Regarding the “loophole” of…

Regarding the “loophole” of municipalities like Kingston currently using “Impost Fees” rather than |”
“Development Charges” to fund water/sewer infrastructure....

In the case of Kingston, where “Impost Fees” are roughly equal to “Development Charges”, the existence of this “loophole” cuts the positive impact of these parts of the proposed legislation in half. Should other municipalities adopt this “loophole”, then presumably the same lessening of the positive impact may happen elsewhere.

Suggested course of action:

1.) Amend Regulation 584/06 of the Regulations of the Ontario Municipal Act.

This regulation currently has a clause that reads:

Capital costs
2. (1) A municipality and a local board do not have power under the Act to impose fees or charges to obtain revenue to pay capital costs, if as a result of development charges by‑laws or front-ending agreements under the Development Charges Act, 1997 or a predecessor of that Act that was passed or entered into before the imposition of the fees or charges, payments have been, will be or could be made to the municipality or local board to pay those costs.  O. Reg. 584/06, s. 2 (1).

Amend it to something like....

2. (1) A municipality and a local board do not have power under the Act to impose fees or charges to obtain revenue to pay capital costs, if the power to impose such fees exists under the Development Charges Act, 1997 ....
**
In this way, municipalities cannot do “an end run” around provincial Development Charges legislation.

**
A transitional measure will be necessary for those municipalities that currently use Impost Fees or such other measures as may exist for items that could be covered under Development Charges.

I suggest that such a measure should be in the form of a regulation that says, where such charges exist, the charges will automatically expire when the current Development Charges By-law in the municipality expires. Should the municipality not have a Development Charges By-law, then the charges will automatically expire on (dd/mm/yyyy).

**
To maintain the intent of the proposed legislation and its benefits to non-profit housing affordability, where municipalities currently use Impost Fees or such other measures as may exist for items that could be covered under Development Charges, then the Regulations implementing the proposed legislation will need to include a stipulation that the various measures contained in this legislation that reduce Development Charges to benefit affordable housing will also apply to any other similar fees collected under different legislation that could be collected under Development Charges Act.