David Guerin
City/Township Council · Cambridge Ward 7
Back to candidatesBudget & Taxes
It should be more transparent and accessible
- Moderate, predictable tax increases to maintain service levels
- Actively pursue provincial and federal transfer funding and grants
- Exploring new local revenue tools where permitted by provincial legislation
- Ensure new development pays a greater share of long-term infrastructure costs
- Re-evaluate development incentives or subsidies that create long-term liabilities
- Maintain current service levels, even if taxes rise
- Adjust service delivery models to reduce costs without reducing access
- Reduce discretionary programs to protect core services
- Prioritize maintenance and state-of-good-repair over expansion
- Require lifecycle cost analysis before approving any new infrastructure
- Defer or cancel capital projects with low long-term return on investment
Please describe one concrete example of a trade-off you would support (or oppose) when costs rise faster than revenues.candidate's own words
If costs were rising faster than revenues, I would support deferring or cancelling a lower-priority capital project before allowing core infrastructure maintenance to fall behind. For example, if Council had to choose between proceeding with a desirable but non-essential new facility or keeping roads, sidewalks, parks, water systems and other existing assets in a state of good repair, I would prioritize maintaining what we already own. That does not mean never investing in new projects. It means being disciplined about timing and recognizing that deferred maintenance often becomes more expensive later. I would rather make a transparent decision to postpone a lower-priority project than create a larger long-term liability for taxpayers.
Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on budgets?candidate's own words
I believe municipal budgeting should start with clear priorities. Residents expect reliable core services, well-maintained infrastructure and responsible management of public dollars. That means being disciplined about new spending, looking carefully at lifecycle costs before taking on new assets, and avoiding the temptation to defer maintenance simply to hold down the current year’s tax increase. I also believe affordability cannot be addressed only through spending restraint. Growing the assessment base through well-planned residential and commercial development is an important part of keeping municipal finances sustainable over the long term. My approach would be to protect core services, look continuously for better ways to deliver them, pursue outside funding where appropriate, and make sure major spending decisions are based on long-term value rather than short-term political appeal.
If you chose "It should be more transparent and accessible", please describe how.candidate's own words
Budget information should be easier for residents to understand without requiring them to work through hundreds of pages of financial documents. I would support clearer plain-language summaries showing what is changing from the previous year, the main reasons for tax increases, which services are growing or being reduced, and the long-term operating and maintenance costs of major capital projects. I would also like to see budget options presented more clearly, including the trade-offs involved. If Council is considering a new service, a capital project or a service reduction, residents should be able to understand both the cost and the consequence of that decision. Good transparency is not simply making information public. It is presenting it in a way that allows residents to meaningfully understand and evaluate the choices Council is making.