Sarnia’s Mayor Mike Bradley is once again taking a victory lap, claiming we are on the verge of being a “debt-free city.” This has been his go-to financial talking point for years, trotted out at service clubs and in local headlines as a sign of responsible governance. But it’s a fundamentally misleading narrative that does more harm than good.
The idea of a “debt-free” city sounds appealing, but it’s based on a faulty comparison between municipal finance and personal finance. It assumes that having debt is inherently bad, like a consumer trying to pay off a credit card. In reality, cities function more like businesses, using debt as a tool to finance growth and invest in infrastructure. A city of Sarnia’s size should not be focused on avoiding debt at all costs—it should be focused on making the city a better place to live.
Bradley continues to frame this as a financial achievement, but what he doesn’t highlight is that we are sitting on massive reserves while basic amenities and infrastructure needs are left unaddressed. The city has over $47 million in reserves, a figure set to drop to $31.9 million in 2025 due to necessary spending2025-Proposed-Budgets-O…. Meanwhile, council continues to defer essential projects under the illusion that being “debt-free” is the goal.
Sarnia’s approach is an outlier. Every city of our size in Canada has an indoor recreation facility—except us. Our roads, parks, and public spaces remain underfunded, and large capital projects like waterfront improvements or a new multi-use recreation facility are left off the table. Even after thousands of residents supported an indoor rec centre years ago, Bradley continues to push this idea further down the road by warning that taking on debt would ruin our finances.
In reality, our debt capacity is $259.3 million, and our annual debt limit under provincial regulations is $37 million2025-Proposed-Budgets-O…. The idea that we cannot afford to take on debt for strategic infrastructure investments is simply false.
The mayor’s fixation on “debt-free” status is about political optics, not sound financial management. It gives the illusion of fiscal responsibility while the city stagnates. Instead of celebrating an arbitrary number on a balance sheet, we should be asking:
-
Why are we sitting on tens of millions in reserves while residents are left without basic amenities?
-
Why is Sarnia decades behind other cities in recreational infrastructure?
-
How much longer will this city let a debt-free slogan prevent us from making the investments we desperately need?
Being debt-free isn’t a strategy—it’s an excuse. A strong city isn’t one that avoids debt at all costs. It’s one that uses its financial tools responsibly to build a place where people want to stay, raise families, and invest in the future.
If Bradley wants a legacy, it shouldn’t be about avoiding debt. It should be about building something worth being proud of.