Crime, Ontario and Thunder Bay

  

Statistics Canada released the police reported crime statistics for Canada in 2025 last week and the overall trends were a decline in both the conventional Crime Rate (CR) as well as the Crime Severity Index (CSI).  According to Statistics Canada, in 2025 the national CSI dropped by 5 percent while the CR declined by 2 percent.  In other words, both the number of crimes per 100,000 population (excluding traffic violations) fell as well as the seriousness of those crimes. Relative to their historic peak in the early 1990s, crime rates are still down dramatically though they are up from 2015 which marks the start of a reversal of the long-term downward trend. However, since 2023, both crime severity and crime rates appear to have declined.

Ontario reflects the national trends with crime severity in 2025 down 6 percent from the year previous (though still up 12 percent from 2015) and the crime rate down 4 percent from the previous year but up 20 percent from 2015.  The Ontario numbers vary when its major CMAs are examined with quite a few CMAs up while others are down.  However, the largest cities – Toronto and Ottawa – are both down and they of course affect the provincial totals dramatically given together they account for well over half of Ontario’s population.  As for northern Ontario CMAs – Greater Sudbury in 2025 saw a 2 percent decline in its CSI but a 3 percent increase in its crime rate while Thunder Bay saw a 3 percent increase in its CSI and an 18 percent rise in its crime rate – the largest increases across Canada’s 41 CMAs. However, Thunder Bay did not have the highest total crime rate in the country as that dubious distinction went to Chilliwack, B.C. (at 11,455 crimes per 100,000) while Thunder Bay was a bit further down the list in 6th place (after Kamloops, Red Deer, Nanaimo and Kelowna) at 8,373 crimes per 100,000.

Comparing Thunder Bay to the other major Ontario CMAs is done in Figure 1 and Thunder Bay definitely stands out when compared to other Ontario cities.  Thunder Bay is first at 8,374 crimes per 100,000 with Peterborough second at 5,386.  At the bottom are Toronto and Barrie at 3,950 and 3,777 respectively.  In terms of growth (Figure 2), about half of Ontario CMAs saw their crime rates decline and the other half saw an increase.  Thunder Bay is not only growing in terms of population, housing, construction and retail but also unfortunately with respect to crime.  Thunder Bay saw the largest increase at 18 percent followed by Brantford at 10 percent and then London at 7 percent.  Toronto and Windsor saw the largest declines at 5 percent and 10 percent respectively. 

 

 

A logical question is what policing resources are available to these Ontario cities to fight crime and Figure 3 presents police officers per 100,000 using data from Statistics Canada (TABLE 35100077).  Here it should be noted that the crime figures correspond to CMAs, whereas the police statistics are for municipal police services whose boundaries may not exactly correspond with the CMA boundaries. Nevertheless, the rankings proceed and here Thunder Bay is again at the top of the rankings of these Ontario municipal forces with 197 police officers per 100,000 in 2025. Next highest is Windsor at 172 followed by Toronto at 171.  At the bottom of the rankings are London, Ottawa and Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge (Waterloo Region Police) at 143, 135 and 118 officers per 100,000 respectively. Thunder Bay has the highest crime rate across major Ontario cities and it has the highest policing resources per capita.

 

However, Figure 4 looks at the policing resources in a somewhat different way.  It looks at the growth in police officers per 100,000 and does so between 2023 and 2025 (because Statistics Canada’s annual data does not have an entry for 2024). Here the numbers show that while the majority of Ontario municipal police forces saw growth in police officers per 100,000 – about one third did not.  Those showing a decline are Sudbury, Windsor, Kingston, Thunder Bay and Brantford. Of these five cities showing a decline in policing resources per capita, four also saw an increase in crime rates in 2025 with the exception being Windsor.

 

So, is there a relationship between policing resources and crime?  Simple correlations between police numbers and crime rates are probably not the best way to evaluate this type of relationship and a regression approach where confounding factors like demographics, community income and land area are considered are better.  Some might argue that wealthier communities with better socio-economic conditions can both afford more police as well as have the determinants for lower crime rates.  Some might argue that more police simply means more crime gets reported and could paradoxically result in a positive relationship between crime rates and policing. Nevertheless, it can be done simply and Figures 5 and 6 are presented together because they show an interesting feature of the data when you plot the crime rate against the number of police officers.  

 

Figure 5 plots the crime rate per 100,000 for all the Ontario CMAs against the number the number of police officers per 100,000 and the correlation is positive when a linear trend is fitted. However, that trend is heavily influenced by one observation in the northeast corner of the chart which "pulls" the line upward.  That is Thunder Bay.  If you remove Thunder Bay and redraw the chart with linear trend (Figure 6) you get the more conventional result that more police officers per capita are correlated with lower crime rates.  Thunder Bay is what one can refer to as an “outlier”.  It is not like the others.

Of course, it might be that using levels is not the way to do such a comparison and what might be better is to plot the recent growth in the crime rate against the recent growth in police officers per 100,000.  This is done in Figure 7 and the result is (including Thunder Bay) more conventional and in line with the expectation that if the number of police officers per 100,000 population is growing, the crime rate should see lower growth rates or even declines. Thunder Bay in this chart is in the northwest quadrant with a decline in per capita police resources in 2025 and an increase in crime rates.

 

Still, Thunder Bay even if its recent policing resources per capita have declined, nevertheless has the most police officers per capita of the Ontario cities in this comparison.  Does this mean there is an efficiency or effectiveness problem? Again, one way to look at this is to take the statistics and compute the reported crimes per police officer.  Figure 8 does this and the ranking shows that Thunder Bay has the third highest reported crimes per police officer of these Ontario cities.  In other words, there are a lot of crimes being reported by the police.  If one wants to use crimes reported per police officer as a productivity or effectiveness measure, then the Thunder Bay Police Service is one of the most “productive or effective” in Ontario.  They are catching a lot of crime.

 

What does this mean for crime in Thunder Bay?  Why are crime rates in Thunder Bay so high despite having one of the largest police forces in per capita terms?  It is because Thunder Bay simply has a lot of crime and it is getting worse and overwhelming the resources available.  If one may hypothesize, Thunder Bay is indeed unique in some of the economic and social forces that have shaped its past and continue to shape its future.  It is located at the crossroads of the country which means it is a transport node not only for grain, potash and transport trucks but also for criminals and criminal activity. 

In terms of social elements, Thunder Bay is a community that has always had a frontier edge and that includes an element of independence that can often border on lawlessness.  While it is true that Canadian cities have all become a bit more lawless in the wake of the COVID pandemic, Thunder Bay seems further along the path when compared to even the GTA. Lawlessness progresses in degrees.  Not following parking bylaws for snow removal or walking your dog across other people’s lawns is the start and suggests a lack of concern for others and the public good.  Indulging in rolling stops at stop signs, speeding and then running a red light is the next step.   I have seen vehicles doing U-turns on the Thunder Bay expressway seemingly oblivious to other traffic.  Increased theft in stores is yet another progression and then there is the infiltration of Thunder Bay by increased numbers of drug dealers coming from Toronto due to it being both a captive and lucrative market in its own right as well as a gateway to northern reserves.  Then comes the litany of domestic abuse and household violence largely springing from drug and alcohol abuse which also consumes police resources.

The police in Thunder Bay are essentially being overwhelmed.  They are being asked to solve not only Thunder Bay’s crime and social problems – which are substantial in their own right - but to deal with a wider range of provincial and national crime trends due to Thunder Bay’s location as a transport crossroads. Do you want to see crime rates in Thunder Bay come down?  Additional resources from the O.P.P. and the R.C.M.P need to be deployed outside the city limits along the highways leading to the city as well as the airport, port and railyards.   Sniffer dogs going through luggage at the airport and a more visible police presence there is needed.  There should be a lot more “seat belt” checks and “speeding enforcements” on the 11/17 and Highway 61 corridors leading to the city as well as more transport truck “safety inspections.”

It is not just the resource available but how they are deployed and used.  Moreover, crime fighting requires cooperation across jurisdictions and better coordination of efforts between the assorted policing levels.  Thunder Bay’s crime rate can be reduced but given the national and regional spillovers of the problem both into and out of Thunder Bay, it is not just the responsibility of the Thunder Bay Police Service.  In some ways, Thunder Bay’s role as a transport choke point is both the source of its crime problems and can facilitate its potential solution. At least, that is what the numbers are telling me.

Municipal Surpluses Are Not That Unexpected

  

The news that the City of Thunder Bay has an “unexpected” operating surplus for 2025 has been greeted with a mixture of commentary including some remarks that it should be spent on crumbing roads or perhaps a tax break.  Apparently much of the additional revenue came from the liquidation of an investment portfolio and as is standard policy, will be added to the reserves.  None of this is really a surprise because if one looks back on past budget years, often, there is an operating surplus or what is referred to as positive variance. 

 

Figure 1 plots City of Thunder Bay operating surpluses from 2012 to 2025 and two-thirds of the time the city has had an operating surplus.  Indeed, the accumulated operating surpluses since 2012 sum to about 17 million dollars.  However, this is not the end of the story because this is only the operating surplus.  The City of Thunder Bay has both a capital and an operating budget and over the 2009 to 2024 period (2025 for Thunder Bay is not available yet on FIR), the total surplus (the difference between total revenues and total expenditures) was only in deficit twice as illustrated in Figure 2.  Indeed, the accumulated total surplus since 2009 has been 376.1 million dollars.

 

This is not a Thunder Bay thing. Across Canada, municipalities are not separate tiers of government but essentially wards or creatures of the province. Provinces keep a tight rein over municipalities and their finances ensuring that they generally run surpluses and that those surpluses go into reserves.  As Figure 3 illustrates, periods of deficit in the national local government sector have been few with only the four years from 2000 to 2003 showing a deficit.  So, Thunder Bay is not exceptional in generating repeated surpluses – it is something that is the norm.  The greater concern would be municipalities running perpetual deficits but that is something generally indulged in by the federal and provincial governments.  By comparison, municipalities are paragons of fiscal rectitude.

 

Do Thunder Bay Councillors Deserve a Raise?

  

At the April 21^stcouncil meeting, Thunder Bay City Council voted itself a substantial set of pay increases that will take effect over time bringing the mayor’s salary as well as those of the councillors to $173,859 and $62,298 to align with current “market” medians of $139,618 and $50,689 over the next eight years.  What of course has caught a lot of attention is the annual increases of up to 9 percent annually that will approximately double councillor remuneration. Naturally the comments and the poll results on TBnewswatch.com overwhelmingly disapprove.

For the record, I think that members of city council do require the pay increases though the term “market median” is a bit disingenuous given that municipal service as a councillor is not a labour market in which councillors shop their wares across a geographic distribution of municipalities. While some might think that this type of community service should be completely selfless at low amounts of compensation, it remains that the compensation is necessary because although the community service is an honour and therefore does not require compensation, the salary is for all the other things that come with the position including constant scrutiny by the public and  the substantial amount of abuse it entails.  If you think about it, the current compensation of a municipal councillor in Thunder Bay is barely at the level of full-time minimum wage work (assuming five eight hour days a week at 50 weeks with two weeks’ vacation) which means it is unlikely to appeal to a broader range of talent. You do get what you pay for.

Still, what has been proposed is not without criticism.  In my view, it is not what was done, or the amount of the compensation per se, but how it was done.  Raising councillor salaries is not just a Thunder Bay thing.  Indeed, many of the “comparator” communities used to justify the increase are also raising or planning to raise their compensation next year including Barrie, Chatham-Kent, and Kingston. Also interesting is Cambridge which in its review of salaries concluded that the mayor was overpaid while councillors were underpaid. However, most interesting is the way Chatham-Kent is implementing its pay increases alongside a restructuring and shrinking of its municipal council from 17 to 14 councillors.  Thunder Bay considered but, in the end, did not reduce the number of councillors going with the status quo, but has gone ahead with pay increase anyway.  The pay increase would have been a lot more politically palatable if it had been accompanied by structural reform.

The other aspect was the choice of comparators.  In the past, when comparing things like property taxes, municipal expenditures, or debt levels across municipalities, some of the feedback received has involved criticism that what I am doing is comparing “apples” with “oranges” and that there are substantial differences and nuances across municipalities and how they function that require highlighting when presenting comparisons as every city is unique. It would appear, however that when it comes to salary comparisons resulting in a pay increase, there are no such qualms at the local municipal level.

The new plan sees council salaries pegged to the median pay of eight comparator municipalities: Barrie, Cambridge, Chatham-Kent, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Kingston, Sault Ste. Marie, and the County of Simcoe.  These were chosen by a consulting company, and the same communities have been used by this company to do other salary comparisons for other municipalities.  In the case of Thunder Bay - a single-tier urban municipality - it is being compared to Chatham-Kent,  which is a single-tier semi-rural municipality, Greater Sudbury, which is a regional municipality, and the County of Simcoe – which is a rather odd fish in that it has a population of nearly 400,000 and includes Barrie and Orillia as separate single tier municipalities. Even more odd is its governance, no doubt an artefact of history,  with a council of 37 members including a warden rather than a mayor, deputy mayors and councillors.  It looks like a regional type municipality to me. Personally, I would have left these three out and included St. Catherines, Burlington, and perhaps Peterborough but I digress.

Using the comparators provided, it is useful to illustrate these comparators with Thunder Bay on several indicators though I am exercising my prerogative to not use Simcoe County because it seems to be a real outlier and replace it with Orillia which is in Simcoe County.  Incidentally, the mayor’s salary and councillor salary for Orillia are close to those for Simcoe County so it fits in just fine.  Figure 1 plots my comparators by population size, and they range from a high of 179,197 for Greater Sudbury to a low of 36,904 for Orillia. In terms of population, Thunder Bay (117,000) is below both the median and the average in this group of comparators.  Figure 2 plots the number of councillors (not including the mayor) and here Thunder Bay is not greatly at odds with everyone else being above average but at the median. 

 

 

Figure 3 plots the salaries of mayors, and these range from a high of $152,500 for Guelph to a low of $87,638 for Sault Ste. Marie with Thunder Bay below both the average and the median.  Finally, Figure 4 plots the councillor salaries which range from a high of $56,206 in Cambridge to a low of $28,193 in Sault Ste. Marie with an average of $43,317 and a median of $44,276.  Thunder Bay’s mayor is paid 19 percent below the average while its councillors are paid 23 percent below the average.  It turns out that relatively speaking, councillors in Thunder Bay are more underpaid than the mayor but not by much.

 

 

Having looked at these indicators, one cannot help but conclude that given the comparators, members of Thunder Bay City Council receive remuneration below the average for these comparators.  Given that these averages are moving targets since other municipalities are also raising their compensation, the increases suggested are also not unreasonable.  In the end, based on this year’s total tax levy of 250 million dollars, the salaries of the mayor and council comprise about $500,000 which is about one-fifth of one percent of the total tax levy.  Sure, it’s a bit more with additional benefits and stipends but even with the proposed increases, by 2033 the total will be about $1 million.  With growth, the council share of the tax levy is not going to change much.  This is not unreasonable.

 

What is also reasonable is given the choice of comparators, why not use them to do one more comparison.  If they are good enough to show that our municipal politicians are underpaid, then they are also good enough to compare tax burdens. Figure 5 plots the average property taxes paid for a detached bungalow for these same comparator municipalities.  The taxes paid range from a high of $4,811 for Guelph to a low of $3,707 for Sault Ste. Marie.  Thunder Bay comes in second at $4,615 which is above the average of $4,275 and the median of $4,298.  It is nice to know that we are above average in something.

Port Activity Will Help Stabilize Thunder Bay's Economy in 2026

  

Despite the snow on the ground, spring has arrived at the Port of Thunder Bay and that means two things.  First, the arrival of the first vessel with the  MV Kathy McKeil passing the breakwall at on March 26.  Second, there is the annual Opening of Navigation Luncheon which will take place this year on April 8^th at the Italian Cultural Centre in Thunder Bay. These annual events always remind us of the importance of the Port of Thunder Bay, not only in the past when the twin ports of Port Arthur and Fort William were the largest grain port in the world but at present given the revitalization of the port’s activity since 2000 and especially over the last decade.  As of 2024, the Port provided approximately 1,000 direct jobs and an annual economic impact of $370 million.

It bears looking at some of the recent trends in the main cargo that passes through the port. Figure 1 presents a plot of total tonnage through the port since 2000 along with a LOWESS smooth to isolate the trends and there has been a pronounced upward trend since 2010 with an average annual growth rate in total tonnage of 1.3 percent annually since 2000 and 3.3 percent since 2010.  In 2025, total tonnage through the Port of Thunder Bay was 10.8 million tonnes. 

 

Of course, the main commodity remains grain accounting in 2025 for 84 percent of total tonnage shipped. Figure 2 presents grain tonnage through the port since 2000 and again with the trend shows an increase after 2010 with a plateauing from about 2016 to 2020 and then another surge bringing total grain tonnage shipped in 2025 to almost 9 million tonnes. From 2000 to 2025, grain tonnage shipped has grown at an annual rate of 1.9 percent but since 2010 the growth rate averaged 4.1 percent annually. Figures 3 and 4 repeat the plots for potash and dry bulk. Since 2000, potash shipments in tonnes have grown at an annual rate of 9.6 percent but since 2010 the growth rate has been 20 percent. Meanwhile, dry bulk since 2000 grew at an annual rate of 7.1 percent with the period since 2010 seeing annual growth of 5.7 percent.  

 

 

With the renewed emphasis on east-west trade within Canada along with the disruption in world markets and shipping as a result the ongoing wars in the crucial cross-roads of the Middle East, one expects the demand for Canadian resource products as well as shipments through Thunder Bay to increase in 2026.  This will be a boon to the Thunder Bay economy and a counterweight to the forecasts of tepid growth in 2026 from Signal49 research.The Port of Thunder Bay remains an important component of local and regional economic activity.

Northwest Resilience and Growth

  

The Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association (NOMA) will be meeting April 22^nd to 24^th for its 2026 conference and annual general meeting in Thunder Bay, under the theme “Resilience.” After the winter we have had, resilience is an apt theme though one suspects the choice of theme pertains to the economy and municipal finances rather than the weather and the gauntlet that has become the region’s highways. Economic resilience is especially important these days and it is important to note that the economy in Northwestern Ontario has been doing rather well over the last few years if one is to take labour force data at face value.

It has been an era not of decline or stagnation but of growth with that growth occurring both in the region’s dominant metropolis of Thunder Bay but also outside of it.  Indeed, there has been a noticeable improvement in one of the key indicators at least from the general public’s perspective – the unemployment rate.  From highs of 8 percent in the wake of the Great Recession and Forest Sector Crisis, the unemployment rate in Northwestern Ontario in 2025 stood at 4.6 percent compared to over 6 percent for Canada and over 7 percent for Ontario.  Using data from Statistics Canada, a more detailed portrait of improvement emerges. 

 

Figure 1 plots three labour market indicators for Northwestern Ontario comparing 2015 with 2025.  Between these two years, the population aged 15 years and over grew from 173,400 to 184,200. The labour force grew from 104,700 to 112,500 and employment grew from 98,400 to 107,300.  Of course, it is worth looking at the data in terms of the Thunder Bay CMA and the rest of the region given that Thunder Bay CMA accounts for about 60 percent of both the population and employment of the entire region.  

 

Figure 2 repeats the indicators for the Thunder Bay and adds Full Time(FT) and Part Time (PT) Employment.  Thunder Bay’s population aged 15 years and over increased by 7,400 between 2015 and 2025.  This was accompanied by labour force growth also of 7,400 individuals and employment growth again of 7,400 with FT employment growing by 8,100 while PT Employment declined by 700 jobs.  The good news here is that this employment creation was overwhelming FT employment, and this pattern repeats itself outside of Thunder Bay.   Figure 3 shows that for the rest of Northwest Ontario outside of Thunder Bay, the population aged 15 years and over grew by 3,400 with the labour force growing by 400 and employment growing by 1500.  FT employment in the region outside Thunder Bay grew by 1,800 while PT employment also declined by 300 jobs.  

 

Figure 4 compares percent growth in these indicators across Thunder Bay and the Rest of Northwest Ontario.  Between 2015 and 2025, population aged 15 and over grew 7 percent in Thunder Bay and 5 percent in the rest of the region.  The labour force grew nearly 12 percent in Thunder Bay but only 1 percent in the rest of the region.  Meanwhile, employment grew 12.5 percent in Thunder Bay and 3.8 percent in the rest of the region.  Full time employment grew impressively by nearly 18 percent in Thunder Bay and almost 6 percent outside of Thunder Bay.  Part time employment declined more in Thunder Bay at -5 percent as opposed to about -4 percent outside of Thunder Bay.

 

Figure 5 illustrates the annual unemployment rates in Thunder Bay and the outside region.  Both have declined over time with the decline somewhat sharper in the region outside of Thunder Bay.  That is because the labour force has expanded more rapidly in Thunder Bay relative to the rest of the region as Thunder Bay has attracted more population growth.  Nonetheless, a rising tide appears to have lifted all boats and the improvement in full time employment is especially welcome.

 

What has been driving these improvements?  The construction work both in Thunder Bay and the region whether on the electricity grid or highway improvement has been a factor.  Thunder Bay can add housing and hotel construction to this set of projects not to mention a billion-dollar correctional facility. Then there is mining development which continues to generate employment and activity.  Of course, the region also benefits from a large public sector and quasi-public sector particularly in the health, social assistance and indigenous economic sectors which has also been a factor in employment growth nationwide.  All these sectors in Northwest Ontario have been relatively well sheltered from the ongoing tariff dispute with the United States.  While the Northwest has not escaped unscathed from recent employment losses, it remains that much of the fallout has hit the manufacturing sector in southern Ontario.

So, regional municipal delegates and leaders will have a lot to celebrate at this year’s NOMA Meetings. Indeed, this growth should also be reflected in growing municipal tax bases which will afford additional revenue.  Yet, it is not time to rest on laurels given that the economy both nationally and globally remains turbulent and uncertain.  Hopefully the region will be able to capitalize both on critical minerals mining as well as the growth in defense related spending.

When Budget Requests Collide: Thunder Bay 2026

  

Thunder Bay has released its planned 2026 operating budget and as usual there are a plethora of numbers, facts and figures splashed across our local media.  This year’s budget is especially interesting given that in the lead up to its release, the messaging from The City was that the tax levy increase would be held to 2.6 percent.  However, as it has emerged, this initially did not consider the rather large request from the Police Services Board of a 9.1 percent increase for their requirements as well as larger requests from other external boards. Apparently, those are 'external' and the City itself has done a good job of keeping its increases to 2.6 percent though one should add City Council needs to approve all of these increases if they are to go forward.

Given that police services alone account for 22 percent of the property tax levy, this has bumped up the proposed municipal levy increase to 4.4 percent though the City as usual is doing its after growth schtick and saying it is only 4 percent. With the Growth Plan setting 3 percent in the assessment growth as a target, we can joyfully anticipate the day when there will be a 4 percent levy increase but which only amounts to 1 percent after growth. And as usual, one also needs to factor in the rate-supported budget in all of this. The average residential household will see a 4.1 percent increase in their total Water and Wastewater charges bring the average per household up to $1,479.88 from $1,436.84.  As a further note, The City will also be expanding its employment in 2026 adding 57.1 Full Time Equivalent positions in areas such as safety and security, growth, service delivery and to run the 2026 municipal election.

 

As has been my practice, the accompanying figure plots Thunder Bay’s tax levy increases since 1990 to provide context.  The last four years have seen a distinct increase in the tax levy not only from the lows of the pandemic but from the period immediately pre-pandemic.  Over the 2023 to 2026 period, the levy increases average 4.7 percent putting this year’s increase slightly below the four-year average but well above the 2015 to 2022 period average of 3 percent.

Of course, the budget still must be ratified and there is a period of public input but the current Thunder Bay City Council is not likely to push back much against what is being asked for even if public opposition emerges given their performance last week largely endorsing the sale of public properties and development as proposed to build new density housing projects in established neighbourhoods. On the other hand, the debate will be interesting to monitor to see what finally emerges given that we are going into an municipal election year. 

 

 

Is Thunder Bay Housing History About to Repeat Itself?

 

In the early 20^th century, the Lakehead cities of Port Arthur and Fort William were amidst an economic boom fueled by the expansion of the Canadian wheat economy in the west and the Lakehead’s role as a port and transport centre.  As the boom progressed, population surged and the years from 1900 to 1914 saw massive growth with the population growing from just over 6,000 people to 30,000 – a 400 percent increase.  With this boom, the need for housing was paramount and the same era saw a massive construction surge with numerous houses built. 

Indeed, it seemed like the growth would never end and plans were afoot to bring huge swaths of land into readiness for what was certainly to become the Chicago of the North.  The pre-1920 period saw residential subdivisions planned and sometimes started for the Kam River Islands, Parkdale (which incidentally was zoned for 25-foot lots as far back as 1907), The Alma Adair Addition and the areas currently between Lakehead University and Confederation College now off Central Avenue and to be known as Inter-Ocean Park.

The Great Boom came to an end not only at the Lakehead but across Canada and for decades Thunder Bay was marked by huge swaths of land that eventually reverted to the municipality for non-payment of taxes and evolved into informal green spaces throughout the city. Along with large swathes of greenery in the centre of the city, many neighbourhoods have also had patches of green space on empty lots that were never developed.  While these lands sometimes evolved into official parks or parkettes, for the most part they were simply green space – owned by the city.  Visually, they made for a vision of forest within the city and in practical terms, while they served no obvious productivity need, they did harbour wildlife and absorb rainwater.  One only needs to see what happens to the inter-city area after a major deluge given that most of the green space there has been paved over.  If anything, the urban green space contributed to that intangible Thunder Bay often advocates as one if its attractions – quality of life.

Fast forwarding to the present, after decades of economic and population stagnation, it once again appears that Thunder Bay’s hour has struck and a boom – albeit a modest one - is underway.  With infusions of public infrastructure money, growing demand for transport services and mining activity in the region, employment and population have finally begun rising again with some of that growth boosted by recent immigration of permanent and temporary residents.  According to Statistics Canada numbers, between 2015 and 2024, the CMA population rose from 124,719 to 133,063 while the City of Thunder Bay proper rise from 110,298 to 117,100 – increases of 6.7 and 6.2 percent respectively. 

There is a demand for housing and with the assistance of federal and provincial housing money, Thunder Bay has embarked on a plan to boost the number of housing units via a combination of infill in existing neighbourhoods as well as move on disposing of its surplus green space.  The infill in existing neighbourhoods with higher density apartment units and more basement units have naturally disturbed the former pace and character of some neighbourhoods as additional residents and their vehicles have cluttered the streets.  Simply accusing existing residents of NIMBYISM does not address their concerns given that the City of Thunder Bay seems to do little to enforce either parking or noise bylaws.

However, the latest chapter in this saga is the declaration of surplus and sale of four major pieces of municipally owned land to build density housing: 300 Tokio Street, 144 Fanshaw Street, 791 Arundel Street, and the land between 211-223 Tupper Street and 224 Camelot Street.  The City of Thunder Bay wants 400 units on Tokio Street, 200 on Fanshaw Street, 600 on Arundel Street, and 185 on Tupper/Camelot streets for a total of about 1,385 units. A key issue here is that of these pieces of land, only one is in a downtown area and can be considered as part of a deliberate plan to boost density in the downtown cores which have been the focus of substantial redevelopment dollars to revitalize them but still lack higher population and traffic.  The others are all on green space adjacent to existing residential areas which in the case of the Arundel lands are also already marked by some high density apartments. 

So, there has been push-back from residents and the Tuesday January 13^th City Council meeting is expected to see a final decision on whether the city will dispose of this land.  Of course, city councillors and administrators have already generated a narrative to convince themselves and city residents – a large portion who concur – that Thunder Bay needs more housing and that this is the right thing to do.  The city maintains that with rising population, Thunder Bay is facing a shortage of 1,000 units of housing and they need to build large quantities of housing quickly to increase supply and make housing more affordable.  Thunder Bay is also pursuing an active growth agenda and plan, and this construction activity is seen as growing the tax base which is a priority of the new growth plan.  To assuage push-back, the claim has been made that the proposals are all conceptual and subject to change hinting but not stating that they will be down-scaled. And, at least one councillor has argued that << “If you build some of these types of units, you will allow people to still stay in your neighbourhood and you will open up a house that has three bedrooms that could potentially occupy [more] people,”  … “Change is hard to kind of wrap your head around ‘til you see it,” he continued. “Sometimes change is good, and then sometimes … the proposal might not be that change, it might be something different.”>>

In deciding on this matter, Thunder Bay City council needs to consider the following points made with reference to some of the arguments that have been advanced:

1.        Thunder Bay needs more housing and that this is the right thing to do.  The city maintains that with rising population Thunder Bay is facing a shortage of 1,000 units of housing and they need to build large quantities of housing quickly to increase supply and make housing more affordable.

Thunder Bay does need more housing and particularly affordable housing and social or geared to income housing.  To date, most of the new builds have been units at market rent and they have increased supply but that new supply comes at monthly rents between $2,000 to $2,500 a month.  These are GTA level rents in a city that despite its recent surge in growth does not even begin to offer the opportunities of a much larger city but seems to be developing all its drawbacks including crime and generally more inconsiderate behaviour on both the roads and in neighbourhoods.  Indeed, Thunder Bay rents are pretty much at the Ontario average. As for rising population, that growth may be about to end.  With recent changes to federal immigration including the caps on international student enrolment, Thunder Bay’s population may once again be levelling off.  In some respects, this may be a small-scale replay of the early 20^th century where the boom petered out, and Thunder Bay was left with large quantities of zoned land with no demand.  In this case, it will be a lot of units that may not find renters.  On the bright side, a classic overbuilding boom may be just what we need to bring local rents down in the longer run. I am sure City Councillors are not too concerned if developers are left holding the bag as that would be someone else's problem.

 

2.        Thunder Bay is also pursuing an active growth agenda and plan, and this construction activity is seen as growing the tax base which is a priority of the new growth plan. 

Thunder Bay’s growth agenda is a municipal revenue enhancement plan masquerading as an economic growth plan.  The key targets are not employment growth targets or business formation targets or per capita GDP growth targets, but measures directly correlated with municipal revenue.  The key targets are to grow the property tax base of 3% annually and grow population by 1 percent annually. Building multi-residential units that generate more tax revenue on a per square foot basis than single family dwellings meet these goals rather nicely – if growth in employment and population continue.  As already noted, continued population growth is not assured. If one looks at Statistics Canada’s labour force characteristics for Thunder Bay, in 2025, the population aged 15 years old and over has stopped growing.  From spring of 2016 to the end of 2024, Thunder Bay’s plus 15 years old CMA population grew from 104,300 to 111,900 – an increase of 7.3 percent.  However, by December 2025, the 15 years plus population was 111,400 – a decline of 500.  A blip? Perhaps? But nevertheless, making decisions based on previous growth rates continuing is always risky.  On the other hand, the developers will be taking the risks and once they have acquired the land, they may simply sit on it for years if economic conditions shift.  At least that is what happened when the city sold off the Municipal Golf Course for housing way back in 2016.  We are still waiting there.

 

 

3.        To assuage push-back, the claim has been made that the proposals are all conceptual and subject to change hinting but not stating that they will be down-scaled.

This is classic bureaucratic issue management.  Make the affected public feel better by giving them the hope that the development will be smaller than the concept drawings illustrate.  That may or may not happen.  Once the land is sold to developers, they will be calling the shots on what is eventually built.  The projects may be scaled down, or they may be scaled up.  People in the Junot /John/Red River area still remember what happened with the Transitional Housing Project for youth that was supposed to be under 30 beds.  If you look at the footprint of the almost completed structure now, it looks like it is well over 50 if not more. In general, in Thunder Bay when there is a development plan, what you see is not always what you get.  Indeed, many of the drawings presented give me a vibe out of Fritz Lang's Metropolis with a 1960s Soviet era flair.

 

4.        “If you build some of these types of units, you will allow people to still stay in your neighbourhood and you will open up a house that has three bedrooms that could potentially occupy [more] people.”  

This is an intriguing argument. I am not sure what type of housing market demand this statement is directed at.  I suppose there are some people in Thunder Bay that would like to downsize to an easier to maintain lifestyle once the kids are gone.  Indeed, the thought has often crossed my mind that it would be nice to sell the house and move into a condo or apartment.  The problem with condos in Thunder Bay is that Thunder Bay’s condo market is very limited in terms of what is available.  Most of it is really glorified apartments with few amenities and outside parking – not terribly attractive.  Moreover, based on average house and condo prices in Thunder Bay, unlike southern Ontario or the GTA where you sell your house, buy a three-bedroom condo in a building with a pool, gym and underground parking and have several hundred thousand dollars left over, the Thunder Bay reality is different.  You sell your house, buy a condo in a building with no pool or gym and outside parking and must sink another $100,000 or so on the purchase price. If that is not enough to change your mind, how about I base the rebuttal here on a simple personal anecdote.  I currently live in a four-bedroom house with yard and deck.  The expenses of maintaining my home (taxes, water, insurance, basic maintenance, etc.…) even with the occasional emergency repair such as an appliance going, do not amount to more than $15,000 annually. Why would I downsize to a two-bedroom apartment at $2,000 a month - $24,000 annually - plus a monthly fee for outside parking that would add another $1,000 annually? True, if I were in my late 70s or early 80s and finding home maintenance challenging, it might be more attractive but at that stage one is looking more at a retirement home or assisted living arrangements.

 

5.        “Change is hard to kind of wrap your head around ‘til you see it,” he continued. “Sometimes change is good, and then sometimes … the proposal might not be that change, it might be something different.”

 

Well, we should save the best for last.  To start, coming right out and saying a proposal is going to change and might be something different means in the end neither we nor City Council for that matter know what City council is deciding to do.  That is not terribly reassuring. Moreover, it is one thing for an administrator or bureaucrat to engage in the assuaging platitudes of issue management; it is another for a ward representative to do so in response to obviously upset people. I am really not sure what to make of this statement by the councillor in question aside from that he is an obvious fan of the Alex Rider series on Prime Video and has decided to channel Dr. Grief.  As aficionados of the series may recall from Season 1 of Alex Rider, Dr. Grief is an evil villain seeking to change the world by placing his clones in key positions around the world.  A key scene is when Dr. Grief in response to a classroom question by teen spy Alex about who gets to choose the one percent in a world starting over, intones: <<Change is never easy. Change hurts, but it can be for the better.>> Not sure if people who are concerned about the erosion of neighbourhood green space and residential quality of life really appreciate this type of lecture from their elected representative but maybe it will work.  People in Thunder Bay complain a lot, but then usually just go back to sleep and let things happen.

 

So, what more can one say.  Thunder Bay probably does need more housing, but a lot already has been or is under construction and it is not obvious that the demand will continue to grow at the same rate. In some respects, Thunder Bay may be about to embark on a small-scale repetition of the early 20^th century when there was a massive push to accommodate housing demand that eventually fell short. Density housing is an obvious solution to future housing needs, but more effort needs to be made to design well placed units with amenities rather than simply throwing up apartment blocks reminiscent of 1960s quick builds.  Most importantly, the City of Thunder Bay is taking the quick and easy way out with greenfield development rather than a more focused approach to building urban density in its core areas especially given the amount of money that is continually being spent to “improve” those areas but without the follow through of increasing the population in those areas. This has been said before and will be said again.

 

 

Recent Labour Force Performance: Thunder Bay and Sudbury

 

Welcome to 2026! While everyone is interested in what 2026 will bring economically, it is also important to review what the recent trends have been. While 2025 has been an economically tumultuous year for Canada, in the end the Canadian economy has performed more resiliently than one might have expected.  This is also the case in northern Ontario’s two main urban centres of Thunder Bay and Sudbury.  The accompanying figures plot monthly labour force data from Statistics Canada over the 2011 to 2025 period for the two cities for four variables: total employment, the unemployment rate, the labour force, and population aged over 15 years of age.

 

 

The most interesting development is when comparing pre and post pandemic employment levels (Figure 1) which suggests that there has been an upward trend in job creation in both cities since 2020.  It turns out that 2025 continued this trend with Thunder Bay going from about 66,200 to 69,100 jobs over the November 2024 to November 2025 period – an increase of 2,900 jobs or 4.4 percent. Over the same period, Sudbury saw an increase in employment from 90,400 to 94,800 – an increase of 4,400 jobs or 4.9 percent.  While Sudbury had relatively greater employment growth, interestingly enough, its unemployment rate in 2025 was higher than Thunder Bay’s (Figure 2). By the end of 2025, Thunder Bay’s unemployment rate was just under 5 percent while Sudbury’s was nearly 7 percent. 

 

 

The reasons for this is that compared to Thunder Bay, Sudbury had a faster rate of both labour force and population growth in 2025 (Figure 3 and 4) relative to jobs created. Sudbury’s working age population in 2025 grew nearly 2 percent, while its labour force grew just over 6 percent.  On the other hand, Thunder Bay's  population growth in 2025 remain flat after several years of growth while its labour force nevertheless rose 4.5 percent as participation rates increased. 

 

 

Needless to say, both Thunder Bay and Sudbury did quite well in 2025 when it comes to employment creation and this naturally bodes well for the coming year.  While northern Ontario’s economy still faces challenges going into the new year as a result of the continuing economic adjustment to a more tariff prone United States (Sault Ste. Marie and its steel industry comes to mind), its resilience so far bodes well for the future.  It is important that the region remains alert and on guard to take advantage of new opportunities as they emerge.