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by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date.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 London'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 · 11 so far
Things worth asking about
We read London's financial reports and meeting minutes. 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.
$292,357,000transportation services expenses in 2025, against a budget of $264,203,000 and 2024 expenses of $277,719,000
Transportation services (roads, snow clearing, parking, traffic signals and transit) spent 292,357 (in thousands of dollars) in 2025 against a budget of 264,203, and 277,719 the year before. It was the biggest overspend of any service, in a year when total expenses came in $12.1 million under budget. The city’s explanation names snow and ice clearing but does not give a dollar figure for it.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
$212,915,000London Police Services expenditure in the 2027 budget, against $141,478,000 in the 2023 budget
The 2024 to 2027 Multi-Year Budget shows London Police Services expenditure of 141,478 (thousands of dollars) in the 2023 budget and 212,915 in the 2027 budget, with an average yearly increase column of 10.9%. One business case (P-28) adds ninety positions over four years and a tax levy impact of $56,890 (thousands) from 2024 to 2027. The case names measurable results: shorter response times for urgent and non-urgent calls, fewer calls waiting in the queue, and a lower Crime Severity Index. We did not find a published report on those results; council’s staff reports sit in a portal that blocked our reader.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 4 sources
$174,156,000added to the rapid transit capital budget in the 2024 to 2027 budget, of which $23,850,000 is borrowed
London is building three rapid transit projects (Downtown Loop, East London Link and Wellington Gateway) with bus-only lanes. The 2024 to 2027 budget adds $174,156 (thousands of dollars) in capital spending, of which $23,850 is borrowed. The city says the Federal and Provincial governments fund $167M and that cost increases are not eligible for that money. It describes the project’s updated overall community investment as $475 million. The city explains the cost growth in detail: inflation, supply chains, bridges, scope and land values.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 5 sources
$760,000one-time funding request that the committee considered hours after a tour held without public notice
The Ontario Ombudsman is London’s closed meeting investigator. In January 2024 the Ombudsman reported that three members of the Community and Protective Services Committee, a quorum, toured a non-profit’s shelter on March 21, 2023, hours before the committee voted on its request for $760,000. The Ombudsman found the tour was a meeting that broke the open meeting rules and made three recommendations. In October 2025 the Ombudsman reviewed two further complaints and found no breach in either. We could not read council’s resolution responding to the 2024 report, because London’s agenda portal blocked our reader.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 5 sources
$463,734,000audited 2025 annual surplus, against a budgeted surplus of $281,085,000; the city’s own operating surplus for the year was $24.5 million
The city’s audited statements show an annual surplus of 463,734 (in thousands of dollars) for 2025 against a budget of 281,085. Revenue came in at 2,103,536 against a budget of 1,932,964, while expenses were 1,639,802 against 1,651,879. The city explains that this surplus is an accounting number: it counts money moved into reserves and capital grants and gifts of roads and pipes from developers, none of which are budget “profit”. The ordinary operating surplus it reported to council was $24.5 million, which council’s policy sends to reserves and debt reduction.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 4 sources
$8,734in discretionary reserves per household at the end of 2025, up from $6,243 at the end of 2021
A reserve is money set aside for later, like a savings account for roads, buildings and equipment. The city’s discretionary reserves and reserve funds were 1,152,763 (thousands of dollars) at the end of 2021 and 1,682,029 at the end of 2025, or $6,243 and $8,734 per household. Over the same years total debt per household went from $1,342 to $1,083. Council set a 2025 tax levy of $882.1 million, up 7.3% from rates. The city explains that it pays for renewing old assets from reserves and taxes instead of borrowing, and that it still faces a large gap between what its assets need and what it sets aside.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 4 sources
28written Mayoral Decisions listed on the city’s website from September 14, 2023 to March 2, 2026
Under part VI.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, the Mayor can create and dissolve committees, appoint chairs, propose the budget and appoint the chief administrative officer. The city lists 28 written Mayoral Decisions from September 14, 2023 to March 2, 2026. They include dissolving the Civic Works Committee (effective November 30, 2024) and moving its work to other committees, appointing the City Manager, and three notices (March 1, 2024, November 27, 2024 and December 1, 2025) that shorten the 10-day veto period on budget amendments. The March 2024 notice says the Mayor will not exercise the veto.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
5formal Code of Conduct complaints received in 2025; one led to a public investigation that found no breach
London’s Integrity Commissioner is a law firm, Aird & Berlis LLP, retained as interim Integrity Commissioner on May 3, 2025 “until such time as the City appoints its permanent Integrity Commissioner”. The firm’s April 30, 2026 report says the Governance Working Group postponed updating the Code of Conduct until after a provincial bill (Bill 9) is enacted. The firm received five formal complaints in 2025 and no conflict of interest applications. One went to a full investigation and public report, which found no breach. The only sanction we found in the city’s published reports is a formal reprimand of Councillor Susan Stevenson recommended in December 2023.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 5 sources
$119,024.59highest 2024 total for a ward councillor (Ward 4), against $86,433.02 for the lowest (Ward 14)
Every ward councillor is paid the same stipend of $65,137.80, but the totals in the city’s 2024 statements run from $86,433.02 (Ward 14) to $119,024.59 (Ward 4). The Ward 2 councillor (Deputy Mayor) and the Ward 12 councillor (Budget Chair) each have a further $8,140.86. The statement shows that the Ward 4 total includes $12,965.28 for the London Police Services Board, conferences and webinars. The Mayor’s total for 2024 is $226,893.26. We did not find a Statement of Remuneration for 2025 on the council page.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 5 sources
$292,357,000transportation services expenses in 2025, against a budget of $264,203,000 and 2024 expenses of $277,719,000
Transportation services (roads, snow clearing, parking, traffic signals and transit) spent 292,357 (in thousands of dollars) in 2025 against a budget of 264,203, and 277,719 the year before. It was the biggest overspend of any service, in a year when total expenses came in $12.1 million under budget. The city’s explanation names snow and ice clearing but does not give a dollar figure for it.
Why it matters
Roads and transit are among the largest things the city pays for. If the gap is mostly snow, it is a one-year weather cost; if it is mostly rising upkeep or the way the budget counts the cost of ageing roads, it will come back every year.
It could be because…
A snowy winter with freezing rain can push plowing, salting and sanding well over budget, as the city says.
The audited statements include a non-cash charge for the wearing out of roads and other assets (amortization), which is counted differently in the budget.
New roads handed over by developers and new transit routes add to cost each year as the city grows.
Questions you could ask
How much of the $28,154,000 gap in transportation services was winter control, how much was amortization, and how much was something else?
Does the 2026 budget update reset the winter control budget, given that it has run over?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The statement of operations shows Transportation services expenses of 292,357 for 2025 against a budget of 264,203 and 277,719 for 2024 (thousands of dollars). Total expenses were 1,639,802 against a budget of 1,651,879.
The city says total expenses were “$12.1 million lower than budget”, with savings in personnel and energy, and that these savings “were partially offset by increased snowfall and freezing rain events resulting in deficits in the plowing, salting, and sanding budgets for roads and sidewalks.” It gives no dollar amount for the snow deficit.
$212,915,000London Police Services expenditure in the 2027 budget, against $141,478,000 in the 2023 budget
The 2024 to 2027 Multi-Year Budget shows London Police Services expenditure of 141,478 (thousands of dollars) in the 2023 budget and 212,915 in the 2027 budget, with an average yearly increase column of 10.9%. One business case (P-28) adds ninety positions over four years and a tax levy impact of $56,890 (thousands) from 2024 to 2027. The case names measurable results: shorter response times for urgent and non-urgent calls, fewer calls waiting in the queue, and a lower Crime Severity Index. We did not find a published report on those results; council’s staff reports sit in a portal that blocked our reader.
Why it matters
Police and fire are a large and fast-growing share of the budget, and the city’s automatic numbers show protection services up sharply since 2019. The city has said what it expects to get. Residents can fairly ask whether it is getting it.
It could be because…
Wage settlements under the police working agreement have pushed costs up; the budget was amended to include the new four-year agreement.
London is growing, and the police business case lists calls waiting in a queue and slow response times as problems the added staff are meant to reduce.
Part of the increase is technology (body-worn cameras, digital evidence systems) listed in the business case.
Questions you could ask
What were urgent and non-urgent response times and the number of calls waiting in the queue before the 90 positions were added, and what are they now?
How much of the increase to 2027 is wage settlements, how much is new positions, and how much is technology?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The Protective Services operating budget table shows London Police Services expenditure of 141,478 (2023 budget), 171,289 (2024), 187,697 (2025), 197,294 (2026) and 212,915 (2027) in thousands of dollars, with an average percentage increase column reading 10.9%. Total Protective Services expenditure is 224,343 in 2023 and 303,739 in 2027.
Business Case P-28, Public Safety and Infrastructure Modernization, shows an annual tax levy impact of $56,890 (thousands of dollars) over 2024 to 2027. The city says: “This business case adds ninety (90) positions over four years”.
The outcomes the case promises include “Reduction in code 2 (urgent) and code 3 (non-urgent) response times” and “Reduction in calls for service holding in que prior to being dispatched”.
Council’s approved changes say: “P-28 – Public Safety and Infrastructure Modernization – Amended to incorporate the new four-year Working Agreement that extends to the end of 2026”.
$174,156,000added to the rapid transit capital budget in the 2024 to 2027 budget, of which $23,850,000 is borrowed
London is building three rapid transit projects (Downtown Loop, East London Link and Wellington Gateway) with bus-only lanes. The 2024 to 2027 budget adds $174,156 (thousands of dollars) in capital spending, of which $23,850 is borrowed. The city says the Federal and Provincial governments fund $167M and that cost increases are not eligible for that money. It describes the project’s updated overall community investment as $475 million. The city explains the cost growth in detail: inflation, supply chains, bridges, scope and land values.
Why it matters
This is the largest single project in the capital budget. Most of the added cost is paid from development charges (fees on new buildings), but the city’s own text says $24M falls on property taxes, and costs that rise this much once may rise again.
It could be because…
Construction prices rose faster than the 2 to 3% a year assumed in the 2018 estimate; the city says a national construction price index rose by over 38.1% in five years.
Bridge work, extra road work at intersections, protected cycling lanes and land purchases added scope beyond the early estimate.
Most of the extra cost is paid by development charges, which the city says fund 85.7% of the municipal share.
Questions you could ask
What has been spent to date on each corridor against its approved budget, and what contingency remains for the unbuilt parts?
If prices rise again, who pays: development charges, property taxes, or a request to the Federal and Provincial governments?
What are the expected operating costs once the East London Link and Wellington Gateway open?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The capital budget table for Business Case P-3 shows expenditure of $174,156 (thousands of dollars) over 2024 and 2025, funded by debenture (borrowing) of $23,850 and the rest from other sources.
The city says the 2018 estimate assumed inflation of 2 to 3% and that “the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Construction Price Index increase by over 38.1%” in five years. It lists inflation, supply chain, bridge costs, vehicle and shelter costs, design best practices, legislation and land values as causes.
The city says the projects are leveraging “$167M in Federal and Provincial funding”, “project escalations are not ICIP eligible at this time”, and “the tax level impact of this business case totals $24M”.
The base budget shows the three projects’ life-to-date budget of 279,035 (thousands of dollars) at 2023. The city says 73.3% of the original project cost is funded by the Federal and Provincial governments combined.
The city says the business case “further leverages investments from the Federal and Provincial governments and Development Charges to deliver an updated overall community investment of $475 million”.
$760,000one-time funding request that the committee considered hours after a tour held without public notice
The Ontario Ombudsman is London’s closed meeting investigator. In January 2024 the Ombudsman reported that three members of the Community and Protective Services Committee, a quorum, toured a non-profit’s shelter on March 21, 2023, hours before the committee voted on its request for $760,000. The Ombudsman found the tour was a meeting that broke the open meeting rules and made three recommendations. In October 2025 the Ombudsman reviewed two further complaints and found no breach in either. We could not read council’s resolution responding to the 2024 report, because London’s agenda portal blocked our reader.
Why it matters
Open meeting rules let the public see how a decision is made. The finding was about how a visit worked, not about the merits of the funding. Whether council changed how it handles site visits is a fair question.
It could be because…
Councillors wanted to see a facility before voting on its request, and the report notes the Ombudsman accepts councillors’ wish to engage outside council chambers while saying the public still expects open governance.
The tour was arranged by one member the day before, and a third member joined by chance as the others were leaving, according to what the Ombudsman was told.
The city may have changed its practice and passed a resolution responding to the report that we could not open.
Questions you could ask
What resolution did council pass in response to the January 2024 report, and where is it posted?
Does the city now give councillors guidance, through staff, on site visits that involve a quorum?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The Ombudsman reported that the gathering “constituted a “meeting” of the committee under the Municipal Act, 2001 and contravened the open meeting rules.”
Opinion: the committee “contravened the Municipal Act, 2001 on March 21, 2023 when a quorum of the committee gathered to discuss a funding proposal for a non-profit organization. Public notice was not provided”.
Recommendation 3: “Members of council for the City of London who organize tours that may be subject to the open meeting rules should consult with City staff.” The report says council is required to “pass a resolution stating how it intends to address this report”.
In a letter of October 2, 2025 the Ombudsman reviewed two complaints (a Mayor’s email of January 23, 2025 and a meeting held on March 11, 2025) and found that they “did not contravene the open meeting rules under the Municipal Act, 2001”.
London spent $205M on police, fire and safety in 2019 and $303M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time.
Why did the cost of police, fire and safety grow 48% in 6 years?
Police, fire and safety
Prices (inflation)
+0%+10%+20%+30%+40%+50%
+48%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Police, fire and safety
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
+9%
+1%
2021
+9%
+4%
2022
+16%
+11%
2023
+26%
+16%
2024
+37%
+18%
2025
+48%
+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
How much of the growth in protection services since 2019 is wage settlements, new positions, and technology?
Which of the response-time and call-queue results promised in the police business case have been reported?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Police, fire and safety: 2019 $205M, 2020 $222M, 2021 $223M, 2022 $236M, 2023 $258M, 2024 $280M, 2025 $303M.
The audited statements show Protection services expenses of 315,882 for 2025, against 290,812 for 2024 and a 2025 budget of 323,543 (thousands of dollars).
The multi-year budget shows London Police Services expenditure of 141,478 (2023 budget) rising to 212,915 (2027 budget), with an average yearly increase column of 10.9%, and says one business case alone “adds ninety (90) positions over four years”. Council amended it to include the new four-year working agreement.
$463,734,000audited 2025 annual surplus, against a budgeted surplus of $281,085,000; the city’s own operating surplus for the year was $24.5 million
The city’s audited statements show an annual surplus of 463,734 (in thousands of dollars) for 2025 against a budget of 281,085. Revenue came in at 2,103,536 against a budget of 1,932,964, while expenses were 1,639,802 against 1,651,879. The city explains that this surplus is an accounting number: it counts money moved into reserves and capital grants and gifts of roads and pipes from developers, none of which are budget “profit”. The ordinary operating surplus it reported to council was $24.5 million, which council’s policy sends to reserves and debt reduction.
Why it matters
A big number headed “surplus” can sound like spare cash. Residents can only judge whether taxes are set about right if they can see how much of the gap is real operating savings and how much is accounting. The city has published a reconciliation, so this is a note for context, not a gap in the city’s explanation.
It could be because…
The city budgets on a “modified cash” basis in which transfers to reserves are an expense, while the audited statements use full accrual accounting, which shows them as part of the surplus.
Developer-built roads, pipes and parks handed to the city, and capital grants earned in the year, are counted as revenue in the audited statements but are not spendable cash.
Interest rates stayed high enough in 2025 that the city’s investments earned much more than it budgeted.
Questions you could ask
How much of the 2025 investment income of $82,008,000 belongs to reserves that are set aside for specific purposes, and how much supports the tax-supported budget?
Has the city changed its investment income budget for 2026, now that 2025 came in at $82,008,000 against a budget of $31,851,000?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The statement of operations shows, in thousands of dollars, total revenues of 2,103,536 (budget 1,932,964), total expenses of 1,639,802 (budget 1,651,879) and an annual surplus of 463,734 (budget 281,085). Investment income was 82,008 against a budget of 31,851.
The city’s own explanation: “This surplus includes transfers to reserves and reserve funds which were identified as an expense under the modified cash basis budget”, and it includes contributions of tangible capital assets from developers and capital funding earned in the year. Table 1 gives the surplus variance as 182.6 ($ millions).
Table 3 reconciles the year-end operating budget report to the audited statements: the property tax supported surplus was 18.0 and the total 2025 operating budget surplus was 24.5 ($ millions), which are moved to reserves and debt reduction under council’s Surplus/Deficit Policy. Other lines include transfers to capital, reserves and reserve funds of 370.5 and a total of 463.7 ($ millions).
City of London, 2025 Financial Report · PDF page 30, Table 3: Reconciliation of Operating Budget Monitoring Report with Consolidated Financial Statements
$8,734in discretionary reserves per household at the end of 2025, up from $6,243 at the end of 2021
A reserve is money set aside for later, like a savings account for roads, buildings and equipment. The city’s discretionary reserves and reserve funds were 1,152,763 (thousands of dollars) at the end of 2021 and 1,682,029 at the end of 2025, or $6,243 and $8,734 per household. Over the same years total debt per household went from $1,342 to $1,083. Council set a 2025 tax levy of $882.1 million, up 7.3% from rates. The city explains that it pays for renewing old assets from reserves and taxes instead of borrowing, and that it still faces a large gap between what its assets need and what it sets aside.
Why it matters
Reserves protect a city from surprises, but a growing pile next to rising tax bills raises a fair question about the right size. The city has explained its policy; the open question is how large is large enough.
It could be because…
The city pays for replacing worn-out assets from savings instead of borrowing, so the reserves are spent over many years.
The city’s own asset plan says the gap between what its assets need and what is set aside is large.
Council policy sends a share of any year-end surplus and extra growth money into the infrastructure gap reserve fund.
Questions you could ask
What reserve balance does council consider enough, by fund, and when would it slow the rate of contributions?
How much of the $1,682,029,000 is already committed to named projects?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The table of debt and reserves per household shows Discretionary Reserve Funds & Reserves of 1,152,763 (2021) and 1,682,029 (2025) in thousands of dollars, or 6,243 and 8,734 per household. Total Debt per Household was 1,342 (2021) and 1,083 (2025).
The city’s explanation of its policy: “Debt is generally not an appropriate funding source for the renewal of existing assets.” Lifecycle renewal is to be funded by capital levy and reserve funds in a “pay-as-you-go” approach.
The city’s 2023 asset plan, as summarized in the budget, shows the 10-year infrastructure gap to maintain current service levels at $946.1M, and says the current gap in 2022 “is less than half ($100.7 million)” of what was projected in the last plan.
28written Mayoral Decisions listed on the city’s website from September 14, 2023 to March 2, 2026
Under part VI.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, the Mayor can create and dissolve committees, appoint chairs, propose the budget and appoint the chief administrative officer. The city lists 28 written Mayoral Decisions from September 14, 2023 to March 2, 2026. They include dissolving the Civic Works Committee (effective November 30, 2024) and moving its work to other committees, appointing the City Manager, and three notices (March 1, 2024, November 27, 2024 and December 1, 2025) that shorten the 10-day veto period on budget amendments. The March 2024 notice says the Mayor will not exercise the veto.
Why it matters
These powers shift who controls committees and the budget from the whole council to one person. The Mayor is required to put each use in writing and publish it, and London does. The question is about effects, not about whether anything was hidden.
It could be because…
The Mayor says he dissolved the Civic Works Committee “to streamline Council operations and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of municipal governance”.
Most decisions are routine, such as appointing committee chairs and vice-chairs each year.
Shortening the veto period can speed up adoption of a budget and does not itself change what is in it.
Questions you could ask
Has the city reported what changed after the Civic Works Committee was dissolved, for example in how long reports take to reach council?
Will the new council keep these powers in use in the same way after October 26, 2026?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The Mayor’s page describes the special powers and says: “The Mayor is required to exercise the powers in writing and make them available to the public”. It lists Mayoral Decisions 2023-001 to 2023-009, 2024-001 to 2024-013, 2025-001 to 2025-005 and 2026-001 (28 in all), the latest dated March 2, 2026.
Mayoral Decision 2024-010, dated October 15, 2024, dissolves the Civic Works Committee “effective Nov.30th, 2024” “in order to streamline Council operations and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of municipal governance” and reassigns its mandate.
Mayoral Decision 2024-004, dated March 1, 2024, shortens the 10-day veto period on budget amendments and states: “The Mayor will not exercise the power to veto”.
5formal Code of Conduct complaints received in 2025; one led to a public investigation that found no breach
London’s Integrity Commissioner is a law firm, Aird & Berlis LLP, retained as interim Integrity Commissioner on May 3, 2025 “until such time as the City appoints its permanent Integrity Commissioner”. The firm’s April 30, 2026 report says the Governance Working Group postponed updating the Code of Conduct until after a provincial bill (Bill 9) is enacted. The firm received five formal complaints in 2025 and no conflict of interest applications. One went to a full investigation and public report, which found no breach. The only sanction we found in the city’s published reports is a formal reprimand of Councillor Susan Stevenson recommended in December 2023.
Why it matters
The Integrity Commissioner is the check on councillors’ conduct. An interim arrangement and an unchanged Code at the end of a term mean the new council will begin without a settled system, while the firm recommends training for all members in early 2027.
It could be because…
Waiting for the provincial rules in Bill 9 avoids rewriting the Code twice.
An interim appointment with an experienced firm may work well and be cheaper than a standing office.
Few complaints reaching an investigation can mean the system screens out ones that are incomplete or outside its power.
Questions you could ask
When does council expect to appoint a permanent Integrity Commissioner?
Will the training the firm recommends happen in the first quarter of 2027, and will it be open to the public?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The firm was retained as Interim Integrity Commissioner “on May 3, 2025, until such time as the City appoints its permanent Integrity Commissioner.”
“The Governance Working Group opted to refer the Code to a future meeting after the enactment of Bill 9”. The firm reports: “Our office received five (5) formal complaints pursuant to the Code in 2025.”
The December 8, 2023 recommendation report on Councillor Susan Stevenson concluded: “the sanction of a formal reprimand is warranted” and recommended that “Councillor Susan Stevenson be formally reprimanded”.
The February 24, 2026 report on Complaints 2025-04-A, B and C says, of the 2023 report, that it recommended “a formal reprimand which Council ultimately imposed”, and finds on the 2025 complaints that “the Councillor has not contravened the Code as alleged”.
$119,024.59highest 2024 total for a ward councillor (Ward 4), against $86,433.02 for the lowest (Ward 14)
Every ward councillor is paid the same stipend of $65,137.80, but the totals in the city’s 2024 statements run from $86,433.02 (Ward 14) to $119,024.59 (Ward 4). The Ward 2 councillor (Deputy Mayor) and the Ward 12 councillor (Budget Chair) each have a further $8,140.86. The statement shows that the Ward 4 total includes $12,965.28 for the London Police Services Board, conferences and webinars. The Mayor’s total for 2024 is $226,893.26. We did not find a Statement of Remuneration for 2025 on the council page.
Why it matters
Pay set by the city is the same for each ward councillor, so the range is mostly expenses and board work. A plain explanation lets residents see what extra duties cost.
It could be because…
Councillors who sit on boards such as the police services board attend board conferences paid from separate budgets.
Role payments for the Deputy Mayor and Budget Chair are part of the policy.
Benefits vary with each member’s choice of vehicle allowance or mileage reimbursement.
Questions you could ask
Where is the 2025 Statement of Remuneration and Expenses, and when will it be posted?
What does each board’s conference budget pay for, and who approves it?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The Ward 14 statement shows a total of 86,433.02 for 2024 and no expenses (0.00).
The Mayor’s 2024 statement shows a total of 226,893.26, including purchased services of 17,558.74 (for example the State of the City address and advertising).
Each ward councillor's statement has the same "Stipends" amount of 65,137.80; for example Councillor Ward 4: "Susan Stevenson 65,137.80 19,729.52 12,540.07 97,407.39".
London spent $107M on water, sewers and garbage in 2019 and $157M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time.
Why did the cost of water, sewers and garbage grow 46% in 6 years?
Water, sewers and garbage
Prices (inflation)
+0%+10%+20%+30%+40%+50%
+46%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Water, sewers and garbage
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
+12%
+1%
2021
+23%
+4%
2022
+20%
+11%
2023
+24%
+16%
2024
+21%
+18%
2025
+46%
+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
How much of the growth since 2019 is garbage and recycling, and how much is water and sewer?
Why are wastewater rates planned to rise faster (4.3% a year) than water rates (2.7%)?
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 London?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The audited statements show Environmental services expenses of 233,313 for 2025, against 207,434 for 2024 and a 2025 budget of 237,905 (thousands of dollars).
The 2024 to 2027 budget says it “includes $438 million in operating expenditures and operating revenues with an average annual water rate increase of 2.9%” and an “average annual wastewater and treatment rate increase of 4.8%”, with capital investments of $320 million (water) and $641 million (wastewater) in 2024 to 2027.
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