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by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date.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 Thorold'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 Thorold's financial reports and meeting minutes, and compared its numbers with 25 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.
Needs an answer
Needs an answer
These are unusual enough that residents deserve a clear answer from council.
Thorold spent $3.0M on parks, arena and library in 2019 and $5.9M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time. Only 1 of 25 similar places had faster growth here.
Found automatically from the city's financial reports · 3 sources
At the end of 2025, $11M of property tax had been billed but not paid. That is 16% of everything billed. None of the 25 similar places had a higher share. A year earlier it was $8.3M.
Found automatically from the city's financial reports · 2 sources
Worth asking
Worth asking
There may well be a good reason. It is still worth asking what it is.
8.14%gross levy change in the 2026 operating budget, with "growth" of -4.65% and a net levy change of 3.49%
The levy is the amount of money the City raises from property taxes. The 2026 operating budget summary puts taxation at $26,448,509, up from $24,457,573 in 2025, a rise of $1,990,936 or 8.1%. The same summary prints three percentages at the bottom: "GROSS LEVY CHANGE 8.14%", "GROWTH -4.65%" and "NET LEVY CHANGE 3.49%". The first minus the second gives the third (worked out by us). The summary does not say in words what these three lines mean, or what the new homes and businesses are expected to add.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
$843,033licences and permits revenue in 2025, against a budget of $1,855,065
The 2025 budget counted on $1,855,065 from licences and permits. The audited statements show $843,033, and $958,729 the year before. Over the same year, the building code reserve (money by law set aside only for running the building permit service) fell from $3,492,928 to $2,327,080. The statements do not explain the gap.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
$5,771,513spent on capital assets in 2025, against a budget of $36,944,206
Capital spending means building or replacing long-lasting things such as roads, pipes and buildings. The 2025 budget planned to buy $36,944,206 of these assets. The statements show $5,771,513 bought, and $16,712,635 in 2024. The City says projects in progress at December 31, 2025 have future costs of about $33,424,392. Development charges are fees paid by builders to pay for the roads, pipes and parks that growth needs. The City held $41,792,512 of them at the end of 2025, and recognized $1,257,540 of capital development charge revenue against a budget of $9,146,947.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 5 sources
$19,123,000held in principal protected notes at December 31, 2025, out of $40,480,043 of investments
The City invests money it does not need right away. At December 31, 2025 the book value of its portfolio was $40,480,043. The largest part, $19,123,000, was in principal protected notes (PPNs), and another $2,000,000 in step-up notes. A principal protected note promises to return the amount put in, but what it earns on top can depend on a market or index, which makes it harder to value than a plain savings certificate. About 47% of the portfolio is in PPNs (worked out by us). The statements say all investments are recorded at cost. The market value of the whole portfolio was $42,917,310.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
$11,042,437taxes receivable at December 31, 2025, up from $8,284,563 (both worked out by us from two printed lines)
At the end of 2025 the City was owed property taxes shown on two lines of its statement of financial position: $7,340,024 and $3,702,413. A year earlier the same two lines were $5,398,607 and $2,885,956. Together they rose from $8,284,563 to $11,042,437, about 33% (worked out by us). The allowance for taxes that may never be collected was $1,752,590 in both years. Penalties and interest on taxes brought in $1,377,173 against a budget of $945,804. The 2026 budget raises that line to $1,194,804.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 4 sources
$1,821,150budgeted spending on the Community Improvement Plan line in 2026, against $621,164 in the 2025 column
A community improvement plan is a program that gives grants or tax breaks to property owners to encourage building or repairs in an area. The 2026 operating budget lists "G824 COMM. IMPROVEMENT PLAN" at $1,821,150 of spending, against $621,164 in the 2025 column, with revenue of $1,546,986 against $347,000. The net cost to taxpayers is $274,164 in both years. The statements also say the City has five signed tax increment based grant agreements, with $844,199 left to pay. The budget pages we read do not say what the new revenue is.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
$4,113,414the Park's annual deficit for 2025 as reported by the Park, which the City shares
Canada Games Park is a large sports centre in Thorold owned jointly by Brock University, the City of St. Catharines, the City of Thorold and the Region of Niagara. The City's statements record a 25% share. The Park reported revenue of $3,648,766 and expenses of $7,762,180 for 2025, an annual deficit of $4,113,414 (2024: $5,391,235). The notes do not say how much of the expenses is the yearly wearing-out of the building (amortization, which is not a cash cost). The notes also say the Park's revenues and operating costs are shared in equal one-third shares by three members, while the City holds 25%. Of the Park's deficit, the notes record contributions from the City of $383,827 in 2025.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
Each question in full
Needs an answerFound automatically from financial reports
Thorold spent $3.0M on parks, arena and library in 2019 and $5.9M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time. Only 1 of 25 similar places had faster growth here.
Why did the cost of parks, arena and library grow 94% in 6 years?
Parks, arena and library
Prices (inflation)
−20%+0%+20%+40%+60%+80%+100%
+94%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Parks, arena and library
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
−17%
+1%
2021
−3%
+4%
2022
+49%
+11%
2023
+51%
+16%
2024
+91%
+18%
2025
+94%
+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 $2.9M a year pay for?
Why did arena and buildings go from $1.6M to $3.1M?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
At the end of 2025, $11M of property tax had been billed but not paid. That is 16% of everything billed. None of the 25 similar places had a higher share. A year earlier it was $8.3M.
Why are so many property taxes unpaid?
$0$2.0M$4.0M$6.0M$8.0M$10M$12M
$11M
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Unpaid property tax at year end
2019
$3.7M
2020
$4.0M
2021
$4.8M
2022
$5.2M
2023
$6.4M
2024
$8.3M
2025
$11M
Why it matters
When taxes go unpaid, everyone else carries the cost, and the city may borrow to cover the gap. The Province's financial indicators treat 10% to 15% as a moderate risk and more than 15% as a high risk. Collection is the city's job, so a rising number is worth asking about.
It could be because…
The final tax bill was due late in the year, so some payments simply arrived in January.
A few large properties are in dispute or being sold for back taxes.
Hard times for residents, which the city may be handling with payment plans.
Questions you could ask
How much is more than one year overdue, and from how many properties?
Are the rules for chasing unpaid taxes applied the same way to everyone?
Has the city registered tax arrears certificates on properties about two years behind? If still unpaid a year after that, Ontario law lets the city sell the property.
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Taxes receivable: 2019 $3.7M, 2020 $4.0M, 2021 $4.8M, 2022 $5.2M, 2023 $6.4M, 2024 $8.3M, 2025 $11M. Of the 2025 total, $3.3M was from earlier years.
8.14%gross levy change in the 2026 operating budget, with "growth" of -4.65% and a net levy change of 3.49%
The levy is the amount of money the City raises from property taxes. The 2026 operating budget summary puts taxation at $26,448,509, up from $24,457,573 in 2025, a rise of $1,990,936 or 8.1%. The same summary prints three percentages at the bottom: "GROSS LEVY CHANGE 8.14%", "GROWTH -4.65%" and "NET LEVY CHANGE 3.49%". The first minus the second gives the third (worked out by us). The summary does not say in words what these three lines mean, or what the new homes and businesses are expected to add.
Why it matters
Whether an owner of an existing home sees a rise of 8% or of 3% depends on how much of the new money comes from newly built property. The budget pages we read print the numbers but not the explanation.
It could be because…
The City is growing, and new buildings add to the tax base, so the same rate raises more money without raising a bill for existing owners. That would fit the "growth" line.
The three lines may be explained in a staff report or a budget presentation that we did not read.
The 2026 summary also lists supplementary taxation (extra tax billed on new or changed buildings during the year), which can move the total on its own.
Questions you could ask
What does "GROWTH -4.65%" in the 2026 budget represent in dollars, and how was it estimated?
What is the change in the tax bill for a typical existing home in 2026, after growth?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Operating budget summary, "0001 TAXATION": 2026 net -26,448,509; 2025 net -24,457,573; variance -1,990,936; "8.1%". "0002 SUPPLEMENTARY TAXATION": 2026 net -1,633,923; 2025 net -1,424,200; variance -209,723; "14.7%".
Operating budget summary, last lines: "Total consolidated" gross 42,391,057 in 2026 against 38,479,584.55 in 2025, variance 3,911,472, "10.7%". Then "GROSS LEVY CHANGE 8.14%", "GROWTH -4.65%", "NET LEVY CHANGE 3.49%".
$843,033licences and permits revenue in 2025, against a budget of $1,855,065
The 2025 budget counted on $1,855,065 from licences and permits. The audited statements show $843,033, and $958,729 the year before. Over the same year, the building code reserve (money by law set aside only for running the building permit service) fell from $3,492,928 to $2,327,080. The statements do not explain the gap.
Why it matters
When revenue is budgeted at about twice what arrives, something else has to give: spending is cut, a reserve is used, or taxes make up the difference. A reserve that shrinks is worth watching in a city that is planning to grow.
It could be because…
Fewer building permits may have been issued than planned in 2025, as in many Ontario places when housing starts slowed.
The budget line may have included revenue from several sources that the statements group differently.
Part of the building code reserve may have been used on purpose, to run the service in a slow year. That is what the reserve is for.
Council may have revised the figures after the budget was adopted.
Questions you could ask
Why was the 2025 licences and permits budget set at $1,855,065, and what did the City expect to be issued?
How much of the $1,165,848 fall in the building code reserve (worked out by us) was planned in the 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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 16, User charges, operating: "Licences and permits" budget 2025 1,855,065; actual 2025 843,033; actual 2024 958,729.
$5,771,513spent on capital assets in 2025, against a budget of $36,944,206
Capital spending means building or replacing long-lasting things such as roads, pipes and buildings. The 2025 budget planned to buy $36,944,206 of these assets. The statements show $5,771,513 bought, and $16,712,635 in 2024. The City says projects in progress at December 31, 2025 have future costs of about $33,424,392. Development charges are fees paid by builders to pay for the roads, pipes and parks that growth needs. The City held $41,792,512 of them at the end of 2025, and recognized $1,257,540 of capital development charge revenue against a budget of $9,146,947.
Why it matters
Residents were told about a large building plan. If most of it is late, the services growth needs may arrive later than promised, and money collected from builders sits unused. Delays can also raise costs.
It could be because…
Large projects often run over several years. The City says its commitments for projects in progress are about $33,424,392, so much of the budget may simply be moving forward in 2026 and later.
The budget figure counts the whole price of a project in the year it is approved, while the work and the payments are spread out.
Development charges can only be spent on projects that growth has made necessary, so the balance may be waiting for those projects to start.
Grants that were expected may not have arrived, which would hold back work they were meant to pay for.
Questions you could ask
Which 2025 capital projects were not started or not finished, and why?
When will the $41,792,512 of development charges be spent, and on which 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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Statement of changes in net financial assets: "Acquisition of tangible capital assets" budget 2025 (36,944,206); actual 2025 (5,771,513); actual 2024 (16,712,635).
Note 23, Commitments: "The estimated future capital expense commitments based on projects in progress at December 31, 2025 is approximately $ 33,424,392 (2024 - $ 33,300,791). These projects will be financed by grants, subsidies and long term liabilities in future years."
Note 25, Budget: the budget was prepared on a modified accrual basis and adjusted for the statements; the adjustments include "Acquisition of tangible capital assets 36,944,206".
$19,123,000held in principal protected notes at December 31, 2025, out of $40,480,043 of investments
The City invests money it does not need right away. At December 31, 2025 the book value of its portfolio was $40,480,043. The largest part, $19,123,000, was in principal protected notes (PPNs), and another $2,000,000 in step-up notes. A principal protected note promises to return the amount put in, but what it earns on top can depend on a market or index, which makes it harder to value than a plain savings certificate. About 47% of the portfolio is in PPNs (worked out by us). The statements say all investments are recorded at cost. The market value of the whole portfolio was $42,917,310.
Why it matters
The money belongs to taxpayers and backs reserves for future needs. Residents should be able to see what the City owns, who issued it, when it ends, and what rule allowed it.
It could be because…
PPNs issued by major banks are a common, allowed choice for Ontario places, and may be covered by the City's investment policy, which we did not read.
They may have been chosen because they promise to return the amount invested and pay more than plain certificates.
The notes may be held until they end, in which case changes in market value do not matter.
Questions you could ask
Which banks issued the principal protected notes, and what do they pay if the market does not do well?
What does the City's investment policy say about the share of the portfolio that may be held in PPNs?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
Note 2, Portfolio investments: book value 2025 "PPNs 19,123,000" (market value 20,187,587); "Step-ups 2,000,000" (market value 1,949,866); "GICs $ 8,622,273"; "Bonds 10,484,770"; "Equity Fund 250,000"; total "$ 40,480,043", market value total "$ 42,917,310". Book value of PPNs in 2024: 14,107,000.
Note 2, text under the table: investments "carry an effective interest rates from 1.50% to 5.30% and maturity dates ranging from May, 2026 to November, 2035", and "all of the Municipality's investments are recorded at cost."
Note 18, Other revenues, operating: "Investment income" budget 2025 703,000; actual 2025 791,796; actual 2024 1,005,810. "Investment income - reserves and reserve funds" budget 1,475,112; actual 1,062,186; actual 2024 1,423,893.
$11,042,437taxes receivable at December 31, 2025, up from $8,284,563 (both worked out by us from two printed lines)
At the end of 2025 the City was owed property taxes shown on two lines of its statement of financial position: $7,340,024 and $3,702,413. A year earlier the same two lines were $5,398,607 and $2,885,956. Together they rose from $8,284,563 to $11,042,437, about 33% (worked out by us). The allowance for taxes that may never be collected was $1,752,590 in both years. Penalties and interest on taxes brought in $1,377,173 against a budget of $945,804. The 2026 budget raises that line to $1,194,804.
Why it matters
Unpaid taxes are money the City has counted as income but not yet received. If owners fall behind, the City may need to write some off, which costs everyone else. A fixed allowance against a growing balance is worth a question.
It could be because…
A tax bill issued late in the year, or a due date just after December 31, would leave more owing at year end without any more unpaid taxes than usual.
Property tax arrears are secured against the property, so the City can recover them through a tax sale. The allowance may be set at what past experience suggests.
The statements say some assessment appeals have yet to be heard, which can affect how much is owed.
More billed taxes (the levy rose in 2025) naturally means a bigger amount owing at year end.
Questions you could ask
How much of the taxes owing at December 31, 2025 had been owing for more than one year, and what is the City doing about it?
How does the City decide the size of its allowance for taxes that may not be collected?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Consolidated Statement of Financial Position, financial assets, "Taxes receivable (Note 3)": 7,340,024 (2024: 5,398,607) and 3,702,413 (2024: 2,885,956), on the two lines under that heading.
Note 3, Taxes receivable: "an allowance for doubtful accounts in the amount of $ 1,752,590 (2024 - $ 1,752,590) and have penalties and interest receivable of $ 2,475,271 (2024 - $ 2,255,874)."
$1,821,150budgeted spending on the Community Improvement Plan line in 2026, against $621,164 in the 2025 column
A community improvement plan is a program that gives grants or tax breaks to property owners to encourage building or repairs in an area. The 2026 operating budget lists "G824 COMM. IMPROVEMENT PLAN" at $1,821,150 of spending, against $621,164 in the 2025 column, with revenue of $1,546,986 against $347,000. The net cost to taxpayers is $274,164 in both years. The statements also say the City has five signed tax increment based grant agreements, with $844,199 left to pay. The budget pages we read do not say what the new revenue is.
Why it matters
Grants to private owners are public money. When a line triples, residents should know who pays, whether it is taxes or fees from builders, and how the grants are chosen. The net cost is unchanged, so the question is what the new revenue is and whether it could be used elsewhere.
It could be because…
The revenue may come from a reserve or from development charges set aside by Council for this purpose, which would leave the net cost to taxpayers unchanged, as the budget shows.
The 2026 figure may include grants approved earlier that are paid out in 2026.
Tax increment grants are paid out of the extra tax a new building brings in, so they cost the City little beyond what the building adds.
Questions you could ask
What are the sources of the $1,546,986 of revenue on the 2026 Community Improvement Plan line?
How many grants were paid in 2025, and what rules did Council set for choosing them?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
Note 23, Commitments, "Tax increment based grants": "There are currently five signed agreements with a term spanning ten years each. At December 31, 2025, the total amount remaining to be paid from these agreements is $ 844,199". Payments: 2026 211,946; 2027 211,946; 2028 207,062; 2029 200,887; 2030 12,358.
Thorold spent $4.8M on police, fire and safety in 2019 and $9.2M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time.
Why did the cost of police, fire and safety grow 93% in 6 years?
Police, fire and safety
Prices (inflation)
+0%+20%+40%+60%+80%+100%
+93%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Police, fire and safety
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
+14%
+1%
2021
+22%
+4%
2022
+30%
+11%
2023
+49%
+16%
2024
+75%
+18%
2025
+93%
+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 $4.4M a year pay for?
Why did fire department go from $3.6M to $5.5M?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Police, fire and safety: 2019 $4.8M, 2020 $5.5M, 2021 $5.8M, 2022 $6.2M, 2023 $7.2M, 2024 $8.4M, 2025 $9.2M.
Thorold spent $5.6M on water, sewers and garbage in 2019 and $13.6M in 2025. Prices only went up about 21% in that time.
Why did the cost of water, sewers and garbage grow 144% in 6 years?
Water, sewers and garbage
Prices (inflation)
+0%+50%+100%+150%
+144%
2019202020212022202320242025
Show as a table
Year
Water, sewers and garbage
Prices (inflation)
2019
+0%
+0%
2020
+58%
+1%
2021
+59%
+4%
2022
+69%
+11%
2023
+76%
+16%
2024
+110%
+18%
2025
+144%
+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 $8.0M a year pay for?
Why did sewage treatment go from $4.0M to $7.6M?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
$4,113,414the Park's annual deficit for 2025 as reported by the Park, which the City shares
Canada Games Park is a large sports centre in Thorold owned jointly by Brock University, the City of St. Catharines, the City of Thorold and the Region of Niagara. The City's statements record a 25% share. The Park reported revenue of $3,648,766 and expenses of $7,762,180 for 2025, an annual deficit of $4,113,414 (2024: $5,391,235). The notes do not say how much of the expenses is the yearly wearing-out of the building (amortization, which is not a cash cost). The notes also say the Park's revenues and operating costs are shared in equal one-third shares by three members, while the City holds 25%. Of the Park's deficit, the notes record contributions from the City of $383,827 in 2025.
Why it matters
A facility with a deficit of this size is paid for by its owners. Residents should know how much of it comes from Thorold taxes, how it is shared, and what the City may be asked to pay later.
It could be because…
Much of the deficit may be amortization. The Park's capital assets fell from $92,113,164 to $87,914,661 over the year, a drop of $4,198,503 (worked out by us), which is close to the size of the deficit. That would not be cash.
The one-third sharing of operating costs and the 25% ownership interest may be two separate things: one for yearly costs, one for owning the building.
The agreement may also set aside money for future repairs: each of the four partners has put $1,677,092 into a $6,708,368 capital reserve.
Questions you could ask
How much cash does Thorold pay toward the Park each year, in total, and under which agreement?
Is the Park's operating cost shared by thirds or by quarters, and does the capital reserve change that?
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 Thorold?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 20, Canada Games Park: "Revenues and operating costs are shared by the participating consortium members, Brock University, the City of St. Catharines and the City of Thorold in equal one-third (1/3) shares. The City of Thorold has a non-controlling interest in the Park of 25%."
Note 20, related party transactions with the Park, Statement of Operations: "Rentals $ 116,218" (2024 130,803); "Contributions 383,827" (2024 317,108). Capital reserve: "Each of the four Consortium partners ... have contributed $ 1,677,092 to the $ 6,708,368 capital reserve."
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