What’s the pitch?
Taggart and their partner, Algonquins of Ontario, are presenting Tewin as an opportunity to address the housing crisis by building between 35,000 and 45,000 housing units, with an emphasis on “protecting the natural environment”. They also claim the development would be mixed-use and transit-oriented. Additionally, one of the reasons this received support from some councillors was the idea that approving the development of Tewin would constitute an act of reconciliation with the Algonquin-Annishinabe.
What are the problems?
Pretty much every claim made about the project is dubious at best, and in some cases, misleading. First of all, Tewin’s location makes things like environmental protection and transit-oriented development incredibly difficult. Sprawling development increases car dependency and requires significant new infrastructure like roads, water, and waste removal, all of which cost more and have a greater environmental impact than the upgrades required for infill development. Tewin is quite far from the city and it’s unlikely residents would be satisfied with relying on our unreliable and under-funded public transit system.
Taggart has already been called out for clear-cutting land just outside Tewin, which we suspect they are hoping to also develop in the future. Unfortunately, they got away with it - the city granted a “farming exemption” despite the fact that trees were removed without a permit and the application for a farming exemption came weeks after this work had already been completed. With this history, we have to assume Taggart is only talking about protecting the environment as a PR strategy. At the end of the day, their mission as a business is to make as much profit as possible, and if environmental concerns get in the way of that, we know what they’re going to prioritize.
The framing of this project as reconciliation is a contentious issue with local Indigenous communities. Former Mayor Jim Watson and several councillors have repeated Taggart and AOO’s claims of reconciliation, which prompted several Algonquin chiefs to denounce the project and call on the city to remove Tewin from the urban boundary.
How are councillors managing this proposal?
One of the biggest voices speaking in favour of Tewin is the councillor for Beacon Hill-Cyrville, Tim Tierney, who just-so-happens to have received $4,400 from donors linked to Taggart in the last municipal election. Tierney was then lobbied by Taggart shortly before putting forward a last-minute motion to include Tewin in the urban boundary without any public consultation.
Other councillors have spoken out against the plan, and attempted to either pause or shut it down. In 2021, Councillor Brockington presented a motion at Council to remove Tewin from the urban boundary expansion but was voted down 15-8. Those who supported keeping Tewin in the expansion included current council members Glen Gower, Laura Dudas, George Darouze, Catherine Kitts, Tim Tierney, Matthew Luloff, and Allan Hubley. Last summer, Councillor Menard put forward a motion directing staff to do an "environmental assessment" in respect to water infrastructure that would service the Tewin lands and analyze as an option "the possibility that the Tewin development does not proceed”. This failed 9-8, and five of those nine councillors who voted "No" accepted campaign contributions from those connected to current and former Taggart development executives and members of their family:
Taggart-linked campaign contributions
- George Darouze in 2018 ($1,000) and 2022 ($2,400)
- Catherine Kitts in 2020 by-election ($750)
- Tim Tierney in 2018 ($4,400)
- Matthew Luloff in 2018 ($1200) and 2022 ($1,200)
- David Hill in 2022 ($3,600)
On March 19, 2025, Councillor Kavanagh put forward yet another motion to shut down Tewin by removing it from the Official Plan. You can read the full text here (item 7.1). The Planning and Housing Committee will be voting on this motion at their next meeting on April 9th at 9:30 AM. This motion gives council the off-ramp they need to get Ottawa out of this deal before it’s too late.
What would it mean if Tewin was approved?
Taggart has repeatedly claimed that “Tewin will pay for Tewin” through things like development charges, but there is very little evidence that this would be true. Local economist Neil Saravanmuttoo has taken a deep-dive into the finances of the project and determined that this simply can’t happen. In order to pay for itself, each home in Tewin would need to bring in $103,000 in DCs. If the full 40,000 homes are built, this would create a structural deficit of $43 million that amounts to a 2% overall tax increase. Meanwhile, Taggart would be set to bring in around $4 billion in profits.
What can we do about it?
Sign our petition to remove Tewin from the city's Official Plan!
You can also contact your councillor and let them know you disapprove of Tewin! This is particularly consequential if they sit on the Planning and Housing Committee, as this means they will be voting on Kavanagh’s motion to remove Tewin from the Official Plan. This motion has been withdrawn temporarily until at least after the June 16th by-election so that Osgoode residents have a representative on council.
Here’s the full list of committee members and their contact information:
If you’re passionate about this issue, you can also make your voice heard by signing up to delegate when this goes to committee! If you want some help putting together your delegation or have any questions, please reach out to us at [email protected] and we can provide you with any resources you may need. Stay tuned to Horizon's social media channels and sign up as a member to stay up-to-date on Tewin and the work we have planned like a delegate training session.
