Transpo Gets $180 Million From Feds
This is a release from the City of Ottawa and the Government of Canada:
By working closely with its partners across Canada, the federal government is ensuring that more Canadians will be able to live near public transit, connecting them to jobs, services, and their communities.
Today, the Honourable Jenna Sudds, Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, the Honourable David McGuinty, Minister of Public Safety, alongside Ottawa Mayor Mark Sutcliffe, announced a federal investment of over $18 million in annual transit funding for the City of Ottawa, providing predictable and long-term funding, tied to greater density near transit.
Through the new Canada Public Transit Fund’s Baseline Funding stream, Ottawa’s transit authority, OC Transpo, will receive an annual funding allocation amounting to over $180 million over 10 years. Funding will upgrade, replace, or modernize Ottawa’s public transit infrastructure, and maintain it in a state of good repair.
This investment, beginning in 2026 until 2036, will help increase the housing supply and affordability as part of complete, transit-oriented communities, while helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change.
For You:
Tech Woes Slow Line 1 Light Rail
Rail Runs Successfully In Ottawa
How To Revamp The Federal Public Service
Bookmark The Bulldog, click here
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
– The Bulldog – News Feed Enter 
Federal votes are getting more expensive by the day and now Ottawa has 10 million of your dollars more each year to WASTE on ill founded poorly managed “plans”all without public consultation and mainly to the benefit of developers.
Frankly I don’t believe in bailouts. I believe in grants to facilitate research and innovation – and to help fund highly needed infrastructure at the front end. Not in response to failure. Exactly what lessons are being taught – and learned – from this?
So $18M a year starting 1 year after the election? This is pretend money, it does not exist and the program does not exist – made up just for votes
Yippee! Now we won’t need to listen to any more weeping and moaning from Mark Sutcliffe concerning the $36M deficit in this year’s city budget and his “fairness campaign” . But wait . . . . . the councilors will likely put the money intended for transit into another coffer. The cycle won’t end, and we’re all stuck living within the City of Ottawa’s ouroboros (look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls)
So the feds blinked!
However, they haven’t really blinked.
And we and the City shouldn’t be rejoicing quite yet, if at all. Don’t count your chickens before the eggs have even been laid, never mind hatched. You may find out you don’t even have a hen.
First of all, it only takes effect next year which probably means in the 2026-2027 fiscal year which starts April 1, 2026 (yes, for anyone following those details, that is April Fools Day which is very appropriate for those believing this story!), That date, by some extremely strange coincidence, is long after the next federal election which, even if it goes as late as possible, must take place no later than October 2025. It would, therefore, require the support of a different group of parliamentarions than those there now and they will have a different prime minister, possibly also of a different political stripe, than is there now. It would also be part of the second federal budget from now.
Second, there are some potentially momentous things on the economic horizon for Canada, Ontario and Ottawa right now which will affect the economic situation in both the short- and long-term. Before you start applauding this measure, take a moment to recall what’s going on down south. If we become embroiled in a world of tariffs, a trade war and/or a territorial/sovereignty dispute with the United States, any and all financial deals in Canada may well be off the table since there may not be money or the political will/ability to continue them. This will include existing fiscal arrangements as well as aspirational ones like this transit deal.
Third, while the City may have to use this particular $18M for transit purposes, there’s nothing to say that they can’t reduce their own funding of transit services by some amount meaning that a) we will not see $18M in “additional” spending on transit and b) the City then gets to decide which funding stream they can boost with some or all of the re-directed money. Maybe they will decide that Lansdowne, Tewin or some other favourite project needs a bit more funding.
As the saying goes, there’s many a slip twixt cup and lip!
Starting in 2026? Will PP honour that commitment? Especially when funding / staffing cuts has already started in the Federal public service.
MM PeePee will never be PM.This is not the USA.
David
I wish that were true, unfortunately it’s PP’s election to lose at this stage.
MM Much of the polling done in this country is flawed and some is corrupt. The Ottawa mayor went in mainly due to invented polling data. I expect the same level of integrity is at work here.
City transit is a city and provincial issue, not federal issue. Why should my federal tax dollars pay for this city’s transportation? OC Transpo has had financial issues for many years. Maybe Ottawa should raise their city taxes to pay for this like every other city in Canada.
Cindy,
The best way to deal with the $36M shortfall would not have been raising property taxes. When you raise taxes to pay for a specific expenditure, that increase is built into the base amount of the tax rate in perpetuity even though the expenditure is long gone. You end up paying the $36M many times over and the increased funds go into General Revenues to be spent however the council of the day sees fit.
To raise and allocate $36M to respond to a particular shortfall or expenditure, the most efficient way is to apply a levy for that amount. It could be one-time or spread over a period of time. The most common way to apply it is either per household, meaning each property is levied the same amount, or based on the assessed value of the property, meaning that a house assessed at $1M would pay twice as much as a house assessed at $500,000.
Once you have wiped out the $36M, the levy disappears. Then it would be incumbent on Council to develop budgets without holes in them so this problem doesn’t arise again. Those budgets would deliver a property tax rate that would cover the expenses of the particular year in a manner that ensures the budget is balanced as is legally required.