Dear Premier Ford, Minister…

Dear Premier Ford, Minister Flack, Minister Sarkaria, and Members of Provincial Parliament,

I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025. While the title suggests a commitment to improving Ontario’s housing and infrastructure outcomes, the contents of the bill undermine the very goals it claims to advance. Instead of accelerating progress, Bill 60 threatens to delay critical transit solutions, obstruct affordable housing development, weaken tenant protections, and centralize authority in ways that diminish local democracy and community well-being.

1. A Direct Threat to Affordable Transit and Safe Streets

Bill 60’s amendments to the Highway Traffic Act would empower the Minister of Transportation to prohibit municipalities from implementing bus rapid transit (BRT) lanes and converting existing car lanes into protected cycling lanes—even when such conversions are the most cost-effective, rapid ways to improve mobility and safety.

BRT corridors like Toronto’s RapidTO represent the fastest, lowest-cost transit expansion tools available, requiring minimal construction and delivering immediate congestion relief. They also unlock the potential for hundreds of thousands of infill homes in existing neighbourhoods—homes that are already pre-approved by cities like Toronto and Hamilton. Eliminating the ability to install BRT corridors would set Ontario’s transit system back years and force municipalities into long, expensive infrastructure projects with no near-term benefit.

Equally concerning is the expansion of the ban to conversions for “any other prescribed purpose.” This wording opens the door for future bans on transit lanes, school-zone safety features, or any form of road reallocation—even when communities are demanding solutions to traffic violence. Cities need more tools, not fewer, to address speeding, dangerous intersections, and the growing hostility faced by pedestrians and cyclists on Ontario’s streets.

2. Impeding Housing Supply, Affordability, and Mid-Rise Development

The bill jeopardizes Ontario’s ability to deliver the mid-rise, multiplex, and car-light housing that experts agree is essential to ending the housing shortage. These homes require access to frequent, reliable transit, yet Bill 60 would prevent municipalities from implementing the very bus lanes that make such housing viable.

Without surface transit improvements, developers cannot reliably build zero-parking or low-parking homes outside downtowns—rendering many recently approved mid-rise and multiplex units economically infeasible. In a time when Ontario needs every feasible solution to address the housing crisis, Bill 60 threatens to choke off supply at the exact moment municipalities have finally aligned their zoning with provincial targets.

Schedule 10 worsens this by granting the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing the power to approve zoning or official plan amendments even when they undermine broader, more productive housing plans. This creates instability in planning processes, empowers politically motivated spot decisions, and weakens municipalities’ ability to shape coherent, long-term growth strategies.

3. Weakened Tenant Protections During a Housing and Homelessness Crisis

Ontario residents are already experiencing unprecedented housing pressure, and Bill 60’s proposed changes to the Landlord and Tenant Board would further destabilize renters by:

Reducing the time renters have to file appeals, even when they need to secure emergency financial assistance.

Allowing landlords expedited eviction hearings, further tilting the process against tenants.

Requiring tenants to pay half of alleged rent arrears before raising maintenance issues, even in cases of landlord neglect.

Allowing landlords to evict tenants with four months’ notice if they or a family member wish to occupy the unit—while eliminating the compensation previously required.

These changes make it significantly easier to evict renters and harder for tenants to defend themselves. At a time when homelessness is rising, vacancy rates are near zero, and rent prices are soaring, these provisions are not only harmful—they are dangerous.

4. A Concerning Pattern of Centralization and Erosion of Local Autonomy

Bill 60 is the government’s fourth attempt to override municipal street design decisions, following repeated efforts to micromanage bike lane placement. Municipalities are closest to their communities and best able to design context-sensitive transit, housing, and street safety solutions.

By giving the province sweeping veto powers over lane repurposing, official plans, and zoning amendments, Bill 60 undermines the democratic authority of elected local councils. This approach also risks enabling poorly planned development, unpredictable approval processes, and decisions that prioritize political convenience over long-term prosperity.

5. A Bill That Works Against Its Own Stated Purpose

The government has framed Bill 60 as a tool to accelerate homebuilding. Yet:

Banning BRT lanes slows down housing supply.

Restricting cycling and pedestrian infrastructure worsens safety and mobility.

Weakening tenant protections increases displacement and instability.

Overriding local planning creates uncertainty for builders and communities alike.

The bill’s changes are internally contradictory, policy-misaligned, and harmful to the very residents and builders the government claims it aims to support.

Ontario needs bold, thoughtful action to address housing shortages, transit needs, and community safety. Instead, Bill 60:

- restricts proven transit solutions,

- jeopardizes affordable infill housing,

- weakens tenant rights,

- increases risks to pedestrians and cyclists, and

- centralizes decision-making in ways that erode democratic accountability.

For these reasons, I urge to withdraw Bill 60 and engage in a transparent, evidence-based consultation process with municipalities, housing experts, transit advocates, and residents.

Ontario needs solutions that strengthen communities—not legislation that undermines them.