My Positions

E&N railway restoration

I support the restoration of the E&N rail corridor for both passenger and freight service, in cooperation with the Island Corridor Foundation and taking inspiration from the Reconciliation Corridor Initiative signed in December 2025. Vancouver Island has one major remaining railway corridor, and roughly eighty percent of the Island's population lives within a few kilometres of the line. Restoration reduces transportation emissions, reduces highway congestion, addresses the accident record on the Malahat highway, and has the potential for measurable economic and tourism benefits.

Both freight and passenger rail should be actively promoted by the City of Nanaimo, as a means of connecting our deep-sea port, airport, and logistics strategy for the next forty years. The essential first step is tangible cooperation between every stakeholder along the length of the corridor, including the fourteen First Nation governments and the municipalities. Our timing to add to the conversation could not be better, as municipalities in the Capital Regional District are already planning to restore a segment of the E&N from Langford to Victoria through the Reconciliation Corridor Initiative.

We need to make it possible for the next generation to board a train in Nanaimo and arrive in Victoria without the need to traverse the Malahat highway. Recent climate events have demonstrated just how vulnerable we are to closures, and the accident record is proof that an alternative route is sorely needed. Vancouver Island's population is projected to grow significantly by mid-century, especially here in Nanaimo, and it is time that City Council incorporated rail transportation as part of the vision for a less congested region.

Removing pay parking from city streets

I support the removal of pay parking from city streets in the downtown core and around the Nanaimo Regional General Hospital. Much of the revenue is consumed by the outsourced contract that enforces the bylaw and through the cost of maintaining the meters and signage. It not only discourages downtown patronage to our local businesses, but it adds an ongoing cost to patients and their families arriving for their appointments. Healthcare professionals arriving for shifts at the regional hospital often cannot find parking on the Island Health property, and are subject to ticketing by the very city that claims to be desperately attempting to attract them to live here.

The city should not be profiting from patients or from the workforce delivering their care. The preferred mechanism is four-hour time-limited free parking, which preserves turnover for downtown businesses while removing the financial deterrent and the stress of a ticket when a hospital appointment runs long. It is far more effective to promote alternative forms of transportation for those who can adjust their schedules than to penalize individuals who have no alternatives.

Fiscally responsible city policy

I support a fiscally responsible approach to city policy, and I say this with real financial governance experience rather than as a slogan. Every spending decision should be tested against three questions: what public need is being addressed, what is the lifetime cost, and how is success measured? The benefit to the broader community has to warrant the figure spent, as we endeavour to do the greater amount of good for the greatest number of people.

Council should take an active approach to the budget process, working toward a general property tax levy that increases at the level of Statistics Canada national CPI rather than above it. Council should also hold the distinction between critical infrastructure and beautification firmly. Repairing a water main is an obligation to the safety and wellbeing of our residents. A decorative streetscape is an aspiration that can wait until the fiscal position is sufficient to proceed without over-burdening our tax base.

Housing affordability

Nanaimo is a beautiful city with a central location on Vancouver Island, but it has become increasingly unaffordable to many of us who live here. I've heard directly about the struggles of young adults seeking to one day start a family, and seniors on fixed incomes who are being priced out of the housing market. Renters have the least protection against the financial strain that our current system has created due to an imbalance in supply.

We need a Council that is committed to building affordable housing on city-owned land, in areas that have already been designated for high density. This will allow residents to access the amenities, public transportation, and employment opportunities that they rely on. That access is the standard of living we aspire to provide to everyone who calls Nanaimo home. Responsible development with reduced permitting delays will require an investment in the city staff who ultimately perform the administrative work to move housing projects forward.

Accessible public infrastructure

Public infrastructure exists to serve the entire population, and this includes people with mobility challenges and other accessibility needs. Infrastructure decisions and investments made today set the path forward, as well as influencing future decisions for decades to come. Nanaimo should ensure that future projects continue to meet the needs of everyone who uses them, not just in the immediate vicinity with the minimum standards, but with a vision that incorporates all municipal and regional services together.

People with diverse abilities and older adults face higher rates of mobility challenges, and although well-intentioned, active transportation simply does not suit everyone. When faced with limited resources drawn from city taxes, municipal governments need to evaluate a project not only by the individuals who will be able to benefit from it, but also by the people who will be excluded. As we renew urban infrastructure in an environmentally conscious way, the City Council must not overlook the crucial aspect of accessibility that people with diverse abilities and our aging population will require.

Data centre construction

I oppose the construction of AI data centres in our city, as they draw heavily on the region's water and electricity supply. The main concern is large-scale facilities whose water consumption is unlimited under current regulations and whose penalties for overuse are set low enough that it can be treated as a cost of doing business. Council needs to carefully assess whether our actions truly support local people or the profits of multinational corporations.

Clean drinking water is a resource every resident of the region depends on to live, and it must be shared among all our current and future businesses as well. Electricity load without a plan to add capacity is the second grounds for opposition. The tax revenue such facilities generate is insufficient to warrant the resource consumption, and the current regulatory framework does not adequately protect our future generations from the downstream effects of such a facility.

Rock City wetland development

I oppose the development that is currently proposed at the Rock City wetland. Although the development permit has been approved through delegated authority, significant environmental concerns remain unresolved. The broader groundwater system and seasonal hydrology supporting the wetland has not received sufficient independent review. The building permit has not yet been issued by city staff, and Council has an opportunity to take direct and immediate action following the municipal election this October.

The six-storey, 102-unit residential building proposed for 3400 Barrington Road, immediately upslope from a sensitive pine swamp ecosystem in Linley Valley, would require significant blasting and excavation of steep rocky terrain. The site sits directly above a groundwater-fed wetland system, and residents, biologists, and provincial experts are concerned this work could alter the groundwater pathways and seasonal water flow that sustain the wetland ecosystem, impacting birds, insects, and of course, the neighbourhood beavers.

The Rock City wetland is cherished by Nanaimo residents for its natural beauty and close connection to the Linley Valley park. Most residents support responsible housing development in appropriate locations, but not at the expense of irreplaceable wetland ecosystems and watershed functions. On municipal planning grounds, the development site itself sits outside the Official Community Plan's growth areas, and lacks close transit access. It is not proximate to the amenities such a development is meant to enable, and these secondary considerations to the environmental case reinforce the case against it.

Tax increases above annual inflation

I oppose general property tax levy increases above the level of Statistics Canada national CPI of the previous year. Most workers and seniors in Nanaimo do not receive annual raises in the range of three percent, and recent increases are unsustainable for young families and for people on fixed-income pensions. When public sector contracts are in the realm of only three percent a year, serious questions must be asked of our elected officials who regularly approve budgets that appear simply out of touch with the average person. Council's obligation is to work within its means and to find innovative ways to close budget gaps, rather than to push the shortfall onto the residential tax base.

The 2026 annual operating budget for Nanaimo is over 225 million dollars, with a project budget of over 90 million for the same time period. During the next Council term, councillors should take an active approach when decisions are made, discerning the essential infrastructure upgrades from the optional beautification projects that serve largely as media events for those privileged few to cut a red ribbon. It is certainly difficult to offer a dissenting opinion on Council when public pressure mounts, but that is the weight of responsibility for accountable civic governance.