Where I stand on Lambeth, Byron and other Ward 9 neighbourhoods
Here is every answer I've given on the record about Lambeth, Byron and other Ward 9 neighbourhoods, word for word, from candidate questionnaires and my replies to residents.
Don't see your question? Search below, or ask me directly and I'll answer it on the record.
Platform (ward9.online homepage)
Roads that actually move
When the arterials flow, your neighbourhood stays quiet. Wonderland, Wharncliffe, Commissioners, Colonel Talbot. The way Lambeth, Byron, and Riverbend get their streets back is by making sure those roads move vehicles quickly and efficiently, as designed. Every mobility vote gets the same test from me: does it get you where you need to go faster, or jam up traffic and push the spillover into someone’s neighbourhood?
London Decides 2026 questionnaire
Point us to one thing you have already done for people in London, before this campaign, that a reader could check and that shows how you would do this job. A web address is welcome.
Before I ran, I read the City's own Official Plan and used it. In June 2025, a developer proposed 31 townhouses on Lambeth's old McEachren school site, all its traffic routed through Marianna Drive's single access point, while Lambeth's one remaining public school is already capped and busing new kids out of the village. I wrote directly to Councillor Hopkins asking her to oppose the whole project, then sent a full written case at my Substack, built on the Plan's own commitments to safe, healthy neighbourhoods and real community engagement. She acknowledged the first email and never answered the second. She voted yes four and a half months later.
That's how I'd do the job: research, offer solutions, represent the will of Ward 9, and hold anyone to account who isn't doing what's best for residents.
Climate Action London questionnaire
Building height maximums as specified in the London Plan should be strictly adhered to as they represent comprehensive plans for the growth of the city taking into account utility demands, emergency services, mobility plans, and preserving neighbourhood character. Recently, council has been approving many developments that exceed both maximum heights and densities as per the London Plan. Given that place types such as downtown, transit villages and corridors and urban corridors already allow significant building heights to meet housing supply demands and intensification targets, individual exceptions should not be allowed but changes to these height and density maximums should only be addressed through official plan amendments.
Strongly agree. The London Plan already allows 45 storeys downtown and 35 in Transit Villages. Urban Corridors go to 15. Neighbourhood Connector streets are capped at 4. Height belongs where the pipes, roads, and emergency services are built for it.
Council has been granting site-specific exceptions that blow past those caps. On June 23, 2026, Council approved six storeys and 100 units per hectare for 3924, 4012 and 4050 Colonel Talbot Road in Lambeth, above the Southwest Area Secondary Plan's own cap of four storeys and 75 units per hectare. I filed a written objection before the vote, citing the specific policies it violated. Council approved the application anyway, and Ward 9's current councillor voted for it. The pattern repeats: Council approved 16 storeys a year earlier at 6309 Pack Road, against a 9-storey cap. That is the kind of exception I will vote against.
If the citywide height table needs to change, change the table through a proper Official Plan amendment, in public. Do not grant exceptions for specific applicants, especially when it has not been proven that the infrastructure is in place to handle such intensification, and when it is not in character with the surrounding neighbourhoods.
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
Traffic on Colonel Talbot & construction of stack and pack them that will ove...?
You're right to be fed up, and staff running the show is one of my biggest reasons for running. Too many decisions follow a staff recommendation over resident opposition and then get defended as inevitable. I want a council that sides with the people who live here instead of with someone in an office downtown.
I filed a written objection before the June 9 planning committee vote on 3924, 4012 and 4050 Colonel Talbot Road, and laid it out in full here: https://ward9.online/articles/3924-colonel-talbot/. It named missing transportation, servicing and stormwater studies, density and height above the Southwest Area Secondary Plan cap, no secured school site, and no recorded consultation. Council approved it on June 23 anyway, and our current councillor voted for it.
I also objected to the 4402 Colonel Talbot rezoning on the old McEachren school site, which asked for 40 units per hectare against a cap of 30. I first wrote about it in June 2025 (https://millartime.substack.com/p/the-proposed-4402-colonel-talbot), and council approved it unanimously in November 2025. What happened after is here: https://ward9.online/articles/4402-colonel-talbot/. The decisions are final, deaf to the objections of area residents.
As councillor, I would oppose developments of this density in our neighbourhoods, full-stop. And for all developments, I would require necessary infrastructure be in place or guaranteed in writing, with stiff penalties for non-compliance, before any approval.
It's also a travesty what was done on Colonel Talbot Road North. Years of construction, and who knows how many tax dollars, only for traffic to move even slower and get more congested. My aim is not to force Londoners to hit some unrealistic target of bicycles and buses that nobody asked for, but to make London adapt to the way Londoners want to live. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-16.)
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
Making it easier to build more homes and allowing more density?
We both want young people to have a realistic opportunity to afford a home in the communities where they want to build their lives. We also want to make it easier to build homes, and add more density near transit and local shops. And a project that meets clear zoning rules should be able to proceed without a long rezoning fight. That's what the London Plan is meant to deliver: predictability for neighbours and builders alike.
Here are my thoughts. The City is rewriting its zoning by-law right now, with public input this fall and a final version going to the next council. I'd ask staff to report how many ordinary projects can go ahead today without a variance or rezoning, set a target to raise that number so fewer projects need exceptions, and publish the results every year along with approval times. When a rule keeps being overridden, there is either a problem with the system, or with the rule itself. I'd also look at the whole approval pile, because a builder faces site plan and servicing review as well as zoning, and cutting one layer doesn't help if the same question gets asked again at the next. Pre-approved designs for common house types would help a small builder too, so they don't need a paperwork department.
As for increasing density in existing neighbourhoods, picture the day a young family gets the keys to their first home in Byron. What do you want them to see out the front window?
People want to live in communities like Byron and Lambeth because of the tree-lined streets, the grassy yards, and the friendly neighbourhood atmosphere.
Now picture the house next door with four households living on a lot with a smaller yard, cars overflowing driveways onto the streets, constant traffic, and kids being bussed off to distant schools because the ones in their own backyard are over capacity. The City's changes to the London Plan already allow up to four units on a property. Keep adding density to every desirable place and, sooner or later, it stops being the place people wanted to call home.
I support the balance of maintaining the character of existing neighbourhoods, making new development faster and easier where infrastructure supports it, larger buildings along main roads and at key intersections, and intensification closer to the core. Build where the roads, transit, and services are ready for more people. That way we add homes while keeping what drew people here in the first place. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-21.)
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
Why did council approve the Boler Road and Byron Baseline development with only one parking space per unit?
I looked at the actual numbers before replying. The city's report on 415-421 Boler at Byron Baseline lists 62 units and 63 parking spaces, 42 on the surface and 21 built into the first floor. That's barely more than one space per unit, with almost nothing left for visitors. The zoning bylaw does only require 0.5 spaces per unit for a building like this, so on paper the developer cleared the bar easily, but I think that bar is set too low. Housing developments should carry at least one space per unit plus real visitor parking, and 63 spaces for 62 units doesn't cut it. You're also pointing at something bigger than the parking count: council approving a project that residents who already live there don't agree with. The London Plan is supposed to require new buildings to fit the neighbourhood before approval. And the residents are the most important part of every neighbourhood. Housing targets come from the province, not city council, but what I can do is have a say into how London applies its own rules to a corner like Boler and Byron Baseline, and I'd rather see a real parking standard, development the neighbourhood can actually accommodate, and something the people who already live there can feel good about. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-8.)
Vote Compass candidate questionnaire
London should encourage more multi-unit housing in neighbourhoods that are currently made up mostly of single-family homes.
Strongly disagree. Many of London's neighbourhoods, Lambeth being a prime example, built their appeal over decades: quiet streets, small-town feel, and the kind of trust where people know each other. That character is worth protecting. London has areas suited to high-density, multi-unit housing. Established single-family neighbourhoods aren't them. Pushing high density where residents expect the opposite, in the name of growth targets, is an assault on their home and sense of belonging. This isn't anti-growth. It's growth in the right place, not growth crammed onto people who never asked for it.
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
Will you help restore school bus service on Byron Baseline Road, including for after-school activities?
I get the frustration here, but day-to-day routing is run by Southwestern Ontario Student Transportation Services, the group behind the yellow buses for TVDSB, and a city councillor has no vote on that. Our area's elected trustees are Beth Mai and Sherri Moore, covering wards 7, 8, 9, 10, and 13. One thing worth knowing: TVDSB has been under a provincially appointed supervisor since last year, so trustees aren't currently voting on board policy the way they normally would. The most direct path for a policy gap like the after-practice bus issue right now is TVDSB's own transportation office. It's still worth copying both trustees, since trustees keep hearing from residents and can push things along even without a formal vote. Happy to help you find contact info for all of them. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-7.)
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
You're asking Londoners to vote you into a significant leadership role that will shape our community. What have you done to earn that job?
Being a city councillor isn't something you earn by jumping through the right hoops and checking the right boxes. It's up to voters to decide who has the wisdom needed to guide the city along the correct path, the skills and determination to execute, and the principles necessary to stay on course. We candidates are all here to help guide that decision.
I've lived my entire life on the farm, so I'm no stranger to dealing with variables completely out of my control, knowing that nobody will be coming to bail me out. When a farmer does something wrong, we feel the consequences immediately, and we're the ones that will be cleaning up the mess. We're also used to working on a shoestring budget, and stretching every dollar.
That is the mindset I'll bring to council, along with my background in tech. I've used my website, ward9.online, as a pilot project for novel ideas to keep Londoners connected with the political process, including a concern tracker to let me know about important issues and get my response, a promise tracker to hold me accountable, and an open-source proposed bylaw tying council pay to property tax rates that anyone can provide input to help shape. I've also provided researched, sourced arguments, based on the London Plan, against developments in the Lambeth area when residents were organizing in opposition. Unfortunately, they fell on deaf ears.
But you can be sure that a vote for me is a vote for someone ready to dig in and read the reports, ask the hard questions, account for every dollar, and stand with voters over the recommendations of City Staff, or special interests.
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
Evening and weekend transit service for Upperpoint/Riverbend?
What your son goes through, spending six hours of his day getting to and from a math class at Western, is the kind of thing a transit plan should be built to prevent.
I looked into what LTC has already said about your neighbourhood. They've flagged Kains Road and Upperpoint Boulevard as growing with serious gaps in service, and Route 22 is meant to fix that with 30-minute service at weekday and Saturday peaks and 35 to 40 minutes on evenings and Sundays. That's a concrete plan, but plans don't help anyone until they materialize into actual results.
The easy thing to do would be to promise you everything you asked for, but that wouldn't be honest. Council doesn't set LTC's routes or schedules directly, and adding on to 17B means new ongoing operating hours with no funding source attached.
What I can commit to, if elected, is raising this directly with the LTC Commission, with three specific asks: prioritize the Kains/Upperpoint piece of Route 22 (LTC's own numbers put it at one peak bus and about 2,000 service hours a year, a small piece to move up), look at whether a smaller interim shuttle could bridge the gap until Route 22 is running, and pay for either option out of the growth-related revenue that new development in a growing area like yours already generates, rather than the general tax base. Growth should fund the infrastructure it requires, everywhere in the ward.
I've also posted this as a public commitment at https://ward9.online/promises/#ltc-transit-priority, so it's on the record.
This is what I can actually stand behind as a city council candidate, and I'd rather give you that than an empty promise. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-15.)
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
As the city grows, how do you see active transportation (cycling networks, sidewalks, transit connections) fitting into your broader vision for the ward, including its role in reducing congestion and supporting the environment and downtown vibrancy?
Active transportation should give residents practical choices without pretending every trip in Ward 9 looks the same, or works the same for everyone.
For most, that's a reliable arterial for getting across the city, and for others it's a safe sidewalk to school or a cycling link that connects to somewhere useful, and Ward 9 needs all of it working at once.
Dense short-trip areas can support walking, cycling, and frequent transit more easily than longer winter trips with groceries or gear, or more rural or outlying areas.
I'd support projects that close existing gaps and keep cut-through traffic off neighbourhood streets, because a network only works if people can trust it to get them where they're going safely and practically.
London Free Press candidate survey
What sets you apart from other candidates?
I've lived on the same Ward 9 property my whole life, as a family farmer and tech professional.
Specific to this election, I've actually drafted a bylaw that I intend to introduce if elected. The PACT bylaw is on GitHub for anyone to read, version by version, before they decide whether to support it. I also built a public tracker at ward9.online asking every council and mayoral candidate in London, not just Ward 9, to put their position on PACT on the record.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
London City Council has just adopted a new 10-year Downtown Plan and a new Economic Development Strategy. Both identify downtown as an important component of London's economic future. At the same time, downtown investment is likely to be a significant issue in this election, with some Londoners calling for continued investment and others questioning whether downtown receives too much of the City's attention and resources. What role should downtown play in London's future, and how would you rank downtown revitalization among your priorities as an elected official?
Downtown should be a thriving part of the city where people can do business, live, and enjoy entertainment while feeling safe and secure. Downtown matters the way every part of London does.
But I'm running to represent Ward 9, and when downtown's priorities compete with Ward 9's roads, parks, and services for the same attention and the same dollars, I'll always lean the same direction. While every area matters in this city, a councillor's job is to prioritize their own ward.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
How would you make it easier for Londoners to understand what council is deciding, why those decisions are being made, and how residents can meaningfully influence them before a final vote? How do we cut through procedure and jargon and be clear?
Put the explanation where residents already look, use ordinary language, and give them enough notice to act.
Every major proposal should have a one-page summary, a clear deadline, an accessible online comment path, and an in-person option for people who can't use the online system.
Public input should be summarized for council, including the concerns that were not adopted. Engagement is meaningful when residents can see both how their input changed a proposal, and why it did not.
I've already built a simple concern tracker for Ward 9 on my own website, where residents can write in and see my response posted publicly. What I'd like to build as councillor goes further: an official city platform with verified, and optionally anonymized, resident accounts, closer to a dedicated Ward 9 forum, eventually citywide, where residents can engage directly with council and each other on what's actually being decided.
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
Protecting farmland and agricultural use on Woodhull Road?
We had our own struggle with a zoning change here on Longwoods Road, but it wasn't quite the same situation.
Your case is a tricky one. As a generational farmer, I know how much of a farm family's life is tied up in the land. And I'm also a strong proponent of personal property rights, so when it comes to that time, and a farmer needs to sell to fund their retirement, they need to have that option. But the key here is the zoning. What a city councillor can do is make sure the rules that protect a rural community get followed.
Here's my understanding of the situation: Council adopted the urban growth boundary expansion last December, and Woodhull Road is in it. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (provincial) gives the final approval, and as of this week, the Ontario registry still showed it before the Minister. The expansion amends the official plan, and zoning is a separate by-law. Nothing can be built that the zoning doesn't allow, so anyone who wants to build something contrary to the zoning has to apply for a rezoning, and council can only approve a rezoning that the official plan permits. The expansion opens the door to those rezoning requests, but each one still needs its own vote at council. That vote is where our voices count now.
But I need to be up-front about the limits. A councillor has one vote on a council of fifteen. I can't approve or refuse a rezoning on my own, and the final approval of the expansion sits with the provincial Minister. And, as you know all too well, once a developer appeals, the odds are against residents. The Auditor General of Ontario found the tribunal allowed about 90% of the proposed developments appealed to it.
According to the tribunal's August 2025 decision on the small-lot house by the Dingman Creek corridor, city staff had recommended approval, council refused it anyway, and the tribunal allowed the developer's appeal after finding it met the provincial and London Plan tests. So, any arguments I'd make would be based on these plans. You can see one such argument I've made here: https://millartime.substack.com/p/the-proposed-4402-colonel-talbot (which was sent to our current councillor and ultimately ignored).
If I'm elected, I'd move a motion asking staff to report on what a rezoning here would do to the properties and farms around it, and I'd push to have that report public before any rezoning request near us goes to a planning meeting, to use as support for keeping prime farmland for agricultural use. Since 2024, neighbours generally can't start an appeal themselves, so I'd be at the planning committee whenever this area is on the agenda, and I'd help get your concerns on the record, in writing and in person, before the vote. And if council refuses a rezoning and the developer appeals, I'd push for council to gather planning and agricultural evidence to defend the decision. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-20.)
Hikma Public Affairs Council candidate statement
Hikma Public Affairs Council candidate statement
I'm Matt Millar, a third-generation farmer and an IT specialist, and I've lived in Ward 9 my whole life.
I'm running for council in Ward 9 because City Hall keeps raising property taxes faster than most families' paycheques grow, and I won't vote for another increase during my term, for any reason. And I drafted the proposed Pay Accountable to City Taxpayers (PACT) bylaw to tie City Council pay to our property taxes.
I want to make it faster and cheaper to build housing here, so families aren't priced out of their own neighbourhoods.
I believe every law-abiding Londoner deserves to be safe and protected, especially in the place they call home.
My website ward9.online is where you can learn more about me or ask me questions on the record, and I'm always glad to hear from residents directly.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Beyond elections and formal public meetings, how should City Hall engage with London residents, particularly people who do not normally participate in municipal processes?
People who don't normally participate mostly assume the decision's already made and their input won't have any effect.
The way to change that is to make the connection between input and outcome visible and specific. My Ward 9 concern tracker already does this: residents write in, and my response goes up publicly, so nobody's left wondering whether it landed.
But not everyone will use an online option no matter how well it's built, so we still need a real in-person option too, accessible to those who need it, like a library or community centre, and at times that actually work for people.
Whichever method someone chooses, they should be able to point to the result and say, "that happened because I got involved."
London and District Labour Council questionnaire
Do you pledge to run an ethical and principled campaign? Is there anyone that you would not accept campaign contributions from?
Of course I pledge to run an ethical and principled campaign. Every contribution to this campaign is tracked and reported under the rules that govern municipal campaign finance, and I will stay well within those bounds. There are other candidates with big money behind them. I am grateful for every dollar that comes in from my grassroots supporters.
Further, my principles and priorities are already public, on the record before a single dollar came in. Anyone who gives to my campaign should give with that knowledge: my position was set based on my own principles and what I believe is best for Ward 9, and it won't move because of any contribution. I'll put every dollar to work getting my message out to voters for the benefit of Ward 9, and London as a whole.
Platform (ward9.online homepage)
Safe at home
Overnight break-ins keep happening in Ward 9. But a councillor can’t assign patrol cars. What a councillor can do, though, is two real things: fight for police resources that match the documented break-in pattern, and push council’s Police Service Board appointees to make recurring hotspots a strategic priority for the Service.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Implementing the Downtown Plan will require Council to make choices about future municipal investment. When downtown investment competes with other priorities across London, do you believe downtown should continue to be a City-wide investment priority? Why or why not? If YES: What would you be prepared to prioritize or fund? If NO: What should take priority instead? If IT DEPENDS: What would your decision depend on?
I won't prioritize downtown to the detriment of the rest of the city, but we shouldn't neglect it either.
Council endorsed a roadmap: a new downtown office, upgrades to Victoria Park, Ivey Park, and Covent Garden Market, a river district at the Forks of the Thames, and more branding around the City of Music title. But endorsing that roadmap isn't the same as funding it. The City's own account says the roughly $48 million it would take gets decided later, through the next strategic plan and the next multi-year budget.
A park upgrade, a new office, or self-promotion shouldn't take priority over essential infrastructure or emergency services.
Downtown definitely needs attention, but my priority will always be Ward 9, and essential services and infrastructure come first.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Past members of London City Council have described the position of councillor as extremely demanding and requiring significant personal sacrifice. The most recent Resourcing Review Task Force found councillors work an average of more than 50 hours per week, including constituent correspondence, extensive meeting preparation, council and committee work, and frequent evening and weekend community events. With this in mind, why do you want to serve as a city councillor?
A 50 hour week would be a nice relaxing pace compared to a hectic harvest season. But it's not so much that I want to inject myself straight into the vipers' nest, where the status quo is designed to stifle people like me, who aren't out to make friends, and aren't there to go along to get along. I feel duty-bound to give Ward 9 a representative who will speak loudly on their behalf, look out for their best interests, and give them a clear window into what's really happening behind the scenes. No more folding to city staff. No more approving of projects because that's what City Hall wants. No more voting for a pay raise and raising taxes at the same time. If the community has an objection, it's my job to make it known.
Climate Action London questionnaire
The City of London should establish more aggressive 2050 mode share targets when they are next reviewed in 2028. It is important that the City move toward more daily trips by walking, cycling and transit given an increasing population, London's GHG emissions slightly increasing and drastically missing CEAP targets and an increasing number of High Density and Medium Density residential buildings. It makes life more affordable for all Londoners.
Strongly disagree. In April 2024 the City set a Mobility Master Plan target of 32.5 percent or more of trips by walking, cycling, and transit by 2050, up from about 23 percent. That target is already being used to justify citywide bike-lane programs, lane takeaways, and 20-year mode-share math as a reason to overrule how people actually travel.
Downtown and other short-trip areas can support walking, cycling, and frequent transit. Ward 9 distances, winter, and ordinary trips with groceries or gear do not. London's winters rule out cycling as a serious year-round option for most people making the kind of trips Ward 9 residents actually need to make.
I will judge each project on its own street, its safety record, its effect on arterial flow, and how people actually want to travel, not how the government wants them to travel. I will not vote for a still-higher 2050 target in 2028 as a substitute for that judgment.
CCAL (Concerned Citizens Association of London) questionnaire
Londoners have watched elected officials override the clearly expressed will of voters on major projects. Council ignored the public vote against the BRT, and the city is now on the hook for a bus rapid transit system that has ballooned to $454 million — up more than 50% from the original estimate, with the local taxpayer share nearly tripling. The costly bike-lane network followed the same pattern.
Will you commit to following the clearly expressed will of voters on major projects — even when it conflicts with activist pressure — and how will you determine what the majority of your ward actually wants, rather than listening only to the loudest voices?
That is my main goal. I opposed the BRT back in 2018 before it started ballooning past what residents were told to expect. Council voted it through anyway on its own authority, despite widespread public opposition. I've also presented arguments, based on the London Plan, opposing high-density developments that are unsuitable and unwanted in Ward 9.
I built ward9.online with a public concern tracker so residents can write in and see my answer go up publicly. I draft policy the same way: my proposed PACT bylaw has been open on GitHub since day one, allowing anyone to see the entire history and suggest changes.
If elected, I'd like to build an official version of the concern tracker, with verified-resident logins (allowing optional anonymity). Activist groups can organize and lobby all they want, but I represent Ward 9 residents. Not activists.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Affordable space for creating, rehearsing, performing and exhibiting remains a significant issue for artists and cultural organizations. What role, if any, should the City play in making affordable cultural spaces available?
Public space should be available to Londoners for the uses they need, at a price the City can sustain without overburdening taxpayers.
That can mean identifying underused City space, clear lease terms, and planning rules that make adaptive reuse easier. It doesn't mean the City becomes the landlord for every group that wants a room, or locking in subsidies with no review date.
London Professional Fire Fighters Association Election Survey
What do you believe are the most significant challenges currently facing the London Fire Department?
In my view, the biggest challenge facing London Fire right now is probably keeping pace with growth. Ward 9, and London as a whole, is adding new structures fast, and I think call volume and response-times are going to keep climbing before the city's capital planning catches up with your needs.
I'd also suspect recruitment and retention. The job is tough, you're competing for skilled people in a tight labour market, and I think that pressure is only going to grow.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
How would you ensure that municipal cultural investments, programs, and decision-making processes are inclusive and accessible for Indigenous, Black, newcomer, disabled, and other equity-deserving artists and communities? What role should reconciliation play in London's cultural development?
Public venues and programs should be equally accessible to every member of the public. That means fixing barriers anyone can hit: inaccessible buildings, tangled applications, and grant information people can't find. One standard, applied the same way.
On reconciliation, London should comply with the obligations it has already committed to. Finish the metrics and timeline on the ReconciliAction Plan, and report progress in public.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
What do you think London City Council needs to do differently over the next term to improve public awareness of how decisions are made at City Hall?
Council should publish a plain-language decision brief before every major vote. It should state the problem, the options, the full cost, who has authority, what staff recommended, and how residents can provide input before the decision.
After the vote, the same page should show the final decision and each councillor's comments and vote. Residents shouldn't need to watch hours of council video or decode a staff report to understand a decision that affects their home or neighbourhood.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Residents expect reliable municipal services while facing increasing household costs. How would you balance maintaining services and infrastructure with keeping property-tax increases affordable? Are there areas where London should spend more, or spend less?
Start with the service level residents actually need, then fund it honestly over the asset's full life. Roads, bridges, water, sewers, fire, police, waste collection, and transit reliability deserve priority. New amenities and expansion should wait when the City cannot maintain what it already has without repeated tax pressure. Affordability isn't achieved by deferring maintenance until the bill is larger. It's achieved by prioritizing early, publishing the trade-offs, and refusing commitments without a durable funding plan.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Some residents feel cycling infrastructure gets built at the expense of other priorities, while others feel it's chronically underfunded. How would you approach funding decisions around transportation relative to other infrastructure needs?
Some people say active transportation crowds out other priorities; others say it's starved. Both of those complaints can be true at once.
Transportation should sit among the City's highest infrastructure priorities, because if people can't move, nothing else works. But the dollars still have to compete in public with water, sewers, bridges, and the rest of the capital plan.
That fight should run on evidence, lifecycle cost, and a published ranked list.
I'd fund what matches how Londoners actually travel and how they want to travel.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Many of London's cultural facilities, creative spaces, and heritage assets face aging infrastructure, affordability pressures, or capacity challenges. What are your priorities for maintaining, improving, and expanding cultural infrastructure across the city?
Start with a condition and lifecycle-cost inventory of every cultural facility the City owns or funds. Rank them by safety, how much the public uses them, heritage value, and what it actually costs to keep the doors open. If a building has a public purpose and a plan London can sustain, keep it. If it can't be maintained, council should say so early instead of letting a structural failure decide years later, and look at shared, adaptive, or partnership models before it becomes a crisis. Waiting on a hard decision almost always makes the bill bigger.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
On May 13, 2025, The City of London approved the ReconciliAction Plan intended to guide the City's actions over the next decade towards truth, justice, and reconciliation by supporting the implementation of the Calls to Action. What specific action(s) will you prioritize to move forward? How will you do this?
London should comply with the obligations it has already committed to, and I won't push for more on top of that.
Council approved a ten-year, 155-action plan in May 2025, and the metrics and timeline for those commitments are still being developed.
Finish that accountability work so the public can see what's complete or delayed, and what the true cost is.
Anything still open to change gets examined against an equal-treatment and taxpayer burden standard, with results reported in public.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
At a time when municipalities face significant pressures around housing, homelessness, infrastructure and affordability, why should, or shouldn't, the City continue investing public money in arts and culture?
I'd support investing public money in arts and culture when it earns its place. Housing, homelessness, infrastructure, and affordability come first.
A city needs more than emergency response, but every cultural dollar still has to face an honest public test.
Cultural spending can support local jobs and downtown activity when the benefit is measurable, but no line item gets automatic protection just because it makes a good sound-bite.
I'd require a public-purpose test and a measurable return for every cultural dollar. When those are transparent, a focused cultural investment can still clear the bar without jumping the line ahead of housing, and without burdening the taxpayer.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
What is one thing the City currently spends money on that you believe should receive less funding, and where would you redirect that money?
I wouldn't name a program for a cut without first seeing its service results, legal obligations, and alternatives.
I would reduce funding for activities that can't show a clear public benefit or measurable outcome, beginning with discretionary initiatives rather than core safety, roads, water, transit, libraries, or emergency services.
Any redirected money should be aimed first at renewal of existing infrastructure, and relief from the tax levy for taxpayers. The principle is simple: fund necessities, measure discretionary spending, and stop paying for work that can't show what residents received. The difficult part is forcing the necessary transparency at City Hall to make the correct decisions, but I believe it can be done, with the right leadership.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
London is a UNESCO City of Music. Do you think the city has taken full advantage of that designation? If not, what would you like to see London do with it over the next four years?
A UNESCO title on letterhead doesn't build a music scene. The people who write, play, book, and fill the rooms do that.
London can facilitate and assist where it's sustainable and not a burden on taxpayers: clearer rules, faster permits for venues and events, and a light touch that gets out of the way. If a partnership has an honest cost up front and doesn't grow bureaucracy, I'll look at it. If it's mainly a way to wave the designation around, I won't.
Over the next four years I want that title tied to what artists and venues get done, with results residents can see.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Voter turnout in municipal elections remains low, and many Londoners appear increasingly disengaged from municipal politics. What do you think is driving that disengagement, and what would you do as a councillor to help rebuild public interest and trust in City Hall?
People lose interest when their input disappears into a murky void, or when they feel that the outcome was already decided before the process ever began.
Trust and engagement comes back when residents can see what was proposed, what staff recommended, what changed, how each councillor voted, and that their input had a real impact. I would publish plain-language ward updates, build a system for residents to voice their concerns and see my responses, and hold me to my word. I might try, but I can't make everyone agree with me. What I can do is make the process clear enough that people know that their participation matters.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
How can London improve public safety while also supporting people experiencing homelessness?
Public safety is the most important thing a city government does. Everything else council debates matters less if people don't feel safe walking through their own neighbourhood.
That starts with a simple line I won't blur: breaking the law shouldn't get a pass. Period. Theft, violence, trespassing, open drug use in public spaces, none of that is acceptable, no matter the circumstances of the perpetrator. I expect that to be enforced consistently.
At the same time, help should go to people who actually want and need it. Outreach and health teams should be there for someone ready to take housing, treatment, or support, and council's job is to fund that system and make sure it works. But help isn't a blank cheque, and it isn't a substitute for consequences when someone breaks the law.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Many residents say they'd like to cycle or walk more but don't feel safe doing so on our streets. What specific steps would you take in your first term to improve safety for people getting around without a car?
Everything has a price tag, so the benefit has to at least match the cost.
I'd start with a ward-wide gap and hazard list built from collision data, school and transit connections, accessibility concerns, and what residents themselves report.
I'd fix the highest-risk areas and the missing links first, keep them maintained, and inspect the result once construction is done.
A route people can't safely reach or safely cross isn't connected, so the first dollars go where the risk and the daily trips already are. Success would show visible, ranked improvements on the ground.
Writing more lines on a plan without that work doesn't make anyone safer.
London Professional Fire Fighters Association Election Survey
When Council considers investments in fire protection, what factors should determine appropriate firefighter staffing, apparatus and station infrastructure?
I think the biggest factor should be actual demand. That means looking at population growth, call volume, and response-time data by area, instead of relying on historical allocation or whichever part of the city has always gotten attention. If Ward 9 and other growing areas are seeing more calls and slower response coverage, that should show up directly in where new stations, apparatus, and staffing get prioritized.
I also think council needs to look at whether a dollar spent gets the most protection for the community, which means being open to shared-facility or co-located models where it makes sense. And staffing decisions should be driven by actual workload and safe response levels.
I don't think fire protection is a place to cut corners to save money, but I also think every dollar needs to be justified by what it actually buys in coverage and safety, not by tradition or politics.
*Section 4 — Labour Relations & Accountability*
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
London must maintain roads, bridges, water and wastewater systems and other municipal assets. What infrastructure investments should be Council's highest priorities over the next four years, and how would you decide what gets funded now, what can wait, and how it should be paid for?
The first priority is renewal of existing roads, bridges, water, sewer, and drainage infrastructure, with projects ranked by condition and risk.
The second is transportation capacity and safety on the arterial network, especially where traffic is pushed into neighbourhood streets.
Finally, we should look seriously at a ring road, or some other solution to get drivers from one end of the city faster. With all of the new development in the West end, Westdel Bourne seems like a prime candidate for improvement. And not to put in fancy curbs, wide boulevards, and drop the speed limit.
I would decide now, on projects with clear safety, condition, or capacity evidence. Projects that depend on uncertain growth or lack full lifecycle costing should wait until the evidence and funding are ready.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Council is regularly required to balance competing priorities and limited municipal resources. What principles would guide your decisions about what the City of London should fund, what it should reduce, and what it should stop doing? What does fiscal prudence mean to you?
First, protect life, safety, and the services people cannot reasonably provide for themselves.
Second, maintain assets the City already owns before adding new commitments.
Third, require a clear public benefit, full lifecycle cost, and measurable result.
Fourth, identify who has jurisdiction and use outside funding only when it doesn't create an unfunded municipal obligation.
If a program can't meet those tests, council should reduce it, redesign it, or stop it altogether.
Fiscal prudence, to me, is being a good steward of the fruits of Londoners' labour. Never ask taxpayers for more before proving you've made the most of what they already gave you. And never ask residents to sacrifice unless you're willing to sacrifice more yourself, and that's exactly what my PACT bylaw makes unavoidable.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
What will you do to respond to the businesses and residents impacted by homelessness in their neighbourhoods?
Communication is the easy part. A contact number and a follow-up email don't fix anything on their own, and residents and business owners in this city have had enough studies and plans thrown at them. They're right to expect more than that. They expect the problem in their backyard or in front of their store to actually get resolved.
So here's what that means in practice. Every resident report should get a clear contact path and a real response time, as the bare minimum starting point. Behind that has to be actual outreach and enforcement, whichever the situation calls for, and a public record of whether the problem was resolved or not. If the same corner shows up on a list month after month with nothing changing, that's a process failure.
The success metric Londoners care about is whether a person got help and whether the sidewalk in front of that business is actually safe and usable again.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Arts and culture contribute to London's economy, downtown vitality, tourism, and civic identity. What specific policies or investments would you support to strengthen the cultural sector as a driver of economic development, talent attraction, and placemaking?
Culture can mean jobs, busy downtown nights, and a reason people stay in London. If it's a net benefit, and we can afford it, it would be worth considering. But I'd treat culture the same way I treat every other line in the budget: show me the objective, the cost, and the result.
It's important to keep grant programs arm's-length and transparent, so residents can see who gets funded and why, and we can support affordable venues and creative space through planning rules the City already controls.
Placemaking works when it's tied to a downtown or neighbourhood plan with a cost attached. It fails when it runs on the assumption that culture pays for itself. A cultural sector that attracts talent and visitors is worth supporting when we can see tangible results for the taxpayer dollars spent on it.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Cycling infrastructure is currently patchy or incomplete in places. What would you prioritize to make active transportation (cycling, walking, mobility devices) safer and more connected, and how would you balance that against concerns from residents and businesses about parking and traffic flow?
We need to plan around how Londoners actually travel. Council's Mobility Master Plan targets walking, cycling, and transit rising from about 23% of trips to 32.5% or more by 2050, with personal-vehicle driving falling from 61% to 52.5%. Most trips today still rely on cars, so I'd judge every project against how people move now and want to move in the future, not against some dreamed up target.
I want to get the arterials moving, protect neighbourhood streets, and put the investment where people will use it. I'd advocate for cycling infrastructure that's safe and connected, and focused where cycling is already a practical way to get around.
Londoners are tired of staring at empty bike and bus lanes while they're stuck in gridlock and can't find a place to park.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
The Downtown Plan contains 58 actions, some of which will require new or additional municipal investment. If elected, would you support allocating additional City resources to implement the Downtown Plan? If YES: What types of investments would you prioritize? If NO: Which elements of the Plan would you not support?
I'm not comfortable giving a blanket yes or no answer to a question with so many unknown variables. It depends on the action, and the cost.
I'd prioritize the investments with a direct, measurable public benefit: safety and enforcement in the core, and cleaning and beautification that keeps the area inviting and enjoyable. Those pay for themselves in results people can experience.
What I wouldn't support is open-ended spending on things like programming and promotion, projection art, self-guided tours, late-night bus pilots, more branding for the City of Music designation, that are competing for the same dollars as core services with no way to measure what they bought.
The Downtown Plan is a roadmap, but that doesn't warrant a blank check. Every dollar allocated should be done based on merit.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
We have seen more incidents of flooding, extreme heat and wildfire smoke in London in the last few years, and the need to adapt to a changing climate. What do you see as the most important climate-related action that you would support if you were elected and how do you envision funding it?
Protect people from the risks that are already here: flooding, extreme heat, and wildfire smoke.
The City's own 2024 progress report puts community emissions 22 percent below 2005 levels, with the 2030 target at 55 percent below.
I'm not willing to subject Londoners to undue financial hardship to hit an arbitrary target.
I won't put more money into climate programs on the strength of an emergency label alone.
The Climate Change Reserve Fund held about $1.19 million at the end of 2024, with only about $225,000 reaching a project and the rest sitting unallocated.
Keep core infrastructure reliable through the capital plan and partnerships where they're available, with the full cost published before any vote. All spending has to pass the same evidence, lifecycle-cost, and result test.
CCAL (Concerned Citizens Association of London) questionnaire
A city cannot function without public order. Police are increasingly forced to deal with "revolving door" criminals and "free of fear" policies that may hide offenders rather than hold them accountable.
How do you think policing can be made more effective while dealing with "revolving door" criminals and "free of fear" policies that hide offenders?
The revolving door for repeat offenders comes from bail, sentencing, and Crown discretion, which are all provincial and federal matters.
Council does control the City's Free of Fear Services for All Policy, which blocks staff from reporting a resident's immigration status to police or CBSA. I oppose selective enforcement of any law. If there is a problem with a law on the books, the law should be amended. Until that happens, the law must be enforced.
To me, "free of fear" should be the natural state for law-abiding Londoners in their communities. Unfortunately, many don't even feel safe in their own homes. My main law and order concern is ensuring police have the will and capacity to act on pervasive and ongoing crime affecting Ward 9 residents, like frequent overnight break-ins. I will also push our four of seven Police Services Board appointees to make recurring hotspots a stated priority.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
How do you balance the needs of people experiencing homelessness with the concerns of residents and businesses?
Everyone deserves dignity.
Residents and businesses deserve safe, usable public spaces too, and those two things aren't in conflict when the system actually works.
London already runs a Coordinated Informed Response team, made up of City staff, London Police, and London Cares, that's on the street every day. The City calls this a caring, compassionate approach, but homelessness and related issues are still one of the biggest concerns Londoners have.
Council also endorsed a full Community Encampment Plan back in June 2024, including a rapid forced closure protocol for situations that need one, but as of the City's own documents, it still hasn't been fully operationalized. That gap between the vote and the follow-through is a serious problem.
The City runs monthly dashboards tracking shelters, encampments, and its Highly Supportive Housing program. I'd hold the city to actually using that data, and changing course where the current approach clearly isn't working.
Supported housing has to come with real conditions. If the City is putting people into housing, that housing needs to stay safe and free of drugs and other illegal activity, for the well-being of both the people living there and for the neighbours around it.
CCAL (Concerned Citizens Association of London) questionnaire
London has signed onto international frameworks — the Global Covenant of Mayors, UN-aligned "human rights" initiatives, and global NGO agendas — that impose obligations, reporting burdens, and data-sharing commitments on the city without any mandate from local voters. These commitments are made by staff and a handful of councillors, then treated as binding on everyone.
How will you ensure that offshore-funded groups do not exert undue influence over London's budget, the privacy of residents' data, or commitments that conflict with Canadian law — and that they cannot bypass local control through well-organized campaigns such as the highly controversial "Climate Emergency"? And will you support withdrawing from organizations that push agendas contrary to Londoners' expressed wishes?
Londoners decide for London. I will reject outright any attempt by offshore-funded groups, international frameworks, or global NGO campaigns to steer our budget, grab residents' data, or lock the City into commitments that conflict with Canadian law. Labels like a "climate emergency" do not get a free pass on spending or policy. Every dollar and every data share still needs a local case, a cost, and a benefit to Ward 9 residents and all Londoners.
I will also support withdrawing from organizations that push agendas contrary to what Londoners have asked for. If a membership mainly exports decision-making and reporting burdens while importing priorities set somewhere else, it does not belong. Local control is not optional.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
What is your plan to reduce homelessness in London over the next four years?
Asking a city councillor for a plan to end homelessness is like asking a farmer for a plan to end world hunger. It's bigger than any one plan, any one seat, or even an entire city.
What a councillor can actually do is make sure London's own effort is honest. And that starts with real targets: shelter exits, supportive housing placements, and repeat homelessness, tracked and published every quarter so residents can see whether the number is moving or not.
It means directing resources where they actually work: prevention, rapid connections to permanent housing, and coordinated health and outreach services.
And it means council actually using the money as leverage: tie funding to results, and correct course or pull it when something isn't working.
That has to include holding supported housing itself to a standard. If the City is putting people into housing, that housing has to stay safe and free of drugs and other illegal activity, for the people living there and for their neighbours.
I can't tell you a councillor ends homelessness in four years, but I can tell you what an honest four years of trying actually looks like: targets you can check, results you can see, and a councillor willing to say when something isn't working instead of throwing more money at it.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Bad faith renovictions by landlords have resulted in tenants being evicted from their rental homes. In 2025 council approved a Rental Unit Repair Bylaw. Is it enough? What else can London do to address this issue?
London already has a tool for renovictions. The Rental Unit Repair Licence has been in force since March 1, 2025. A landlord serving an N13 for renovations needs a building permit first, and has to apply for that licence within seven days.
But here's what people miss on evictions generally. The bigger risk to tenants isn't a landlord adjusting rent to cover rising costs, insurance, taxes, maintenance. It's a landlord who can't afford to keep the unit on the market at all, or a unit that falls apart because there's no money left to maintain it. Block every legitimate path to a workable rent, and there will be no more units left for renters to live in. That helps no one.
Same logic applies to safety enforcement; nobody should be trapped in a home that's genuinely unsafe. But push too hard over minor, fixable issues, and landlords pull units off the market instead of fixing them. That only shrinks the supply, and there is no avoiding the laws of supply and demand.
The law has to work for both sides. Tenants need stability. Landlords need viability. Enforce the licence, and apply safety standards with reasonable judgment.
Constituent concerns (ward9.online/concerns/)
What would you do about persistent boulevard/weed neglect and unresolved property theft in Ward 9?
You're certainly not the only one to bring these issues up, and I share your concern. The camera case is especially egregious, knowing where the stolen item was but completely dropping it anyway.
A councillor can't explicitly direct the police, but we do have a say in the budget, and council effectively controls four of the seven Police Service Board seats. Board duties under the Community Safety and Policing Act include hiring and firing the chief, running the chief's annual performance review, and approving the operating and capital budget. The board also sets the service's objectives and priorities as part of its strategic plan, and the chief has to run the department within those priorities. I would advocate for strict enforcement. We can't control the courts at the provincial level, but we need to make London as inhospitable for criminals as possible.
The weeds and the boulevards are a different problem with the same shape. The City already budgets for that work, and it isn't getting done. You've called every year and gotten the same promise. That's exactly the kind of documented example I'm building into a public record of City spending priorities, so council has to answer case by case for services taxpayers already pay for and aren't getting. (Answered publicly at ward9.online/concerns/#concern-6.)
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
If a new supportive housing project was proposed in a neighbourhood where many residents opposed it, how would you respond? What commitments are you prepared to make tonight that voters can hold you accountable for?
I don't believe a developer or a bureaucrat downtown should get to decide what a neighbourhood has to live with. If a supportive housing project came to a neighbourhood that didn't want it, it's my job to be the voice of the people living there and represent their will.
But the truth is that provincial law limits how far a council can go to block a housing project just because a neighbourhood opposes it. I won't tell any neighbourhood that I can hand them a guaranteed veto, because that would be a promise I couldn't keep, and I don't make those.
What I can promise is that before a project like this comes anywhere near a vote, residents get the actual plan on the table: who runs it, what security looks like, what happens when something goes wrong, and how they can hold someone accountable after it opens. I'll use every real tool a councillor has, like site conditions, servicing requirements, and a public record that actually reflects what residents said, to make sure a project that goes forward reflects what the neighbourhood raised. And if I think a project is being forced through without honestly addressing what residents brought forward, I'll vote against it and say so publicly, regardless of the final outcome.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
As of 2024, one in three households in London face some form of food insecurity. Many families must choose between paying rent and getting enough groceries to meet their nutritional needs. What city-level actions do you think could be taken to address food insecurity in London?
Food insecurity is primarily an income problem, though the City still has real tools available. The health unit's own primer to every candidate this September puts Middlesex-London household food insecurity at 31.3 percent in 2024, up from about 17 percent in 2019.
The London Food Bank is privately run, not a City department, but the City partners with it directly, promoting donations and running food-rescue programs that get fresh produce that would otherwise be thrown out to people who need it. That's a real, working piece of infrastructure, and I'd keep London leaning into it.
Beyond that, the City funds anti-poverty and food-related non-profits through its Community Grants Program. I'd want those dollars judged the same way I judge every other City dollar: a real accounting of what the money actually bought, with grant agreements that tie the funding to food-insecurity outcomes specifically, not just a general mission fit.
No city councillor can honestly claim to fix household income. That's a whole-of-government and economy-wide problem, well beyond what any one level of government controls, let alone one seat on council. What the City can do is not waste money pretending otherwise, and make sure what it does spend actually gets food to people who need it.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
What specific actions would you support to increase affordable and supportive housing in our city?
By the City's own numbers, council endorsed 600 new highly supportive housing units, over three years, back in April 2024. As of the City's own most recent report, 169 of those units are actually built and occupied.
I'd use City land first, the way our own Official Plan already says surplus land should be evaluated for affordable housing before anything else.
And I want to be clear about what I'm not proposing. Turning single-family streets into rental complexes, three, four, five units crammed onto one lot, run by a landlord who doesn't live there and doesn't answer to the neighbours, isn't the kind of housing policy I'll support.
What I do support is family taking care of family. London and the province both already allow a homeowner to add a basement suite or a small backyard suite on their own property, so a parent or an adult child can live right there with the family instead of getting shipped off to a facility they don't want to be in. I'd protect and expand that option specifically, while keeping the line clear against turning ordinary neighbourhoods into rental blocks.
And supportive housing has to come with the services that make it actually work: health supports, case management, security. Without that, it's just a different kind of failure in a nicer building.
Both council and the public need to see the numbers. Units approved, units built, units occupied, and units still safe and stable a year later.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
What should London be doing now to prepare for the city it will be 20 years from now?
London shouldn't just use its own long-range plan as a slogan, but as discipline.
Growth should be directed where infrastructure can support it, with roads, transit, water, sewers, schools, and emergency capacity considered before approvals are finalized. We should renew the infrastructure we already own, close critical transportation gaps, and require clear costing for new commitments.
One of those gaps has been open for decades. London still doesn't have a real ring road, and every year we don't build one, we push more raging drivers through neighbourhoods where children play. Council finally voted in April 2025 to open talks on it, but in that same meeting admitted a ring road runs completely counter to their mobility plan, which is built around forcing 32.5 percent of all trips onto bikes, sidewalks, and buses. And this is the problem we face: City Hall constantly trying to make Londoners fit their plans, instead of making their plans fit Londoners. This needs to change.
Along the same thread, we need to ensure London doesn't become a city that taxes itself out of being livable. Every new commitment, be it a ring road or a mess of bike and bus lanes, has to come with a real number attached, because the same growth that builds a bigger city can just as easily build a permanently bigger tax bill if nobody's counting the pennies.
The London Plan's inward-and-upward direction can help control the cost of growth, but only if council follows it consistently, costs its commitments honestly, and reports the results publicly.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
London's Mobility Master Plan commits the City to delivering a safe and connected cycling network suitable for all ages and abilities, including closing critical gaps, adding new facilities, and integrating cycling infrastructure into major road projects. The MMP is based on evidence indicating cities that increase walking, cycling, and transit as viable alternatives to the personal automobile consistently see reduced road congestion, stronger local business activity, and significant cost savings for both residents and government. If you are elected, what specific actions will you take in the next four years to accelerate implementation of London's cycling network, particularly closing critical gaps, ensuring cycling facilities are included in all major road projects, and making active transportation a preferred daily travel option across the city?
I wouldn't accelerate it. I'd aim to make it smarter.
I'd request a four-year schedule that closes gaps where people already travel, and put the priority on links to schools, transit, and jobs where walking and cycling are already practical.
That means safe crossings at danger points where people are currently at risk, and coordinating with planned road renewals so a street isn't torn up twice.
I'd review every major road project for what it does for people walking, cycling, and using mobility devices, whether the arterials move more efficiently, and whether neighbourhood streets stay protected.
I'd publish the safety and usage results so residents can see if the benefit outweighed the cost.
A citywide mode-share target on paper isn't the project. I won't use 32.5% by 2050 to justify a build that fails on its own street.
I'd judge each project on safety, usage, and whether it matches how Londoners get around.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
In a 2025 survey, Londoners identified homelessness as their top issue. In spite of significant investments, the city's level of homelessness is continuing to grow. What do you believe council has done well in dealing with this critical issue? What would you do differently?
Council has made progress worth noting. It built 24/7 Hubs that have moved dozens of people into stable housing, a Highly Supportive Housing Plan with actual staffing and intake standards behind it, and London was the first city in Canada approved for federal Housing Accelerator Fund money, over 80 million dollars now, tied to real unit targets the City has actually beaten on permits issued.
But there are problems, straight from the City's own numbers. The City keeps a real, active count of every person known to be homeless in London. In 2021, that count was just over a thousand people. By the end of last year, it was nearly twenty-three hundred. That's a core measure of this crisis, and it more than doubled while the City was building all of that infrastructure.
Council endorsed a full Community Encampment Plan back in 2024. The City's own website says it still hasn't been fully put into practice. That lack of follow-through on the plans already voted on is a real gap. And in 2024, the share of people successfully diverted away from homelessness actually dropped, well below the City's own five-year average.
I don't want to keep funding programs that return no or negative results. I'd rather run smaller pilot projects, test them against real outcomes, and get behind whatever actually works instead of pouring more into something the City's own numbers say hasn't been effective.
Urban League Ward 9 debate questions (2026-09-17 debate)
Each term, London city council approves a 4-year multi-year budget. This past council approved a record setting 23.5% increase. This means that if a resident was paying $4000 in taxes in 2023, they will be paying just under $5000 today. Do you think that this was an appropriate level of tax increase and what level of levy increase do you think is appropriate over the course of this next 4-year term of council?
No. A multi-year tax levy increase of this scale is not something residents should be expected to accept. By the City's own numbers, this multi-year budget works out to a cumulative increase of around 25 percent on your tax bill, 8.7 percent in 2024 alone. And to add insult to injury, council voted itself a raise of almost 40 percent for the next term at the same time.
To make up for this egregious abuse of taxpayers, I won't support any levy hike that will increase an individual's tax bill over the next 4 years. On top of that, I've drafted a proposed Pay Accountable to City Taxpayers bylaw that would tie council's pay to the City's portion of Londoners' tax bill; for every percentage point it rises above inflation, council pay goes down by the same percentage. If leadership expects Londoners to sacrifice more, they can lead by example. I've invited every candidate city-wide to read and either support, oppose, or propose amendments to PACT, and it's all open source and tracked on ward9.online and GitHub.
Aside from that, growth from new homes should pay for growth. It shouldn't be an excuse to raise the rate on the people already here.