Municipal Election Q&A: Mayoral candidates answer questions from Paris Independent readers

4 days ago

28 min read

Casandra Turnbull

Managing Editor

As voters prepare to head to the polls in the upcoming municipal election next month, the Paris Independent is providing candidates with an opportunity to speak directly to the issues and priorities raised by local residents.

All certified mayoral candidates were contacted and invited to participate in this Q&A. Each candidate was provided with the same set of questions, which were developed from submissions received from Paris Independent readers. The goal is to give voters an opportunity to compare candidates’ perspectives on the same issues and learn more about how each would approach the role of mayor.

We encourage readers to continue engaging with candidates throughout the election campaign. Those who have follow-up questions, concerns or would like to learn more about a candidate and their platform can find candidate contact information through the County of Brant’s certified candidates webpage: https://www.brant.ca/council-and-county-administration/elections/certified-candidates/

The Paris Independent’s candidate Q&A coverage continues in next week’s edition with candidates running in Ward 1. Ward 1 candidates were provided with the same questions presented to the mayoral candidates, with the exception of a small number of questions specific to the role of mayor.

The mayoral candidates are listed below in order of certification on the county’s website.

Jennifer Kyle

What is your position on the current and projected residential growth and development in the county? Do you believe the pace and scale of development are appropriate for the community, and what factors should Council consider when approving future development?

I don’t think the answer is to simply say growth is good or bad. Brant is growing, and I believe what is important is how well we manage that growth.

We have made some important strides in planning for growth, but there is still work to do. Any new development must be supported by the physical and social infrastructure that makes our community function every day. We can’t continue to build first and figure those pieces out later.

We also need to understand what growth costs, protect agricultural land and recognize that what makes sense in Paris may not make sense in Burford, St. George or our other rural communities.

We have better plans in place, and now we need to follow through. The goal should never be simply a bigger Brant. The goal is a Brant that remains a great place to live as we grow.

Recent approval of a zoning change for properties in downtown Paris represents an important first step toward a significant residential development in the downtown core. What impact do you believe this type of development could have on downtown Paris? Please identify both the potential benefits and challenges.

I think residential development can really benefit downtown Paris if it is done thoughtfully. More people living downtown means more customers within walking distance of our shops and restaurants, more housing options, and more activity in downtown outside normal business hours.

This also fits with the Downtown Paris Master Plan, which looks at how we can accommodate growth while protecting the historic character of downtown Paris that we all love. The details matter! Traffic, parking, servicing, pedestrian safety and how a development fits into the existing downtown all need consideration.

I support appropriate density in our serviced communities, including downtown Paris. But it needs to add to what is already there, not overwhelm it. Done well, I think more people calling downtown Paris home can help make an already successful downtown even stronger.

How would you improve access to affordable public swimming facilities for County of Brant residents, particularly given the limited access to pools in Brantford? Would you support the development of a public swimming pool (a new one indoors or another one outdoors) in the County of Brant?

I certainly support building an indoor public pool in the County of Brant.

Year-round access to a pool is one of the things I hear requested most often from residents. We have a very well-used outdoor pool in Paris, but an indoor pool would allow swimming lessons, recreation, seniors’ programming and other activities throughout the year. County recreation planning already suggests doing an updated feasibility study and business case to consider an indoor pool, so I think it is time to move ahead with that work.

An indoor pool is, of course, a huge investment, both to build and operate. Council would have to really consider where it should go, what it will cost, potential partnerships and what funding may be available. But there is absolutely a gap here, so I support doing the work now to find the most responsible way to make an indoor pool a reality.

What are your views on establishing a public transit system within the County of Brant to connect communities such as Paris, Brantford, Burford and St. George and how should the County approach the costs and funding associated with implementing and operating such a system?

I absolutely see a need for more transit connections in Brant, but I also don’t think that means a traditional fixed-route transit system right away. I think it makes sense to start with what we have. We already have Brant Transit, which can and should be expanded as demand grows. This could include trying out fixed routes where they make sense.

We should also continue to pursue collaboration with Brantford and other neighbouring municipalities. People cross municipal borders every day for work, school, appointments and other services, so thinking about transportation shouldn’t stop at the boundary.

Cost is also an important consideration. I would want to look for provincial funding and partnerships where possible, and then use ridership and demand to guide how and where we expand. The goal should be better transit options people will actually use and that we can also afford to sustain.

What changes or improvements would you like to see made to Brant Transit to better meet the transportation needs of County of Brant residents?

I would like to make Brant Transit easier and more practical for people to use. I have heard frustrations from residents about how far in advance rides need to be booked, as well as reliability and cancelled bookings. If we want more people to use Brant Transit, we need to make sure they can actually depend on it to get where they need to go.

I also think we should pay attention to where people are trying to go. If we are seeing the same trips and destinations over and over again, there could be opportunities for scheduled connections or even fixed routes in some areas. We should also keep looking at better connections with Brantford and other neighbouring transit systems where it makes sense.

Brant Transit is a good service, but I would like to see us make it more convenient and reliable for more residents.

What specific outcome would you work toward regarding the proposed boundary adjustment involving the Brantford Municipal Airport and surrounding County-owned lands? Include key concerns you would address before supporting any agreement with the City of Brantford?

The airport boundary adjustment has been paused, and I really do believe that was the right decision. There wasn't enough time to work through all of the details and give residents opportunity to fully understand and provide their input on a permanent decision.

I do expect boundary discussions with Brantford to come back. Brantford has legitimate growth and transportation challenges, and the County should be willing to work together to find solutions that benefit both municipalities. But any future boundary adjustment also has to make sense for Brant.

Before I could support an agreement, I would want to see fair compensation, impacts on agriculture, infrastructure and transportation properly understood, and residents given meaningful opportunities to participate.

I want a strong, cooperative relationship with Brantford, but transferring land is permanent. We need enough time to look at every reasonable option and make sure any agreement protects Brant’s long-term interests, too.

Can you provide an example of a time you worked within a complex organization or with a diverse group of people to achieve a successful outcome? What role did you play in reaching that result?

One example I am particularly proud of is my eight years on the board of AgScape, an Ontario-wide agricultural education organization.

When I joined the board in 2018, the organization was struggling financially and there were some difficult decisions ahead. Over the next several years, our board and staff worked together to turn things around and put AgScape on much stronger footing.

I served several years as Vice-Chair, chaired the HR Committee and was part of the Executive Committee. I was closely involved in leadership transition, supporting staff through that change, and also helped develop a completely new strategic plan that really helped refocus the organization.

It was absolutely a team effort. My role was to ask questions, work through some tough decisions and help provide stability and direction during a pretty significant period of change.

If elected to Brant County Council, will you propose a motion for Council's approval to impose a one-year moratorium on artificial intelligence data centers until the water, energy, pollution, and noise issues are thoroughly understood?

I would support a one-year moratorium on data centres. However, with nothing currently proposed in Brant, I don’t know that I would bring the motion forward myself right now.

There are very legitimate questions about how much water and electricity data centres use, along with concerns about noise, pollution and other impacts. As we already have water challenges in some areas and communities that experience issues with hydro reliability, understanding the impacts is essential.

If a data centre was proposed before we had answers, I would absolutely support putting things on hold while we figured them out. I would also support considering a moratorium if another member of Council or residents brought the issue forward.

The bottom line is we don’t know enough yet to say whether or not data centres are a good fit for Brant. We need to understand the impacts before making that decision.

The County has adopted a Long-Term Financial Plan to help guide its financial decisions and priorities over the coming years. If elected, how would you use that plan to guide your decisions at the council table, particularly when weighing new priorities, major investments and the long-term affordability of services for County residents?

The County's Long-Term Financial Plan helps Council understand how the decisions we make today affect taxpayers years from now.

Brant has some big investments coming down the pipe. We don't have unlimited funds, so that means making choices and then being honest about the trade-offs. If we add something new, what will it cost to build and operate? If we delay something, what are the financial consequences? If we cut or redirect funding, what are we giving up to do that?

I would use the long-term financial plan to help Council see our priorities all together rather than making decisions one project or one budget year at a time.

For me, affordability isn't just about spending less. It is about making good choices with the money we have, understanding the consequences of those decisions, and still investing in what Brant needs for today and tomorrow.

How do you foresee the culture of staff and councillors under your leadership?

I want a Council where folks come prepared, speak their minds, ask questions and are willing to listen to each other.

We are not always going to agree, and that's a good thing. Eleven different perspectives around the table can lead to better decisions, as long as we can disagree respectfully, make a decision and then move forward.

I think the same should apply to relationships with staff. Council should be able to ask tough questions and challenge recommendations, and staff need to be comfortable giving us their best professional advice, even when it's something we don't want to hear.

There are 10 councillors and a mayor, and every person at that table was elected by residents to have a voice. My job as mayor would be to make sure those voices are heard, keep us focused on the work, and help Council find ways forward.

Would you use the strong mayor powers available under Ontario legislation? What circumstances, if any, would justify using those powers rather than seeking consensus through Council?

No. I would not use the discretionary Strong Mayor Powers. I don't agree with giving that much decision-making power to one person. Brant elects 10 councillors and a mayor, and I believe those 11 people should make decisions together through discussion, debate and ultimately a vote.

There are some responsibilities the province has specifically given to mayors that I can't opt out of. For example, the mayor is required to propose the municipal budget. I will fulfill those responsibilities, but Council will absolutely be part of the process.

Beyond what I am required to do, decisions belong at the Council table. If I can't convince a majority of Council that an idea is good for Brant, I don't think I should be able to force it through just because I'm the mayor.

My job is to work with Council and find ways forward, not find ways around it.

Christine Garneau-Bisaillon

Recognizing that Council must operate within its Official Plan and Provincial Policy Statements when approaching new proposals, I believe Council can find better balance in these decisions. By starting conversations sooner, Council can work with County staff and proponents to identify opportunities to mitigate both neighbourhood and broader municipal concerns in ways that can be incorporated into what comes forward to Council for approval, helping avoid costly appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal that often have more impactful outcomes for the County.

The next Council also needs to revisit the Community Planning Permit System (CPPS) to address on-farm diversified use restrictions and increased red tape for farmers to preserve the viability of our rural communities. Ensuring that farms remain financially viable also helps protect agricultural land from development proposals as part of the broader strategy to manage land use pressures, especially when it’s closest to settlement and municipal boundaries.

As the mayoral candidate advocating for change, I believe that Council should have paused to consider the precedent set by more permissive zoning for its own projects in downtown Paris because this opens the door to requests by private interests asking for the same consideration. Keeping our downtowns economically viable without losing our heritage streetscapes is essential. Redevelopment disproportionate to the scale of any downtown seeks to undermine its character. The same is true for all the County’s villages and hamlets, as well as Paris.

At the same time, proceeding with projects without having completed the flood mitigation works for downtown Paris puts the cart before the horse, so it is important that the next Council prioritizes flood mitigation before further investments are made downtown by public or private interests, otherwise everyone risks what they’ve worked hard to achieve.

Council missed the opportunity to explore the costs of integrating an indoor pool into the Brant Sports Complex expansion in July, despite the majority of those publicly supporting the costly project doing so under the understanding that the pool was included.

By increasing municipal debt to fund this and other capital projects, I am concerned that a pool is no longer financially viable in the near term. As an interim solution the County needs to work with community partners, such as the YMCA, to ensure that County residents can access year-round aquatics with Brant Transit support if required.

Along with reframing public transit as an amenity that facilitates employment, education, and enjoyment in the County, Council needs to make decisions about fixed-route options based on proper data and cost estimates, following broad-based public engagement. I’ve heard arguments in favour and against pursuing public transit during the campaign, which is why Council must have this conversation next term. Fixed-route public transit decisions need to be made around the Council table, in open session and in conjunction with a review of Brant Transit. My approach is to work constructively with Council, staff, and the community to explore what’s right for Brant today, and tomorrow.

What changes or improvements would you like to see made to Brant Transit to better meet the transportation needs of County of Brant residents?

From what I observe from conversations with Brant Transit users, better managing the contract with the service provider in the short term could help because this model is heavily subsidized for a small ridership that is often left behind, so it needs to work!

Council also needs to consider the future of Brant Transit in tandem with the conversation about public transit (fixed route buses) because both could be part of a broader regional transportation strategy going forward.

It’s also important that the next Council insists on a competitive procurement process for all municipal contracts, including Brant Transit, to ensure that the County is always getting the best value for your tax dollars.

I’ve already stated publicly that I won’t initiate a boundary adjustment with the City and am prepared to protect the County’s interests should the next City Council ask to re-initiate negotiations. I seek to lead a Council that’s focused on core municipal issues, closest to home, to strengthen the County’s case to maintain both its autonomy and its boundaries.

This involves identifying next steps for Cainsville’s redevelopment. This is essential to our regional economy and balanced property tax assessments within the County. Since the City managed to withdraw its decade-old agreement to allow the County’s infrastructure to hook up to Brantford sewer-water services in recent negotiations, I’m concerned that the County will be forced to identify new industrial-commercial lands that Brant can service independently of Brantford. I worry this will compound development pressures for Paris and St. George if the County cannot hold the City accountable under the prior agreement.

Can you provide an example of a time you worked within a complex organization or with a diverse group of people to achieve a successful outcome? What role did you play in reaching that result?

Working at the nexus of strategic and operational governance within Ontario universities earlier in my career, I led the teams facilitating institutional decision-making around some of the most challenging topics including the adoption of enterprise risk management frameworks, major capital project approval processes, provincially mandated policies including sexual violence prevention and response, and judicial procedures for student and professional misconduct.

My role involved identifying stakeholders and facilitating participation, determining relevant legislation and policies, and arranging subject matter experts to provide advice to boards and committees when required, all while ensuring that process was as fair, clear, and transparent as possible because when there’s trust in the process, outcomes are stronger.

Having held primarily facilitative, rather than authoritative roles,

I’ll be drawing on this experience to guide Council and our community through the questions we face over the next four years because the strongest outcomes result from the broadest engagement.

I will defer to County staff to identify and recommend the most appropriate method to preserve time to complete due diligence on AI data centres within existing land use planning legislation because a procedural misstep resulting from a Council-led motion could undermine the efficacy of such a resolution.

This begins by ensuring the most recent iteration of the Long-Term Financial Plan is easily accessible on the County’s website because it had not been published as of submitting this answer. We also need to ensure that the data used to project future expenses is accurate because Council cannot make sound financial decisions without correct forecasts, otherwise decisions will continue out of sequence.

Our current economic outlook suggests Council should proceed more cautiously when it comes to discretionary spending, especially projects funded by anticipated, but not realized sources and debt because these risk quickly driving up property taxes if funds don’t materialize.

One of the most consistent messages I’m hearing on doorsteps is that rising cost of living is making it harder to make ends meet. Just as residents, business owners, and farmers have learned to choose between “needs” and “wants,” Council needs to do so as well.

How do you foresee the culture of staff and councillors under your leadership?

Building on the Elect Respect Pledge, the County I seek to lead prioritizes integrity and accountability, as I always have myself.

When Council better recognizes how each decision it makes affects real people everyday, this percolates through the organizational structure creating an even more people-focused culture over time. With a Council that sets a more respectful “tone from the top,” the County will strengthen relationships within itself and its community, and not just among folks with whom they agree. This is essential because the municipality must work for everyone.

Would you use the strong mayor powers available under Ontario legislation? What circumstances, if any, would justify using those powers rather than seeking consensus through Council?

Continued pressure for a “yes” or “no” soundbite dismisses the persistent, implied authority that remains after formally delegating Strong Mayor Powers back to Council and staff.

These destabilized the Brant’s governance and administration, so we must elect candidates who’ve consistently conducted themselves as leaders, aligned with the Elect Respect Pledge.

Restoring public trust in local government requires a Mayor and Council who can lead by example, show up together at events, and who welcome public engagement in decision-making processes as I always have.

The Council I seek to lead values divergent views and collegial debate, creates safe space to respectfully say that you disagreed, and preserves access to staff resources even when we don’t agree with each other.

Besides, if an outcome brought such great benefit to Brant that a mayor felt they had to “pull rank” on Council as some suggest could happen, shouldn’t Council be on board already?

Graham Horner

Candidate did not respond as of press deadline.

David Swanson

I do not believe the recent pace and scale of suburban-style development have been appropriate. Sprawl has grown the tax base, but it has eroded rural character, hit villages through school and health-care amalgamations, and locked the County into costly water, sewer, and road expansions.

I ran in 2022 on “stop the sprawl” and still hold that position. Council should favour modest lot severances along existing rural road frontages. That spreads growth, keeps rural identity, and puts most new homes on wells and septic instead of new municipal systems. Snowplows, garbage trucks, and emergency services already use those roads. With some ditching upgrades, the County gains tax revenue at little extra cost and with limited impact on farms.

Council should weigh rural character, long-term infrastructure costs, use of existing roads and services, farmland protection, and whether a proposal strengthens smaller communities. I support growth that pays its way and fits Brant—not sprawl that expands obligations while stripping away what makes this place unique.

Downtown Paris needs year-round foot traffic and spending, not just strong event weekends. More residents living in the core, with money to spend locally, is the most reliable way to support existing businesses. Events at the Promenade and Paris Drinks Fest show what vibrancy looks like; housing downtown would make that energy more consistent.

Those sites sit on some of the municipality’s highest-capacity services. Leaving them underused is a planning and tax problem. Adding homes puts more assessment on infrastructure we already have and can ease pressure on other ratepayers. The original Penman buildings were four storeys or more, so modest height there is not a break with Paris history. Done well, this adds people, sales, and tax revenue without pushing growth onto farmland or new suburban pipes.

Challenges are process and execution. Council should support the project and cut delay so it actually gets built. I will judge it by whether it brings people and spending downtown, uses existing infrastructure, and avoids years of red tape.

The Paris Pool is a real community asset. It is rarely at capacity. Before building a new pool, we should get more use from what we already have. A seasonal dome over the Paris Pool is worth studying if cost, energy use, and operations make sense.

I do not see an immediate case for another public pool. Residents already have the Gretzky Centre, YMCA, Brant Park, Earl Haig, Woodman, private clubs, and local waterways.

When taxes and basic infrastructure are already strained, another subsidized pool should not jump the queue. Recreation matters, but roads, bridges, and core services come first. I will review a serious proposal with costs, location, operating funding, and proof of demand. Until then: better use of the Paris Pool, partnerships that keep existing facilities affordable, and no new spending that crowds out work the County cannot keep up with.

I am not in favour of a County transit system at this time. After working on maintenance in downtown Toronto and seeing how transit operates in practice, I do not believe the benefits would outweigh the cost.

The County does not have the same street-level problems seen in larger cities, and I want to keep it that way. Transit brings ongoing operating costs, security issues, and other consequences taxpayers would carry year after year.

Basic income and welfare reform are a better way to help people than asking current residents to subsidize a transit network. Many people moved here knowing a car is part of rural life. It is not fair to shift that cost onto neighbours already paying for roads, bridges, and services we cannot keep up with now.

If a tightly costed, user- and senior-government-funded option is put forward, I will look at the numbers. I will not support a permanent municipal obligation we cannot afford and do not need.

What changes or improvements would you like to see made to Brant Transit to better meet the transportation needs of County of Brant residents?

The real barriers are the cost of a vehicle, gas, insurance, and low income. That is why I keep coming back to basic income and putting money directly in people’s pockets. They can then spend it on the transportation that actually fits their life.

I do not support expanding or further subsidizing Brant Transit as the County’s answer. Transit is another form of wealth redistribution, but only for one use. I would rather help people with income than build a system current residents must keep paying for.

This is a rural county. People who move here should expect that a vehicle is part of daily life. The lack of Uber or similar ride-share service does not help. I would rather see private ride options become available than have the municipality take on more transit costs.

If Brant Transit can be made more useful without a larger local subsidy, I will listen. My priority is income support and practical private options, not growing a public transit obligation.

My test is simple: value for County taxpayers. I will not support a deal that hands over prime land on poor terms.

A sale in the $12,000 to $14,000 an acre range would be a raw deal, even in a softer market. That land is flat, close to Highway 403, near a new water tower, and served by roads in every direction. It can generate far more income for residents than an airport that, at best, breaks even and more often costs money. The first question is whether this is the best use of land that belongs to County residents.

Before supporting any agreement with Brantford, I would need a fair price that reflects development potential, a clear explanation of what the County gives up in tax revenue and control, a long-term plan for the site instead of a short-term political fix, and protection for surrounding County lands and ratepayers.

I want a durable settlement that lets both communities prosper. Partnership does not mean giving the land away.

Can you provide an example of a time you worked within a complex organization or with a diverse group of people to achieve a successful outcome? What role did you play in reaching that result?

I have run two winter maintenance contracts in York Region, one with 33 pieces of equipment and one with 20. I was responsible for both yards: scheduled maintenance, routing, payroll, driver training, personnel, reporting, and day-to-day communication with my company and the Region.

That work only succeeds if drivers, mechanics, and managers pull in the same direction under tight timelines and public pressure. My job was to set the plan, keep the equipment and people ready, and stay in constant contact so problems were solved before they became failures on the road.

I like clear goals and I measure success the same way I would in the County: get the big jobs done early and under budget. I listen first and I do not rush to judgment, which helps strong personalities work together. That is the role I would bring to Council and staff: set the target, keep people aligned, deliver.

I would not start by imposing a one-year ban. I would start with a proper investigation. Data centres are not all the same, they are relatively new in our area, and there is a lot of online noise around them. We should not govern off the most extreme claims, and we should not wave the questions away. Skepticism and cross-examination are necessary for sound judgment.

Water, power, noise, and servicing are real municipal issues. If a proposal needs large volumes of water or new electrical capacity, Council has to see the numbers, the source of that water, the effect on existing users, and who pays for the upgrades. That review should be public, not a blanket freeze that treats every project as identical.

I do not believe we need a full year to get those answers. Staff, the proponent, and the utilities can put the water, energy, and nuisance impacts on the table much sooner. I will not support a project until those impacts are understood.

I would treat the Long-Term Financial Plan as a limit on what the County can afford, not a wish list. New priorities and major projects should have to fit the plan’s affordability test: what it costs to build, what it costs to run, and whether residents can carry it without another jump in taxes or debt.

I am not interested in adding services we cannot maintain. If a proposal raises the County’s long-term obligations, I want it measured against the plan before it gets a vote.

The best way to change the status quo is to keep more public money circulating here. Property tax credits as part of how we pay employees and contractors would keep that value created in local tax coffers instead of leaving town and contributing to interest bearing debts. Combined with basic income, that would put cash in local pockets, raise the velocity of money, and reduce pressure on debt.

How do you foresee the culture of staff and councillors under your leadership?

I am known for temperament, grace under fire, and patience. That should bring an immediate improvement in morale and efficiency. I have overseen seasoned veterans on various contracts over the years, and they have recognized me as one of the most effective managers of people they have worked with.

I will meet every staff member, right down to the people with shovels in their hands, and give them my undivided attention when we are together. To deliver the best services, every employee must know the importance of their role and the value they bring to this team. That tone can only be set from the top.

Would you use the strong mayor powers available under Ontario legislation? What circumstances, if any, would justify using those powers rather than seeking consensus through Council?

Strong mayor powers are in the toolkit. I have no interest in using them as a first resort. The first job is to persuade, build a majority, and get Council moving in the same direction.

I have been on the 20 side of an 80/20 fight and later been proven right. If I had exhausted every effort at persuasion, believed the evidence was clear, and the issue was a raw deal for taxpayers, I would use the powers. If I am wrong, voters can deal with that at the ballot box.

There are times when people around the table know a proposal is bad for residents but will not break with their group. That is weak leadership. I will not pretend it does not happen. My standard is what is good for the County, even when it is unpopular.

I would use strong mayor powers only after consensus has failed. I would not use them to win ordinary political arguments.

Kent Hollett

Candidate did not respond as of press deadline.

Stuart Braid

Growth in the county is inevitable but manageable with proper leadership. I think we’ve reached a full capacity mark as far as current infrastructure, and I am cautious about allowing future development without an in-depth analysis on impacts to the watershed, infrastructure, and the general quality of life for our residents. I believe the pace and scale of development is too fast, and not appropriate for the community and therefore should be slowed. Council should always consider the wishes of the constituents which voted them in, and that consensus is: slow down. Some of the factors that council should always consider are 6 words I’m campaigning on: Responsibility, Trust, Accountability, Protection, Preservation, Peace. I am also looking into utilizing the internet and phone system we are using for this election to use in cases where community feedback is requested. This should be able to be accomplished at a reasonable cost.

I think it’s a great idea, providing the housing we offer is geared towards the segment of society that needs it most. This would be housing priced towards lower to middle class families and individuals. It’s also just as important to assist the business owners of downtown Paris (and all of Paris) who have suffered tremendous losses with the awful mismanagement related to construction and planning. In fact bringing back business to the area is one of my top priorities. The benefit would be increased foot traffic in the downtown core, possibly, but the challenges remain: our infrastructure.

I would support this idea if the county has the funds to build a pool. At this point, without further consultation, it’s hard to say if we can afford it. I have other priorities, such as making sure our residents have a roof over their head, employment, and can feed themselves. The current infrastructure and construction mess needs to be cleaned up first before we start building other major structures.

I think it’s a great idea and I have heard this request from many of the constituents I’ve spoken to. I think a comprehensive sensible plan could be put forth with the assistance of the provincial and federal governments. The current transportation plan calls for a possible Go Train connection at 403 and Rest Acres Road, and that is a start. The current plan doesn’t really offer any immediate solutions, only suggestions for the decades to come, which obviously should be revised and sped up.

What changes or improvements would you like to see made to Brant Transit to better meet the transportation needs of County of Brant residents?

I personally think it’s not working as it should for the money we pay for the service and I would look into revamping it or getting rid of it altogether. We can have a better system in place, such as small buses or shuttles that you can access immediately, not by booking on an app a day in advance.

The residents of Brant County have already spoken out against this and made it clear they don’t want it. The discussions have been paused for now, as they should be during an election. I have also heard complaints of bullying like tactics from the government officials, and those who feel this process has been undemocratic and done behind closed doors, without proper consultation and transparency. This is not acceptable. Brant County would incur losses of its tax base, and farmlands. There are environmental concerns associated with the proposed expansion as well. Why doesn’t Brant County put forth a motion to absorb Brantford instead of Brantford wanting to amalgamate with us? There have been too many people losing their homes, farms, businesses and livelihoods because of government interference and land development the last few years and I find that concerning.

Can you provide an example of a time you worked within a complex organization or with a diverse group of people to achieve a successful outcome? What role did you play in reaching that result?

I have worked in many complex situations with a diverse group of people. I have worked with psychiatric patients, autistic and down syndrome people, and street kids. I have also been involved in the business and I.T. world since the eighties. I have owned businesses, led teams and campaigns (both marketing and political), and have effected change in many different organizations. My work experience and education in I.T. has also led to many successful outcomes. I’ve had to navigate through many complex and technical concepts, while still being able to explain these concepts in a simple manner. Whether in social work, business or politics my role in the success of these ventures was leadership with honesty and integrity. All of my past experience is about helping people solve problems. With trust in government at an all-time low, it’s time people elected someone they can trust.

Yes. Data centers are best suited to be constructed way up north, where it’s always cold, not in Southern Ontario. Data centers require a large amount of fresh water, and hydro, which would put more of a strain on our watershed and infrastructures. I would prefer to make sure our indigenous first nations groups have fresh water before a data center. I would also rather attract new businesses and jobs by filling the many vacant buildings before constructing new ones.

Yes I would use the guide, a lot of work and information has been put into producing that guide. However the Long Term Financial Plan is meant to be revised and updated yearly at least, so I would expect a new government with new ideas to make improvements to the guide going forward. The guide must take into account constituent feedback and changing economic conditions. The government must seek to preserve small town values in all of it’s future planning. The well-being of the constituents of Brant County must be paramount at all times, and the peace that they seek here.

How do you foresee the culture of staff and councillors under your leadership?

I think the culture needs to change. My role will be to lead as a team. That’s what Brant County residents want. We must remember we are there to act on the wishes of our constituents. We don’t need a local government mired in conflicts of interest or other distractions. For a local government to tell its tax paying constituents “if you don’t like it move” in response to push back on government policy is unacceptable and indicative of the need for culture change and new ideas. I aim to build a collaborative council that works together on every issue. The culture will definitely be different.

Would you use the strong mayor powers available under Ontario legislation? What circumstances, if any, would justify using those powers rather than seeking consensus through Council?

No, I am not a king (although I do have royalty in my blood). As I already mentioned, my role on council is to represent the voices of the community, and council should act as a team, especially at the municipal level. That is democracy. Unfortunately, the idea of democracy and elected leaders acting on behalf of their constituents is a concept few politicians seem to grasp these days. I do not intend to follow that path. The strong mayor powers were enacted by the provincial government to help speed up the building of houses. I think we have enough of that in the county. So no, I won’t be using them, because I don’t believe that’s what Brant County residents want. Doug Ford also passed a law where the provincial government can take over a council if it deems it necessary. These are not very democratic laws.

Municipal Election Q&A: Mayoral candidates answer questions from Paris Independent readers

Recent Posts

Comments