Vancouver’s current approach has relied heavily on building specific regulations, reporting requirements and new construction standards. The City is now reviewing whether some of those rules duplicate provincial requirements or add cost and delay without enough additional benefit.

My approach is to keep the outcome, but improve the method: measure energy performance, indoor comfort, emissions and lifecycle cost; align with provincial standards where they achieve the same result; eliminate unnecessary duplication; and expand practical retrofit support for older rental, non profit and multi family buildings.

The focus should be less on adding layers of regulation and more on proving which measures actually reduce energy use, improve resilience and lower long term costs without making housing harder or more expensive to deliver.

Vancouver has long term sewer, rainwater and coastal adaptation plans, but delivery is spread across multiple programs and long timelines, making it difficult for residents to see which neighbourhoods face the greatest risk and when improvements will happen.

My approach is to combine sewer capacity, pipe condition, extreme rainfall modelling, sea level rise and planned housing growth into one risk based capital plan. High risk areas should have clear priorities, timelines and funding. Sewer upgrades should be coordinated with street reconstruction and redevelopment, while green rainwater infrastructure is expanded where it can reduce peak flows.

The City should publish annual results showing projects completed, capacity added, flood risk reduced, combined sewer overflows and whether work was delivered on time and on budget.

Vancouver has strong urban forest and parks strategies, but access to shade and green space is still uneven, especially in low canopy and hotter neighbourhoods.

My approach is to target investment block by block using heat, canopy, population growth and park access data. The City can create more green space without relying only on expensive land purchases by converting suitable boulevards, medians, curb extensions, excess road space and selected lanes into planted areas, rain gardens, small plazas and pocket parks during street reconstruction.

Where larger spaces are needed, the City can repurpose suitable City owned land, acquire strategic parcels or secure public space through redevelopment. Greenways should connect parks, schools, commercial areas and transit with trees, planting, safer crossings and green rainwater infrastructure.

Progress should be reported by neighbourhood, including canopy gained or lost, tree survival, new public green space created and capital investment. The goal is to put shade and green space where residents need it most.

Vancouver’s curb space has to serve many competing needs, but residents and businesses do not always have a clear view of the data and tradeoffs behind major parking changes. Poorly designed decisions can affect accessibility, loading, deliveries, local businesses, traffic flow and neighbourhood access.

My approach is to base major parking and curb changes on local data, including occupancy, loading demand, accessibility, transit access, traffic and business activity. Significant changes should be tested where practical, with clear objectives and community input before becoming permanent.

Results should be measured through parking availability, loading conflicts, accessibility, traffic impacts, business feedback and safety. If a change is not delivering the intended result, the City should adjust it.

Heat risk is not distributed evenly across Vancouver. Neighbourhoods with less tree canopy, older buildings and fewer accessible cooling options are more exposed, and emergency measures during heat waves do not address the underlying problem.

My approach is to use heat mapping, tree canopy, building age and vulnerability data to identify the highest-risk areas and prioritize investment there first. Expand shade trees, drinking fountains, misting stations and cooling access, improve cooling and filtration in City facilities, and support practical retrofits such as heat pumps and ventilation in older rental and non-profit housing.

Measure results by neighbourhood through canopy coverage, access to cooling, new shade and water infrastructure, retrofit uptake and changes in localized heat exposure. The goal is to reduce heat risk before extreme events happen, not simply react once temperatures rise.

Pair safer infrastructure with education on road rules, visibility, intersections, safe passing, sidewalk use and large-vehicle blind spots, working with schools, community groups and transportation partners.

Festival organizers face rising security, permitting, insurance and City-related costs, and several major Vancouver events have reported financial strain or scaled back programming. Council itself directed staff in April 2026 to develop a more stable, transparent multi-year Festival Support Fund, which shows the current system is still too reactive and uncertain.

My approach is to create a clearer one-window process for event approvals, publish City fees and timelines up front, coordinate departments earlier, and provide multi-year support where recurring free events demonstrate attendance, community value and responsible financial management. Support should not be automatic; larger grants should be linked to measurable public benefit and realistic budgets.

Measure results through permit processing times, City costs per event, number of events retained, attendance, external sponsorship leveraged, economic impact where measurable, cancellations and organizer satisfaction.

Vancouver has an established Public Art Program and a long-term Culture Shift strategy, but public art can become disconnected from neighbourhood priorities when residents cannot clearly see how projects are selected, what they cost or how they will be maintained over time.

My approach is to make project selection more transparent, connect public art to major infrastructure and public-space projects, expand opportunities for local and emerging artists, and ensure appropriate involvement of the Musqueam, Squamish Nation and Tsleil-Waututh Nation where projects relate to their lands, histories or cultural expression. Every permanent project should include lifecycle cost, maintenance responsibility and expected public benefit before approval.

Measure results through geographic distribution, local artist participation, project delivery on budget, maintenance condition, community engagement and public use of the spaces where art is installed.

Housing performance is currently reported through multiple City dashboards, annual reports, permit databases and construction statistics. That makes it difficult for residents to follow the full journey from an application entering City Hall to homes actually being completed. Approvals alone do not tell us whether housing is being built, how long projects are taking or where projects are getting stuck.

My approach is to create one continuously updated public dashboard showing the housing pipeline by neighbourhood and housing type: applications received, units under review, approvals, building permits, construction starts, homes under construction and completed homes. It should also show median processing times, time between approval and construction, affordability or tenure where available, major reasons for delay and whether annual housing targets are being met.

Projects should be tracked through clearly defined stages so residents can see where bottlenecks are occurring. When delays are primarily within City processes, the responsible department should identify the cause and corrective action. When projects stall because of financing, market conditions or other external factors, the dashboard should distinguish those from municipal delays.

Success should be measured by homes completed, approval-to-construction time, permit processing time, percentage of approved homes that actually reach construction, affordability mix and progress against annual targets. The goal is to shift the conversation from how many homes were announced or approved to how many were actually delivered.

Where municipal processes create avoidable duplication, unclear responsibilities or unnecessary delay, they can slow Nation-led housing and development and make coordination less effective.

My approach is to create a clearer municipal pathway for projects led by the Musqueam, Squamish Nation and Tsleil-Waututh Nation, with coordinated City review, defined points of contact and early identification of municipal requirements, while respecting Indigenous rights, title, jurisdiction and Nation-led decision-making.

Progress should be measured through approval timelines, issues resolved earlier in the process, reduced duplication and regular reporting developed in partnership with the Nations.

Foreign policy and international human-rights enforcement are primarily federal responsibilities, so the City’s direct ability to affect events abroad is limited. Vancouver does, however, spend public money and contract with suppliers around the world, giving it a practical lever through procurement.

My approach is to strengthen risk-based human-rights screening in City purchasing, enforce the existing Supplier Code of Conduct, and require corrective action where suppliers fail to meet labour and human-rights standards. The City should apply these standards consistently rather than selectively.

Measure results through contracts screened, supplier compliance, violations identified, corrective actions completed and annual reporting on ethical procurement. Vancouver already requires suppliers to follow its Supplier Code of Conduct and Ethical Purchasing Policy, which reference International Labour Organization standards.

Vancouver’s sidewalk network is only 80% complete, with about 450 km of sidewalks still missing. Of the roughly 2,200 km of existing sidewalks, about 253 km, or 12%, are rated Poor or Very Poor, and approximately 2,300 street corners still lack curb ramps. This means accessibility depends too much on where someone lives, and people using wheelchairs, walkers, strollers or other mobility aids can still encounter significant gaps.

My approach is to create a citywide Sidewalk Completion and Accessibility Program with every missing and deficient block mapped and prioritized. New sidewalks and reconstruction should be ranked using safety, accessibility, schools, senior facilities, transit, hospitals, parks, population density and pedestrian demand. Wherever possible, sidewalk work should be bundled with sewer replacement, road reconstruction and redevelopment so the City does the work once instead of repeatedly reopening the same street.

Set annual kilometre targets for new sidewalks and rehabilitation, dedicate capital funding to reducing the backlog, and publish a neighbourhood-level dashboard showing kilometres completed, remaining gaps, curb ramps installed, sidewalk condition and project costs.

The objective should be clear: steadily move Vancouver from 80% toward a complete, continuous and accessible sidewalk network, while bringing the poorest-condition sidewalks back to an acceptable standard.

Newcomers often have to navigate federal, provincial, municipal and nonprofit systems separately, making it difficult to know which organization provides which service. Vancouver’s Immigration Partnership already works to improve service access and coordination, but navigation can be made more practical and visible at the City level.

My approach is to create a clearer multilingual City entry point connecting newcomers to settlement organizations, City services, libraries, recreation, business resources, employment supports and civic participation. Work through the Vancouver Immigration Partnership rather than duplicating services already delivered effectively by community organizations or senior governments.

Measure results through service referrals, language access, participation, partner response times, newcomer feedback and successful connections to existing programs.

Vancouver’s current framework places substantial emphasis on the safety and non-discriminatory treatment of sex workers, but prevention and transition supports should be more prominent. The City itself identifies prevention of sexual exploitation and opportunities to transition from sex work as priorities, yet these need clearer delivery and measurable outcomes.

My approach is to strengthen education for youth and vulnerable populations about exploitation, coercion, online recruitment and trafficking; work with schools, community organizations and service providers on prevention; and expand practical exit pathways through housing, employment assistance, counselling and skills training. Municipal licensing and zoning should also be reviewed to ensure City rules do not enable exploitative businesses or create unsafe neighbourhood impacts.

The City should fully support enforcement against trafficking, procuring, exploitation of minors and illegal purchasing of sexual services, while recognizing that these criminal-law powers primarily belong to federal law and police. Canadian law already criminalizes purchasing sexual services and procuring another person for that purpose.

Measure results through prevention-program participation, referrals to employment and housing, successful transitions out of sex work, exploitation and trafficking investigations, youth-safety indicators and compliance with City licensing requirements.

The City has adopted policies specifically focused on the safety and inclusion of transgender, Two-Spirit and gender-diverse residents. The challenge is to ensure those protections are delivered in a way that also respects Vancouver’s wider diversity of religious, cultural and personal beliefs. BC law protects people from discrimination in public services based on both gender identity or expression and religion, while the Charter protects freedom of conscience, religion, belief and expression.

My approach is based on mutual respect: no resident should be denied City services, treated unfairly or made unsafe because of who they are. At the same time, inclusion should not require people to abandon sincerely held religious or personal beliefs or affirm views they do not share. City policies should focus on respectful conduct, equal access and non-discrimination rather than policing personal belief.

Implementation should be measured through access complaints, barriers resolved, service consistency, staff training and response times, while ensuring City policies protect both equality and freedom of conscience. The principle is simple: respect everyone, discriminate against no one, and do not force one person’s beliefs onto another.

Use regular service reviews to identify duplication, outdated processes and unnecessary costs across departments. Improve procurement, contract management and operational efficiency before asking residents or businesses to pay more. Publish where savings are found, what service improvements are being made and how funds are being redirected toward essential priorities. The goal is not across the board cuts. It is better value from every public dollar while protecting frontline services and maintaining long term financial stability.

Create a simple public accountability dashboard that allows residents to see what Council committed to, what stage each major initiative is at, how much has been spent, what results have been achieved and why something is delayed or changed. Major projects should have clear milestones and regular updates. When goals are missed, the City should explain why and what corrective action is being taken. Accountability should be easy for residents to understand, not buried in lengthy reports.

Integrate land use, housing, transportation, utilities, parks, community facilities and climate resilience into one coordinated growth framework. Tie population and housing growth forecasts to infrastructure capacity, capital budgets, asset condition and service demand by area. Use measurable indicators such as housing delivery, sewer and water capacity, transit access, road condition, park access and community-facility demand to identify where investment is required before or alongside growth. Align the Official Development Plan, Capital Plan and annual budgets so major projects have defined costs, funding sources, timelines and performance targets. Review progress regularly and update priorities when demand, costs or infrastructure conditions change.

Build on Shape Your City and Vancouver’s existing engagement framework by establishing a consistent protocol for major plans and projects. Before consultation, publish the problem, key data, realistic options, estimated costs, constraints and what is actually open to public influence. Use online and in person engagement and track participation to identify neighbourhoods and communities that are underrepresented. After consultation, publish a standardized “What We Heard, What Changed and Why” report showing the major feedback received, what was incorporated, what was not and the reasons. Engagement should begin early enough to influence the recommendation presented to Council, not after the major direction has effectively been determined.

Build on Vancouver’s existing Children, Youth and Families Advisory Committee by creating a consistent youth-engagement process for major decisions involving housing, transportation, climate, public spaces and community services. For major initiatives with significant long-term impacts, require staff reports to include a short Youth Impact section summarizing how young people were consulted, the issues they raised and how those concerns were addressed.

Hold regular youth roundtables with Council and City staff, working through schools, community centres and youth-serving organizations to reach young people beyond existing advisory committees. Use both digital and in-person participation, publish participation numbers and report back on what changed as a result. The goal is not another consultation exercise. It is to give young people an identifiable point in the decision-making process where their input can influence the final recommendation.

My approach is to work with Vancouver Coastal Health to establish clearer triage criteria, coordinated dispatch pathways and shared performance measures across City-funded crisis services. Lower-risk health crises should be directed to health-led teams, while police remain available when there is an immediate safety risk.

Measure response times, police diversions, repeat crisis contacts, successful connections to care and outcomes across each response model.

The unpredictable illicit drug supply remains the main driver of overdose deaths, but responsibility is divided across health, policing and different levels of government. The City does not control health services, which makes coordination especially important.

My approach is to use the City’s zoning, permitting, outreach and partnership roles to support evidence-based overdose prevention and faster connections to treatment, while advocating to the Province for adequate health and recovery capacity. Services should be coordinated with responsible public-space management rather than treating health and neighbourhood safety as competing goals.

Measure overdose deaths and incidents, treatment referrals, successful service connections, response times and recurring public-space impacts.

Treatment capacity is primarily a provincial and Vancouver Coastal Health responsibility. Access has improved through Vancouver’s Road to Recovery model, but the City still has an important role in removing municipal barriers and helping treatment and recovery facilities open where they are needed. Provincial data show that urgent withdrawal-management waits have fallen substantially, while routine clients can still wait longer.

My approach is to identify suitable City-owned sites, streamline zoning and permitting for qualified treatment and recovery providers, and advocate for provincial funding tied to measurable service levels and continuity of care.

Measure median wait times, treatment capacity, successful transitions from withdrawal to treatment, follow-up care and connections to stable housing.

Police officers are still being drawn into situations involving mental-health crises, substance use and social distress where enforcement may not be the primary need. That matters because using the wrong response can consume police capacity, increase costs and fail to connect people with appropriate services.

My approach is to expand proven health-led and community-based responses in partnership with Vancouver Coastal Health and community organizations, including models such as the Mobile Crisis De-escalation Team and Indigenous Crisis Response Team. Police should remain available when there is violence, immediate danger or a criminal investigation. Vancouver already uses both non-police teams and police-health partnerships, giving the City a base to evaluate and expand what works.

Measure results through response times, calls successfully diverted from police, repeat calls, connections to treatment or services, use-of-force incidents and cost per response.

Police funding debates can become focused on the size of the budget rather than what residents are receiving for that investment. That matters because both under-resourcing essential policing and increasing spending without measuring results can weaken public confidence and fiscal accountability.

My approach is to assess annual funding requests against calls for service, serious and violent crime, investigative workload, response times, staffing pressures and clearly defined service outcomes. Council should also examine whether some calls can be handled more effectively by health, outreach or other services before adding police capacity.

The Police Board prepares the provisional policing budget and Council considers it under the BC Police Act, so decisions must respect that governance structure.

Measure results through emergency response times, clearance rates, repeat offending indicators where available, service demand, overtime, staffing deployment and cost per major service area.

Police misconduct complaints are overseen independently by BC’s Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner, not by the Mayor or City Council. The weakness is that accountability can be difficult for residents to understand, and lessons from complaints or systemic investigations do not always translate visibly into organizational change.

My approach is to respect the independence of the OPCC while using the City’s and Police Board’s roles to improve transparency around systemic recommendations, policy changes and corrective actions. Where legally permitted, the public should be able to see what issue was identified, what institutional response followed and whether the recommended changes were implemented.

Measure progress through complaint-processing timelines, implementation of OPCC recommendations, recurring complaint themes, policy changes, training or corrective actions and publicly reported follow-up.

Enforcement responds after an incident occurs, but recurring public-safety problems are also connected to factors such as untreated mental illness, substance use, housing instability and social marginalization.

My approach is to combine focused policing for violence and persistent criminal behaviour with better coordination among housing, health, outreach, youth services and community organizations. City funding and partnerships should prioritize interventions where data shows repeated calls, victimization or public disorder, while pressing the Province to provide the treatment, health and justice services that fall under provincial responsibility.

Measure results through repeat calls for service, repeat victimization, violent incidents, referrals successfully connected to services, neighbourhood safety indicators and whether high-demand locations show sustained improvement rather than temporary displacement.

Recreation facilities are managed by the elected Park Board, while City Council plays a major role in approving capital funding. My approach would be to use the Mayor’s role in budgeting and citywide planning to support transparent, evidence-based investment priorities developed with the Park Board.

Funding decisions should consider facility condition, utilization, waitlists, accessibility, population growth and geographic coverage. Major renewals should also be coordinated so nearby communities are not left without essential recreation services at the same time.

Results should be reported through facility condition, participation, accessibility improvements, closure time, project costs and whether major renewals are delivered on schedule and budget.

Vancouver has strong urban forest and parks strategies, but access to shade and green space is still uneven, especially in low canopy and hotter neighbourhoods.

My approach is to target investment block by block using heat, canopy, population growth and park access data. The City can create more green space without relying only on expensive land purchases by converting suitable boulevards, medians, curb extensions, excess road space and selected lanes into planted areas, rain gardens, small plazas and pocket parks during street reconstruction.

Where larger spaces are needed, the City can repurpose suitable City owned land, acquire strategic parcels or secure public space through redevelopment. Greenways should connect parks, schools, commercial areas and transit with trees, planting, safer crossings and green rainwater infrastructure.

Progress should be reported by neighbourhood, including canopy gained or lost, tree survival, new public green space created and capital investment. The goal is to put shade and green space where residents need it most.

Health services and City growth planning can operate on different timelines, which can leave fast-growing neighbourhoods without nearby services that match increasing population needs.

My approach is to incorporate health-service access into major neighbourhood and redevelopment planning. Map population growth, age demographics and service gaps, then work with Vancouver Coastal Health, the Province and community providers to identify where clinics, primary care, mental health, seniors and other community health services will be needed. Use suitable City-owned sites, community facilities, redevelopment opportunities and faster municipal approvals to help partners establish services closer to residents.

Measure results through service locations added, neighbourhood coverage, partner funding secured, project delivery timelines and improved access to services in areas experiencing the fastest growth.

Public washroom access is still inconsistent by location, operating hours, accessibility and maintenance. That matters because unreliable access affects seniors, families, tourists, delivery workers, people with disabilities and people experiencing homelessness, and can push basic sanitation problems into streets, parks and businesses.

My approach is to build on the City’s new washroom framework by identifying service gaps using pedestrian activity, transit hubs, parks, commercial areas and vulnerable-population needs. Add washrooms through major capital projects where practical, expand hours at high-demand locations, improve universal accessibility and signage, and use attendants or technology where they improve cleanliness and reliability. Council approved a citywide Washroom Strategic Framework in January 2026, including annual implementation updates and integration into major capital projects.

Measure results through geographic coverage, operating hours, uptime, cleanliness, accessibility, repair response times and complaints. The standard should be simple: if a public washroom is listed as available, people should be able to find it, access it and expect it to work.

Indigenous languages are increasingly visible in Vancouver, but their presence across civic spaces and services is still inconsistent. That matters because language is directly connected to culture, history and the living relationship of the local Nations to this territory.

My approach is not for City Hall to decide how Indigenous languages should be used. Work with the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations to identify appropriate opportunities for Nation-approved place names, signage, pronunciation resources, civic facilities and cultural programming. Build language considerations into relevant capital and naming projects from the beginning rather than adding them at the end.

Measure progress through Nation-approved naming and signage projects, civic facilities incorporating local languages, public pronunciation resources and annual reporting on agreed language initiatives.

Where municipal processes create avoidable duplication, unclear responsibilities or unnecessary delay, they can slow Nation-led housing and development and make coordination less effective.

My approach is to create a clearer municipal pathway for projects led by the Musqueam, Squamish Nation and Tsleil-Waututh Nation, with coordinated City review, defined points of contact and early identification of municipal requirements, while respecting Indigenous rights, title, jurisdiction and Nation-led decision-making.

Progress should be measured through approval timelines, issues resolved earlier in the process, reduced duplication and regular reporting developed in partnership with the Nations.

The City has reconciliation and UNDRIP commitments, but implementation spans many departments and projects, making progress difficult for the public to follow and creating a risk that consultation happens too late in planning.

My approach is to involve the local Nations earlier in major land-use, infrastructure and policy processes where their rights and interests are affected, while respecting that Indigenous title and self-government extend beyond municipal authority. Use the existing UNDRIP Action Plan as the delivery framework, assign responsibility and timelines to City departments, and coordinate issues that require provincial or federal action instead of pretending the City can resolve them alone.

Measure results through completion of agreed UNDRIP deliverables, reporting on timelines, Nation participation in relevant planning processes and transparent annual progress updates. Vancouver’s current UNDRIP plan contains 88 deliverables across 18 action groups.

Naming decisions are handled through different City and Park Board processes, and the path from proposal to final decision can be difficult to understand. Indigenous names also require cultural knowledge and protocols that cannot simply be determined by City Hall.

My approach is to establish clear timelines and criteria for civic naming and renaming, engage the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations early on proposals involving Indigenous history or language, and prioritize opportunities to recognize original place names where the Nations support doing so. Residents should be able to see why a name is being considered, who was consulted and how the final decision was reached.

Measure results through processing times, completed naming projects, public reporting on consultation and the number of Nation-supported Indigenous naming initiatives delivered.

Recognition of residential-school history can become concentrated around commemorative dates while the broader work is spread across multiple City initiatives and difficult for residents to track. The impact of residential schools is not an issue the City can solve alone, but municipal government does have responsibilities around education, public spaces, heritage, employment practices and reconciliation.

My approach is to identify which Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action fall within City jurisdiction, connect them to Vancouver’s UNDRIP and reconciliation work, assign responsible departments and publish progress. Commemoration and public education should be developed with Indigenous Nations, survivors and communities rather than designed unilaterally by City Hall.

Measure results through a public tracker showing relevant Calls to Action, actions completed, work underway, responsible departments and outstanding commitments. The City currently states that it is implementing TRC Calls to Action that fall within its jurisdiction.

Vancouver’s curb space has to serve many competing needs, but residents and businesses do not always have a clear view of the data and tradeoffs behind major parking changes. Poorly designed decisions can affect accessibility, loading, deliveries, local businesses, traffic flow and neighbourhood access.

My approach is to base major parking and curb changes on local data, including occupancy, loading demand, accessibility, transit access, traffic and business activity. Significant changes should be tested where practical, with clear objectives and community input before becoming permanent.

Results should be measured through parking availability, loading conflicts, accessibility, traffic impacts, business feedback and safety. If a change is not delivering the intended result, the City should adjust it.

Pair safer infrastructure with education on road rules, visibility, intersections, safe passing, sidewalk use and large-vehicle blind spots, working with schools, community groups and transportation partners.