What I’m hearing

Concerns from Ward 9

Concerns that have been brought to me appear here. If you have something to say, the form is on the homepage.

1. A Byron resident October 15, 2026

   Matt, I have a question. If I vote for you, what will you do to keep the homeless off the street? Is your response - by-law compliance and police action? or, is it place them in care/treatment at my expense? or, other?

   Matt’s reply October 15, 2026

   As is my style, I’m not going to sugarcoat it: Any council candidate who claims to have a plan to end homelessness isn’t being honest with you. A councillor making that claim is like a lone farmer trying to sell a solution to end world hunger: he may have the right ideas, but he doesn’t have the capacity or the power to deliver it.

   But what I can tell you is how my personal position and principles will inform every decision on the topic. My answer to your question is enforcement, plus help for the people who want it, without raising your taxes.

   First and foremost, breaking the law shouldn’t get a pass. Open drug use, theft and trespassing are already illegal, and I expect those laws enforced. Parks and sidewalks belong to all of us, so encampments get cleared, with an offer of safe, clean (zero tolerance for illegal activity) shelter for anyone willing to take it. Someone who refuses help, with the attached conditions, doesn’t get to keep a public park or sidewalk.

   As for the expense, London already spends about $16 million a year on homelessness, which is part of roughly $46 million across all partners. I’ve committed to voting against any property tax increase, for any reason. I want the money we already spend tied to results you can check every quarter, like how many people move from shelters into housing and stay there. And programs that aren’t delivering should be reimagined or decommissioned.

   Treatment is mostly the province’s job. I’d use whatever influence my position has to push for recovery and treatment that gets people clean. Hospitals, CMHA and the province deliver the clinical care.

   A vote for me is a vote for strict enforcement, with the opportunity for those who are willing to get back on their feet, without inflating your tax bill.

2. A Lambeth resident October 9, 2026

   This resident says the garbage situation at the Wonderland Path townhouses is very disappointing, and suggests outdoor garbage and recycling bins like the ones at the complex across Savoy Street beside the fire hall.

   Matt’s reply October 9, 2026

   On the garbage, Wonderland Path is a rental complex owned by Valour Group, so outdoor bins there are their decision and their cost. They can be reached at 1-833-582-5687 or [email protected].

   If garbage is piling up, it can be reported to 519-661-4660 or service.london.ca, and the City can, and should, order the owner to clean it up.

3. A Lambeth resident October 9, 2026

   This resident lives just off Savoy Street, near the fire hall. They ask whether traffic lights will ever be installed at the Savoy Street and Wharncliffe Road intersection, which they say has become very busy, and they worry an accident is likely there if nothing is done.

   Matt’s reply October 9, 2026

   Turning left out of Savoy at rush hour is no fun, and I understand the concern.

   It would be easy to simply agree with you, but one of my main points of focus is improving mobility and getting traffic moving more smoothly, and adding another red light only 400m from the one at Bostwick is just adding to the pile of more stops, fewer lanes, and lower speed limits already inflicted on this route over the past few years.

   What I’d push for instead, and what I’d personally like to see if I lived there, is another connection to the main arteries.

   When the development north of Bakervilla was approved last year, City staff recommended extending Savoy north to the future Hayward Drive, which is planned to meet Bostwick at a new roundabout. Several neighbours asked for the same thing. The developer said the road wasn’t needed, and City Hall let them drop it, as seems to be the pattern that I am intent on breaking.

   If the neighbourhood wants that connection, I’ll push to get it put back. Before anything gets built, the City has to approve a site plan, and that’s where the traffic study happens. From what’s publicly available, neither has happened yet, so there should still be time. What are your thoughts? I created a mockup to make it easier to visualize.

   

4. A Byron resident October 8, 2026

   This resident says making it easier to build more homes is one of their biggest priorities. They want young people to have a realistic opportunity to afford a home in the communities where they want to build their lives, and they would like London to allow more density in existing neighbourhoods, including in Ward 9, along with greater density near transit and local shops. They want projects that meet clear zoning requirements to proceed without lengthy individual rezoning battles. They understand the importance of listening to residents, but hope council will also represent people who would like to live in these neighbourhoods and currently cannot afford to, and they feel local opposition should not continually prevent much-needed housing from being built. They hope the next councillor will make more permissive zoning a priority, and they ask what changes I would support to make it easier to build more homes in London.

   Matt’s reply October 8, 2026

   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.

5. A Woodhull Road resident October 6, 2026

   The area around Woodhull Road was recently brought into London’s urban growth boundary. Residents want the farmland and its agricultural use to stay protected. As a farmer, how would you support an active rural community?

   Matt’s reply October 6, 2026

   Thanks for writing, and I can definitely empathize. 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.

   Thanks again for writing, and for fighting to preserve our farmland!

6. A Byron resident October 6, 2026

   City is too leftist and woke, that’s why in decline. You seem sensible enough to know what you’re up against. Common sense over nonsense. Local government responsibilities are only priority. I’ll vote for you.

   Matt’s reply October 6, 2026

   We’re in agreement that we need our local government to focus on the core, common sense issues and cut the nonsense.

   That’s my goal: show me the hard data, get input from the community, and make the right choice based on all the facts. If it’s not worth the cost, taxpayers shouldn’t be footing the bill for it.

7. A Talbot Village resident October 1, 2026

   E-scooter safety. Kids riding e-scooters at high speeds without helmets and not following road safety.

   Matt’s reply October 1, 2026

   A kid flying down a residential street or a sidewalk on an e-scooter with no helmet is a frightening thing to watch.

   Here’s where the rules stand. Riders have to be 16 or older, and 16 and 17 year olds must wear a helmet. Scooters are banned from sidewalks and capped at 24 km/h, and they belong in bike lanes, on multi-use pathways or on roads posted at 50 km/h or less. Council extended the pilot in May, and the by-law holds parents responsible when a child under 16 rides on City property. So the rules exist. But, rules without teeth are just a sheet of paper flapping in the wind.

   As with many of our problems, the answer isn’t more rules. It’s enforcement of the rules already on the books. But that’s the tricky part. Enforcement is (ideally) targeted based on data like incident reports, so the best course of action is likely to report violations to the City’s bylaw enforcement office at 519-661-4660 or [email protected], or to London Police on their non-emergency line at 519-661-5670.

8. A Talbot Village resident September 30, 2026

   Traffic on Colonel Talbot & construction of stack and pack them that will overtake Lambeth, we are fed up with city of London employees running the show.

   Matt’s reply October 1, 2026

   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.

9. An Upperpoint-area resident September 28, 2026

   A resident asked what I’d do to improve evening and weekend transit service for the Upperpoint/Riverbend area before LTC’s planned Route 22 expansion arrives. Route 17B only runs weekday daytime hours, and her son spends about six hours of his day getting to and from a math class at Western because of it.

   Matt’s reply September 28, 2026

   Thank you for reaching out, and for asking a very specific and well-researched question. 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.

10. A Byron resident September 28, 2026

    A resident asked me to eliminate the $5-per-night fee charged for overnight street parking once the free allotment runs out each winter, citing a narrow street with little spare parking or snow-storage space.

    Matt’s reply September 28, 2026

    The $5 fee you’re asking about is a different rule though, and a different question. Every plate (which is its own issue, with no per-address limit) gets 15 free overnight passes each winter, and only after that do you start paying $5 a night, separate from the snow-event ban. That fee doesn’t buy you anything on a plow night, either (and it shouldn’t). It only applies on ordinary nights when the streets aren’t being cleared. I couldn’t find any satisfactory justification from the City for charging a fee once the free nights run out, and I’m not convinced yet that it’s worth keeping, at least in its current form. I know past councils have already inquired into this.

    I’m not ready to stake a solid position, because I want to find out for sure if there is a proper justification or need for that fee, or the 15-night cap. I don’t take my commitments lightly. But I want you to know where I stand right now. With the way neighbourhood planning has gone in London, I understand the need to prevent excessive street parking, which could become a real mess with so many houses in such close proximity. But I do lean against any unnecessary fees and regulations that make daily life more costly and burdensome, across the board, so it would take a good argument to sell me on the fees over and above the free permit.

11. A Byron resident September 4, 2026

    The 62-unit development at Boler Road and Byron Baseline was approved with only 64 parking spaces, which the resident sees as inadequate. She also questions the “family homes” framing used to describe it, drawing a comparison to what she considers similar messaging around the Colonel Talbot Road and Southdale developments, and asks who on council opposed the project and why Byron keeps getting this kind of provincially driven development that, in her view, doesn’t solve housing or traffic.

    Matt’s reply September 4, 2026

    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.

    Matt Millar

12. A Byron resident September 4, 2026

    Saunders Secondary’s yellow bus route along Byron Baseline Road was cut after roughly 50 years of service, leaving kids to walk almost a kilometre to the one remaining stop. Several kids on sports teams or in band who don’t need the morning bus but do need one to get home after practice or rehearsal have had that need ignored.

    Matt’s reply September 4, 2026

    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.

    Matt Millar

13. A Riverbend resident August 27, 2026

    Our City is in decline. The downtown core is unsafe & looks dystopian. Every boulevard in Ward 9 has weeds at least 3 feet high, every year, I call, every year they say they will send someone out, every year they don’t. We never see City grounds keeping. Theft is at an all time high in Ward 9. A friend had a $3000 camera stolen from their locked car- caught on video, found online at a house in Byron, advised the police, they said just to file insurance. They knew who had it- refused to do anything about it… we need better resources allocated to our area. If nothing happens to the thieves, we just get more of it. What would you do to address these 2 concerns?

    Matt’s reply August 28, 2026

    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.

14. A Byron resident July 14, 2026

    I like your fiscal concerns. I’d also like to add we need to know why no one is ever at work at city hall. I’d also like to know how many people work there and what they do. They should provide “proof of performance” each year to taxpayers strating what they have done within that year to EARN our money. We especially need to limit the number of people moving into our area. The high rise going up on Commissioners just west of Boler Road is an obscenity! That corner is already too hazardous.More congestion increases risks. As for Anna Hopkins - her real world business experience is selling bird seed part time before Gina Barber used her NDP voters to get her elected and there she has sat. She claims she worked for her husbnd’s business but he HAD NO BUINESS. He worked freelancing generating orders for companies’ services. He took a deposit from me (never refunded) for work never done. I called, the company said he did not work for them. Hopkins has no fiscal business acumen.

    Awaiting reply

15. A Longwoods Road resident May 12, 2026

    Asking for a lower speed limit on Longwoods Road through Ward 9, citing safety concerns and tragic fatalities including a child.

    Matt’s reply May 12, 2026

    Thanks for reaching out and voicing your concern. As you know, I also live on Longwoods Road, just down from the horrific tragedy that occurred on December 16, 2024. It’s not something that any of us will forget.

    Our goal here is the same: a road where what happened to an innocent child doesn’t happen again. But speed limits are not the cause or the solution here, and I want to walk through my reasoning.

    What happened that day.

    The bus was stopped. The red lights were flashing. The stop arm was extended. A courier in a 2023 Honda Pilot drove straight past it. The child had been told, correctly, that those flashing lights and that extended arm meant every driver on the road would stop. London Police investigated for six months. Two people were charged: the courier, for the bypass, and the bus driver, for letting him off the bus without confirming traffic had stopped.

    Two separate, independent failures of an absolute rule. Neither one is a speed-limit question.

    Why a lower limit would not have changed this outcome.

    A posted speed limit sets the upper bound for drivers who intend to obey the rules of the road. It is meaningful for the careful driver. It is not meaningful for a driver willing to pass a stopped school bus with its lights flashing. A driver who commits that violation with a posted 80km/h limit will commit it at any posted speed, and probably won’t slow down either. The problem with the courier was not his speed. It was that he blew past a stopped bus with its lights flashing. That’s not something a lower speed limit can solve.

    Lowering the speed limit of the former Highway 2 corridor would not have changed the outcome on December 16, 2024. That is the hard truth.

    More broadly, studies on two-lane roads have found that slower lead vehicles, larger speed differentials, platooning, and restricted passing opportunities can increase driver frustration and overtaking intent. That is especially concerning on our stretch of Longwoods, with its many driveways, curves, and side roads, and it is another reason I am cautious about lowering posted limits as a general policy.

    What would actually move the needle.

    The interventions that target what actually went wrong are real, and most of them are within the scope of city council.

    • Stop-arm cameras on London school buses. Ontario authorized municipalities to use and prosecute with these in 2020. A petition launched by Charles and Rachel Bakker after the Longwoods tragedy gathered over 2,100 signatures and called for measures including red light cameras. The petition was addressed directly to local politicians and London’s police chief. The city installed a speed radar sign in response, but has not acted on the camera proposal. This is the kind of targeted deterrent I would push the city to pursue.
    • The school bus stop relocation. The school bus service already adjusted the route, and students are no longer crossing Longwoods. This is the type of intervention that actually targets the failure mode: address the root and don’t rely on the competence and reliability of drivers.
    • Police enforcement of the rules already on the books. Monitoring stop-arm violations and corridor speeding are operational decisions a councillor does not direct. What a councillor does have influence over is the police operating budget and four of seven Police Service Board appointments. My goal is enforcement of what is already in place.

    Where I stand.

    Lowering speed limits, especially on major roads and arteries, is contrary to my commitment to improving mobility. Frustrated drivers can become dangerous drivers. My focus is on efficient road travel, proper and complete safety measures for our children, and enforcement of the safety laws we already have.

    Matt Millar