MattersFinanceFirst seen Feb 21, 2025Last discussed Mar 17, 2026
2025 five-year financial plan
The draft 2025–2029 financial plan proposed a 14.51% property-tax increase, with operating and capital spending shaped by population growth, service needs and debt costs. A survey of 630 respondents ranked protective services and road and sidewalk maintenance among top priorities; committee directions included deferring the e-bike rebate to 2026–2027 and seeking non-tax funding or deferrals.
Where it stands: Committee directed budget revisions Feb 21, 2025; final financial-plan adoption is not shown.
Background
Earlier and later steps of the same initiative.
Feb 18, 2025
2025–2029 draft financial plan
The item provided an overview of the 2025 budget meeting schedule and related materials. It does not describe proposed spending or tax changes.
Mar 5, 2025
2025–2029 financial plan
The plan sets Langford’s operating and capital spending for 2025–2029, with changes to staffing and project timing. Its initial draft projected a 14.51% tax increase for 2025; the report estimated committee changes could lower that to 11.96%, but the final tax impact is not stated.
Apr 8, 2025
2025–2029 financial plan
The amended financial plan projects a 15.59% property-tax increase for 2026, though projected property-tax revenue is $340,010 lower than in the initial plan. It also sets a $100,000 Grant in Aid budget for 2026, with annual increases of $2,500 funded by taxes.
May 5, 2025
2025–2029 financial plan
The five-year financial plan sets out the City’s planned finances for 2025 through 2029. It guides budget decisions and has potential tax impacts for residents; the available record does not provide specific spending or tax figures.
Timeline
Every time this matter appeared in council records, newest first.
- Frazer JohnsonConcerned · Budget survey and internal debt
Questions the survey’s usefulness and urges more context, then calls for repaying internal debt to restore the city’s financial stability. - A residentConcerned · Budget, crossing guards, and truck routes
Questions proposed crossing-guard cuts given child-safety commitments and renews concerns about missing truck-route signs and low survey participation. - Lisa FoxallOpposes · Budget and internal debt
Opposes rising taxes and spending choices, and asks where the $1.7 million medical-clinic transfer appears in the budget. - T. DamidianosSupports · Financial plan and budget survey
Supports the 2026 financial plan and argues accessible surveys may better include working families and produce representative feedback. - N. McNeelySupports · Budget options
Supports continued investment and endorses the 11% or 9% budget options as balanced approaches that avoid delaying essential costs. - S. RossanderConcerned · Budget survey reliability
Questions whether survey responses came from verified residents or unique respondents and urges caution until data integrity is confirmed. - A residentAsks · Woodlands Park remediation
Requests disclosure of Woodlands Park remediation costs, citing prolonged unanswered information requests and potential contamination with budget implications.
- Frazer JohnsonConcerned · Budget survey and internal debt
- Mike Morton (Lankford)Opposes · Budget items 9.1 and 9.2
Opposes the budget’s tax increases, citing poor roads, limited services, spending priorities and inadequate public-safety staffing. - Lisa FoxallOpposes · Budget and Woodland Park
Opposes the budget and council spending, citing steep tax increases, insufficient police staffing, lack of consultation and affordability concerns. - A residentConcerned · Budget items 9.1 and 9.2
Calls on council to demonstrate bold leadership and control spending amid uncertain conditions and steep tax increases.
- Mike Morton (Lankford)Opposes · Budget items 9.1 and 9.2
Committee reviews proposed plan and directs budget changes
Committee considered the 2025 budget and made multiple directions to staff on taxation, capital funding, program deferrals, and reporting.
Decision: Directed staff to report on City Hall staffing impacts and Fire Master Plan staffing alternatives.
Adopted 7–0
Decision: Directed staff to find non-tax revenue to cover the Langford Aquatic Centre rent.
Adopted 7–0
Decision: Directed staff to decrease the Royal Roads Innovation Studio budget by 50% for 2025.
Adopted 7–0
Decision: Defeated the motion to remove E-Comm from the budget and require a separate tax line.
Defeated 3–4· Against: Scott Goodmanson, Mark Morley, Colby Harder, Kimberley Guiry
Decision: Directed staff to report on deferring tech upgrade funding to 2026 and non-tax options.
Adopted 7–0
Decision: Extended the meeting to 10:30 pm.
Adopted 0–1· Against: Keith Yacucha
Decision: Extended the meeting to 10:40 pm.
Adopted 0–1· Against: Keith Yacucha
Decision: Withdrawn the proposal to set aside $200,000 for technology upgrades in 2025.
Withdrawn
Decision: Approved an amendment moving the E-bike rebate to 2026 and 2027.
Adopted 7–0
Decision: Removed the E-bike rebate from 2025 and deferred it to 2026 and 2027.
Adopted 7–0
Decision: Reduced the internal debt payment increase so 2025 payment totals $1,000,000.
Adopted 5–2· Against: Kimberley Guiry, Lillian Szpak
Decision: Directed staff to cut Council travel and training budget by 25% for 2025.
Adopted 5–2· Against: Kimberley Guiry, Lillian Szpak
Decision: Directed staff to provide options endorsing an 11% tax increase and discretionary item background.
Adopted 5–2· Against: Kimberley Guiry, Lillian Szpak
Decision: Directed staff to find other funding or defer capital items to avoid 2025 tax increases.
Adopted 7–0
- Wendy Hobbs (Luxton Highway)Opposes · 2025 budget
Opposes major spending and tax increases, questions purchases and remediation costs, and urges funding protective services while cutting travel, consulting, and other expenses. - A residentMixed · 2025 budget
Requests detailed budget line items, continued first-responder funding, stronger bylaw action, and tighter scrutiny to limit tax increases. - A resident (Langford)Concerned · 2025 budget
Questions what residents receive for rising taxes and urges attention to road maintenance, visible road markings, travel costs, and staffing growth. - Tanya Sunshine (Langford)Mixed · 2025 budget
Welcomes the budget process but asks council to scrutinize spending and spread large tax increases across future years. - Patsy Hamilton (Langford)Concerned · 2025 budget
Flags discretionary programs, including e-bike rebates and arts and culture initiatives, amid uncertainty about future costs. - A residentOpposes · 2025 budget
Challenges the police-cost rationale, criticizes consultant spending and delayed facility expansion, and argues tax increases burden residents. - W. Bowers (Langford)Opposes · 2025 budget
Questions police and fire budget increases, criticizes parks spending and consultant costs, and objects to rising taxes during economic uncertainty. - S. Rothander (Langford)Concerned · 2025 budget
Asks whether budget questions will receive answers and urges council to limit increases by scrutinizing travel, training, staffing, and consultants. - Lisa FoxallOpposes · 2025 budget
Opposes steep tax increases affecting businesses, seniors, renters, and families, and asks for staffing workload data and scrutiny of expenses. - Josh RelfMixed · 2025 budget
Supports funding the RCMP but urges prioritizing essential needs, delaying planning projects, reducing staff workload, and reconsidering CPI raises.
- Wendy Hobbs (Luxton Highway)Opposes · 2025 budget