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by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date.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 Minto'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 · 9 so far
Things worth asking about
We read Minto'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.
Worth asking
Worth asking
There may well be a good reason. It is still worth asking what it is.
($222,429)Fire reserve fund at December 31, 2025 (2024: ($314,429) as shown in the 2025 statements)
A reserve fund is a savings account a town builds for a later purpose, such as new fire trucks or road work. The town's schedule of accumulated surplus (the total of what it has built up over the years) shows the Fire reserve fund at a negative $222,429 at the end of 2025, and the Roads reserve fund, which held $312,408 a year earlier, at a negative $8,548. A negative reserve fund means the town spent more from that fund than it held, so other town money covered the gap. We did not find a note in the statements that explains either one.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources
$891,018 vs $445,509the town's 2024 OMERS pension payment, as printed in the 2024 and 2025 statements
Each year's statements show last year's numbers beside this year's. For 2024, three of those numbers changed. The 2024 statements say the town paid $891,018 into the OMERS pension plan (the pension plan for most Ontario municipal workers). The 2025 statements say the 2024 payment was $445,509. The Fire reserve fund for 2024 reads "(308,377)" in one set and "(314,429)" in the other, and the Economic development reserve fund reads "1,696,852" in one and "1,600,746" in the other. The total of all reserve funds, $12,544,107, is the same in both, so money appears to have been moved between funds on paper. We did not find a note explaining any of the changes.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 4 sources
$4,078,818spent on Transportation services in 2025, against a budget of $3,619,404
The statement of operations compares the 2025 budget with what happened. Spending on Transportation services (roads, winter control, street lighting) was $4,078,818 against a budget of $3,619,404, which is $459,414 more (worked out by us). Recreation and cultural services was $3,558,560 against $3,278,072 ($280,488 more, worked out by us). Planning and development was $906,030 against $733,755 ($172,275 more, worked out by us). Protection services (fire, building and by-law enforcement) was $3,271,067 against $3,142,447 ($128,620 more, worked out by us). Other lines came in below budget, so the town finished with an annual surplus of $1,701,014 against a budgeted $1,026,435. The town says the budget figures in the statements are the council-approved budget restated to the accrual basis (note 9).
Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources
$582,304investment income in 2025, against a budget of $230,000
The town earns interest on money it holds in cash and investments. The note on other income shows investment income budgeted at $230,000 in both 2025 and 2024. The town actually earned $582,304 in 2025 and $828,105 in 2024. At the end of 2025 the town held $11,308,936 in cash and $7,133,961 in portfolio investments. Putting a low number in the budget leaves the extra money unplanned each year.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources
$7,294,059salaries and benefits in 2025, up from $6,736,795 in 2024
The segmented disclosure splits the town's spending by type. Salaries and benefits rose from $6,084,805 in 2023 to $6,736,795 in 2024 and $7,294,059 in 2025. That is $557,264 more in 2025 than in 2024, or 8.3% (worked out by us). Contracted services (work bought from outside companies) went from $207,000 in 2023 to $402,147 in 2024 and $540,188 in 2025. Total expenses grew from $16,732,496 to $17,790,016 over the last year, about 6.3% (worked out by us). This covers all staff together.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources
$185,993well decommissioning obligation at December 31, 2025
Note 16 explains the town's asset retirement obligations, the cost of cleaning up certain assets later, such as removing asbestos or closing old wells. The well part of the note says the obligation is for a well "owned by Leeds and the Thousand Islands", which is a different municipality, and calls the owner "The City". The same wording is in the 2024 statements. The amount for well decommissioning is $185,993 in the 2025 note. Minto is a town in Wellington County.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources
$1,050,000still owed to the town by North Wellington Health Care Corporation at December 31, 2025
The statements show two holdings that are not ordinary town services. The town owns 9.28% of the shares of Westario Power Holdings Inc., a private company, valued at cost ($1,696,046) because a market value is "not practicable to determine". The reserve fund "Minto hydro - Westario dividends" held $512,203 at the end of 2025. The town has also lent North Wellington Health Care Corporation money to help build a medical centre; $1,050,000 was still owed at the end of 2025. The town explains both in the notes. Its own long term debt fell from $8,314,980 to $7,182,827, and it had no balance on its line of credit.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources
($222,429)Fire reserve fund at December 31, 2025 (2024: ($314,429) as shown in the 2025 statements)
A reserve fund is a savings account a town builds for a later purpose, such as new fire trucks or road work. The town's schedule of accumulated surplus (the total of what it has built up over the years) shows the Fire reserve fund at a negative $222,429 at the end of 2025, and the Roads reserve fund, which held $312,408 a year earlier, at a negative $8,548. A negative reserve fund means the town spent more from that fund than it held, so other town money covered the gap. We did not find a note in the statements that explains either one.
Why it matters
Reserve funds are how a town spreads the cost of big purchases over many years. A fund below zero is a promise to pay itself back. Residents can ask how long that will take and whether the yearly tax levy includes the repayment.
It could be because…
The town may have bought fire equipment or done road work ahead of the saving, and planned to pay back the fund from later budgets.
A negative balance can be a normal timing difference when a grant or a loan arrives after the spending.
The Fire fund has been shrinking its shortfall: the 2025 statements show it improving by $92,000 (worked out by us: 314,429 less 222,429).
Questions you could ask
Why is the Fire reserve fund negative, and what is the plan and date to bring it back above zero?
What caused the Roads reserve fund to go from $312,408 to below zero in one year, and is it built into the 2026 budget to refill it?
Which town funds covered the shortfall in the meantime, and is interest charged between funds?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
Consolidated Schedule of Accumulated Surplus (Schedule 2), reserve funds: "Fire (222,429) (314,429)" for 2025 and 2024, and "Roads (8,548) 312,408" for 2025 and 2024.
The same schedule in the 2024 statements shows the Fire reserve fund at "(308,377)" for 2024 and "(350,929)" for 2023, and Roads at "312,408" for 2024 and "222,196" for 2023.
$891,018 vs $445,509the town's 2024 OMERS pension payment, as printed in the 2024 and 2025 statements
Each year's statements show last year's numbers beside this year's. For 2024, three of those numbers changed. The 2024 statements say the town paid $891,018 into the OMERS pension plan (the pension plan for most Ontario municipal workers). The 2025 statements say the 2024 payment was $445,509. The Fire reserve fund for 2024 reads "(308,377)" in one set and "(314,429)" in the other, and the Economic development reserve fund reads "1,696,852" in one and "1,600,746" in the other. The total of all reserve funds, $12,544,107, is the same in both, so money appears to have been moved between funds on paper. We did not find a note explaining any of the changes.
Why it matters
Last year's numbers are supposed to be final once audited. If they change, readers cannot tell whether an error was fixed, a rule changed, or money was reclassified. The pension amount in particular is nearly double in one set of statements.
It could be because…
The 2024 note may have counted the employee and employer shares together, and the 2025 note only the employer's share, which would be a change in how the note is written, not in what was paid.
The 2025 statements may have reclassified amounts between reserve funds after the auditor's review, with no effect on the total.
One of the two figures may be a typing error that was corrected in the later set.
Questions you could ask
Which of the two 2024 OMERS figures, $891,018 or $445,509, is the amount the town paid, and what changed in the wording of the note?
Why were the 2024 balances of the Fire and Economic development reserve funds changed after the 2024 audit?
Is there a restatement note or a council report that explains the changes?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
Schedule 2, reserve funds, 2024 comparative column: "Economic development 1,624,643 1,600,746" for 2025 and 2024, and "Fire (222,429) (314,429)". Total reserve funds "13,599,763 12,544,107".
$4,078,818spent on Transportation services in 2025, against a budget of $3,619,404
The statement of operations compares the 2025 budget with what happened. Spending on Transportation services (roads, winter control, street lighting) was $4,078,818 against a budget of $3,619,404, which is $459,414 more (worked out by us). Recreation and cultural services was $3,558,560 against $3,278,072 ($280,488 more, worked out by us). Planning and development was $906,030 against $733,755 ($172,275 more, worked out by us). Protection services (fire, building and by-law enforcement) was $3,271,067 against $3,142,447 ($128,620 more, worked out by us). Other lines came in below budget, so the town finished with an annual surplus of $1,701,014 against a budgeted $1,026,435. The town says the budget figures in the statements are the council-approved budget restated to the accrual basis (note 9).
Why it matters
A budget is the promise made to taxpayers about what a year will cost. When some services overspend by hundreds of thousands of dollars and others underspend, residents may want to know whether the budget for each service is set realistically, and whether the overspending was approved by council as it happened.
It could be because…
The figures include amortization (the yearly wearing out of roads and buildings), which is not set the same way in the cash budget, so some of the gap may be accounting.
Winter control and road repair costs depend on weather and can run over in a hard year.
Council may have approved extra spending during the year, funded by grants or reserves. The statements show the town's grants were $2,514,333 against a budget of $2,603,900, so grants do not explain it.
Questions you could ask
What drove the Transportation services overspend, and did council approve it before the money was spent?
Which services were under budget by enough to leave the town with a surplus, and was that planned?
Does the town publish a mid-year or year-end report that compares each service with its 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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Statement of operations, 2025 Budget and Actual: "Transportation services 3,619,404 4,078,818", "Recreation and cultural services 3,278,072 3,558,560", "Planning and development 733,755 906,030", "Protection services 3,142,447 3,271,067". "ANNUAL SURPLUS 1,026,435 1,701,014".
Note 9, Budget: "The budgeted figures are prepared on the cash basis of accounting and have been restated to conform to the accrual basis of accounting on which the actual figures are reported." Approved budget expenses "20,965,608", total expenses in the statements "17,345,435".
$582,304investment income in 2025, against a budget of $230,000
The town earns interest on money it holds in cash and investments. The note on other income shows investment income budgeted at $230,000 in both 2025 and 2024. The town actually earned $582,304 in 2025 and $828,105 in 2024. At the end of 2025 the town held $11,308,936 in cash and $7,133,961 in portfolio investments. Putting a low number in the budget leaves the extra money unplanned each year.
Why it matters
Budgeting low is a common choice, because interest rates can fall. But when the real number is two to three times the budget two years in a row, residents can ask where the extra goes: toward lowering taxes, into reserves, or into projects.
It could be because…
The town may budget cautiously on purpose because interest rates are not under its control.
Part of the money may have been from one-time balances, such as grants waiting to be spent, that will not last.
The extra may be transferred to reserves at year end, which would be a sound way to use it.
Questions you could ask
How does the town decide the investment income number in its budget?
How was the $352,304 of investment income above budget in 2025 used (worked out by us: 582,304 less 230,000)?
Does the town have a published investment policy and a yearly report to council on its holdings?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 11, Other income: "Investment income 230,000 582,304 828,105" (2025 budget, 2025 actual, 2024 actual).
$7,294,059salaries and benefits in 2025, up from $6,736,795 in 2024
The segmented disclosure splits the town's spending by type. Salaries and benefits rose from $6,084,805 in 2023 to $6,736,795 in 2024 and $7,294,059 in 2025. That is $557,264 more in 2025 than in 2024, or 8.3% (worked out by us). Contracted services (work bought from outside companies) went from $207,000 in 2023 to $402,147 in 2024 and $540,188 in 2025. Total expenses grew from $16,732,496 to $17,790,016 over the last year, about 6.3% (worked out by us). This covers all staff together.
Why it matters
Wages and outside contracts are most of what a town spends. Residents pay for them through taxes and fees, so a faster rise than the rest is worth asking about, especially in an election year.
It could be because…
The town may have added staff for new services, such as child care or building inspection, paid for by fees and grants.
Wage settlements, minimum wage changes and benefit costs have risen across Ontario.
A jump in contracted services may be one-time work, such as studies or engineering for projects.
Questions you could ask
How many full-time-equivalent staff did the town have in 2023, 2024 and 2025, and which services grew?
What was bought through the contracted services line in 2025, and was it competitively tendered?
How much of the growth in staff costs is paid for by grants or user fees?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Schedule 3, Segmented disclosure, 2025 and 2024 Total columns: "Salaries and benefits" 7,294,059 and 6,736,795; "Contracted services" 540,188 and 402,147; total expenses 17,790,016 and 16,732,496.
Schedule 3, Segmented disclosure, 2024 and 2023 Total columns: "Salaries and benefits" 6,736,795 and 6,084,805; "Contracted services" 402,147 and 207,000.
Minto spent $1.8M on police, fire and safety in 2019 and $2.9M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time.
Why did the cost of police, fire and safety grow 59% in 6 years?
Police, fire and safety
Prices (inflation)
+0%+20%+40%+60%
+59%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Police, fire and safety
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
+1%
+1%
2021
+8%
+4%
2022
+19%
+11%
2023
+37%
+16%
2024
+58%
+18%
2025
+59%
+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 town 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 $1.1M a year pay for?
Why did fire department go from $879K to $1.9M?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Police, fire and safety: 2019 $1.8M, 2020 $1.8M, 2021 $1.9M, 2022 $2.1M, 2023 $2.5M, 2024 $2.8M, 2025 $2.9M.
$185,993well decommissioning obligation at December 31, 2025
Note 16 explains the town's asset retirement obligations, the cost of cleaning up certain assets later, such as removing asbestos or closing old wells. The well part of the note says the obligation is for a well "owned by Leeds and the Thousand Islands", which is a different municipality, and calls the owner "The City". The same wording is in the 2024 statements. The amount for well decommissioning is $185,993 in the 2025 note. Minto is a town in Wellington County.
Why it matters
Audited statements are meant to describe the town's own affairs. A sentence that names another municipality suggests wording copied from another set of statements. It is a small point, but the note records an amount that residents rely on.
It could be because…
The wording may be left over from a template used by the same accounting firm for another client, with the dollar amount belonging to Minto.
The note may describe a real well, and only the municipality name is wrong.
Questions you could ask
Which well does note 16 describe, and who owns it?
Will the town ask its auditor to correct the wording in the next statements?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 16, Asset retirement obligations: "The City must recognize an asset retirement obligation related to one well owned by Leeds and the Thousand Islands that will be required to be decommissioned at the end of life." Well Decommissioning: "185,993"; total "587,079".
Note 16 in the 2024 statements has the same sentence: "The City must recognize an asset retirement obligation related to one well owned by Leeds and the Thousand Islands". Well Decommissioning at end of 2024: "178,553"; total "563,198".
$1,050,000still owed to the town by North Wellington Health Care Corporation at December 31, 2025
The statements show two holdings that are not ordinary town services. The town owns 9.28% of the shares of Westario Power Holdings Inc., a private company, valued at cost ($1,696,046) because a market value is "not practicable to determine". The reserve fund "Minto hydro - Westario dividends" held $512,203 at the end of 2025. The town has also lent North Wellington Health Care Corporation money to help build a medical centre; $1,050,000 was still owed at the end of 2025. The town explains both in the notes. Its own long term debt fell from $8,314,980 to $7,182,827, and it had no balance on its line of credit.
Why it matters
These are real assets and a real loan that residents are ultimately backing. It helps to know what they are worth, what they pay, and whether the health care corporation can keep repaying. Overall the statements show a town whose debt is falling and whose audit opinion is clean.
It could be because…
The loan is matched to a debenture that the health care corporation repays, as note 5 describes, so the town may be only passing the payments through.
Shares in a local power company can provide steady dividends that help keep taxes lower.
Questions you could ask
How much does the town receive each year from Westario Power Holdings, and where is it spent?
Does council get a yearly report on whether North Wellington Health Care Corporation is current on its loan?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 6, Long term investment: "The municipality owns 9.28% of the outstanding common shares of Westario Power Holdings Inc." Statement of financial position: "Long term investment (note 6) 1,696,046 1,696,046".
Note 5: "The total amount outstanding as at December 31, 2025 is $1,050,000 (2024 - $1,100,000)." Schedule 2: "Minto hydro - Westario dividends 512,203 423,502".
Minto spent about $346 per home on snow ploughing in 2025. The typical similar town spent $139. Only 2 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
What makes this cost higher here than in similar towns?
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 Minto?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Snow ploughing per home: Minto $346; typical similar town $139; ranked 3rd highest of 47.
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