City Council Meeting – Dec 16,2025
With a sharp increase in landlords claiming demolition or conversion in order to evict tenants a number of motions were brought forward to accelerate discussions and solutions. A City report is due in May, 2026 however a number of existing affordable housing properties could be lost by the time an amendment to the existing bylaw is proposed and passed. The loophole involves bad faith owners ticking a different box on the same form as for renovictions (the N13), a landlord can avoid the renoviction by-law, evict the tenant, and not have to offer the unit back to the tenant at the end of the work.
One side of the argument is that a report on the Renoviction Bylaw is expected in May, 2026 and it is pointless and a waste of staff time to discuss this before the report is complete. However, the counter argument is that there has been an identified loophole on the existing bylaw and the May, 2026 report will be incomplete, and then waiting until Q3 2026 for another review report will be wasting precious time.
This Council a week ago asked the province to realize we have a crisis of homelessness. What does crisis mean? Does it mean business as usual? Does it mean we wait for a report back? Or does it mean we act now?
Councillor Ferreira (Video Timestamp 2:56:20)
We have a demonstrated problem now. The report will provide information on the bylaw as it currently exists.
Councillor Trosow (Video Timestamp 3:07:12)
I think this (motion) is doing a disservice to landlords. I think we have pushed them as far as we can with the renoviction bylaw. And I have spoken to landlords who have told me this. Our current bylaw is very, very effective. It’s doing its job.
Councillor Cuddy (Video Timestamp 2:28:01)
Asked how many applications have been made under the new Renal Unit Repair Licensing bylaw. Staff indicated only one applicant has applied (for 7 licenses -aka 7 units) “I am interested in hearing from staff what these recommendations could be”
Councillor Franke (Video Timestamp 2:34:40)
“We have actually had opposition to demolition of buildings where small numbers of units (6 or 8) are going to be demolished so that a 12, or 15 or 30 storey, in some cases, apartment building can be built and add significant density to the housing inventory we have in our city. This potentially prohibits that.” …“I am very satisfied that the current bylaw that we have is working. I am not going to support any further changes to this until I have at least seen the results of a year’s worth of data.”
Councillor Lewis (Video Timestamp 2:40)
Highlighted the problem of affordable units being replaced with higher cost units: “If this doesn’t pass, my plan is to go back to committee and ask for the affordable angle… because I think we have excellent examples of this (in other cities).”
Councillor Rahman (Video Timestamp 2:49:28)
I will not be supporting this now. I think we need to wait.
Councillor Pribil (Video Timestamp 2:50:14)
NOTE: A renoviction is a practice where a landlord evicts a tenant under the pretext of needing the unit for major renovations or repairs, often to re-rent it at a much higher price, sometimes without actually performing substantial work or allowing the tenant to return. London’s renoviction bylaw (Rental Unit Repair Licence bylaw) came into effect in March, 2025.
Watch the meeting at the “London Ontario City Council” Youtube channel
Motion from CaPS meeting that is discussed: Moved by: D. Ferreira Seconded by: S. Trosow (in committee meeting)
That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to the Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) with recommendations on a spectrum of municipal options to limit or prevent “bad-faith” tenancy evictions for reasons of demolitions and conversion to use for a purpose other than a residential premise, including but not limited to amendments to, or new municipal by-laws, policies and programs; it being noted that the communication, as appended to the Added Agenda, from V. Flear, London ACORN, was received with respect to this matter.
The first vote was to accelerate discussion at the next CaPS meeting (failed)
The second vote was to wait until the report was completed by staff and discuss at that time (failed). The final vote – to receive the report and take no action passed.
Looking forward: The motions failed. Based on discussions and statements Councillor Rahman will be bringing back to committee how many truly “affordable” units are rendered unaffordable – especially when they are sold to new owners who know at the time of purchase the existing rental rates for the units.
Do you think there was a lack of discussion about who’s responsibility it is to provide deeply affordable rental accommodation? Do you think private developers themselves who are guided by profitability will take on that responsibility?
There is a link between a loss of deeply affordable units and homelessness however do you think the loss of deeply affordable units is not given sufficient priority? In it’s place there is simply a focus on overall housing numbers?
Do you think “good faith” owners doing necessary renovations are inappropriately given additional red-tape paperwork?