2026 Budget Process

As part of the annual budget process, the County reviews the Long-Term Financial Plan. This plan helps guide how we plan, manage, and invest your tax dollars responsibly.

It includes two main parts:

The Long-Term Financial Plan Model: This is a 10-year forecast showing the County’s expected revenues (money coming in) and expenditures (money going out). It helps us plan for growth, maintain services, and invest in key projects. It is reviewed annually.
Council-Approved Financial Policies: These policies guide how staff and Council make financial decisions and set budgets in a responsible and transparent way.

The annual review helps ensureContinue reading

As part of the annual budget process, the County reviews the Long-Term Financial Plan. This plan helps guide how we plan, manage, and invest your tax dollars responsibly.

It includes two main parts:

The Long-Term Financial Plan Model: This is a 10-year forecast showing the County’s expected revenues (money coming in) and expenditures (money going out). It helps us plan for growth, maintain services, and invest in key projects. It is reviewed annually.
Council-Approved Financial Policies: These policies guide how staff and Council make financial decisions and set budgets in a responsible and transparent way.

The annual review helps ensure our plan reflects real, up-to-date information, including public input, 2025 growth as well as new inflation forecasts for 2026 and beyond. This review also allows Council to add new initiatives or projects that came forward in 2025, revisit timelines or project scopes, and confirm priorities for the upcoming year.

View the 2026 Budget Process infographic, learn about what a municipal budget is, and discover how the County's budget process works.

Your input matters

Your feedback is an important part of this process. By sharing your input, you help Council better understand what matters most to residents and help inform decisions that must balance investments across essential areas like infrastructure, services, and, community and economic development throughout the entire County.

Stay Informed

Subscribe for updates and be the first to get more information about this project! Simply add your email to the Stay Informed box on this page and click ‘Subscribe'.

Share your comments or questions

County of Brant Staff aim to maintain a respectful and constructive dialogue with the public through all forms of communication. We understand and appreciate that people will have differing opinions and concerns, and welcome all feedback, questions, and comments in a respectful and constructive manner.

All constructive feedback and recommendations will be presented to Council for consideration.

Please ask your question or leave your comment below. We will do our best to respond within 3 business days. You may also find answers to some of your questions on our FAQs page or on the County of Brant website at brant.ca/Budget.

Thank you for your input!

You need to be signed in to add your question.

Share Budget Meeting is Dec.4/2025 9am, in Council Chambers... If you want to speak, a delegation form must be submitted prior... The County "projects" should differentiate between County needs vs County wants. A Brant County hospital is a required NEED (not to be confused with Brant County residents contributing to the current old Brantford Hospital). With the constantly growing population of Brant County and the 1% tax adder for the proposed Brant County hospital already added to our property taxes in 2025, there does not seem to be any rush or transparency for future plans for "our hospital", other than yet another Consultant's Report. There currently seems to be inconsistencies and a lot of wasted revenue or shortfalls in the Budget, even though Brant County is growing residentially and Industrially. Why aren't industries and developers paying for their share of new infrastructure ? Are they applying for loopholes in the "user fees" or has Brant County "partnered" with them and we essentially have to pay for all of their required new infrastructure ? Why aren't the many new residential neighbourhoods created in Paris offering enough "extra" revenue of Property Tax to sustain the budget ? These new neighbourhoods better not be a loophole in Brant County's "affordable housing initiative" with Developer user fees not applicable or reduced ? We'll just pay for yet another Consultant Report to tell us we need more Affordable Housing... How many units has Brant County built so far ? Supposedly, "15 in Paris, but part of a 49 unit Building, Managed by City of Brantford ?" ... also according to Ontario Gov.website, "Homelessness Prevention Program for the City of Brantford, which also provides housing services in Brant County, bringing the total to $7.02 million ANNUALLY", In conjunction with, "The City of Brantford was allocated $10.32 million through all phases of the Social Services Relief Fund to deliver critical services such as shelters, food banks and emergency services." Doesn't anyone else wonder where this money went ?? Also from the Ontario Government News release from 2023, "Having served as County Councillor and now as MPP, I understand the importance of affordable housing. This is another solid step that our government is taking to enable the building of 1.5 million housing units and to make housing easier and more attainable for everyone." - Will Bouma Member of Provincial Parliament for Brantford-Brant "Housing need presents itself in every community including the County of Brant. Citizens can find it challenging to secure affordable quality housing in their community and many people take a second job or choose which bill to pay. I am very pleased with the County and City’s response to partner and take action to construct new affordable homes in PARIS to address this ever growing and concerning trend." - David Bailey Mayor of County of Brant - The July 2025 County report states "it will need 2,455 new homes by 2035 - with at least 680 affordable units." - "Over 7,700 homes are already approved but not yet built - these will roll out over time, and we will focus on ensuring these are the types of homes that the community needs." Also, will Brant County address reports of the low levels of water this past summer and fall in the Bethel Well Report and the impact of even more neighbourhoods and Industrial growth surrounding it ? Or should we approve yet another Gravel Pit or splash pad that consumes our Neighbourhood water ? What if the staff recommendations for the Downtown Dig were the same as the current arguments against rebuilding the Cleaver Rd bridge ? I'm sure many of you would be screaming your opposition... Our Community is trying to shed some light onto our "failing infrastructure" and the need for it to be rebuilt as well ... Let's just imagine, IF the staff recommendation for the Paris Downtown Dig was not approved and it instead stated, Paris has Old infrastructure - let it go until end of life and then close it to vehicles. Despite the disruption from the Paris downtown dig, everyone managed to find an alternate route, Google Maps shows it’s only six minutes longer—reopening Grand River Street North should no longer be necessary. The infrastructure is too old to justify a major reconstruction within the Capital budget. While funds were included in the 10-year forecast, that budget is fluid—and this project no longer fits our long-term asset management plan. So, we’ll evaluate it again at end-of-life.” Then, in the same breath, the recommendation proposes repaving the Council parking lot—not for vehicles, but for pedestrian walkways only—and painting brighter lines to improve visibility for foot traffic and a multi level vehicle garage. This would be presented as a meaningful alternative. “Look at what we’re offering you,” the recommendation would say. “All these other options—justified as a key priority by 15 of the 150 people surveyed in Paris, which staff framed as a significant portion.” And the cost? Staff can budget accordingly. It’s less than—but nearly equivalent to—the Downtown Dig. This isn't what happened, BUT, These are some of the same pushback phrases used as part of a broader effort by staff to oppose rebuilding the Cleaver Road Bridge for vehicle access, just imagine IF the same excuses were used for Paris's once in a lifetime, historic downtown transformation? In the current 10 year plan, there is money already allocated in the budget to repair Robinson Road bridge, Instead, allocate that money to rebuild a single lane vehicle bridge with a dedicated walk/bike path to meet the safety and infrastructure requirements of our Community. This has been a majority & consistent message to Council for 2 1/2 years now. Over the past two and a half years, I’ve tracked inconsistencies in the Cleaver Road Bridge project—across phone calls, public meetings, community communications, paid reports, and bid tenders. These inconsistencies have delayed action and undermined trust in a process that is ultimately funded by taxpayers. This issue matters deeply to me. I’ve committed several hours a day to reviewing reports, verifying facts, and researching policies to get to the base of the truth—and to bring forward practical, financially responsible solutions. The survey results and staff recommendations do not reflect the full picture—and that needs to be challenged. When conclusions rely on selective interpretation and lack clear supporting data, it’s our duty to question those assumptions in order to make the best community and financial decisions and ensure choices are based on complete and accurate information. on Facebook Share Budget Meeting is Dec.4/2025 9am, in Council Chambers... If you want to speak, a delegation form must be submitted prior... The County "projects" should differentiate between County needs vs County wants. A Brant County hospital is a required NEED (not to be confused with Brant County residents contributing to the current old Brantford Hospital). With the constantly growing population of Brant County and the 1% tax adder for the proposed Brant County hospital already added to our property taxes in 2025, there does not seem to be any rush or transparency for future plans for "our hospital", other than yet another Consultant's Report. There currently seems to be inconsistencies and a lot of wasted revenue or shortfalls in the Budget, even though Brant County is growing residentially and Industrially. Why aren't industries and developers paying for their share of new infrastructure ? Are they applying for loopholes in the "user fees" or has Brant County "partnered" with them and we essentially have to pay for all of their required new infrastructure ? Why aren't the many new residential neighbourhoods created in Paris offering enough "extra" revenue of Property Tax to sustain the budget ? These new neighbourhoods better not be a loophole in Brant County's "affordable housing initiative" with Developer user fees not applicable or reduced ? We'll just pay for yet another Consultant Report to tell us we need more Affordable Housing... How many units has Brant County built so far ? Supposedly, "15 in Paris, but part of a 49 unit Building, Managed by City of Brantford ?" ... also according to Ontario Gov.website, "Homelessness Prevention Program for the City of Brantford, which also provides housing services in Brant County, bringing the total to $7.02 million ANNUALLY", In conjunction with, "The City of Brantford was allocated $10.32 million through all phases of the Social Services Relief Fund to deliver critical services such as shelters, food banks and emergency services." Doesn't anyone else wonder where this money went ?? Also from the Ontario Government News release from 2023, "Having served as County Councillor and now as MPP, I understand the importance of affordable housing. This is another solid step that our government is taking to enable the building of 1.5 million housing units and to make housing easier and more attainable for everyone." - Will Bouma Member of Provincial Parliament for Brantford-Brant "Housing need presents itself in every community including the County of Brant. Citizens can find it challenging to secure affordable quality housing in their community and many people take a second job or choose which bill to pay. I am very pleased with the County and City’s response to partner and take action to construct new affordable homes in PARIS to address this ever growing and concerning trend." - David Bailey Mayor of County of Brant - The July 2025 County report states "it will need 2,455 new homes by 2035 - with at least 680 affordable units." - "Over 7,700 homes are already approved but not yet built - these will roll out over time, and we will focus on ensuring these are the types of homes that the community needs." Also, will Brant County address reports of the low levels of water this past summer and fall in the Bethel Well Report and the impact of even more neighbourhoods and Industrial growth surrounding it ? Or should we approve yet another Gravel Pit or splash pad that consumes our Neighbourhood water ? What if the staff recommendations for the Downtown Dig were the same as the current arguments against rebuilding the Cleaver Rd bridge ? I'm sure many of you would be screaming your opposition... Our Community is trying to shed some light onto our "failing infrastructure" and the need for it to be rebuilt as well ... Let's just imagine, IF the staff recommendation for the Paris Downtown Dig was not approved and it instead stated, Paris has Old infrastructure - let it go until end of life and then close it to vehicles. Despite the disruption from the Paris downtown dig, everyone managed to find an alternate route, Google Maps shows it’s only six minutes longer—reopening Grand River Street North should no longer be necessary. The infrastructure is too old to justify a major reconstruction within the Capital budget. While funds were included in the 10-year forecast, that budget is fluid—and this project no longer fits our long-term asset management plan. So, we’ll evaluate it again at end-of-life.” Then, in the same breath, the recommendation proposes repaving the Council parking lot—not for vehicles, but for pedestrian walkways only—and painting brighter lines to improve visibility for foot traffic and a multi level vehicle garage. This would be presented as a meaningful alternative. “Look at what we’re offering you,” the recommendation would say. “All these other options—justified as a key priority by 15 of the 150 people surveyed in Paris, which staff framed as a significant portion.” And the cost? Staff can budget accordingly. It’s less than—but nearly equivalent to—the Downtown Dig. This isn't what happened, BUT, These are some of the same pushback phrases used as part of a broader effort by staff to oppose rebuilding the Cleaver Road Bridge for vehicle access, just imagine IF the same excuses were used for Paris's once in a lifetime, historic downtown transformation? In the current 10 year plan, there is money already allocated in the budget to repair Robinson Road bridge, Instead, allocate that money to rebuild a single lane vehicle bridge with a dedicated walk/bike path to meet the safety and infrastructure requirements of our Community. This has been a majority & consistent message to Council for 2 1/2 years now. Over the past two and a half years, I’ve tracked inconsistencies in the Cleaver Road Bridge project—across phone calls, public meetings, community communications, paid reports, and bid tenders. These inconsistencies have delayed action and undermined trust in a process that is ultimately funded by taxpayers. This issue matters deeply to me. I’ve committed several hours a day to reviewing reports, verifying facts, and researching policies to get to the base of the truth—and to bring forward practical, financially responsible solutions. The survey results and staff recommendations do not reflect the full picture—and that needs to be challenged. When conclusions rely on selective interpretation and lack clear supporting data, it’s our duty to question those assumptions in order to make the best community and financial decisions and ensure choices are based on complete and accurate information. on Twitter Share Budget Meeting is Dec.4/2025 9am, in Council Chambers... If you want to speak, a delegation form must be submitted prior... The County "projects" should differentiate between County needs vs County wants. A Brant County hospital is a required NEED (not to be confused with Brant County residents contributing to the current old Brantford Hospital). With the constantly growing population of Brant County and the 1% tax adder for the proposed Brant County hospital already added to our property taxes in 2025, there does not seem to be any rush or transparency for future plans for "our hospital", other than yet another Consultant's Report. There currently seems to be inconsistencies and a lot of wasted revenue or shortfalls in the Budget, even though Brant County is growing residentially and Industrially. Why aren't industries and developers paying for their share of new infrastructure ? Are they applying for loopholes in the "user fees" or has Brant County "partnered" with them and we essentially have to pay for all of their required new infrastructure ? Why aren't the many new residential neighbourhoods created in Paris offering enough "extra" revenue of Property Tax to sustain the budget ? These new neighbourhoods better not be a loophole in Brant County's "affordable housing initiative" with Developer user fees not applicable or reduced ? We'll just pay for yet another Consultant Report to tell us we need more Affordable Housing... How many units has Brant County built so far ? Supposedly, "15 in Paris, but part of a 49 unit Building, Managed by City of Brantford ?" ... also according to Ontario Gov.website, "Homelessness Prevention Program for the City of Brantford, which also provides housing services in Brant County, bringing the total to $7.02 million ANNUALLY", In conjunction with, "The City of Brantford was allocated $10.32 million through all phases of the Social Services Relief Fund to deliver critical services such as shelters, food banks and emergency services." Doesn't anyone else wonder where this money went ?? Also from the Ontario Government News release from 2023, "Having served as County Councillor and now as MPP, I understand the importance of affordable housing. This is another solid step that our government is taking to enable the building of 1.5 million housing units and to make housing easier and more attainable for everyone." - Will Bouma Member of Provincial Parliament for Brantford-Brant "Housing need presents itself in every community including the County of Brant. Citizens can find it challenging to secure affordable quality housing in their community and many people take a second job or choose which bill to pay. I am very pleased with the County and City’s response to partner and take action to construct new affordable homes in PARIS to address this ever growing and concerning trend." - David Bailey Mayor of County of Brant - The July 2025 County report states "it will need 2,455 new homes by 2035 - with at least 680 affordable units." - "Over 7,700 homes are already approved but not yet built - these will roll out over time, and we will focus on ensuring these are the types of homes that the community needs." Also, will Brant County address reports of the low levels of water this past summer and fall in the Bethel Well Report and the impact of even more neighbourhoods and Industrial growth surrounding it ? Or should we approve yet another Gravel Pit or splash pad that consumes our Neighbourhood water ? What if the staff recommendations for the Downtown Dig were the same as the current arguments against rebuilding the Cleaver Rd bridge ? I'm sure many of you would be screaming your opposition... Our Community is trying to shed some light onto our "failing infrastructure" and the need for it to be rebuilt as well ... Let's just imagine, IF the staff recommendation for the Paris Downtown Dig was not approved and it instead stated, Paris has Old infrastructure - let it go until end of life and then close it to vehicles. Despite the disruption from the Paris downtown dig, everyone managed to find an alternate route, Google Maps shows it’s only six minutes longer—reopening Grand River Street North should no longer be necessary. The infrastructure is too old to justify a major reconstruction within the Capital budget. While funds were included in the 10-year forecast, that budget is fluid—and this project no longer fits our long-term asset management plan. So, we’ll evaluate it again at end-of-life.” Then, in the same breath, the recommendation proposes repaving the Council parking lot—not for vehicles, but for pedestrian walkways only—and painting brighter lines to improve visibility for foot traffic and a multi level vehicle garage. This would be presented as a meaningful alternative. “Look at what we’re offering you,” the recommendation would say. “All these other options—justified as a key priority by 15 of the 150 people surveyed in Paris, which staff framed as a significant portion.” And the cost? Staff can budget accordingly. It’s less than—but nearly equivalent to—the Downtown Dig. This isn't what happened, BUT, These are some of the same pushback phrases used as part of a broader effort by staff to oppose rebuilding the Cleaver Road Bridge for vehicle access, just imagine IF the same excuses were used for Paris's once in a lifetime, historic downtown transformation? In the current 10 year plan, there is money already allocated in the budget to repair Robinson Road bridge, Instead, allocate that money to rebuild a single lane vehicle bridge with a dedicated walk/bike path to meet the safety and infrastructure requirements of our Community. This has been a majority & consistent message to Council for 2 1/2 years now. Over the past two and a half years, I’ve tracked inconsistencies in the Cleaver Road Bridge project—across phone calls, public meetings, community communications, paid reports, and bid tenders. These inconsistencies have delayed action and undermined trust in a process that is ultimately funded by taxpayers. This issue matters deeply to me. I’ve committed several hours a day to reviewing reports, verifying facts, and researching policies to get to the base of the truth—and to bring forward practical, financially responsible solutions. The survey results and staff recommendations do not reflect the full picture—and that needs to be challenged. When conclusions rely on selective interpretation and lack clear supporting data, it’s our duty to question those assumptions in order to make the best community and financial decisions and ensure choices are based on complete and accurate information. on Linkedin Email Budget Meeting is Dec.4/2025 9am, in Council Chambers... If you want to speak, a delegation form must be submitted prior... The County "projects" should differentiate between County needs vs County wants. A Brant County hospital is a required NEED (not to be confused with Brant County residents contributing to the current old Brantford Hospital). With the constantly growing population of Brant County and the 1% tax adder for the proposed Brant County hospital already added to our property taxes in 2025, there does not seem to be any rush or transparency for future plans for "our hospital", other than yet another Consultant's Report. There currently seems to be inconsistencies and a lot of wasted revenue or shortfalls in the Budget, even though Brant County is growing residentially and Industrially. Why aren't industries and developers paying for their share of new infrastructure ? Are they applying for loopholes in the "user fees" or has Brant County "partnered" with them and we essentially have to pay for all of their required new infrastructure ? Why aren't the many new residential neighbourhoods created in Paris offering enough "extra" revenue of Property Tax to sustain the budget ? These new neighbourhoods better not be a loophole in Brant County's "affordable housing initiative" with Developer user fees not applicable or reduced ? We'll just pay for yet another Consultant Report to tell us we need more Affordable Housing... How many units has Brant County built so far ? Supposedly, "15 in Paris, but part of a 49 unit Building, Managed by City of Brantford ?" ... also according to Ontario Gov.website, "Homelessness Prevention Program for the City of Brantford, which also provides housing services in Brant County, bringing the total to $7.02 million ANNUALLY", In conjunction with, "The City of Brantford was allocated $10.32 million through all phases of the Social Services Relief Fund to deliver critical services such as shelters, food banks and emergency services." Doesn't anyone else wonder where this money went ?? Also from the Ontario Government News release from 2023, "Having served as County Councillor and now as MPP, I understand the importance of affordable housing. This is another solid step that our government is taking to enable the building of 1.5 million housing units and to make housing easier and more attainable for everyone." - Will Bouma Member of Provincial Parliament for Brantford-Brant "Housing need presents itself in every community including the County of Brant. Citizens can find it challenging to secure affordable quality housing in their community and many people take a second job or choose which bill to pay. I am very pleased with the County and City’s response to partner and take action to construct new affordable homes in PARIS to address this ever growing and concerning trend." - David Bailey Mayor of County of Brant - The July 2025 County report states "it will need 2,455 new homes by 2035 - with at least 680 affordable units." - "Over 7,700 homes are already approved but not yet built - these will roll out over time, and we will focus on ensuring these are the types of homes that the community needs." Also, will Brant County address reports of the low levels of water this past summer and fall in the Bethel Well Report and the impact of even more neighbourhoods and Industrial growth surrounding it ? Or should we approve yet another Gravel Pit or splash pad that consumes our Neighbourhood water ? What if the staff recommendations for the Downtown Dig were the same as the current arguments against rebuilding the Cleaver Rd bridge ? I'm sure many of you would be screaming your opposition... Our Community is trying to shed some light onto our "failing infrastructure" and the need for it to be rebuilt as well ... Let's just imagine, IF the staff recommendation for the Paris Downtown Dig was not approved and it instead stated, Paris has Old infrastructure - let it go until end of life and then close it to vehicles. Despite the disruption from the Paris downtown dig, everyone managed to find an alternate route, Google Maps shows it’s only six minutes longer—reopening Grand River Street North should no longer be necessary. The infrastructure is too old to justify a major reconstruction within the Capital budget. While funds were included in the 10-year forecast, that budget is fluid—and this project no longer fits our long-term asset management plan. So, we’ll evaluate it again at end-of-life.” Then, in the same breath, the recommendation proposes repaving the Council parking lot—not for vehicles, but for pedestrian walkways only—and painting brighter lines to improve visibility for foot traffic and a multi level vehicle garage. This would be presented as a meaningful alternative. “Look at what we’re offering you,” the recommendation would say. “All these other options—justified as a key priority by 15 of the 150 people surveyed in Paris, which staff framed as a significant portion.” And the cost? Staff can budget accordingly. It’s less than—but nearly equivalent to—the Downtown Dig. This isn't what happened, BUT, These are some of the same pushback phrases used as part of a broader effort by staff to oppose rebuilding the Cleaver Road Bridge for vehicle access, just imagine IF the same excuses were used for Paris's once in a lifetime, historic downtown transformation? In the current 10 year plan, there is money already allocated in the budget to repair Robinson Road bridge, Instead, allocate that money to rebuild a single lane vehicle bridge with a dedicated walk/bike path to meet the safety and infrastructure requirements of our Community. This has been a majority & consistent message to Council for 2 1/2 years now. Over the past two and a half years, I’ve tracked inconsistencies in the Cleaver Road Bridge project—across phone calls, public meetings, community communications, paid reports, and bid tenders. These inconsistencies have delayed action and undermined trust in a process that is ultimately funded by taxpayers. This issue matters deeply to me. I’ve committed several hours a day to reviewing reports, verifying facts, and researching policies to get to the base of the truth—and to bring forward practical, financially responsible solutions. The survey results and staff recommendations do not reflect the full picture—and that needs to be challenged. When conclusions rely on selective interpretation and lack clear supporting data, it’s our duty to question those assumptions in order to make the best community and financial decisions and ensure choices are based on complete and accurate information. link

Budget Meeting is Dec.4/2025 9am, in Council Chambers... If you want to speak, a delegation form must be submitted prior... The County "projects" should differentiate between County needs vs County wants. A Brant County hospital is a required NEED (not to be confused with Brant County residents contributing to the current old Brantford Hospital). With the constantly growing population of Brant County and the 1% tax adder for the proposed Brant County hospital already added to our property taxes in 2025, there does not seem to be any rush or transparency for future plans for "our hospital", other than yet another Consultant's Report. There currently seems to be inconsistencies and a lot of wasted revenue or shortfalls in the Budget, even though Brant County is growing residentially and Industrially. Why aren't industries and developers paying for their share of new infrastructure ? Are they applying for loopholes in the "user fees" or has Brant County "partnered" with them and we essentially have to pay for all of their required new infrastructure ? Why aren't the many new residential neighbourhoods created in Paris offering enough "extra" revenue of Property Tax to sustain the budget ? These new neighbourhoods better not be a loophole in Brant County's "affordable housing initiative" with Developer user fees not applicable or reduced ? We'll just pay for yet another Consultant Report to tell us we need more Affordable Housing... How many units has Brant County built so far ? Supposedly, "15 in Paris, but part of a 49 unit Building, Managed by City of Brantford ?" ... also according to Ontario Gov.website, "Homelessness Prevention Program for the City of Brantford, which also provides housing services in Brant County, bringing the total to $7.02 million ANNUALLY", In conjunction with, "The City of Brantford was allocated $10.32 million through all phases of the Social Services Relief Fund to deliver critical services such as shelters, food banks and emergency services." Doesn't anyone else wonder where this money went ?? Also from the Ontario Government News release from 2023, "Having served as County Councillor and now as MPP, I understand the importance of affordable housing. This is another solid step that our government is taking to enable the building of 1.5 million housing units and to make housing easier and more attainable for everyone." - Will Bouma Member of Provincial Parliament for Brantford-Brant "Housing need presents itself in every community including the County of Brant. Citizens can find it challenging to secure affordable quality housing in their community and many people take a second job or choose which bill to pay. I am very pleased with the County and City’s response to partner and take action to construct new affordable homes in PARIS to address this ever growing and concerning trend." - David Bailey Mayor of County of Brant - The July 2025 County report states "it will need 2,455 new homes by 2035 - with at least 680 affordable units." - "Over 7,700 homes are already approved but not yet built - these will roll out over time, and we will focus on ensuring these are the types of homes that the community needs." Also, will Brant County address reports of the low levels of water this past summer and fall in the Bethel Well Report and the impact of even more neighbourhoods and Industrial growth surrounding it ? Or should we approve yet another Gravel Pit or splash pad that consumes our Neighbourhood water ? What if the staff recommendations for the Downtown Dig were the same as the current arguments against rebuilding the Cleaver Rd bridge ? I'm sure many of you would be screaming your opposition... Our Community is trying to shed some light onto our "failing infrastructure" and the need for it to be rebuilt as well ... Let's just imagine, IF the staff recommendation for the Paris Downtown Dig was not approved and it instead stated, Paris has Old infrastructure - let it go until end of life and then close it to vehicles. Despite the disruption from the Paris downtown dig, everyone managed to find an alternate route, Google Maps shows it’s only six minutes longer—reopening Grand River Street North should no longer be necessary. The infrastructure is too old to justify a major reconstruction within the Capital budget. While funds were included in the 10-year forecast, that budget is fluid—and this project no longer fits our long-term asset management plan. So, we’ll evaluate it again at end-of-life.” Then, in the same breath, the recommendation proposes repaving the Council parking lot—not for vehicles, but for pedestrian walkways only—and painting brighter lines to improve visibility for foot traffic and a multi level vehicle garage. This would be presented as a meaningful alternative. “Look at what we’re offering you,” the recommendation would say. “All these other options—justified as a key priority by 15 of the 150 people surveyed in Paris, which staff framed as a significant portion.” And the cost? Staff can budget accordingly. It’s less than—but nearly equivalent to—the Downtown Dig. This isn't what happened, BUT, These are some of the same pushback phrases used as part of a broader effort by staff to oppose rebuilding the Cleaver Road Bridge for vehicle access, just imagine IF the same excuses were used for Paris's once in a lifetime, historic downtown transformation? In the current 10 year plan, there is money already allocated in the budget to repair Robinson Road bridge, Instead, allocate that money to rebuild a single lane vehicle bridge with a dedicated walk/bike path to meet the safety and infrastructure requirements of our Community. This has been a majority & consistent message to Council for 2 1/2 years now. Over the past two and a half years, I’ve tracked inconsistencies in the Cleaver Road Bridge project—across phone calls, public meetings, community communications, paid reports, and bid tenders. These inconsistencies have delayed action and undermined trust in a process that is ultimately funded by taxpayers. This issue matters deeply to me. I’ve committed several hours a day to reviewing reports, verifying facts, and researching policies to get to the base of the truth—and to bring forward practical, financially responsible solutions. The survey results and staff recommendations do not reflect the full picture—and that needs to be challenged. When conclusions rely on selective interpretation and lack clear supporting data, it’s our duty to question those assumptions in order to make the best community and financial decisions and ensure choices are based on complete and accurate information.

ABowden asked 12 days ago

Thank you for your submission on November 24, 2025. As you are aware, the next Council meeting regarding the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP), the 2026 Budget and the Cleaver Road Bridge is scheduled for December 4, 2025. I see you are registered to speak at this meeting.
The LTFP has been drafted, carefully keeping in mind a balance between the economic position of the municipality and its ratepayers, alignment with public sentiment on various projects and initiatives, appropriate investments in health, safety and emergency response and maintaining the County’s infrastructure and key assets.
Section 14 of the LTFP specifically speaks to funding the County’s Local Contribution towards the New Hospital Project. The site selection process is underway as a joint initiative with the BCHSYS, neighbouring municipalities and other levels of government.
The County of Brant is experiencing a period of high growth, and funding towards infrastructure / services required to support that growth is funded from related revenue sources such as development charges and planning / building fees and services. New infrastructure does also benefit existing residents, which is reflected in the legislated “benefit to existing” calculated for each project.
Each year, property tax ratios are reviewed by Council to ensure that the split of costs remains fair to each property class. There are no “loopholes” in the property tax, fees and charges or development charges systems. They are applied in accordance with legislation, which, at times, provides for exemptions / reductions that must be accounted for.
Section 14 of the LTFP also speaks to the County’s commitment to fund affordable housing initiatives in Brant, both in terms of the standard “municipally-built” units, such as Trillium Way and in looking at partnership opportunities, which may allow more units to be built quicker and at a reduced cost to the County ratepayer. Social Services is a joint service with the City of Brantford, with the City being the designated service provider.
Section 12 of the LTFP specifically relates to the Cleaver Road Bridge future design and will facilitate Council’s deliberation on the implementation of works for that structure in the 10-year capital forecast.
Thank you,
Heather Boyd
General Manager of Corporate Services
Share Hey whens the next public meeting for the brant county? on Facebook Share Hey whens the next public meeting for the brant county? on Twitter Share Hey whens the next public meeting for the brant county? on Linkedin Email Hey whens the next public meeting for the brant county? link

Hey whens the next public meeting for the brant county?

Natashaclarkson asked 30 days ago

Thank you for your question.
All County of Brant Council and Committee meetings are open to the public and residents may request an opportunity to speak through the following link:
https://www.brant.ca/en/council-and-council-administration/speaking-before-council.aspx
Further information on opportunities to speak to Council regarding the Long Term Financial Plan and the 2026 Budget will be posted shortly.
Thank you,
Heather Boyd, General Manager of Corporate Services