There has been a lot of sniping at city halls lately.

First, accusations have centered around local development charges and how much they add to the cost of housing. The second issue has been the time it takes city halls to approve developments for new homes.

New housing has been a central theme for city halls in the past several years, and billions of dollars have been invested in acquiring, servicing, and developing land for construction. For the first time in a long time, massive amounts of federal funding were made available to municipalities. Often there were conditions or targets, but money flowed to develop new housing.

Most of that cash went into preparing land for new homes and apartments. Streets. Sewers. Water. Lighting. Land for new schools and libraries. Storm water management ponds. And the other servicing costs for development.

Who pays how much varies widely across Canadian municipalities. Development charges have different names, but they all reflect the municipality's need to recover (most of) the costs of this fundamental step to create new housing.

The issue of who pays how much is always a challenge. The argument today is that these costs are adding dramatically to the affordability of new homes. Municipalities are accused of gouging, not playing fairly, and other concerns.

In some cases, the accusation may have legs.

However, the central question remains, who is paying for the up-front costs of servicing the land?

The answer, of course, as civic politicians have been saying for years, is that it cannot just be the local government.

The issue of red tape at city hall costing time and money most certainly is a legitimate complaint. Most city halls can move faster on issues, and land approvals are a good one to attack. Major developers in Canada usually plan ten-to-twenty years from when they first acquire property to finishing a new development and selling the houses. Those costs are baked into the final price of a new home.

Housing is a long-term issue. Home development is a significant economic player in any municipality. It attracts substantial employment. It spins millions of dollars for the local economy, including secondary and tertiary spending on things like home furnishings. It is an important consideration for attracting families. The price of housing is a concern for potential new residents.

At the same time, market forces far removed from municipal jurisdiction have a lasting effect on local housing: immigration levels, central bank rates, and international tariffs on construction equipment and supplies.

The sniping at city halls seems unhelpful as municipalities struggle to provide housing. Can local governments do better? Sure. But at the end of the day, somebody must pay to service raw land for housing.