Quebec to Pay Cities for School Land

Summary#

• This Quebec bill would pay local municipalities when they must give land, for free, to build or expand public schools, vocational centers, or adult education centers.

• It also pushes school projects to use land more efficiently by favoring higher-density designs, and gives cities more time to review school space plans.

• Key changes:

  • Municipalities could claim compensation from the provincial government equal to the land’s value on the municipal assessment roll.
  • School service centers must plan for “optimal use” of sites and prioritize higher density (for example, building up instead of out or sharing sites).
  • Municipalities get 60 days (up from 45) to give input on, and approve or refuse, a school space plan.
  • The Education Minister could cancel the requirement for a city to give land for free if the school plan does not prioritize higher density.
  • Other related payments are adjusted so cities do not get paid twice when they receive this compensation.
  • The bill confirms that cities keep their right to compensation even when other rules in the law apply.

What it means for you#

• Municipalities

  • You could be paid by the province for land you must transfer for a school, based on the property assessment roll.
  • You would have 60 days to study and respond to a school service center’s plan, giving more time to coordinate zoning, services, and public input.
  • You may need to work with denser school site designs (smaller footprints, taller buildings, or shared facilities).
  • Some other claims or payments tied to the same project would be reduced by the amount of compensation, to avoid double payment.

• School service centers

  • Your space plans must show you are using land efficiently and favoring higher-density options.
  • If you do not prioritize density, the Minister could remove the city’s obligation to give you land for free.
  • Timelines with municipalities extend to 60 days, which may add time to planning but can reduce later conflicts.

• Parents and students

  • New or expanded schools may be denser (more floors, smaller sites), and may share fields or facilities with other uses.
  • Slightly longer planning timelines could affect when projects move ahead, but may improve coordination with cities.

• Quebec taxpayers

  • Provincial spending would rise to cover compensation paid to municipalities.
  • Municipal budgets would avoid the hit of giving up valuable land without payment.

Expenses#

Estimated fiscal impact: No publicly available information.

Proponents’ View#

• This is fair to municipalities, which now lose valuable land when they must give it away for schools.
• Paying cities removes a barrier to building schools where they are needed and speeds land assembly.
• Requiring higher-density use makes better use of scarce urban land and can reduce sprawl.
• The added 15 days helps cities do proper analysis and public consultation, leading to fewer disputes later.
• Ministerial oversight ensures school plans actually follow the density-first rule.

Opponents’ View#

• It increases provincial costs, which could pressure the education or general budget.
• Longer timelines and extra reviews could delay school construction when classrooms are urgently needed.
• Using the assessment roll value may not match market value, leading to disputes over fairness for either the province or cities.
• A density-first rule might reduce room for green space, sports fields, or future expansion on school sites.
• The Minister’s power to cancel free land transfers could create uncertainty or politicize local school siting decisions.