In 2014, I saw a divided municipality, a divided council, and more specifically a group of Ward 2 councillors that were not working together. I saw taxpayers struggling under two terms of large tax increases and people that were not getting the help they needed. I saw families not getting the ‘quality of life’ infrastructure that they needed.
So I ran, believing that I could help address those issues. Since then Ward 2 and the council have come together. We delivered a tax increase below inflation, the lowest in a term of council. We’ve built new parks and trails.
I’m running because there is still work to be done, to attract doctors, attract residents and pay down debt.
It’s been a privilege to serve, and I’ve worked hard to try to deserve that privilege.
- Do you support increasing funding for infrastructure given the fact several culverts and bridges – including the Third Street Bridge – have had emergency issues and closures recently?
Yes. We have an infrastructure deficit of about $40-million and a backlog of nearly 10 times that. Over the term 4.8% of our 5.6% tax increase has gone into infrastructure. We need to continue to fund it. More than that, we need to find better ways of stretching those dollars.
- Would you support a tax freeze or rollback if it meant reduced staff and/or services?
But it is not an either/or situation. Over the term, we’ve kept our operational budget flat. Just a 0.8% increase over four years. We’ve merged departments, found efficiencies and continue to eliminate redundancies. We hired a lawyer, and have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in consultant costs in the process.
- Would you support shifting some services to the private sector if those services could be done more efficiently that way?
Chatham-Kent has already done that in many areas. Garbage pickup, paving, and grass cutting to name a few.
- Do you believe we need a municipal ombudsman or ethics commissioner?
Because of course we do. We already have an integrity commissioner.
- Do you support investigating a reduction in the number of council members?
Fewer voices means less representation for rural needs. Fewer councilors means full time and no cost savings. It also means the potential for more quid-pro-quo deal making behind the scenes. It doesn’t result in better decision making, it results in worse decisions being made slightly faster. Removing half the players from the Maple Leafs doesn’t make them a better team.
- Should the municipality try to land an Ontario Cannabis Store as soon as possible?
Because why wouldn’t we? Do you really want to lose an economic opportunity to neighbouring municipalities?
- Should council be more proactive in terms of working with landowners with contaminated wells?
This is the biggest blunder of the past four years and my largest mistake. I regret the way I voted. We’ve taken steps to address it, but more needs to be done.
- Some critics say the municipal building department is an impediment to development in C-K. Do you agree?
The horror stories I could tell are legion. From unnecessary hoops and red tape, we are the example of what not to do. We make it far more difficult than neighbouring municipalities to build a home or construct a business.
- Do you believe Chatham needs a new twin-pad arena?
I believe Chatham-Kent needs a new arena placed near the 401 for access for all residents. Without provincial or federal funding though, it’s a nonstarter. We need high level government help, and we need a plan to divest Memorial and Erickson.
- Should the municipality cut back on its expenditures for overseas economic development efforts?
Focus closer to home. Draw a circle 500km around Chatham-Kent. That’s the target area.
- Should municipal councillors ever be forced to go the Freedom of Information route when seeking municipal information?
There are a number of privacy laws in place that supersede municipal councillor powers. Employment history, health records to name a few.
- Should members of the public have more access to municipal information without having to resort to an FOI?
Transparency and accountability are paramount. There is a caveat that there are a couple of people that take up an inordinate amount of staff time and therefore residents tax dollars on literally hundreds of issues. The cost of those FOI requests by those who would require information down to the minutiae should be borne by the requester, not the taxpayer.
