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by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date.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 Strong'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 Strong's financial reports and meeting minutes, and compared its numbers with 23 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.
$3,249,377owed for landfill and asbestos clean-up at the end of 2025, up from $765,178
Landfills have to be capped and watched for years after they close. The Township must record an estimate of that future cost as a debt (an asset retirement obligation). Its audited statements show the total rising from $765,178 at the end of 2024 to $3,249,377 at the end of 2025. Nearly all of the rise is the landfill estimate, and a "remeasurement adjustment" of $2,450,758. The statements show the estimated remaining life of the Forest Lake Road site dropping from 174 years to 39 years. The Township set aside $259,078 in a landfill closure reserve (a savings account for one purpose). The statements do not say how the rest will be paid for.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 4 sources
$367,6682025 actual on the fire pumper truck line, against $212,500 budgeted
The 2025 budget put $212,500 on a line called fire pumper truck. The 2026 budget shows the unaudited 2025 actual on that line as $367,668. The audited statements show vehicle additions of $367,668 in 2025 and a Fire reserve (money saved for a fire truck) that fell from $212,500 to $21,961. The 2026 budget has a further $137,500 on the same line. The documents do not say what the truck cost in total, who is paying for it, or whether the 2026 amount is a payment on it.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources
$366,746unaudited 2025 actual on the "2025 Road Washouts" line, with no 2025 budget
The 2025 adopted budget had nothing for road washouts. The unaudited 2025 actuals in the 2026 budget show $366,746 on a line called 2025 Road Washouts. The transportation operating total was budgeted at $1,043,343 and came in at $1,797,957 (unaudited). The audited statements show provincial grants for capital of $688,407 against $185,958 budgeted. The Township does not say how much of that, if any, was help with the washouts.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 4 sources
$3,295,820net debt at the end of 2025, up from $828,342 a year earlier
The accumulated surplus note breaks the Township's total surplus into parts. The "General" part is negative: (326,557) at the end of 2025 and (455,343) at the end of 2024. Reserves fell from $2,586,049 to $2,191,816. The working capital reserve went from $288,582 to $242,225, and the Community Hub reserve from $179,052 to $64,395. Net debt (what the Township owes less its financial assets) went from $828,342 to $3,295,820. Most of the change in net debt traces to the landfill estimate and to large capital spending, not to day-to-day costs.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources
$655,976balance printed in the 2026 budget under the unaudited 2025 actuals, against a planned $0
The 2025 operating budget was meant to balance at zero. The unaudited actuals in the 2026 budget show operating spending of $5,727,322 against operating revenue of $5,071,347, which leaves a gap of $655,975, worked out by us (the budget prints the balance as $655,976). The audited statements also show a deficit before other income of $456,207 against a budgeted deficit of $270,840, and then a surplus of $334,773 once capital grants are added. Reserves fell by $394,233 in the year. Much of the gap sits on two lines already noted: road washouts and the fire pumper truck.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 3 sources
$16,601adopted for 2026 on the Restructuring Committee expenses line
The administration budget has a line called Restructuring Committee expenses: $20,750 adopted for 2025, $4,149 actually spent (unaudited), and $16,601 adopted for 2026. The budget does not say what is being restructured. It spent far less than planned in 2025, so we raise this only as a question about purpose.
Found by reading the town's own documents · 1 source
$700,000provincial grant budgeted for 2026, up from $600,000
The Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund is a yearly provincial grant to smaller municipalities. The Township budgeted $600,000 from it in 2025, received $600,000, and budgeted $700,000 for 2026. Total operating revenue in the 2026 budget rises by $248,682, so the extra $100,000 is about 40% of that rise (worked out by us).
Found by reading the town's own documents · 2 sources
In 2019, Strong had $2.3M more in cash and money owed to it than it owed to others. By 2025 it was −$3.3M. About 58% of that change ($3.2M) is a new accounting rule from 2023: towns must now record the future cost of closing things like a landfill. That is not new spending or borrowing. Even leaving that out, only 4 of 23 similar towns are in a weaker position.
Found automatically from the town's financial reports · 2 sources
$3,249,377owed for landfill and asbestos clean-up at the end of 2025, up from $765,178
Landfills have to be capped and watched for years after they close. The Township must record an estimate of that future cost as a debt (an asset retirement obligation). Its audited statements show the total rising from $765,178 at the end of 2024 to $3,249,377 at the end of 2025. Nearly all of the rise is the landfill estimate, and a "remeasurement adjustment" of $2,450,758. The statements show the estimated remaining life of the Forest Lake Road site dropping from 174 years to 39 years. The Township set aside $259,078 in a landfill closure reserve (a savings account for one purpose). The statements do not say how the rest will be paid for.
Why it matters
A bill of this size is large for a township whose total yearly spending is about $5.5 million. It shows up as a drop in the Township's net financial position, and the money is owed whenever the landfills close.
It could be because…
The Township's own note says a waste capacity study dated May 2025 changed the estimate of how much room is left, so the old number was out of date and the new one is more honest.
Closing a landfill is a cost that was always coming. Recording it earlier does not mean the Township spent anything extra in 2025.
The estimate is based on the engineer's assumptions about how long the sites will stay open, and it may change again.
Questions you could ask
What did the May 2025 waste capacity study find, and is it posted?
Does the Township have a plan to save for closing the landfills, given that the closure reserve has stayed at $259,078?
Can the Township say what the Forest Lake Road site's remaining life was based on in earlier years, and why it was 174 years?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The note on asset retirement obligations shows a balance at the beginning of the year of $765,178, a remeasurement adjustment of $2,450,758, accretion expense of $33,441, and a balance at the end of the year of $3,249,377.
The same note splits the total: landfill $3,224,965 (2024: $742,428) and asbestos removal $24,412 (2024: $22,750). It says "The most recent waste capacity study for the landfill site was performed in a report dated May 2025." For Forest Lake Road it lists remaining capacity of 45% (190,926 m3) and 39 years remaining life for 2025, against 68% (226,514 m3) and 174 years for 2024.
The accumulated surplus note lists a reserve called Landfill closure of $259,078 at the end of both 2025 and 2024, and a line for unfunded liabilities, asset retirement obligations of (3,249,377), against (765,178) in 2024.
The Consolidated Statement of Operations and Accumulated Surplus shows "Total expenses" of 5,513,928 for 2025 actual (budget 5,553,762) and 5,510,352 for 2024 actual.
$367,6682025 actual on the fire pumper truck line, against $212,500 budgeted
The 2025 budget put $212,500 on a line called fire pumper truck. The 2026 budget shows the unaudited 2025 actual on that line as $367,668. The audited statements show vehicle additions of $367,668 in 2025 and a Fire reserve (money saved for a fire truck) that fell from $212,500 to $21,961. The 2026 budget has a further $137,500 on the same line. The documents do not say what the truck cost in total, who is paying for it, or whether the 2026 amount is a payment on it.
Why it matters
A fire truck is a large purchase for a small township. Residents can fairly ask what it cost, how it was paid for, and whether the 2026 money is part of the same truck.
It could be because…
The price rose between the budget and the delivery, or options were added.
The 2025 amount may include a trade-in, taxes or equipment fitted after the truck arrived.
The $137,500 in 2026 may be a planned payment toward a loan or to rebuild the reserve, and not new spending.
Questions you could ask
What was the total price of the pumper truck, and how was it paid for (reserve, loan, grant, levy)?
What is the $137,500 on the same line in 2026 for?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The 2026 budget, Protection Expenses: "Fire pumper truck 212,500 367,668 137,500 -75,000 -35%", under the headings 2025 adopted budget, unaudited 2025 actuals, 2026 adopted budget, then the change in dollars and in percent.
$366,746unaudited 2025 actual on the "2025 Road Washouts" line, with no 2025 budget
The 2025 adopted budget had nothing for road washouts. The unaudited 2025 actuals in the 2026 budget show $366,746 on a line called 2025 Road Washouts. The transportation operating total was budgeted at $1,043,343 and came in at $1,797,957 (unaudited). The audited statements show provincial grants for capital of $688,407 against $185,958 budgeted. The Township does not say how much of that, if any, was help with the washouts.
Why it matters
Emergency repairs that were not in the budget can push a small township's costs up fast. Residents should know how much of the bill was paid by other governments and how much fell on local taxes.
It could be because…
Provincial or federal disaster help may have paid for much of it, and the larger capital grants in the audited statements may be that help.
Some of the work may have been counted as a capital asset rather than as a yearly cost.
The washouts were weather damage that could not have been planned for.
Questions you could ask
How much has the Township received, or applied for, in disaster help for the washouts?
How much of the $366,746 was paid from reserves and how much from taxes?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The 2026 budget, Transportation Expenses: "2025 Road Washouts 0 366,746 0 0" (2025 adopted budget, unaudited 2025 actuals, 2026 adopted budget). The line below it is headed "Adams Rd Washout - 06-23-2024".
The audited statement of operations shows Government grants and transfers related to capital - Provincial of 185,958 budgeted and 688,407 actual for 2025 (2024: 340,574).
$3,295,820net debt at the end of 2025, up from $828,342 a year earlier
The accumulated surplus note breaks the Township's total surplus into parts. The "General" part is negative: (326,557) at the end of 2025 and (455,343) at the end of 2024. Reserves fell from $2,586,049 to $2,191,816. The working capital reserve went from $288,582 to $242,225, and the Community Hub reserve from $179,052 to $64,395. Net debt (what the Township owes less its financial assets) went from $828,342 to $3,295,820. Most of the change in net debt traces to the landfill estimate and to large capital spending, not to day-to-day costs.
Why it matters
A negative general fund and shrinking reserves leave less room to cover surprises. A township this size has few other cushions.
It could be because…
A negative general fund is common when large liabilities, like the landfill estimate, are recorded before the money to pay them is saved.
Reserves are meant to be spent. The Community Hub reserve may simply have paid for the work it was saved for.
The general deficit shrank in 2025, so the trend may be improving.
Questions you could ask
Does the Township have a plan to bring the general fund back above zero?
What was the $3,954,326 of capital spending in 2025 (the statements show $2,453,502 added to land and land improvements), and how much is the landfill estimate?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 14 shows General (see note (a) below) of (326,557) for 2025 and (455,343) for 2024, Total reserves of 2,191,816 and 2,586,049, Working capital 242,225 and 288,582, and Community Hub 64,395 and 179,052.
The statement of change in net debt shows net debt, end of year of $ (3,295,820) for 2025 and $ (828,342) for 2024, and acquisition of tangible capital assets of (3,954,326) for 2025.
Strong spent $232K on water, sewers and garbage in 2019 and $419K in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time.
Why did the cost of water, sewers and garbage grow 80% in 6 years?
Water, sewers and garbage
Prices (inflation)
+0%+20%+40%+60%+80%+100%+120%
+80%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Water, sewers and garbage
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
+6%
+1%
2021
+15%
+4%
2022
+40%
+11%
2023
+107%
+16%
2024
+71%
+18%
2025
+80%
+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 $186K a year pay for?
Why did the dump (landfill) go from $119K to $411K?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
$655,976balance printed in the 2026 budget under the unaudited 2025 actuals, against a planned $0
The 2025 operating budget was meant to balance at zero. The unaudited actuals in the 2026 budget show operating spending of $5,727,322 against operating revenue of $5,071,347, which leaves a gap of $655,975, worked out by us (the budget prints the balance as $655,976). The audited statements also show a deficit before other income of $456,207 against a budgeted deficit of $270,840, and then a surplus of $334,773 once capital grants are added. Reserves fell by $394,233 in the year. Much of the gap sits on two lines already noted: road washouts and the fire pumper truck.
Why it matters
A gap this size is about 13 cents on every dollar the Township takes in. How a township covers an unplanned shortfall (reserves, grants or next year's taxes) tells residents how much cushion is left.
It could be because…
Some of the spending was capital in nature (the pumper truck) and was paid from reserves and grants. It appears in the operating columns of the budget but not in the operating expenses of the audited statements.
The 2025 actuals in the 2026 budget are unaudited, and the final audited numbers may differ.
The audited statements add amortization (the yearly wearing out of assets) to expenses, while the budget table leaves it out, so the two sets of numbers are not directly comparable.
Questions you could ask
Which reserves paid for the 2025 gap, and how much is left in each?
Does the Township expect to rebuild those reserves in 2026, or will they stay lower?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Budget totals: "TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES -5,138,724 -5,071,347 -5,387,406 -248,682 5%" and "TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES 5,138,724 5,727,322 5,385,402 246,678". Revenue is shown with a minus sign. The line below, "NET OPERATING REVENUE - AVAILABLE FOR CAPITAL", shows 0 for the adopted 2025 budget and 655,976 for the unaudited 2025 actuals. The last line, "BALANCE", also shows 655,976 for 2025 actuals.
The audited statement of operations shows an annual deficit before other of (270,840) budgeted and (456,207) actual, and an annual surplus (deficit) of 334,773 for 2025 against (307,419) for 2024.
$16,601adopted for 2026 on the Restructuring Committee expenses line
The administration budget has a line called Restructuring Committee expenses: $20,750 adopted for 2025, $4,149 actually spent (unaudited), and $16,601 adopted for 2026. The budget does not say what is being restructured. It spent far less than planned in 2025, so we raise this only as a question about purpose.
Why it matters
Residents cannot tell from the budget whether this is a study of how the Township is organized, shared services with neighbours or something else.
It could be because…
It may cover a committee that looks at sharing services with neighbouring municipalities.
It may be a small line kept in the budget for when the committee meets.
Questions you could ask
What is the Restructuring Committee, who sits on it, and where are its reports?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
$700,000provincial grant budgeted for 2026, up from $600,000
The Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund is a yearly provincial grant to smaller municipalities. The Township budgeted $600,000 from it in 2025, received $600,000, and budgeted $700,000 for 2026. Total operating revenue in the 2026 budget rises by $248,682, so the extra $100,000 is about 40% of that rise (worked out by us).
Why it matters
If the province's amount for 2026 is lower than $700,000, the Township would have to find the difference from taxes, reserves or cuts.
It could be because…
The province usually tells municipalities its allocation in the fall, so the Township may already know the 2026 amount.
The Township may have set the number from the province's own announcement.
Questions you could ask
Has the province confirmed the $700,000 for 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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
The 2026 budget: "Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund -600,000 -600,000 -700,000 -100,000 17%" (2025 adopted budget, unaudited 2025 actuals, 2026 adopted budget, change). Revenue is shown with a minus sign.
In 2019, Strong had $2.3M more in cash and money owed to it than it owed to others. By 2025 it was −$3.3M. About 58% of that change ($3.2M) is a new accounting rule from 2023: towns must now record the future cost of closing things like a landfill. That is not new spending or borrowing. Even leaving that out, only 4 of 23 similar towns are in a weaker position.
Strong went from having money in the bank to owing more than it has. What changed?
−$4.0M−$2.0M$0$2.0M$4.0M
−$3.3M
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Net financial position
2019
$2.3M
2020
$1.6M
2021
$1.6M
2022
$999K
2023
−$778K
2024
−$828K
2025
−$3.3M
Why it matters
This number is one of the clearest signs of whether a town is living within its means. The accounting-rule part is a bill that will come due when the landfill closes, not money already spent. The rest is real borrowing and spending of savings.
It could be because…
A new accounting rule (asset retirement obligations, from 2023) added a large future cost to the books all at once.
Borrowing for a planned project, such as sewage lagoons, which is paid back over many years.
Questions you could ask
What is the plan and timeline for paying the landfill closing cost?
Without the accounting change, is the town's position getting better or worse?
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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
Strong spent about $305 per home on snow ploughing in 2025. The typical similar town spent $144. Only 3 of 23 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 Strong?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Snow ploughing per home: Strong $305; typical similar town $144; ranked 4th highest of 24.
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