Open Government and Fiscal Transparency

Part 1

How Public Money and Staff Are Managed

Financial Disclosure and Zero-Based Budgeting

Mayor's Budget Responsibility

Owen Sound is a strong-mayor municipality. Under Ontario's strong-mayor budget process, the Mayor is responsible for preparing and proposing the City's annual budget. Andrii would use that responsibility to obtain a complete understanding of the finances behind the budget he puts forward, while recognising that Council can amend the proposed budget before adoption.

City staff will be asked to provide the underlying financial information needed to review municipal spending in usable, machine-readable formats wherever practical, rather than limiting financial review to summary PDFs. This includes the detailed expenditures and revenues, staffing costs, contracts and vendors, debt and reserves, capital projects, budget-to-actual results, and historical trends that support the service-level disclosure described below, subject to legitimate privacy, legal, security, and procurement restrictions.

Andrii would use modern software and data-analysis tools to organise and examine this information across departments and years, identify unusual changes and recurring costs, compare spending with service results, trace how expenditures are funded, and test opportunities for savings or simpler delivery. This would form a Continuous Digital Value-for-Money Review, described below.

The principle is straightforward: if Andrii is responsible for proposing the City's budget, he should understand the finances behind it. Residents should then be able to see as much of that financial picture as can lawfully be made public.

The resulting datasets, analyses, and service-level financial information will be published in accessible and machine-readable forms wherever practical so residents can independently examine the same financial picture and contribute their own expertise. Information needed for budget preparation may be available for internal scrutiny even where privacy, legal, security, or procurement rules prevent public release.

The legal responsibility is grounded in Municipal Act, 2001, s. 284.16, with the preparation and proposal process prescribed by O. Reg. 530/22, s. 7. Strong-mayor budget responsibility does not make every internal City record public; lawful disclosure boundaries continue to apply.

Complete Service-Level Financial Disclosure

Full financial disclosure will cover every municipal service, regardless of how it is funded. This includes services financed through property taxes, water and wastewater rates, user fees, grants, reserves, debt, development charges, cost recoveries, and other revenues.

For each service, the City will publish:

• complete operating and capital budgets;
• every major source of revenue;
• staffing, compensation, overtime, consultants, and contracted services;
• reserves, debt, infrastructure needs, and planned capital projects;
• actual revenue and spending compared with the approved budget;
• clear explanations for rate increases, major spending variances, and service changes;
• service use, performance measures, and results.

Audited financial statements will be published as soon as they are available to City staff.

This disclosure includes:

• water and wastewater services;
• police services and the municipal funding provided through the Police Service Board;
• local boards;
• municipally operated, funded, or governed services;
• services supported through rates and user fees.

For water and wastewater, the City will publish the calculations and cost pressures behind proposed rate increases so residents can understand changes directly from the public record.

Wastewater reporting will include treatment volumes, wet-weather flows, bypasses, contamination events, infrastructure condition, repair costs, debt, planned capital work, enforcement outcomes, and amounts recovered from responsible dischargers. Serious incidents will receive prompt preliminary disclosure followed by updated laboratory findings, engineering conclusions, final costs, and corrective action. Read the detailed Wastewater Infrastructure and Ratepayer Protection plan.

For police services, the City will publish the proposed and approved operating and capital budgets, revenues, staffing categories, compensation, overtime, equipment, facilities, training, contracted services, budget variances, and service results. Specific information involving active investigations, individual privacy, officer safety, or operational security will remain protected.

Residents will be able to see the full cost of every municipal service, how it is funded, how the money is used, and what results it delivers.

Zero-Based Budgeting and Finding Efficiencies

Owen Sound should progressively subject municipal services and major recurring expenditures to zero-based review, establishing a justified current baseline for each service. Each department and major municipal service will periodically rebuild its budget around:

• the services Council has decided to provide and the statutory or regulatory requirements;
• expected workload, public use, measurable service standards, and outcomes;
• the complete cost, staffing, management, equipment, facilities, and contracts actually required;
• automation, shared services, local delivery, simpler workflows, and lower-cost options that achieve the same or better result;
• activities, positions, contracts, and expenses that are no longer required.

Budget proposals will show different service and funding options, the consequences of each option, and the evidence supporting the recommended level of spending. Any proposed increase will identify the added service, workload, legal requirement, or measurable public benefit it is intended to address.

Comprehensive zero-based reviews will be conducted on a rotating schedule so that every major municipal service is reviewed at least once during each Council term. Annual budgets will update the resulting justified baseline while clearly identifying new spending, removed spending, workload changes, and verified savings. Verified recurring savings will be tracked through the Verified Savings Ledger.

For example, the City should publish an accessible debt register showing each loan’s purpose, approval date, original and remaining balance, interest rate, repayment schedule, funding source, and early-payment options. Residents and Council could then examine whether higher-interest loans should be repaid faster, refinanced, or retained.

The information will be published in usable forms. The Participation Plan connects these records to the Public Document Forum and Open-Source Civic Problem-Solving, where residents can examine assumptions and propose alternatives. Council and staff remain responsible for municipal decisions.

Property taxes ultimately fund the gap between what the City spends and what it receives from other revenues. Finding durable efficiencies lowers that funding requirement. Zero-based budgeting therefore gives Council a systematic way to look for opportunities to lower the tax levy or reduce the pressure for future property-tax increases while protecting the services residents value most.

The commitment is to expose the costs, conduct the review, implement worthwhile efficiencies, and return resulting fiscal room to residents through lower taxes or lower future tax pressure wherever feasible. The review will determine how much fiscal room is available.

See the spending → understand the spending → question assumptions → find efficiencies → lower the cost of government → reduce pressure on property taxes.

Continuous Digital Value-for-Money Review

Between the larger rotating zero-based service reviews, the City would use modern software and data analysis for a continuous value-for-money review. The Office of the Auditor General of Canada describes value for money through three related questions: economy, purchasing necessary inputs at a reasonable total cost; efficiency, producing more or better service per dollar; and effectiveness, achieving the intended public result.

“Zombie costs” is the accessible public term for recurring expenses that continue after their original use or purpose has disappeared. In financial and audit records, a particular zombie cost may be classified more precisely as an unused or redundant service cost, an avoidable recurring expenditure, billing leakage, an overpayment, or orphaned spending. Orphaned spending is an expense without a clearly identified owner, active contract, municipal asset, current service, or public purpose. Examples worth testing include charges that continue after a telecommunications line or software licence is unused or disconnected.

Every major recurring expense should be connected to:

• a named department and responsible owner;
• an active service, asset, facility, or legal requirement;
• evidence showing that it is being used;
• a contract, rate, and renewal or expiry date;
• a measurable service result or public purpose.

Software would flag expenses with missing links, unusual changes, zero usage, duplicate records, expired projects, or questionable billing. Each item would receive human review before any contract, payment, position, or service change. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario’s digital-transformation report provides relevant municipal examples involving digital processes, automated accounts payable, contract workflows, shared services, procurement, and cost savings.

Verified Savings Ledger. Finding a possible saving and producing an actual tax saving are separate stages. For each implemented saving, the public ledger would report the expense or process reviewed, its former annual cost, any one-time recovery, implementation and transition costs, ongoing software, licensing, cybersecurity, maintenance, and training costs, verified recurring net savings, any change in service level or result, and how the saving affected the budget, debt, reserves, or tax levy. The public-sector spend-recovery example from the United Kingdom illustrates why duplicate payments, overpayments, unprocessed credits, and other recoveries should be documented separately from recurring savings.

Recurring net savings can responsibly reduce the ongoing tax requirement or future tax pressure. One-time recoveries should be labelled separately and assigned a one-time fiscal purpose. Software identifies review candidates; Council and authorised staff remain responsible for financial and service decisions.

Every recurring dollar should have a living purpose.

A Resident Estimate Worth Testing

Local budget researcher Jim Hutton estimates that comparing current City spending with 2011 levels, adjusted for inflation and changes in municipal responsibilities, could reveal savings equal to roughly 5–10% of Owen Sound’s municipal tax levy. This is a conservative range to test through a transparent service-by-service review, rather than a guaranteed tax cut.

Owen Sound had 21,688 residents in the 2011 Census and 21,612 in the 2021 Census. That makes 2011 a useful starting point for comparison, while population alone does not determine the appropriate level of spending.

The current 2026 municipal tax requirement implies approximately $1.91–$3.82 million for a 5–10% range. Water and wastewater services are rate-supported and excluded from the property-tax comparison. Capital spending, debt payments, consolidated boards, changed responsibilities, internal allocations, and accounting/reporting changes require explicit reconciliation before the figures can be treated as a like-for-like savings calculation.

Hutton’s 2023 Service Review reports comparator gaps including $10.5 million in taxation above the average of three primary comparators and $6.5 million above Cobourg. His updated savings note presents an $11.893 million annual opportunity and a half-implementation illustration of $5.9 million, or 18.6% of 2021 property-tax revenue. Those are comparator-gap and recommendation estimates, not a reproducible 5–10% calculation against the current municipal levy. The City’s official Service Review record separately reports approximately $2 million in anticipated direct and indirect savings over the 2022–2026 term. The 5–10% range therefore remains an estimate to test.

Publishing service-level costs, staffing and management structures, contracts, procurement, debt, goals, results, and the reconciliation behind each proposed saving would allow residents with financial and operational experience, including Hutton, to examine the same records and submit specific proposals. Transparency supplies the information, participation brings more knowledge to the search, and the Mayor and Council remain responsible for evaluating each proposal, protecting valued services, and adopting the final budget. The City budget and finance records, 2011 audited financial statement, 2026 Mayor’s Budget, 2011 Census, 2021 Census, and Statistics Canada CPI table provide the starting records for that work.

One specific opportunity within this broader estimate is the Locally Grounded Management Compensation proposal. Its position-by-position savings under the revised bands are pending verification and will be tracked separately through the Verified Savings Ledger rather than included in the broader 5–10% estimate prematurely.

When modern software, the participation system, Local Representatives, civilian responders, shared services, or redesigned workflows reduce staff workload, the following budget will examine corresponding opportunities involving overtime, vacancies, future hiring, management layers, contracts, equipment, or authorized staffing. The City will report released staff capacity and actual financial savings separately, and will label tax savings when spending is genuinely reduced or avoided.

Police budgeting will follow the same service-based principles while respecting the statutory responsibilities of the Police Service Board and Chief of Police. Council will require police operating and capital estimates to identify service levels, workloads, staffing categories, overtime, civilian alternatives, shared-service opportunities, and measurable results. Civil, mental-health, and community matters that can be handled safely by less costly qualified responders will be considered when determining the resources required for adequate and effective policing.

Staffing and Accountable Administration

A Clear and Accountable Municipal Organization

Residents will be able to see how City Hall is organized, who is responsible for each service, what every management position costs and how its results are measured.

The City will publish a complete organizational chart showing positions, employee names, public contact information, salary bands, reporting relationships, employment status and management spans of control. Compensation will be connected to actual responsibility and local incomes through clear, incremental salary bands.

The wider staff and management plan explains how clearly defined responsibilities, Lean process improvement, private-sector recruitment, measurable targets and gradual salary restructuring can improve services while controlling costs. Read the full A Lean, Accountable City Organization plan →

Published Management Goals

At the beginning of each year, the City will publish clear performance goals for every municipal manager. At the end of the year, it will publish the original goals, measurable targets, progress and final results, explanations for incomplete work, and priorities carried into the following year. Each goal will connect to the relevant budget, service, project, Council decision, or strategic priority where practical. City Manager goals will include measurable targets for improving efficiency, controlling staffing costs, simplifying management structures, and strengthening service delivery.

Contracts, Audits, and Service Results

Residents will be able to review major City contracts, successful bidders, contract values, amendments, extensions, and final costs. Sole-source and emergency procurements will include a clear public explanation.

Where lawfully publishable, contract reporting should also identify the responsible department and contract owner, the service or asset supported, start, expiry, and renewal dates, original value, amendments and price changes, usage or contract-performance measures, and cancellation or termination obligations.

The City will conduct periodic accounts-payable and spend-recovery analysis covering duplicate payments, overpayments, unprocessed credits, incorrect contracted rates, and invoices continuing after a service was cancelled or disconnected. Verified findings will be reported through the public Verified Savings Ledger.

Audits, consultant reports, service reviews, and financial analyses will be released promptly once received by City staff, subject to applicable privacy and confidentiality requirements.

Responsible Litigation and Legal Risk

Before initiating or materially escalating litigation, the City should obtain a documented and confidential assessment of:

• the legal merits and realistic range of outcomes;
• whether sufficient admissible evidence has already been gathered and preserved;
• the expected legal costs, possible adverse cost awards, settlement options, and broader public interest.

The City should avoid litigation where the available evidence or legal analysis indicates a poor prospect of success and where negotiation, mediation, or another remedy would better protect the public interest.

Urgent legal action may proceed where delay would threaten public safety, legal rights, or limitation periods, with the full assessment completed as soon as reasonably possible.

After a case concludes, the City should publish an appropriate summary of the issue, outcome, public cost, and lessons learned, while respecting privacy, solicitor-client privilege, court orders, and continuing legal obligations.

Service Results

Each department and major service will publish understandable year-over-year measures showing:

• what the service costs;
• how many people use it;
• staffing levels;
• service outcomes;
• changes from previous years.

Back to contents

Part 2

How Decisions Are Made and Reported

Open Meetings and Decision Tracking

Residents will be able to follow a public decision from the first report through implementation and final results:

1. Council reports, supporting documents, presentations, and relevant background information will be easy to locate before Council considers the matter.
2. Minutes will record decisions, motions, amendments, recorded votes, declarations of interest, delegations, presentations, links to supporting documents, and assigned follow-up actions where applicable.
3. Draft minutes for Council, committee, and other public City meetings will be published online no later than the day after the meeting and clearly marked as draft. Approved minutes will replace them after formal adoption.
4. The City will identify the responsible department and manager, Council resolution, policy or budget authority, expected timeline, cost, and outcome.
5. The City will publish progress updates, explanations for delays or major changes, and final results.

Staff reports will clearly distinguish Council-approved direction, staff recommendations, actions under delegated authority, and matters requiring a further Council decision. Meeting agendas, recordings, minutes, decisions, and implementation updates will be kept together in one searchable public record.

Automatic Release of Closed-Meeting Records

Complete Closed-Meeting Record

The City will make audio or video recordings of all closed Council and committee meetings, alongside complete written minutes.

When the reason for confidentiality ends, the City will publish the closed-meeting record within 30 days, including:

• the written minutes;
• the audio or video recording and transcript;
• reports and presentations considered during the meeting;
• resolutions, directions, and recorded votes;
• the final decision and resulting actions.

Any redactions will be limited to information that remains legally protected after the release trigger. Each release will include a redaction log identifying the legal basis and the affected page or recording time.

Automatic Release Triggers

Closed-meeting records will be released:

• Land purchases and sales: within 30 days after the transaction closes;
• Contracts and negotiations: within 30 days after the agreement is executed and any formal challenge period has ended;
• Collective bargaining: within 30 days after the agreement is ratified;
• Litigation: within 90 days after final resolution and expiry of the appeal period;
• Security matters: within 30 days after the identified risk has ended;
• Confidential third-party information: within 30 days after the confidentiality obligation expires or the source makes the information public;
• Legal advice: the factual background, resulting decision, costs, and implementation record will be released after the matter is resolved. Privileged legal communications will be released where Council formally waives privilege.

Personnel Matters

Personnel records require different public reporting rules because an employee may remain identifiable even when their name is removed.

City Manager and Council-Appointed Officers

When Council makes a final appointment, suspension, resignation, or termination decision involving the City Manager or another Council-appointed officer, the City will publish within seven days:

• the position involved;
• the employment status change and effective date;
• the public resolution and recorded vote;
• the organizational decision and resulting administrative changes;
• compensation information already subject to public disclosure;
• the total public cost of legal advice, recruitment, and organizational transition.

The related closed-meeting record will be released within 30 days after any grievance, litigation, or appeal period has ended. Personal evaluations, medical or accommodation information, witness information, unproven allegations, and privileged legal advice will remain redacted. The City may disclose those categories with the affected person’s consent or after the information has lawfully entered the public record through a court or tribunal.

Other Municipal Employees

After a personnel matter is finally resolved, the City will publish:

• any resulting policy, service, management, or organizational changes;
• the department affected;
• the financial and operational impact;
• confirmation that the matter has concluded;
• any follow-up action assigned to management.

Individual allegations, findings, discipline, performance records, health information, and complaint evidence will be released only with written consent or when made public through a court, tribunal, or other lawful public process.

The City will publish quarterly aggregate reports showing the number and general category of workplace complaints, investigations, grievances, disciplinary actions, and resolutions. Categories will be combined where necessary to prevent identification of individual employees.

Back to contents

Part 3

How Residents Access Information

Accessible Public Information

City information will be:

• searchable and downloadable;
• written in accessible formats;
• accompanied by plain-language summaries;
• organized so agendas, reports, recordings, minutes, decisions, and implementation updates can be found together.

Accessible public information becomes more useful when residents can discuss and analyse it together. The Participation Plan establishes a Public Document Forum where verified Owen Sound residents can discuss City documents, ask questions, propose alternatives, and follow issues through implementation.

Back to contents