Ward 5 Candidate Q&A: Ward 5 candidates answer questions from Paris Independent readers

9 hours ago

15 min read

Mike Gatopoulos

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 growth itself is the problem. The question is whether the infrastructure and services needed to support that growth are keeping pace. My position is simple: infrastructure before development.

New housing has to be matched with realistic plans for roads, water and wastewater, emergency services, schools, recreation and traffic capacity. Council also needs to consider the cumulative impact of multiple developments, not assess each one in isolation.

I support growth that is well planned… financially sustainable and directed to appropriate locations, while protecting the productive farmland in our communities. If the infrastructure is not ready, Council should be prepared to slow down development until it is.

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.

There are real benefits to adding more residents in downtown Paris. More people living within walking distance can support local shops and restaurants, and help make better use of existing infrastructure. It can also add different housing options in a community where demand is high.

The challenges are equally important… parking, traffic, servicing capacity, construction impacts, building height, and protecting the heritage character that makes downtown Paris unique.

I am not opposed to density downtown… but, like all of these types of decisions… it needs to fit the community. Any major development should come with a clear plan for parking, traffic, infrastructure, and public space, with meaningful public input before final approvals are given.

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?

Yes, I would support improving public swimming access in the County, including seriously examining a County-owned pool. Families should not have to depend on limited availability in Brantford to access basic recreation and swimming lessons. As a parent of five kids, I feel this struggle.

That said, an indoor pool is a major capital and operating commitment, so I would want to see the full cost, projected usage, and potential partnerships before committing taxpayers to a specific project.

We should look at options including an indoor facility, another outdoor pool, partnerships with schools or community organizations, and whether provincial or federal funding is available. The goal should be affordable, reliable access to swimming for County residents, with a solution that is financially sustainable over the long term.

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 support exploring better transit connections between communities such as Paris, Burford and St. George, but I don’t think the County should look at transit in isolation.

We need to work much better with our neighbours in Brantford and develop a regional transportation plan that looks at how people actually move between the City and County for work, school, healthcare and recreation.

I would favour an approach that identifies where demand exists and builds connections to Brantford Transit rather than immediately creating a costly conventional bus system.

Any expansion needs a clear understanding of operating costs, ridership and available provincial and federal funding. One important part for me is that I believe seniors should be able to use the system free of charge.

The goal should be a regional system that is useful, affordable and sustainable.

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 biggest improvement I would like to see in Brant Transit is reliability. If people cannot get a ride when they need one, the service is not meeting its purpose.

I would look at increasing capacity, improving availability for essential trips such as work, medical appointments and school, and creating better options for same-day or shorter-notice travel.

I also think Brant Transit should be better integrated into a broader regional transportation plan with Brantford, including stronger connections with Brantford Transit.

As demand grows, we should use booking and ridership data to determine where scheduled service may make more sense than purely on-demand transportation.

And, again, I believe seniors should be able to use Brant Transit free of charge.

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?

My goal would be to reach the best possible agreement for County residents, not simply transfer land because the City has asked for it.

The County has been put in a difficult position because, if the municipalities cannot reach an agreement, the Province may ultimately step in. That makes it even more important that we negotiate carefully.

Before supporting any agreement, I would want clarity on the amount and location of land being transferred, protection of farmland, compensation and long-term tax impacts, servicing responsibilities, transportation and road connections, emergency services, and the future operation of the airport.

I also want residents and affected landowners to have the information early enough to meaningfully respond. Whatever happens here…the City and County need a much better working relationship going forward.

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 is my work with Lansdowne Children’s Centre, where I serve as Vice Chair of the Board and Chair of the Capital Steering Committee as the new treatment centre is being built.

It is a complex project involving the Board, staff, government partners, consultants, contractors and community stakeholders, all with different responsibilities and perspectives.

My role has been to help keep the project moving, ask the difficult questions, understand the financial and operational implications of decisions, and help bring people together when choices need to be made.

A project of this size requires collaboration, accountability and an ability to work through disagreements without losing sight of the end goal.

That experience has reinforced for me that good governance is not about having all the answers yourself. It is about doing your homework, listening to the right people and helping a group reach good decisions.

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?

Yes. I would support a one-year moratorium on new artificial intelligence data centres while the County properly understands the implications.

These facilities can have significant demands for electricity and water and can create concerns around noise, land use, infrastructure and emergency response. A one-year pause is reasonable if it gives the County time to establish clear policies and standards before applications arrive or proceed further.

That work should include evidence on water and energy capacity, noise, environmental impacts, fire protection, servicing costs and the long-term economic benefit to the County.

I am not opposed to technology or investment, but Council should understand what it is approving before committing land and infrastructure to developments of this scale. And erring on the side of caution while we figure out those answers makes the most sense.

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?

I would use the Long-Term Financial Plan as a guardrail, not as something that sits on a shelf.

Every major decision should be considered in terms of its full life-cycle cost, impact on reserves and debt, future operating costs and the effect on taxpayers over more than one budget year. New priorities may be worthwhile, but Council needs to understand what they displace and whether the County can afford to operate them long after the ribbon cutting.

I would also expect the assumptions in the plan to be reviewed regularly as growth, inflation, interest rates and project costs change.

My small business background has taught me that a plan is only useful if you actually use it to make decisions, measure results, and adjust when the numbers change.

Ella Haley

Growth numbers are being imposed on Brant County by the province. Our current Official Plan is a design for accommodating population growth projections to 59,00 by 2051. This plan calls for infilling within the existing settlement boundaries where we have existing and planned servicing (sewers, water), and areas designated for residential, commercial and employment. We need to ensure that we build affordable housing for people on limited incomes (young people, the employed, working families and seniors).

There are “limits to growth” if we hope to protect the basis of our economy: farmland, water, natural heritage. We are losing farmland at an alarming rate to housing, employment lands and gravel pits. I do not support any settlement boundary expansions, or conversion of employment land to residential.

This will be a big change for downtown Paris and should help the local Paris economy. We need to preserve the historical character of Paris, with building codes to ensure that residential development fits in.

I’m a swimmer and support public swimming facilities. If we were to build the Paris pool, we would need to have a fundraising campaign, so that we do not impose any additional taxes on ratepayers.

I am a champion of better public transit within Brant County (Burford, Paris, St. George) – this could be in the form of mini-buses. Bring back the Brantford to Paris bus. Have minibus routes to Six Nations, Simcoe, and Waterford. I support regional public transit – we must make it easier for people who don’t have access to a car to get to Guelph, Cambridge and KW.

Negotiate/subsidize Via to enable a train stop in Paris with adequate free parking and more frequent and affordable train rides from Brantford to Hamilton, Toronto, Woodstock and London. Parking at the Brantford train station should be free and expanded. This will reduce the number of cars on the road and help commuters.

GO Bus We also need more frequent and direct Go buses from Brantford to Hamilton Go station, with stops in West Brant.

How do we fund it: redistribute the budget so that public transit is more of a priority at the table. Start small with minibuses. Ensure that public transit is affordable for the users. Partner with Brantford and other communities. Fund the program through user fees, grants, reallocation of Brant County’s budget, and partnering with a provider.

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 have used Brant Transit to see how it works, and I have helped people to use it. It is a great improvement to get around, particularly in rural Brant County. I found it to be very affordable, but sometimes unreliable.

Concerns: Shared rides - some people say that they don’t want to drive to other places before they get to their stop. They find that they need to plan extra travel time because of this.

Some recommendations:

Make it easier to book rides, especially for people with disabilities or who can’t book the ride on their own.

Improve reliability so that riders can count on Brant Transit to get to work, and seniors/people with disabilities can count on getting picked up on time.

Have more frequent service, more vehicles available and longer service hours.

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?

I do not support any annexation of land in the Oakhill/Airport area. Brant owns the airport lands, and Brantford operates the airport. This relationship has been in place for many years. In 2017 Brantford annexed approximately 6,700 acres of mostly prime farmland. Brantford has not developed most of this land and does not need any more land from Brant County.

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?

As a tenured Assistant Professor, I taught and worked on a number of committees to provide education to students across Canada and throughout the world.

As a Head Kinesiologist in Rehabilitation Medicine in a Toronto teaching hospital (Wellesley), I worked with a team to provide care for many patients with disabilities and injuries. In particular, I ran support groups for stoke patients, and people with chronic pain, multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis.

As a current member of Brant County Council, I have worked in particular with the Oakhill/Airport community to negotiate a pause on Brantford’s proposed annexation. I have also worked closely with the residents in Cainsville to help them to have a say regarding the proposed Cainsville Employment Plan. I have worked with residents throughout Ward 5 and Brant County to try to address their concerns.

Yes.

I would use this as a guide in my decision making, but I would also seek feedback from the ratepayers on major expense items. For example, some residents wanted a referendum on the hospital levy. We need to reflect on the fact that Brantford had 2 hospitals. St. Joseph’s Hospital was a fully functioning hospital that was closed in 2001. The Province ordered it closed to “centralize acute care, eliminate hospital service duplication and cut healthcare costs” . “The recommendation was not received well by St. Joseph’s Hospital as it had just opened four renovated operating rooms, a day surgery and an outpatient area”. (“Brantford in the 1990s – Part 6, Jack Jackowetz, BScene)

I’m concerned about Development Charge Reduction Program that was introduced this year by the federal and provincial governments. Brant County has opted in and can apply for infrastructure funding to make up for the loss of income from development charges. This makes us dependent upon the federal and provincial government for infrastructure funding, but we need to remember that this funding is also taxpayers’ dollars. This makes us more dependent upon higher levels of government, that get to decide if they will fund us or not. We are basically funding the developers in order to meet the growth projections set by the province.

Sonia Brown

When approving future developments, Council must strictly consider:

Infrastructure Capacity: Ensuring our water, wastewater, emergency services, and roads can handle increased capacity before shovels hit the ground.

Community Alignment: Inviting residents to the table before major planning decisions are finalized, ensuring development serves current residents, not just developers.

Agricultural Preservation:

Protecting our vital farmland from premature or excessive urban sprawl.

Intensification in our downtown cores brings a complex mix of opportunities and pressures.

Potential Benefits: Increased foot traffic to support local small businesses, the revitalization of underutilized spaces, and providing diverse housing options that allow residents to downsize while staying in their community.

Potential Challenges: Severe strain on downtown parking, increased traffic congestion, and the risk of losing the unique architectural heritage and charm that makes downtown Paris a destination.

My role on Council would be to ensure that any approved design strictly respects heritage guidelines and includes a robust traffic and parking mitigation plan.

My Stance: I support exploring the feasibility of a public swimming facility within the County of Brant.

Approach: Given our climate, a new indoor facility would provide the greatest long-term value year-round. To keep it affordable, we must aggressively pursue federal and provincial infrastructure grants, as well as corporate partnerships, to ensure the capital cost does not fall entirely on the municipal tax base.

Connecting our distinct communities—like Paris, Burford, St. George, and our neighbors in Brantford—is essential for economic mobility, supporting seniors, and reducing our carbon footprint.

My View: I support a phased, demand-driven approach to regional transit connectivity rather than implementing a massive, costly system all at once.

Funding Strategy: Operating costs must be carefully balanced. The County should pursue shared service agreements with neighboring municipalities, leverage provincial gas tax funding, and look into public-private partnerships to ensure the system is financially sustainable and affordable for riders.

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

Brant Transit provides a necessary service, but there is clear room for improvement to better meet the needs of our residents. I would advocate for:

Booking Reliability: Streamlining the reservation system to reduce wait times and ensure residents can reliably get to medical appointments and workplaces.

Expanded Service Windows: Assessing the financial feasibility of extending hours into evenings and weekends to better serve shift workers and youth.

Enhanced Capacity: Ensuring the fleet matches growing peak-hour demand so no resident is left stranded due to a lack of available vehicles.

My ultimate goal is to protect the long-term economic and environmental interests of Brant County residents. Before supporting any agreement, my key conditions would include:

Revenue Protection: Securing fair, long-term tax-sharing or compensation mechanisms so the County does not lose vital municipal revenue.

Environmental Safeguards: Ensuring strict environmental assessments to protect surrounding agricultural lands and local water tables.

Service Impacts: Fully understanding how changes to the land jurisdiction affect municipal service delivery and infrastructure costs.

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?

The Situation: During the COVID-19 pandemic (2019–2022), all seven of my staff members became ill with COVID-19, leaving me as the only person available to care for 17 residents living with mental illness. One of my staff members and one resident were admitted to the ICU. It was an extremely challenging and stressful situation that required immediate action to ensure the safety and well-being of the residents.

My Role: As the owner of the home, I was responsible for managing the crisis and ensuring that the residents continued to receive the care and support they needed. Recognizing that I could not manage the situation alone, I contacted the City of Hamilton for assistance. With their support, temporary staff were arranged through Ontario Health atHome. I was responsible for managing and coordinating these staff members for approximately one month, until my regular team could return to work.

The Outcome: By acting quickly, recognizing the need for assistance, and working collaboratively with the City of Hamilton and Ontario Health atHome, I was able to maintain care and support for all 17 residents during a very difficult period. Everyone recovered, and the situation reinforced the importance of leadership, teamwork, adaptability, and asking for help when necessary.

The intense resource demands of data centers—specifically regarding water consumption, massive energy grid draws, and localized noise pollution—require a cautious, sober approach. My Commitment: Yes, I will propose/support a motion. Reasoning: Our local environment and resource sustainability must always come before rapid commercial expansion. We must fully understand the long-term ecological footprint before welcoming these high-intensity industries into our backyard.

The Long-Term Financial Plan must be a living roadmap for Council, not a document that sits on a shelf. If elected, I will use it as a benchmark for every fiscal decision:

Weighing New Priorities: Every new project or major investment must be evaluated against its impact on our projected long-term debt and reserves.

Affordability: I will oppose capital expenditures that cause municipal tax increases to outpace the financial realities of our hard-working families and seniors on fixed incomes. Compassionate leadership means ensuring our community remains affordable for the people who built it.

Ward 5 Candidate Q&A: Ward 5 candidates answer questions from Paris Independent readers

Recent Posts

Comments