After working through motions from Hamilton councillors looking to add and subtract items from the city’s proposal 2026 budget, homeowners are now looking at a 3.87 per cent tax increase.

Mayor Andrea Horwath has just over a week to veto any of the budget amendments, and if she doesn’t, the budget will be adopted as is.

Council concluded its final budget meeting on Thursday, approving the results of two previous meetings where councillors made their cases for changes to the version of the budget initially proposed by the mayor. That budget would have meant a 4.25 per cent residential tax increase — about $228 for the average home assessed at $387,100. 

The budget as amended would see homeowners pay $209 on a house of the same value.

“Council’s review and amendments reflect a shared commitment to affordability, essential services, and making strategic investments that strengthen our community today and for the future,” said Howarth, who voted in favour of many of the amendments proposed by her colleagues. 

“With many Hamiltonians feeling the real pressure of rising costs, this budget process has been about getting the balance right — protecting the services people rely on while being responsible with every tax dollar,” she said in a news release issued on Thursday.

Under the “strong mayor” powers granted by the province, Horwath has 10 days to veto amendments. If she does exercise her veto, there will be a 15-day period during which councillors can attempt to override the veto, for which they require a two-thirds majority. 

Savings proposed by deferring some payments

Among the biggest reductions proposed by councillors was a deferral of $3 million to next year’s budget to pay for previously approved development charge exemptions.

The exemptions have added to the city’s infrastructure spending shortfall of $5.2 billion, says a motion from Ward 12 Coun. Craig Cassar and Ward 10 Coun. Jeff Beattie.

The city has adopted a 10-year plan to close this infrastructure spending gap for core assets and 25 years for “non-core” assets. Deferring $3 billion “would reduce the burden on the 2026 tax levy without affecting services or capital investment plans,” says their motion, which passed 12 to 4. 

This was one of the motions on which Horwath voted no, potentially earmarking it for her veto. However, with a 12-4 vote, councillors appear to have more than the two-thirds majority required to override her veto if they all voted the same way at that time.

The motions proposed by councillors included two that trim money allocated for contingency funds for capital projects, such as two proposed by Mark Tadeson and Beattie that will reduce contingency funds for two city departments’ projects by 3 per cent.

For the Planning and Economic Development department, that amounts to a trim of $182,490, and for Public Works, that would be $593,000.

Councillors also approved a deferral to 2027 of $706,580 to build a bike bridge across the Red Hill expressway, saying the project timelines would not have it start in 2026 in any case.

Councillors also approved cancellation of free meals for themselves and senior staff, for a savings of $25,780.

In addition to cuts, they also approved some additions to the budget, most notably $2,118,000 to pay for recycling services at properties not covered by the province’s Blue Box transition, which took over city recycling services in April.

“Under the transition to the new producer responsibility Blue Box Program, certain property types such as industrial, commercial, institutional, are considered non-eligible and do not qualify for coordinated blue box collection,” said the motion from Ward 2 Coun. Kroetsch and Ward 3 Coun. Nann. 

Council voted 14 to 1 to continue these services, with Ward 9 Coun. Brad Clark the sole “no,” and Beattie absent.

Residents write letters of support for climate funding

A sprawling motion from Ward 14 Coun. Mike Spadafora and Ward 5 Coun. Matt Francis, which was defeated, would have seen the budget reduced by $3.2 million by deferring investments in cyber security and the city’s climate change reserve, which made up the bulk of the proposed cut, at $2.5 million.

Council received dozens of letters asking it to refrain from cutting any funding from environment- and climate-related projects.

The letters show how much these initiatives are important to residents and also reveal that there is no other way in the current process for residents to weigh in on councillors’ amendments, says Environment Hamilton executive director Ian Borsuk.

“There were two public delegation days, then almost a full month later we have councillors proposing cuts or deferrals literally at the last minute, with no opportunity for public input,” said Borsuk, whose organization had suspected climate cuts might be on the table in advance of the budget meetings.

He said that while some councillors complain that strong mayor powers take away their ability to participate, motions without time for public consultation take away rights from the public.

“Councillors are taking a new system and instead of making it work they’re using it as an excuse to be undemocratic,” he said.