Mayoral Candidates who can answer those four questions have a plan. Candidates who can only name a number have a slogan, whatever the number is.
Water Was Called a Need, Not a Right. Ottawa Still Votes on the Rate Increase Before the List of Needs.
The next council has to debate what Ottawa must do, what it can defer, and what it can afford, before it picks a tax number.
In March 2000, ministers met in The Hague for the Second World Water Forum. Their declaration described access to safe water and sanitation as "basic human needs." It did not call them rights. That was a deliberate choice, and it still shapes how cities talk about water today.
If water is a need
It can be priced, metered and rationed. The question becomes who can pay. A household that can't is a customer problem.
If water is a right
Government carries a duty to ensure access. Affordability, shut-offs and minimum service become obligations someone has to answer for.
How the question was settled, and not settled
- 2000, The Hague. The ministerial declaration frames water and sanitation as basic human needs.
- 2009, Istanbul. A group of countries formally challenged that framing at the next forum. Canada was reported among the governments backing "need" over "right."
- July 28, 2010, United Nations. The General Assembly recognized access to clean water and sanitation as a human right, 122 to 0. About 41 countries abstained, Canada among them. Canada's representative said the move was premature and left the scope of the right undefined.
- 2012. Canada reversed course and declared support for the right.
So Canada has moved, in about a decade, from resisting the language to accepting it. The harder question is whether the budgets that fund water have moved with it.
Ottawa prices water as a utility
The City of Ottawa states that water, wastewater and stormwater services are fully funded through charges on the water bill. That is the model: user rates, set by council, covering the full cost. Council approved a 4.3 per cent overall increase in 2024. In the 2026 budget, water rates rise by an average of $47.30 per household.
Behind those rates is a long-term plan. Council approved a strategy to maintain aging water infrastructure through new debt and higher water rates. Staff called it prudent. Some councillors and advocates called it short-sighted. That plan covers water only. The matching plan for infrastructure paid through property taxes, such as roads, facilities and parks, came later, and neither plan had been updated since 2017.
The bigger bill sitting behind the water bill
Ottawa's 2025 asset management plans identified a $10.8 billion funding gap over ten years, across a roughly $90 billion portfolio of assets. The long-range financial plan projects a $169 million funding gap through 2035, which would add $1.7 billion in new debt on top of an existing base of $3 billion.
Now compare that with the campaign. The mayoral candidates are pledging tax increases from zero to roughly two and a half per cent, and several also promise to deal with the infrastructure gap. Those promises can only both hold if something else gives: more debt, more deferral, higher user fees, or fewer services. Water shows what "user fees" means in practice: the households with the least room carry the same rate increase as everyone else.
What a council should have to answer
Treating water as a right, not just a need, gives council a test it can actually run. Before the next water rate is set, members should be able to answer in public:
- What does the water and sewer bill cost a low-income household as a share of its income, and how has that share changed?
- What affordability support exists, how many households use it, and who is not reaching it?
- What is the shut-off policy, and what does each shut-off and turn-on cost the household?
- What does deferring the work cost later, in dollars and in failures?
- Who decided, and where is that decision recorded?
A council that only votes on the rate is choosing the answer before asking the question.
Necessary versus affordable
Water is the cleanest example, but the same logic applies to the whole budget. Some things are necessary and non-negotiable. Some are necessary but get more expensive each year they are deferred. Some are choices. Today's budget process blends all three into one number and then asks whether residents can afford it.
The next council should reverse the order. Sort the list first: what must be done, what must be maintained, what is a choice. Attach a real cost and a named decision-maker to each item. Then set the rate. "Affordable" is not a fact that arrives from outside. It is the result of choices council makes, and residents are entitled to see them being made.
Sources
- World Water Council, The Hague 2000 forum summary: ministers recognized water and sanitation as basic human needs.
- Environment News Service report via Environment Information Center, "Access to Water: A Human Right or a Human Need?": counter-declaration and the governments supporting "need." Verify which forum and the number of countries before quoting; accounts differ (about 20 to 24).
- Canadian Consulting Engineer, UN votes on access to water and sanitation as human right, Aug. 16, 2010: 122 in favour, none against, 41 abstentions including Canada; Canada's statement that the resolution was premature. Other sources count 42 abstentions.
- Water Canada, Exercising the Human Right to Water and Sanitation (drawing on Karen Busby, Canadian Journal of Human Rights, 2016): Canada changed position in 2012.
- City of Ottawa, Water utility rates and fees: fully funded through water bill charges; 4.3 per cent increase in 2024. Check the current fee schedule before citing shut-off and turn-on charges.
- CTV News Ottawa, 11 things that will cost more in the 2026 draft budget: 3.75 per cent tax increase, $166 on the average bill, water rates up an average of $47.30.
- CTV News Ottawa, Lawson promises 0% tax hike in 2027: tax increases by year (2.5, 2.5, 3.9, 3.75) and the mayoral candidates' tax pledges.
- CBC News, City plans to take on debt to cover billions in infrastructure repairs, June 4, 2025: $10.8 billion gap; water plan funded by debt and rate increases; plans not updated since 2017.
- Capital Current, City begins grappling with projected $10.8-billion infrastructure gap: $90 billion portfolio, $169 million funding gap, $1.7 billion in new debt on a $3 billion base.
Set the Tax Number After the Spending Review, Not Before
Ottawa’s mayoral candidates are now trading property tax numbers. One promises a freeze, one promises a cap, one promises a new levy, and one declines to name a figure at all. Before treating any of those numbers as a plan, it is worth asking what a number set in advance actually tells a voter.
What the last pledge delivered
In 2022, Mark Sutcliffe pledged to hold property tax increases to between 2 and 2.5 per cent in the first two years of the term.[5] Council capped increases at 2.5 per cent in 2023 and 2024, then raised them 3.9 per cent in 2025 and 3.75 per cent in 2026.[2] The 2026 increase added $166 to the average property tax bill, alongside higher OC Transpo fares, water and wastewater rates and recreation fees.[1]
Figure 1. Ottawa property tax increases by budget year
To be fair to the incumbent, the pledge held for the years it covered. The point is that a two-year number says little about years three and four. Compounded, the four budgets add up to roughly 13.3 per cent (my arithmetic: 1.025 × 1.025 × 1.039 × 1.0375).
What is on offer this time
| Candidate | Property tax position | What the coverage does not say |
|---|---|---|
| Mark Sutcliffe | Cap increases at 2–2.5% in the first two years, find another $250 million in savings, and add a one-year deferral for residents hit by a major disruption.[2] | Years three and four of the term. |
| Alex Lawson | 0% in 2027, 1% in 2028, then at or below 2% in each of the next two years. His campaign says this saves the average homeowner $759 over the term compared with Sutcliffe’s promise.[1] | The specific spending changes that pay for it. The $759 figure is a campaign claim. |
| Jeff Leiper | A one per cent infrastructure levy on tax bills, with increases to be “affordable, reasonable and predictable,” but no base target.[3] | The base increase the levy would sit on top of. |
| Neil Saravanamuttoo | No target. A comprehensive spending review first, ending programs that no longer serve residents.[4] | When the review would report, and who would run it. |
Figure 2. Stated increases for the first two budgets of the next term
Over four years, Lawson’s stated path (0, 1, then at or below 2 and 2), would compound to no more than about 5.1 per cent (my arithmetic). That is a very large difference from the last term. It is also the number with the least public explanation of how it is reached.
Why the order matters
A number set without the books is a guess. Saravanamuttoo’s stated reason for declining to name a figure is that there is not enough information today to say what it should be.[4] That is a defensible position, and it is the one that starts in the right place. A freeze or a cap is a promise about the outcome, made before anyone has shown what has to move to deliver it.
The easy savings may already be spent. The city manager told council during the 2026 budget debate that efficiency measures had realized more than $252 million in savings this term.[4] Sutcliffe’s campaign now promises another $250 million.[2] Any review worth the name has to say what is left to find, and where.
Holding the rate moves the cost somewhere else. The 2026 budget raised property taxes together with transit fares, water and wastewater rates and recreation fees.[1] A lower property tax number can coexist with a higher total bill, or with deferred maintenance. Leiper’s infrastructure levy makes the opposite argument, that catching up on repairs costs less than replacing later.[3] A voter comparing candidates should see the base increase and the levy added together as one figure.
The real question is necessary versus affordable. Which services is the city obliged to provide, what can residents afford to pay for them, and who gets to decide? Water is the clearest example: it is not optional, so the debate is about how it is paid for, not whether. A tax rate is the answer to that debate. It should not be the opening bid.
What I would ask every mayoral candidate to commit to
- Name who runs the review. It should be someone outside the departments being reviewed, with access to the real numbers.
- Set a scope and a deadline. The results should be public before the first budget of the term is tabled, not after it is passed.
- Show the trade-off for any target. For every property tax figure, list the consequences for services, user fees and capital spending, including liabilities that sit outside the headline operating budget.
- Report against the promise every year. One page: what was promised, what council passed, and what fees moved alongside the property tax rate.
Candidates who can answer those four questions have a plan. Candidates who can only name a number have a slogan, whatever the number is.
Notes on the numbers.
Pledge details are as reported by CTV News Ottawa and the Sutcliffe campaign as of October 10, 2026. Campaign savings figures, including the $759 and the $250 million, are the campaigns’ own claims and have not been independently verified. The compounded totals of 13.3 per cent and 5.1 per cent are my own arithmetic from the annual percentages. The 5.1 per cent figure treats Lawson’s “at or below two per cent” years as exactly two per cent, so it is an upper bound.
References
- CTV News Ottawa. “Lawson promises 0% tax hike in 2027 if elected Ottawa mayor.” ctvnews.ca
- CTV News Ottawa. “Sutcliffe pledges to cap tax increases at 2–2.5% if re-elected Ottawa mayor.” ctvnews.ca
- CTV News Ottawa. “Leiper pledges to add 1% infrastructure levy to property tax increases if elected Ottawa mayor.” ctvnews.ca
- CTV News Ottawa. “Saravanamuttoo promises spending review at Ottawa City Hall if elected mayor.” ctvnews.ca
- CTV News Ottawa. “Sutcliffe pledging to keep to a 2 to 2.5 per cent property tax cap if elected mayor of Ottawa” (2022 campaign). ottawa.ctvnews.ca
Disclosure: I am a candidate for councillor in Ward 13 and I endorse Neil Saravanamuttoo for mayor.
No comments:
Post a Comment