There is a loophole to the…

There is a loophole to the Development Charges Act that existed for sure in the past, and I understand still exists.

For water/sewer infrastructure, some municipalities (for example Kingston) do not use Development Charges. They use Impost Fees that were (and I believe still are) allowed under the Municipal Act.

Under the legislation that existed a few years ago (and I believe still exists; I no longer work in this field and have not looked lately), impost fees are not restricted to growth required infrastructure. They can be used for any capital works. In other words, purchasers of new homes can be forced, through the purchase price of their homes, to fund replacement of existing infrastructure that "has been worn out" by existing home owners. Similarly, the determination of them is somewhat arbitrary, and not subject to the checks and balances of the Development Charges Act.

This also means that renters of newly built apartments and non-profit housing can be made to subsidize existing home owners.

The solution ...... at the same time that you are doing this change, amend the Municipal Act to restrict or eliminate the use of Impost fees for water/sewer infrastructure. Or, if you want to leave them in, put in regulations that require them to follow the same process and procedure as Development Charges.