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by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date.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 Burlington'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 · 10 so far
Things worth asking about
We read Burlington's financial reports and meeting minutes, and compared its numbers with 7 similar Ontario places. 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.
Worth asking
Worth asking
There may well be a good reason. It is still worth asking what it is.
$80,128,000user fees and charges in 2025, against a budget of $30,712,000 (amounts as printed in thousands)
User fees and charges are what people and businesses pay directly for city services, such as recreation programs, transit fares, permits and recoveries from others. The 2025 audited statements show $80,128,000 of them, against a budget of $30,712,000 and $55,507,000 the year before. The statements split the money by service area but do not say what the extra money was. In that split (an image page in the statements), the Roads, parks and forestry column is larger than the other five service columns put together. The City’s own 2026 budget plans for only $25,892,000 of user fees and service charges in its operating budget.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 4 sources
$77,721,000left in the development charges fund at the end of 2025, down from $85,421,000 (amounts as printed in thousands)
Development charges are fees builders pay when they build, kept in a separate fund that can only be used for the roads, parks and other things growth needs. In 2025 the fund received $6,835,000 and $1,959,000 of interest, and the City took out $16,494,000 to pay for projects (the statements call this "revenue recognized"). The balance fell by $7,700,000. The 2026 budget plans to use another $15,641,000 of development charges for capital projects.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
$350Mthe gap between what the City says renewal needs ($1.22B) and what it is spending ($868M) over 10 years
The City owns $7.1 billion of roads, buildings, pipes and other assets. Its own budget book says renewing them on time takes $1.22 billion over 10 years, and current spending is $868 million, which "leaves a gap of $350M". The City adds a 2% infrastructure levy to the tax increase each year to help. In 2026 that levy raises $5,677,000 more, which the budget book shows as 2.14% of the tax levy. The City says average asset condition is "Good" but trending to "Fair".
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
$2,600,000the hospital levy in 2025 and again in the 2026 budget, against a $60,000,000 promise with $58,597,000 contributed
In 2010 council promised $60,000,000 to the Joseph Brant Hospital expansion, to be paid from a dedicated tax levy. The 2025 statements say the City has contributed $58,597,000 — the same number as a year earlier — even though the levy of $2,600,000 was collected in both years. The 2026 budget again includes a "Provision for Joseph Brant Hospital" of $2,600,000. The statements do not say where the 2025 levy went.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
5.8%stabilization reserves as a share of City revenues at December 2025, against the City’s own 10% to 15% target
A reserve is money a city sets aside for emergencies and future costs. The City’s 2026 budget book says its stabilization reserve funds (for unexpected costs) are at 5.8% of its own revenues, against a target of 10% to 15%. It says its capital reserve funds (for replacing buildings and equipment) hold about $40.3 million, against a $143 million target. The audited statements show the total in reserve funds fell from $140,425,000 to $135,605,000 in 2025, while a line the statements call "Unfunded" grew from $(163,480,000) to $(174,465,000). During the 2026 budget, council also lowered the yearly top-ups to the Contingency and Insurance reserve funds by $50,000 each.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
2 yearsof council pay and expense statements (2024 and 2025) we could not find on the City’s page
Every year a city must publish what each member of council was paid and reimbursed. Burlington’s page for this lists a remuneration statement and an expenses statement for each year from 2020 to 2023. On October 5, 2026 we found none for 2024 or 2025. The 2023 remuneration statement lists pay by title, not by person: the Mayor $202,712 in total (Region portion $54,958, City portion $147,754) and each Councillor $120,602 (Region portion $54,958, City portion $65,644).
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
Burlington spent $66.7M on roads and snow in 2019 and $116M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time. Only 1 of 7 similar places had faster growth here.
Found automatically from the city's financial reports · 3 sources
$124,555,000long-term debt at the end of 2025, up from $114,966,000 (amounts as printed in thousands)
Long-term debt was $114,403,000 at the end of 2023, $114,966,000 at the end of 2024 and $124,555,000 at the end of 2025. New debt was $54,740,000 in 2023, $17,000,000 in 2024 and $24,460,000 in 2025, and the 2025 budget had planned the same $24,460,000. The City’s 2026 budget plans to pay for $10,350,000 of capital projects with debt. The City says its debt payments are well below its own limit of 12.5% of net revenue.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
$80,128,000user fees and charges in 2025, against a budget of $30,712,000 (amounts as printed in thousands)
User fees and charges are what people and businesses pay directly for city services, such as recreation programs, transit fares, permits and recoveries from others. The 2025 audited statements show $80,128,000 of them, against a budget of $30,712,000 and $55,507,000 the year before. The statements split the money by service area but do not say what the extra money was. In that split (an image page in the statements), the Roads, parks and forestry column is larger than the other five service columns put together. The City’s own 2026 budget plans for only $25,892,000 of user fees and service charges in its operating budget.
Why it matters
The 2025 budget undercounted this line by about $49,000,000 (worked out by us from the $80,128,000 actual and $30,712,000 budget), yet the City still reported a surplus of $46,391,000. If the extra money was a one-time recovery or a change in how the line is counted, it should not be read as a lasting source of income, and residents cannot judge that from the statements alone.
It could be because…
The City may have recorded one-time recoveries, such as costs paid back by another government or a developer, as user fees. The budget would not plan for those.
The City may count the line on a different basis in the budget than in the audited statements, for example net in one and gross in the other.
Money the City must hold for specific uses (development charges, parkland and grants) is moved into revenue as it is spent. If some of that is counted in this line, the budget would not show it.
Questions you could ask
What made up the 2025 user fees in the Roads, parks and forestry column, and how much of it was a one-time recovery?
Why was the 2025 budget for this line set at $30,712,000 when 2024 actual was $55,507,000?
Will the City publish a note with the statements that explains large gaps between the budget and the actual result for each revenue line?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The 2025 statement of operations shows user fees and charges of 30,712 budgeted, 80,128 actual in 2025 and 55,507 actual in 2024 (in thousands of dollars). Total revenue was 375,253 budgeted and 419,928 actual, and the annual surplus was 22,906 budgeted and 46,391 actual.
The 2024 statement of operations shows "User charges" of 40,906 budgeted, 55,507 actual in 2024 and 38,666 actual in 2023 (in thousands of dollars). The 2025 budget for this line (shown in the 2025 statements) is lower than the 2024 budget printed here.
The segment table is an image page. In its 2025 table, the column headed "Roads, parks and forestry" shows the largest share of user fees and charges, more than the other five service columns added together. The statements do not describe what those fees are.
The 2026 approved budget plans 25,892 for "User Fees and Service Charges" in its operating revenues, out of an operating budget of $386.0M (in thousands of dollars).
$77,721,000left in the development charges fund at the end of 2025, down from $85,421,000 (amounts as printed in thousands)
Development charges are fees builders pay when they build, kept in a separate fund that can only be used for the roads, parks and other things growth needs. In 2025 the fund received $6,835,000 and $1,959,000 of interest, and the City took out $16,494,000 to pay for projects (the statements call this "revenue recognized"). The balance fell by $7,700,000. The 2026 budget plans to use another $15,641,000 of development charges for capital projects.
Why it matters
If the fund keeps paying out more than it takes in, the growth projects it pays for will need another source: property taxes, borrowing or delay.
It could be because…
The fund exists to be spent on growth projects, so a falling balance can simply mean projects are being built.
Collections go up and down with the number of building permits issued in a year,.
Some of the balance may already be promised to approved projects.
Questions you could ask
How much of the $77,721,000 is already promised to approved projects, and how much is free?
If the 2026 plan to use $15,641,000 goes ahead and collections stay near $6,835,000, how many years of balance remain?
When the fund cannot pay for a growth project, which will cover it: property taxes, borrowing or delay?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 6 shows the development charges column: balance at the beginning of the year 85,421, restricted funds received 6,835, interest earned 1,959, revenue recognized (16,494), balance at the end of the year 77,721 (in thousands of dollars). All obligatory reserve funds together stood at 115,544 at the end of 2025 and 118,186 a year earlier.
The 2026 capital budget of $106.9M is paid from, among other sources, Development Charges of (15,641), Debt of (10,350) and Other Reserve Funds of (17,798) (in thousands of dollars).
$350Mthe gap between what the City says renewal needs ($1.22B) and what it is spending ($868M) over 10 years
The City owns $7.1 billion of roads, buildings, pipes and other assets. Its own budget book says renewing them on time takes $1.22 billion over 10 years, and current spending is $868 million, which "leaves a gap of $350M". The City adds a 2% infrastructure levy to the tax increase each year to help. In 2026 that levy raises $5,677,000 more, which the budget book shows as 2.14% of the tax levy. The City says average asset condition is "Good" but trending to "Fair".
Why it matters
A gap that is not closed means repairs are put off and cost more later. Residents should know how long the 2% levy has to continue to close it, and what happens to the gap if growth costs rise.
It could be because…
The City has already said the gap exists and has set up a dedicated levy to address it, so this is a known plan and not a hidden problem.
A 10-year need is an estimate. It moves with construction prices and with how assets age.
Some of the gap may be closed by grants from other governments that are not yet counted.
Questions you could ask
In what year does the City’s plan close the $350 million gap, and what yearly levy does that need?
What happens to the gap if the 2% levy is reduced in a year when the tax increase is politically hard?
Which assets would be put off first if the gap is not closed?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The budget book says: "BURLINGTON HAS $7.1B IN CITY ASSETS" and "THIS LEAVES A GAP OF $350M. To ensure our assets do not deteriorate further, the City needs to invest $1.22B over the next 10 years in infrastructure renewal. Currently we are spending $868M over 10 years." It also says "TO HELP ADDRESS THIS FUNDING SHORTFALL, THE CITY HAS A 2% INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY."
The 2026 tax summary shows the Infrastructure Renewal Levy at $5,677,000, or 2.14% of the budget change, within a City budget increase of 5.81%. The overall tax increase (City, Region and Education) is 4.50%.
$2,600,000the hospital levy in 2025 and again in the 2026 budget, against a $60,000,000 promise with $58,597,000 contributed
In 2010 council promised $60,000,000 to the Joseph Brant Hospital expansion, to be paid from a dedicated tax levy. The 2025 statements say the City has contributed $58,597,000 — the same number as a year earlier — even though the levy of $2,600,000 was collected in both years. The 2026 budget again includes a "Provision for Joseph Brant Hospital" of $2,600,000. The statements do not say where the 2025 levy went.
Why it matters
Residents pay this levy on their tax bills. It is fair to know when it ends, or what it pays for once the promise is met.
It could be because…
The contribution agreement may schedule payments by milestone, so the City may hold the levy in a reserve until each payment is due.
The levy may continue to repay money the City borrowed to pay earlier instalments.
Council may plan to keep the levy for another hospital or health purpose once the promise is met.
Questions you could ask
How was the 2025 levy of $2,600,000 used if the amount contributed did not change?
When is the City’s last payment to the hospital due, and when will the levy stop?
Will the levy be removed from the budget once the promise is met, or kept for something else?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 15 says: "Council approved a commitment to the Joseph Brant Hospital expansion project of $60,000." It says funding is "through a dedicated tax levy which began in 2010. The 2025 dedicated tax levy was $2,600 ($2,600 in 2024)." It adds that "As of December 31, 2025 the City had contributed $58,597 ($58,597 in 2024)" (amounts in thousands of dollars).
5.8%stabilization reserves as a share of City revenues at December 2025, against the City’s own 10% to 15% target
A reserve is money a city sets aside for emergencies and future costs. The City’s 2026 budget book says its stabilization reserve funds (for unexpected costs) are at 5.8% of its own revenues, against a target of 10% to 15%. It says its capital reserve funds (for replacing buildings and equipment) hold about $40.3 million, against a $143 million target. The audited statements show the total in reserve funds fell from $140,425,000 to $135,605,000 in 2025, while a line the statements call "Unfunded" grew from $(163,480,000) to $(174,465,000). During the 2026 budget, council also lowered the yearly top-ups to the Contingency and Insurance reserve funds by $50,000 each.
Why it matters
Reserves are the cushion for a bad year. A thin cushion means a surprise cost goes straight to the tax bill or to debt.
It could be because…
The City has said so itself, citing an outside review, and the dedicated 2% levy is meant to start rebuilding capital reserves.
The $50,000 cuts are small. Council may have judged other needs to matter more in a tight year.
The "Unfunded" line is an accounting balance that includes liabilities the City pays over many years, such as employee benefits. It can grow without any sign of trouble.
Questions you could ask
In what year does the City expect its stabilization reserves to reach the 10% target?
What does the "Unfunded" line of $(174,465,000) consist of, and what plan pays it down?
Why lower the contingency and insurance top-ups while reserves are below target?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The budget book says the stabilization reserve funds are "below target at 5.8%" against a target of 10%-15% of own source revenues. It says capital reserve funds are "approximately $40.3 million, well below the intended target" of $143 million, using the City’s total asset replacement value of $7.15 billion.
Note 11 shows reserve funds of 135,605 in 2025 and 140,425 in 2024, and "Unfunded" of (174,465) in 2025 and (163,480) in 2024, within an accumulated surplus of 1,285,981 in 2025 and 1,244,973 in 2024 (in thousands of dollars).
2 yearsof council pay and expense statements (2024 and 2025) we could not find on the City’s page
Every year a city must publish what each member of council was paid and reimbursed. Burlington’s page for this lists a remuneration statement and an expenses statement for each year from 2020 to 2023. On October 5, 2026 we found none for 2024 or 2025. The 2023 remuneration statement lists pay by title, not by person: the Mayor $202,712 in total (Region portion $54,958, City portion $147,754) and each Councillor $120,602 (Region portion $54,958, City portion $65,644).
Why it matters
This is the main public record of what elected officials cost. With an election on October 26, 2026, voters will not find it for the last two years on the page where the City keeps it.
It could be because…
The statements may be posted somewhere else, such as a council agenda, and the page may simply not be updated.
The City may have posted them under a name our search did not match.
The page may be missing the latest links while it is being updated.
Questions you could ask
Where can residents find the 2024 and 2025 council remuneration and expense statements?
Will future statements show pay and expenses for each member by name?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The page "Council Remuneration and Expenses" links a "Council Remuneration" and a "Council Expenses" file for each of 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, and the Council Member Expense Manual. We found no link for 2024 or 2025 when we read the page on October 5, 2026.
The 2023 remuneration statement is one page. It has one line for the Mayor and one line for "Councillor", each split into a Region portion, a City portion and a total. It does not list pay person by person.
Burlington spent $66.7M on roads and snow in 2019 and $116M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time. Only 1 of 7 similar places had faster growth here.
Why did the cost of roads and snow grow 74% in 6 years?
Roads and snow
Prices (inflation)
−20%+0%+20%+40%+60%+80%
+74%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Roads and snow
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
−11%
+1%
2021
−1%
+4%
2022
+8%
+11%
2023
+12%
+16%
2024
+34%
+18%
2025
+74%
+21%
Change since the first year shown. The grey line is how much prices rose overall, for comparison.
Why it matters
When one area grows much faster than prices, it is either doing more (which may be great) or paying more for the same thing. Residents deserve to know which.
It could be because…
The city added a service, a building or staff that residents asked for.
Costs were moved from another area, so the total did not really change.
Accounting rules changed how costs are sorted.
Large one-time costs, like a study, lawsuit or repair, landed in one year.
Questions you could ask
What did the extra $49.3M a year pay for?
Why did paved roads go from $31.8M to $62.2M?
Was each increase approved by council as a separate decision, or did it happen through the yearly budget?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
Burlington spent about $53 per home on council in 2025. The typical similar city spent $40. None of the 7 similar places 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 places record the same cost in a different category.
A one-time cost in this year.
Questions you could ask
What makes this cost higher here than in similar places?
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. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Council per home: Burlington $53; typical similar city $40; ranked 1st highest of 8.
Burlington spent about $1,606 per home on long-term debt in 2025. The typical similar city spent $1,361. Only 1 of 7 similar places 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 places record the same cost in a different category.
A one-time cost in this year.
Questions you could ask
What makes this cost higher here than in similar places?
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. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Long-term debt per home: Burlington $1,606; typical similar city $1,361; ranked 2nd highest of 8.
$124,555,000long-term debt at the end of 2025, up from $114,966,000 (amounts as printed in thousands)
Long-term debt was $114,403,000 at the end of 2023, $114,966,000 at the end of 2024 and $124,555,000 at the end of 2025. New debt was $54,740,000 in 2023, $17,000,000 in 2024 and $24,460,000 in 2025, and the 2025 budget had planned the same $24,460,000. The City’s 2026 budget plans to pay for $10,350,000 of capital projects with debt. The City says its debt payments are well below its own limit of 12.5% of net revenue.
Why it matters
Debt is paid back from future budgets, with interest. Residents should see how it fits with the capital plan and the asset gap.
It could be because…
Cities borrow to build things that last for decades, and the borrowing matched the amount planned in the 2025 budget.
The City’s own indicator shows debt charges well under its 12.5% limit.
Debt can be repaid on a schedule: $15,102,000 of principal falls due in 2026.
Questions you could ask
How much new debt does the 10-year capital plan assume, year by year?
Is the 12.5% limit a ceiling the City intends to approach, or a safety limit it expects to stay well under?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Burlington?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The statement of financial position shows long-term debt of 124,555 at December 31, 2025 and 114,966 a year earlier. The cash flow statement shows new debt issued of 24,460 in 2025 and 17,000 in 2024, and principal repayments of (14,871) and (16,437). Note 9 shows principal due in 2026 of 15,102, and Note 16 shows "Proceeds on debt issue" of 24,460 in the 2025 budget (in thousands of dollars).
The budget’s key performance indicators show "Debt Charges as a % of Net Revenue" with a Council-approved policy limit of 12.5%, and results of 10.85% (2023), 10.29% (2024), 8.69% (2025 forecast) and 8.04% (2026 forecast). The 2026 capital budget lists Debt of (10,350) (in thousands of dollars).
Can we count your visit? With your OK, we use Google Analytics to see which pages help people. It sets cookies and sends visit data to Google. Nothing loads unless you say yes. Privacy