Mississauga residents spent much of the 2026 budget season asking a simple question: is the city getting full value for the money it spends? At its Jan. 28 meeting, council took that question seriously enough to ask for a formal answer. The report that comes back deserves to be thorough, and council should be open to whatever it finds.
Councillors directed staff to report on how value-for-money audits could be carried out at the city. According to the city's council recap, the report will explain the roles of the Audit Committee and the internal audit department, describe how such audits can be requested, and set out options including hiring an independent auditor general or bringing in outside consultants for one-off reviews, with costs and benefits for each.
Where the idea came from
The push came from residents. The Applewood Hills and Heights Residents' Association asked the budget committee to consider an auditor general, and Coun. Chris Fonseca brought the motion to council. That matters. Oversight that residents asked for is more likely to be trusted than oversight a government designs for itself.
The timing is also hard to ignore. The city's 2026 budget, adopted on Jan. 28, raises city spending by 4.39 per cent. The city's share of the tax increase is 1.61 per cent, and the combined city and regional increase is 5.21 per cent. To get there, the city found $17.4 million in savings by deferring costs, trimming budgets and raising revenue, and it paused or cut two infrastructure and fire levies for a year. Those choices show restraint. They also show how tight the margins are, which is exactly when independent scrutiny of how services are delivered pays off.
The case for caution, too
Coun. Joe Horneck, who chairs the audit committee, made a fair point at the meeting. He noted that the city's director of internal audit already has independence and can take suggestions from councillors and residents on where to look. He suggested watching how the Region of Peel's new auditor general, Nick Stavropoulos, performs before committing Mississauga to its own office.
That is reasonable. An auditor general is not free, and a city that just trimmed levies to hold taxes down should not add a new office without knowing what it buys. Ontario's Municipal Act lets councils appoint an auditor general who reports to council, but the structure and budget matter a great deal to whether the role works.
What the report should do
The staff report should not be a defence of the status quo, nor a sales pitch for a new office. It should spell out how many value-for-money audits the city has done in recent years, what they found, what an independent office would cost and what comparable municipalities have gained from theirs. It should also say plainly how residents can ask for a review today, because many likely do not know they can.
Council approved the three parts of the motion separately, a sign that members do not all see the issue the same way. That is fine. What residents need is a clear, honest comparison. With the facts on the table, they and their councillors can judge whether Mississauga needs a new watchdog or simply better use of the one it has.
