Taxes and spending

It will depend on the contract and any agreements signed with the organizations involved, none of which have been made public to my knowledge. I could see this being reviewed as part of the forensic audit of the Township books and debt load, as it is not how a municipality normally operates.

What you term “generic promises” came from a long period of talking with people from around Langley. We listened first, we researched, we collaborated, and then we wrote the most comprehensive platform ever offered to Langley voters, and I am very proud to run on it. As a dad and a coach, it’s hard for me to not be the most pumped about the Children and Youth pillar; it’s the one closest to my heart as I raise my kids here. The hardest one: Respect for Taxpayers. We have to get the fiscal situation of the Township under control. The current mayor has run debt up to nearly $800 million, dangerously close to our legislated debt cap, and made us a total municipal outlier in the amount of debt in B.C. No one has as much debt per capita as us. Not even close. At the same time, he has raised taxes 22%. He has raided our reserves. His CAC scheme was found unlawful by the courts. That’s a lot of strikes against the Township. We need to dig deep into those numbers, the decisions behind them, the deals he may have signed, and craft a plan to get us back to solid footing financially. That’s job one, and everything flows out of that. It’s a massive, huge black hole of debt and very little information about how we got there. (And on fire inspectors and educators, remember: it’s cheaper to prevent fires than suppress them after.)

Thank you for raising this, and as someone who has played, coached and been a spectator in our facilities, thank you. Your work and quality are noticed and appreciated. This is one of several issues I’m sure we will learn more about when we take office, as we have heard many concerning stories from the past few years. It’s hard to say more than that now, as we just don’t have the information. Just a note on maintenance: the current mayor has slashed and postponed key things that need repair and refreshing, like the leaky roof of LEC. He’s done it because he needs that money to cover the payments on the nearly $800 million of debt he has racked up. We want to put that debt on a public payback plan and be smart with our priorities, so we have the money to maintain our facilities properly, for the long term.

The annual audit answers one question: do the financial statements fairly present the numbers under accounting rules? The auditor samples transactions, checks they're recorded properly, and signs off on the math. It doesn't ask whether a deal was a good one, whether a plan’s assumptions held, where the risk is hiding, or what led to the decision. A forensic audit does all that, following specific money through specific decisions. This could include the borrowing through the Township's housing society (taxpayers were told by the mayor it would have no effect on our borrowing cap, and yet it did), our exposure now that the court has struck down his CAC policy (the Township can’t live in denial about this), legal costs, and more. The mayor can’t have it both ways. He says the slowdown in growth is a good (and “planned” thing), but he also claims the Township’s debt will be paid off by growth. If it’s slower, less revenue comes in, and taxes will go up to cover debt servicing and operating costs for the new facilities. Through July, construction value in the Township is down 36%, permits down 15%, permit fees down 25%. The CFIB just gave the Township a 2.5 out of 10 on red tape. So the plan borrowed against growth and then made growth harder. That's how you get a 22.8% tax hike in the Township's own projection for 2027. Forensic audit first, so we know how truly deep the hole is. Then a public debt repayment plan, sequenced and prioritized capital projects, eliminating any slush funds within the Township, no more borrowing through the housing society, slashing legal spending and eliminating the Mayor’s contingency fund, and prioritizing economic development to get higher-paying commercial and industrial to locate here. One last note: we have been very forthright about our platform. 39 pages, posted at LangleyStrong.ca/Platform. The current mayor doesn’t have a single platform page posted on his site. Has to make you wonder why.

On Margaret and Barb: yes, they voted for a lot of what's on the books, including the $25 million loan for the new Brookswood fire hall and the budgets from 2023 to 2025. Barb was elected in 2022 on the mayor's own slate, and Margaret backed several projects in good faith. As a retired VPD officer, Barb has initiated many of the first responder and staffing growth initiatives over the past 4 years. But as less and less information about budgets and the Township’s true financial state was given to Council, they realized the mayor’s obsession with borrowing had run out of control, and was not sustainable. Earlier this year, they voted against the 2026 budget, which carried even more borrowing, and debt payments climbing from $47 million a year to $64 million by 2030. On Kim: I won't promise anyone else's vote. Council is nine independent people, and no one on our team gets coerced or commanded into voting a certain way. Each of us will vote our conscience and answer to voters. Every candidate on our slate signed on to a platform (See the full document at LangleyStrong.ca/Platform) that commits to staffing firefighters and police to keep pace with growth, with more prevention and public education. Kim has voted against most budgets and borrowing bylaws over her career. She has also voted yes on fire truck replacements, seconded the 2022 study that put the new Brookswood fire hall on the map, and moved a 2017 motion to require sprinklers in new condos and apartments. Her fight has mostly been about making good priorities and how things get paid for. Kim likes to see that there’s a good case and information provided on every issue, which I appreciate about her. We won't agree on every issue, and that's OK, it's actually healthy in a team. But I know Kim will always ask the right questions and promote healthy dialogue. And with the current mayor and his slate having drawn down savings, hiked taxes 22%, and running up an $800 million debt, she was right to be worried.

You’re right, and we can’t promise zero. The current mayor, his slate, and his “aligned” city manager (his word, not ours) have done everything they can to hide the true state of Township finances from the public. They have cut budget debates and decimated the budget process, offered no information on current state of various Township accounts, and we believe they have hidden deals or agreements as well. They have also outright misled the public, claiming that the $177 million of borrowing for the Township housing trust (that only Woodward slate members were appointed to the Board of) would have 0 effect on Township borrowing levels. Months later, that was proven false as it was shown on a Township debt slide. That’s why we want to start with a forensic audit, digging into what is owed, what is hidden on the mayor’s desk, what has been ignored or deferred, and why. Only when you know how deep the hole is can you make a plan to dig out of it. On seasonal staffing, I can’t speak to that as I haven’t seen information on what he has planned for 2027 (beyond the 22.8% tax hike he and his city manager have in the five year fiscal plan). This is obviously concerning, and I will add it to my list of questions for when I am elected. Please email me at jaylundgren@langleystrong.ca if you have paper or reports on this that I can look at.

Yeah, and this comes down to really looking at the numbers. We've seen a 22% increase in our property taxes in residential taxes in Langley over the past four years. Like Cory said, there's a 22.8 projected increase in the mayor's budget for next year. Those are his numbers. No one's making those up. None of the independents, no one on Langley Strong, we didn't make those numbers up. That's in his budget, approved by his council, that's aligned with his city manager. So it's important that we note that. Now, $800 million of debt, yes, 565 is published, but we also have approved spending up to $800 million. So we're looking at a serious debt crisis. And growth pays for growth. Growth is not, it's a catchy slogan, and you know what, it's a great theory and concept. But when we're in a recessed economy, where building applications are down 30%, where building permits are down 15%, where we're down 25% in construction fees, and our total construction value up to July, this past July, is 36% behind. 36% behind year over year. So growth is not paying for growth. That plan is not working. That forward plan is not working. So if growth's not paying for growth, then what is paying for growth? Debt. Debt is paying for growth. Up to $800 million worth of it. And we're running out of space. So we can promise another $450 million of projects, but there's just no space for that. And yeah, everyone loves promises. And my kids love me promising them everything at Christmas. But sometimes if I do that and I can't pay for their kids' sports in the spring, am I doing them a real service? So we need a proper plan. We need a forensic audit. And we need to put together a great financial plan that addresses the debt situation and puts a proper list of priorities moving forward. And that debt situation, it's real. We've got $47.7 million of debt servicing in the budget for this year. We've got a projection of up to $64 million in 2030. And that's going to debt servicing. That's not going to any projects. That's going to debt servicing. It's a problem. It needs to be looked at and addressed with a proper plan. Thank you.

I'm glad that he brought up that I'm a sports coach. I've actually coached 600 kids in this community, been involved in their families. So I'm in touch with families in this community. I'm having these conversations with them. I, like them, are feeling the pinch in every area. When I was staring at a 22% tax increase and a proposed 22.8, these are things that are costing families. And I'm in a unique position here. I've got four kids. I've got two sets of aging parents that fixed incomes for seniors can't keep up with a runaway tax bill. A senior centre, another grandiose project that's been promised, along with a community centre, a pool, a new fire hall, all these... There's about 450 million worth with about 100 million of borrowing capacity left. How are we just going to continue to just run up the credit card debt? … run up the credit card debt without a plan. And there is no plan. We've seen it. Go on. Progress for Langley. Look at their website right now. Tell me, do you see a plan or do you just see a list of accomplishments or also known as a list of bills that we need to pay? So this is where we need to get a team in council that is going to do a forensic audit. That is going to not, and they'll say well we get the books audited every year. Well it's different than just getting the arithmetic audit. It's saying, it's finding out things like how could we borrow through a society 177 million, tell taxpayers that it doesn't go against our borrowing capacity, and now we find out in the budget that it does. Find out what is our risk with CACs that have been deemed illegal by the courts and beyond the township's authority to collect. What is the risk there? These are things that we need to look at and look at in depth in an audit and put a plan together that's going to tackle … going to tackle this debt because this burden is going on my four kids' bill in the future, and I, and I can say that because I have four kids who want to stay here in Langley for the long term, and it's important that we don't put that burden on them. $800 million, … per household, the highest municipal debt per household in the province, and there's no plan. There's no plan. We keep hearing there's a plan, but it's just growth pays for growth in a recessed economy with regressed numbers going in every situation. Developers, yeah. I've sat with like 40 of them as I've sat with multiple, multiple small business owners and trades people and union members and communities and families and seniors. I've talked to all of them. By the way, seniors don't want to drive to one senior centre. They want community in their communities. They want dedicated spaces in their communities. It's important that there's a plan to, to, to attack this debt and put together a priority list from there. And that's what we're going to bring with Langley Strong.

… is a great park. Pretty much everyone supported this, and the issue is the order. … sports facilities went first, but a lot of things … promised. A community center, …, and a library are still undone. The first priority is forensic audit, and that's a fiscal … that the township has. Then the priority is projects that keep people safe. That includes … fire hall, and … infrastructures like the reservoirs, roads, and sidewalks. I mean, the less flashy things that keep these residents healthy and safe. That's the lesson of this term. The township built on a funding tool … struck down, and the taxpayers now cover the difference out of reserves … The credit card is high enough that the basics may arrive with a 22.8% amount attached to next year. The next council should publish the …, the place, and the payback plan for the vote.

I believe that it really starts with listening to the communities. I think that's something people are missing … is the listening mechanisms to hear from our communities. … Hearing what they need, it's important to them. I think it's important that we do that and we establish those … because when you first have it, the communities do not feel that there's a fair distribution of tax dollars going to their communities. … But there's taxpayers all over … who are sitting in multiple different communities that have very … It's made … that we establish … so … can give us the feedback on what their …

I also know that I didn't make up that number. It's actually his number from his budget. And it's right there. You can look it up on the Township website. Growth, it's a super catchy saying. But when we're in a recessed economy, when development dollars are down, when commercial dollars are down, applications are down, yes, development applications are moving faster. That's because there's less of them. Our population increase has declined over the last few years. We've seen population growth of only 1,600 and 1,200 the last couple of years in Langley. So that increase, that growth that we're all betting on here is actually not happening. And if you're in touch with economic projections, it's not coming soon. So if growth's not paying for growth, then debt is paying for growth. And guess who has to pay for debt? We do in this room, right? So that is the reality of the situation. We've got almost $800 million of debt on the books right now. I know there's a lot of short-term debt that hasn't been converted to long-term. So that number is probably a lot larger. But that is where the growth has come from. It's come from debt. Now, the bill is due.

Yeah, it's a great, great question. I'm going to come back to in a second. I mean, I'm not even sure where I start with some of that. On the previous answers, you know, it's not a soccer stadium. It's an indoor training facility for kids under 12. It's for high school students and middle school students at the new middle high school secondary schools. If it's such a challenge, then why are members of his slate, ones that voted for it, they're campaigning against their own record? Why, if debt is such a challenge, why are members of his slate people that voted for all of it? He's campaigning against his own record for an election. And so the challenge is the debt is about 575. It's not 800 million. And they just keep saying it like it's true. It's not true. Property taxes are rising in the township because of operating costs that the township faces similar to every household, you and me. My taxes have gone up just the same. Here in the township this term, the 20% was in the bottom four of Metro Vancouver. Myself and others on council, we did a lot of work to deliver that. Bottom four in the region, Metro Vancouver, not 30% Vancouver, not 38% like the city of Langley. We did a lot of work. And in between there, we had 40% … inflation and costs from the RCMP imposed by Ottawa. That was the main driver of a lot of these increases. While we staffed a fire hall, added 44 firefighters, significantly preparing for SkyTrain, as was mentioned during some of the council debates, hiring police, and completely overhauling our by-law enforcement department for a number of other initiatives. And so the challenge we have is that, you know, people will say they're in favor of public safety. They will look into your face, look into your eyes, and say they support firefighters and your public safety, and vote against staffing a fire hall that they voted to build. You can't make this up. This election, we've seen an unprecedented amount of misinformation. We all know the 22% projection is a complete, utter lie. We all know that. Because in 2025, for 2026, it was projected to be 17%. And it includes every wish list from every department, contemplates every capital project being approved, contemplates every renewal project being implemented, contemplates every call for it being fixed, contemplates every department getting every staff member that they want hired. It is just that. Debt service is not $47 million. It's around $40, $42. They don't account for all the different by-laws, because they don't understand it. And they don't ask. They don't ask. Not one of them has ever come to my office and asked, because they don't want the answers. They want to come into an election, gaslight, and lie to the community about how this plan is working, where growth is paying for growth, just as it is doing in countless other municipalities throughout the province of British Columbia, with councils that are like ours, put residents first, not second.

Yeah, I think that's the core distinction which I really value in this election. We've got one or two more critical large infrastructure projects like a community centre that can't be built without it. If you want to save up for that project like they've said they're going to do, you'll see it in 2050 after we have 125,000 residents and kids and thousands of youth in our Langleys can't get swimming lessons. That's their plan. They say they're going to build it, but how? They don't have a clue what they're talking about when it comes to how capital debt works. For those that don't know, I also sit on the board of the Municipal Finance Authority as appointed through Metro Vancouver, and I've learned a tremendous amount of how valuable a tool it is if it's structured correctly. We have 12 different development revenue sources that we are using in a very strategic way to deliver infrastructure results for residents. And ensuring that growth pays for it. We have up to 12 development revenue sources that are being strategically placed and organized to do that. Shorter amortizations. These are bonds. These are not mortgages. So when he says we're doing debt service, I don't think he knows what it means. That over half of the payment is direct to principal. Debt comes down very quickly. And so with our plan, we will see roads, parks and facilities that we need if we're going to continue to grow. We will have growth paying for growth not taxpayers and with their plan constantly telling everyone that CACs, community amenity contributions, are illegal is them handing $200 million of Township of Langley future revenue to a handful of people at your expense. That is who's funding their campaigns and this is what's at stake is an actual plan to serve residents and hold development accountable. We deliberately slowed our growth rate. He will call it some kind of calamity. It's deliberate because we need time to catch up on infrastructure and have less housing units but have the right volume to make sure that growth is paying for that growth. Catch up on the infrastructure. Not have thousands of kids on waiting lists. I've never heard of a sports coach campaigning against sports facilities for kids that he's coaching. This is not right. We need to have a plan for roads, parks and facilities and we do have a financial plan to pay for it. And of course there's a handful of developers that are propping them up that don't like it. Just look where their signs are all located. It's not hard to see what's actually going on here if you look. And what I want to do is continue to get things done for the Township of Langley that I love. We have to get through this phase. We have to use debt as a tool and ensure … that we have a plan to pay it down, which we do.

Yeah, so the … project … because the township's also working on it, with the council, is a community center for Willoughby. And it includes a library, gymnasium, … facility, and a senior center. … This is the last major amenity project that's really, really needed for what is projected to be 100,000 people. And that will be very, very shortly. And … the center is constructed in Aldergrove for 13,000. Constructed in Walnut Grove for 20,000. And here we are, really, with 65,000 people. We have no plan to … the center whatsoever. This is not reasonable. This is not forward-looking. This is not planning for the future. This is not government. And so that's the top priority project that's coming up for next term. The second top priority project is continuing to ensure that Hall 8 in Walnut Grove … And there are other capital projects that could be deferred, but those are the two top priorities. And deferring other projects is challenging, because the mayor would make that decision, to council to make that decision. But for me and our team, we are committed to get those two capital projects done …

So it's important to think … because infrastructure is funded through multiple different funding sources. So I think it's pretty easy to stand up there and say nobody's listening, I'm going off and everybody's upset. Because, you know, people saying they're upset and everything's terrible has been an opposition politician running for office … forever, since forever. And so, you know, I think that's not, I think that's kind of a tired cliché, because what we're doing is we're funding infrastructure through amenity programs from growth and development. So we're spreading around different infrastructure projects based upon the funding sources that are available. The amenity programs in Willoughby, very specific projects, so those are the projects that are getting done. The road infrastructure program for DCC has a very specific funding source only for very specific projects. And those are typically Fraser Highway and Willoughby. So those are being spread around based upon those priorities. And we're seeing investments into all of those … all the different funding sources. Some of them from revenues from growth and other of those from property taxes. So I think, again, it suggests that it's all about Willoughby … It's also, to go along with that, not factual … there's a 22% tax increase … next year. He knows that. … I think shows the level of … we're dealing with in this campaign. When … done and using the revenue sources available to fund them, based upon amenity programs, DCC programs, and some property taxes, based upon the projects that are required to be identified through communicating and listening to the community. And … delivering for residents, such as youth and family that don't want to be on …, right? … want to deliver the ability to serve the residents of the town to get around. And that means building capital projects in the programs that fund them. And that … almost … to 1 on almost every vote this term. And now the campaign against them. It's remarkable to see what's going on in this election. We want to continue to do roads, parks, and facilities with growth paying for growth, not taxpayers. And that's respect for taxpayers, not deceiving them.

What would you do to achieve that number? We're not going to be able to achieve that number. Because the number is completely made up in sectional. So in 2025, the projection for 2026 was 17%. Not one of them said a word. Because they knew it was never going to happen. The same as this is not going to happen. These projections are based upon every project being filed. Every department's wish list being granted. And each and every increase in costs being done. With no contemplation of not pursuing projects … not funding specific other programs. And every year council goes through the work with staff to determine the priorities and reaches a consensus number. And so to continue to beat this, 22% shows what is actually occurring in budget. It's a very ambitious capital plan funded from growth revenues, which are now $75 to $100 million per year going into reserves and then coming out of reserves being allocated. So the program doesn't contemplate reserves, which of course are used each and every year. So these projections are not factual. They do not occur, just as like they did not occur in 2026. And they all know that, and who knows that?

Yes, I really want to address, you know, like here we increased the taxes 20 percent over four years and now they say we're going … to increase 22% over one year. You know, the last year was projected at 17% and we came in at … So it shows that those figures that are being used in this election are political to be kind, okay? And looking at what we're doing is we're investing now at a lower interest rate. We get a much lower interest rate by borrowing the way we are. And we are looking at how we can pay it down. We've got a plan with CACs, which are funding. The debt right now, that is not operating debt, that is capital debt, and that is very, very important to establish that. So when you're looking at the debt, also look at what you're gaining. You're getting world-class facilities that are benefiting the youth of today, tomorrow, and into the generations. Also we borrowed for a fire hall that is going to serve this community without any renovations of that for at least 30, 40 years. So borrowing for capital assets is not the same as borrowing on a credit card. Thanks.

I think the interesting thing on debt is risk versus value. Many of us in this room have got mortgages or had mortgages. Many of us had a business … which they had to take a risk to get value. And everything we've done this term, we've taken time to plan for it and prepare for it. And it means that debt is going to pay for through our services. And so I … believe that going on in the future, we have done an awful lot of things in the past. Now we want to put community centers, we want more roads, we want more things in the Township of Langley to believe, and I believe, to be the most livable community in the province. I think we're doing that.

Well, thank you for the question, Cory. I think one of the key issues that I've heard while door knocking has been how much the Township debt has ballooned in the last four years. Per household, it's more than $14,000. Though some debt is good to build amenities, we have to see that debt servicing, which is projected to be $60 million by 2030. This is something that the taxpayers will be on the hook to pay. The approach which Langley Strong will have is We will have a clear financial audit identify … what the fiscal hole is, and from there, we will present a transparent picture to all the residents where we stand, and then any new project that we have will have a clear funding plan that is available, and residents know what would be the operating cost for it going forward. While growth is essential, we also need to make sure that we are keeping taxpayers, their property taxes to a lower level, and we don't want, as we have seen in the last four years, a 22 percent increase in property taxes, another projected 22.7 percent in the Township books. So I hope we are able to put together a strategy that keeps taxpayers on the … Thank you.

So currently, the business businesses pay 30 about 30, percent maybe even more, a little bit more of our property tax base. So we need to keep businesses, make making sure that they're viable and that they stay in our community. And that if we have a higher tax rate, they're gonna they're gonna take off so there's a really nice property over on 216th and 80th that we could have had some great employment there you know that could have been people working and people paying into our tax base right now we have employment lands that you know Fraser Highway we have some in Brookswood and that's gonna be a really great way for us to increase our tax base and keep making sure that our businesses are not gonna have to pay more and as well as our residents so we have to make sure that our businesses stay profitable and we can't talk some more.

I guess everyone's standing while I'm answering these questions, I'll do it. So what happened four or five years ago? Just our taxes went up Or no, it's everything went up after COVID, right? Our payroll stayed the same. Our grocery bill went up. I used to pay $10 for my lunch, but now I need to pay 20, dollars right? Given that, we did a great job. So what do what we need to focus. It's not just a number on the budget sheet and the paper, but we need to focus on what we really need for the Township. What we have done the past four years, … street, you know Langley … center upgrade with um ice sheet and dry sheets, um and a fire hall down to the southern Langley. All those things that we need, we have to build it right now. If you want to build it 10 years later, it's going to cost you double, triple. Imagine borrowing … $10,000 30 years ago, you still think that is a debt. But if you're trying to pay up $10,000 30 years ago, it's a lot harder than paying up $10,000 right now. That's what we're … We need to focus on the vision and what we need to build for the Langley. Thank you.

Well, I think you said something very important in the original question. Which was the remaining debt capacity on the capital slide was between 130 to 160 million dollars. That was on the capital slide when it came through. But then in a CBC article three months later, the mayor is saying it's 350 million dollars. So what's the true number of our remaining debt capacity? Is politics getting in the way of accounting? But regardless, we have spent and borrowed far beyond what our tax base can accommodate. That's why when you look in the five-year financial plan it shows a 40% tax increase. What we desperately need to do is grow our tax base in a financially productive way. We need to grow our business tax base, make it easier for business industry to come here because a business doesn't need a pool, it doesn't need ice rinks, it doesn't need those expensive amenities. That way all this debt and spending that's taken place over the last four years doesn't end up in residents who can't afford what's happened over the last four years here.

Yeah, thank you for the question, Cory And as a team, what we'd like to see is that the ratio between the industrial, the commercial mill rate, and the residential mill rate stays. As narrow as possible in the long term so that it's fair for businesses and operators to do business here in the Township. And one of the ways that we will make sure that we keep that industrial and commercial tax base and mill rate as low as possible is to, where appropriate, where makes sense, expand our employment base, expand our industrial base. And we do that along major truck routes, like along Fraser Highway. We do that along major infrastructure nodes, like in Brookswood on 28th Avenue there. We don't do it by paving over the Salmon River watershed. We don't do it by paving over the forest and wetlands like is in the platform of some folks on this stage So what we do is we make sure that we have the right employment base we have the jobs close to home we have these employment centers for people to be able to work and live and play close to home here in the Township and that's how we're going to make sure in the long term we are growing our tax base in a sustainable way because the slower rate of development that we have brought in here in the Township on purpose by phasing multiple acres hundreds of acres in Willoughby that growth rate is … still sufficient to make sure that the growth is paying for the amenities that we're all enjoying while bringing in more people to shop at your business.

Well, the reality is we can't do everything for everybody. We just can't afford to. And we have to live within our means, and this is why I think we're in a financial crisis right now. We're not living within our means. We've taken the Township, and I'm not going to say we because I don't didn't support a lot of those votes. We've taken the Township's credit card and run it up to the max. There's no more room on it. We have to get it under control. So the very first thing that Langley Strong is gonna do if they're elected is they're gonna have a forensic audit in the first 100 days. We need to know exactly how deep that hole is. And then we have to make a plan and a budget to get out of it. Thank you.

Tess Rouse with Progress for Langley. So number one, municipalities are not for profit, they're not profitable businesses so they shouldn't be run like one. That's number one. Number two, um there's a lot of value in actually the borrowing that we've been doing. Ask any parent here, maybe the ones out there. Playing sports right now. The facilities that have been built in the last four years, the roads that we all just talked about on the last panel of candidates actually, all of those are investments for this community that were put off for so many years. I served under multiple mayors, I saw it myself. Let's talk about 208 Street. That was voted down by some of the people running here. It would have been 30 million dollars just before covid, instead we paid 60 million to do it. That's double. So if we want to talk about finances, our platform is to build more roads, more facilities, more parks, to give Langley the services that it needs to move the goods that all of you in this room probably need moving without congestion. We need state-of-the-art facilities to bring more people to Langley. Those are the people shopping in your businesses. Those are the people staying in your hotels. And we want to see more of that, and we have the team to get it done. Thank you.

Thanks for the question Cory. I don't have the experience or the background to actually give you exactly how much the number should be or what's the percentage what I do know is that you're here from our Chamber so the consultation process is very important working with businesses working with advocacy such as Chamber as well as working with different levels of government to make sure that the business our businesses are supported part of it what we have in Langley also making sure that they are along the act of transportation process where we can support the teams that work in different businesses to be able to get their jobs efficiently and provide the ability for them to access these places, there's also important to keep in mind, parking is also important. Understand when we do the employment structuring and the commercial areas and the zoning, we have to understand how these people will get to that area. So I definitely will advocate to make sure that there is a balance and also working with the different organizations that we have in the Township. Thank you.

So are … two types of debt that I can think of right now on a personal level. You have the debt that's a mortgage, where you're actually buying asset to cover that mortgage debt. The other is a line of credit, which you're just borrowing because you need to buy groceries or something like that, and you can't wait for your next paycheck. The issue that we're seeing in … the about Langley is that developers haven't been keeping up with the amenities, which is why over the last four years they've had to spend a lot of money in order to build those amenities. And they're not quite done yet because I feel like there's things like swimming pools, there's infrastructure, there's amenities that haven't been built and they really need to be built. The good thing about borrowing is that you can finance it over 25, 30 years, but you have to be careful because you shouldn't be using debt to build things that a few individuals can enjoy it should be for everybody and it should be for things that everybody can enjoy and it increases our property value things like debt servicing it shouldn't be put onto our debt this is not visa and mastercard we need to be fiscally responsible with people's money Thank you.

Okay, so yeah, we do have an incredibly large debt. And Part of the problem … is that when you take a look at it from a business perspective, the debt that we have doesn't have a really good return on investment. And so what we have here is a bunch of debt that is going to be paid for over a long period of time. That's going to be pushing us back into a corner for our future. So when things come up, for instance, government grants that We could take advantage of to build art centers, things like that, we won't have the capacity to take care of them or to be able to utilize those grants because we don't have enough room left on our debt ceiling. So what we need to do is in the first 100 days, make sure that we have that forensic audit, that we've got a really clear picture of where our debt is, pay it down as best we can without raising taxes as much as possible, and then make sure that we are putting things aside for those eventualities in the future. Because if I ran my business the way the Township is running their budget, I would be out of business in about 10 minutes.