because…

  • The levy grows by the rate increase plus new homes and businesses added to the assessment, which is how the Reeve's slides present it.
  • The County levy depends on County Council's budget and on Beckwith's share of the County's assessment.

Questions you could ask

  1. Does the Township publish a one-page bill example showing the Township, County and school parts for a typical home for 2024, 2025 and 2026?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Slide 4: Total 2024 Municipal Levy of $ 4,655,649. Slide 23: "New residential growth was 2.93% in 2023"; "The Township Tax Rate increased 2.2% in 2024"; "In 2024, a 1% increase for the Township Tax Rate would provide $45,539".

    2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024 · 2024 Municipal Budget presentation, April 2, 2024, slides 4 and 23 (slide 23 is PDF page 22)

  2. Slide 4: Total 2025 Municipal Levy of $ 4,885,852. Slide 22: "New residential growth was 1.15% in 2024"; "The Township Tax Rate increased 3.75% in 2025"; "In 2025, a 1% increase for the Township Tax Rate would provide $47,067".

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slides 4 and 22 (slide 22 is PDF page 21)

  3. Slide 4: Total 2026 Municipal Levy of $ 5,097,937. Slide 22: "New residential growth was 1.55% in 2025"; "The Township Tax Rate increased 2.75% in 2026"; "In 2026, a 1% increase for the Township Tax Rate would provide $49,593". Slide 20, Lanark County Levy Apportionment - 2026: Beckwith $6,361,331.

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slides 4, 20 and 22 (slide 22 is PDF page 21)

↑ All questions

Good to knowFound by reading the town's documents

Do the 2026 budget slides agree with each other and with the 2026 totals?

$50,000 vs $15,000heritage jobs on slide 15, against Community Development in the 2026 capital summary on slide 16

Two things in the 2026 presentation do not line up on their face. First, the Heritage slide (slide 15) lists four jobs totalling $50,000, but the Capital Summary (slide 16) shows Community Development at $15,000, and its total of $3,268,018 is the sum of its five rows as printed. In 2025 the same row was $50,000. Second, the "Sources of Revenue" pie charts for 2025 and 2026 print the same figures for five of seven slices: Taxation 26.3%, Reserves & Reserve Funds 27.1%, Other Revenue 25.8%, Other Municipalities 4.5% and Unfinanced 0.9%, yet slide 4's total revenue fell from $17,593,085 in 2025 to $7,574,260 in 2026 (about 57% lower, worked out by us). Also worked out by us: on slide 4 in both 2025 and 2026, total revenue plus the levy equals total expenditures, so the "Total Revenues" figure leaves out the levy, while the pie includes Taxation as a slice. We do not know what base the pies use.

Why it matters

Small mismatches are common in slide decks reused from year to year. They matter because the slides are the main public summary we could see, so a reader cannot tell which number is the current one.

It could be because…

  • Part of the heritage work may have been finished or moved to another year, with slide 15 not updated.
  • The pies may be built from the operating budget only (not the capital budget), which could keep their shares close from year to year.
  • A 2025 chart may have been reused by mistake and the 2026 version corrected in the Township's full budget.

Questions you could ask

  1. Is the heritage work in the 2026 capital summary at $15,000 or $50,000, and which slide is right?
  2. Were the 2026 revenue charts drawn from the 2026 budget? What total do the pie shares add up to, and does it include the levy?

You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. Your town office can tell you how to reach council.

Speak for Beckwith? Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.

The evidence

  1. Slide 15, Heritage: Heritage Total $50,000 (project cost, all from reserves). Slide 16, Capital Summary: Community Development project cost 15,000, reserves 15,000; TOTAL project cost $3,268,018. Slide 4: Total Revenues of $ 7,574,260; Total 2026 Municipal Levy of $ 5,097,937; Total Expenditures of $ 12,672,197. Slide 6 (image), 2026 Sources of Revenue: Taxation 26.3%, Reserves & Reserve Funds 27.1%, Other Revenue 25.8%, Other Municipalities 4.5%, Unfinanced 0.9%.

    2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026 · 2026 Municipal Budget presentation, April 14, 2026, slides 4, 6 (image), 15 and 16

  2. Slide 16, Capital Summary: Community Development project cost 50,000, reserves 50,000. Slide 4: Total Revenues of $ 17,593,085; Total 2025 Municipal Levy of $ 4,885,852; Total Expenditures of $ 22,478,937. Slide 6 (image), 2025 Sources of Revenue: Taxation 26.3%, Reserves & Reserve Funds 27.1%, Other Revenue 25.8%, Other Municipalities 4.5%, Unfinanced 0.9%.

    2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025 · 2025 Municipal Budget presentation, April 29, 2025, slides 4, 6 (image) and 16

↑ All questions