Positions & Priorities

We need more homes at a range of prices, including rentals and supportive housing. I support more infill and density where the infrastructure can handle it, particularly downtown and around the GO station, rather than relying only on outward growth.

Before we sell surplus City land, I want us to ask whether housing is the better long-term use. When the existing police headquarters is no longer needed, the downtown site should be considered for housing.

Growth also has to pay attention to water, sewer, streets and transit. Approving homes without planning the infrastructure that serves them simply moves the cost down the road.

September 22, 2026: At Finance and Labour Relations, United Housing asked the City to consider a municipal loan of up to $800,000 for its 24–26 Brunswick Street project. The staff report put the preliminary project cost at about $3.925 million and noted that, unlike a grant, loan repayments could replenish the City’s housing reserve.

I supported continuing the discussion with United Housing, but I asked staff to look beyond this one request. Could Stratford expand the capital available and structure it as a loan program capable of supporting more United Housing-type projects? The point is to lend municipal capital rather than spend it as a one-time grant: as principal is repaid, it returns to the fund and can be used again. That does not eliminate lending risk or the City’s opportunity cost, but it could allow the same public capital to support more housing projects over time.

As this comes back to Council, I want that broader option quantified. One scenario I want examined is a $3-million revolving housing fund. Using the Brunswick proposal only as an illustration, $800,000 of City financing sits within a preliminary $3.925-million project. At the same capital ratio, $3 million of municipal lending capacity would correspond to about $14.7 million of total project activity and roughly 34 units. Those numbers are illustrative, not a forecast; future projects would have different costs, funding sources and unit counts.

I also think we should distinguish between financing the creation of housing and helping individual households afford it. They are related problems, but they do not necessarily require the same tool. Capital financing can help get units built; income-based assistance can be targeted to households that need it.

Watch my September 22 discussion from 12:15 →   City of Stratford: Finance & Labour Relations Sub-committee →   United Housing: Brunswick Street Apartments →

I support moving the shared community hub forward. I do not support treating the entire eighteen-acre site as one enormous municipal building project.

Council has approved a City contribution of up to $15 million toward the shared facility. Before any further major commitment, I want firm partner contributions, realistic operating costs and real evidence of private-sector interest in the rest of the site.

I was originally open to retaining more of the existing superstructure. As the cost and complexity became clearer, I changed my view. I said at council that Stratford could put its financial position at serious risk if we get the scale wrong. The railway history matters, but the structure should not dictate the plan regardless of cost.

I want the hub deliverable in the next council term and the rest of The Grand Trunk developed in stages, with housing, public space and private investment all part of a long-term plan.

City of Stratford: next phase of The Grand Trunk →   Council discussion →

Events matter, but they are not the whole tourism economy. Hotels, restaurants, shops, theatres, galleries and other businesses depend on one another. I want our Municipal Accommodation Tax policy to reflect that wider ecosystem rather than create competing objectives.

My preference is one coherent tourism framework with Destination Stratford central to the work, while the City retains a modest reserve for legitimate municipal needs. I have supported a 10% City reserve rather than creating a second tourism stream with overlapping administration.

More people living downtown, better regional transportation and more reasons to visit throughout the year would make the centre of Stratford more resilient for residents as well as visitors.

City of Stratford: MAT Ad-Hoc Committee →

My first infrastructure priorities are the basics: roads, water and sewer, followed by work that unlocks housing and prepares Stratford for growth. Around the GO station, we should plan for more residents and the infrastructure needed to support them.

The new Wright Boulevard police headquarters is estimated at $36 million: $12 million for the property and $24 million for renovations. At that scale, I want disciplined project management, regular public cost reporting and careful control of contingencies and change orders.

When budgets are tight, non-essential beautification and later project phases without secure funding should come after core infrastructure and obligations we already know we have.

City of Stratford: Wright Boulevard police headquarters →

I have been specific about where I would look first. I favour selling the Normal School to eliminate the costs associated with that asset. I would defer studies that can wait, cosmetic upgrades and new administrative positions when the budget is under pressure. I also want us to review whether fleet vehicles are better owned or leased.

Professional project management should help reduce the very large contingency allowances attached to major projects such as Wright Boulevard and The Grand Trunk.

There is also a timing problem when new housing is occupied before MPAC assessment catches up. I want the City to quantify the property-tax revenue delayed by that lag. Where revenue is reasonably expected, it should be treated as a known timing contingency when setting the levy rather than simply passed on to existing taxpayers.

StratfordToday: my answer on keeping the tax levy in check →

The City has a real role in housing and homelessness: prevention, outreach, supportive housing and making sure local services work together. But municipalities cannot substitute for provincial responsibility for health care, mental health, addictions and income support.

I support supportive housing where the operating plan is sustainable and the outcomes are measured. I want us to be able to show that the money we spend is actually helping people become safer and more securely housed.

Sustainability should also be practical: buildings and vehicles that use less energy, infrastructure designed for a changing climate, and growth that protects green space where possible. Those choices should be evaluated for both environmental and long-term financial results.