Anna Meksavanh

Please describe one concrete policy, program, or decision you would support to address both encampments and permanent housing.candidate's own words

I support a policy that prioritizes outreach and addiction support in a housing-first strategy. I believe a holistic and equitable approach is necessary, as a single large-scale housing project cannot fix the complex social issues driving this crisis. To ensure this strategy succeeds, I would support decisions made in direct partnership with existing community supports to: 1) Address the root causes of homelessness through immediate, specialized outreach. 2) Provide permanent, safe housing that gives individuals immediate stability. 3) Wrap tailored supports around residents, including addiction and mental health services so they can truly thrive and regain independence.

Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on housing?candidate's own words

I firmly believe that safe housing is a human right, and our policies must reflect that reality. When people lack a stable place to live, it becomes nearly impossible to maintain a job, stay healthy, or keep children succeeding in school. By investing in accessible, affordable housing and protecting renters, we aren't just helping individuals, we are building a stronger, safer, and more economically resilient community for everyone.

• Reallocate space on selected streets (e.g. road diets, transit lanes, protected bike lanes)
• Prioritize active transportation improvements during routine resurfacing
• Focus improvements around schools, transit corridors, and commercial areas

1. Invest in rapid transit to anchor growth
2. Use transit to shape land use
3. Prioritize lower-cost or incremental transit improvements
4. Prioritize maximizing operational efficiency
5. Prioritize expanding coverage area

Yes, sidewalks should be cleared alongside roads as part of regular winter maintenance

Improve existing subsidies and discounts, but maintain fares for most riders

Please describe one criterion or principle that should not be compromised when making transit investment decisions.candidate's own words

Equity of access. Public transit is a community service meant to bring us all together. Our investments should always ensure that everyone, especially neighbours who rely on it most, have a reliable way to get to work, school, and doctor appointments.

Please name one specific street, corridor, or project where you would prioritize these changes.candidate's own words

I would like to prioritize the Huron Road and Fischer-Hallman Road transit corridor, to better connect the south side of Kitchener to the rest of Kitchener. There has been, and continues to be immense residential development on the south side of Kitchener. Making it critical to establish a high-frequency transit link that connects this dense part of the community directly to the city core and other parts of the region. Taking public transit from the south side of Kitchener to downtown and nearby post-secondary institutions takes more than twice as long as driving, and forces commuters through multiple time consuming transfers. Prioritizing this corridor with a direct, transfer-free express option will bridge these gaps and provide a truly realistic, competitive commuting option for local residents and students that does not involve a car.

Describe one concrete policy, incentive, or decision you would prioritize to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Where possible, explain how it balances environmental goals with fiscal responsibility.candidate's own words

Ensuring our house is in order would be a good start, so I would support transitioning part of the municipal fleet to lower-emission vehicles. It balances environmental goals with fiscal responsibility as the transitioning process would be phased, helping to offset higher upfront costs with long-term operational savings. There is also the opportunity to not have the funding come out of property taxes and leverage external funding and financing options. This will also help the Region fulfill its 50x30 pledge for reducing greenhouse gases.

Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on sustainability?candidate's own words

Sustainability is no longer an optional choice or a passing fad; it has become an absolute necessity. To ensure our communities remain resilient and supportive for future generations, we must adopt sustainable practices that help us adapt to a changing climate and protect our local economy.

1. Promote and support low-barrier spaces for local producers to distribute and sell food
2. Partner with other levels of government to develop local food hubs that reduce costs and barriers for small businesses
3. Develop a local food strategy, including research on how land-use change affects the food system
4. Encourage and support local landowners to rent to newcomer farmers
5. Leave local food livelihoods to the private market

Please describe one concrete policy, program, or decision you would support to strengthen the local food system.candidate's own words

Building a stronger and resilient community requires a strong local food system. Right now, finding fresh, affordable local food in our city is far too difficult for many residents. By bringing this food directly into our neighborhoods, we remove the geographic and economic barriers to healthy eating. I support launching a network of neighborhood-scale community food hubs on public land to achieve three critical goals: 1) Barrier-Free Distribution: Providing rent-free market spaces so local producers and new farmers can sell directly to residents without high startup costs. 2) Affordable Local Access: Putting fresh, nutritious food within walking distance of our neighborhoods at prices families can actually afford. 3) Space to Grow: Creating dedicated incubator plots and community gardens to give new farmers and residents the physical space and resources to grow their own food. This will help keep our food dollars local, cut transit emissions, and ensure every resident has a direct connection to healthy, community-grown food.

1. Limit outward growth unless full lifecycle infrastructure
2. Prioritize infill and intensification where infrastructure
3. Require detailed cost and risk analysis before approving
4. Proceed with outward growth to address housing supply

Describe one concrete zoning, planning, or development decision you would support (or oppose) that reflects how you would balance these priorities.candidate's own words

I support a growth plan that protects our environment, respects tax dollars, and builds housing regular people can actually afford. I support “missing middle” housing (like townhomes and triplexes) inside existing neighborhoods, while locking down a strict regional boundary to permanently stop urban sprawl. Here are four priorities for a growth plan that uplifts our communities: 1) Protect Our Green Spaces: Avoid paving over our vital agricultural lands and nature for low-density subdivisions. 2) Growth Pays for Growth: Developers, not taxpayers, should be responsible for the cost of the water lines, sewers, and parks needed for new builds. 3) Real Affordability: Defining a clear, local income-based benchmark (replacing the flawed federal standard) for development that is truly affordable for our local middle class and marginalized neighbours. 4) Design Guided by Residents: Consultation that isn’t about whether to build, but rather how to build beautifully. Residents should be part of creating strict design guidelines that include; height limits, architectural matching, and privacy screening to ensure new homes complement a neighborhood's character, rather than erasing it. We should protect our environment, shield taxpayers, and ensure our families aren’t priced out of the community they call home.

Please describe one concrete example of a growth or infrastructure decision you would support or oppose using this approach.candidate's own words

I would oppose proposed local greenfield subdivision expansion and instead support delaying any settlement boundary expansions.Our current infrastructure priority must focus on a state-of-good-repair within our existing borders rather than taking on the massive, unsustainable lifecycle costs of building outward. Expanding our boundaries violates our commitment to protecting vital agricultural lands and green spaces from urban sprawl. Also, we cannot ask existing taxpayers to subsidize the multi-million-dollar extensions of water lines, sewers, and roads required for a new low-density development.

What can the municipality/region do, if anything, about land which sits vacant for years because it is being used as an investment (land banking)?candidate's own words

We need to stop corporate landlords and developers from treating our neighborhoods like a stock market while families struggle to find a place to live. Leaving buildable land empty just to watch its value go up is unacceptable, and I support strict rules to force these investors to start building. The Region of Waterloo directly manages our water treatment and major sewer infrastructure, so water allocation policies and strictly enforced connection timelines can be used to help stop land banking. Here’s how: 1. A "Use It or Lose It" Water Clock: In our region, a developer cannot build without a guaranteed share of municipal water capacity. Under our regional Water Supply Capacity Allocation Policy, we can put developers on a strict clock. If a developer secures water capacity for a property but fails to pull a building permit or start construction within a clear timeline (like 2 to 3 years), they lose their water allocation automatically. 2. Reassigning the "Water Bucket" to Ready Builders: We can take that clawed-back water capacity and put it back into the municipal "bucket". It will immediately be reassigned to local builders who are actually ready to put shovels in the ground to build income-matched, affordable missing-middle housing. 3. Milestone-Based Servicing Agreements: We can stop giving out blanket infrastructure promises for massive, multi-phase pieces of land. Through Forward-Looking Servicing Agreements, the Region can unlock water hookups in small, strictly monitored phases. A developer will not get water capacity for "Phase 2" of their investment until "Phase 1" (which must include the affordable housing our community needs) is built and occupied.

It should be more transparent and accessible

Please describe one concrete example of a trade-off you would support (or oppose) when costs rise faster than revenues.candidate's own words

When municipal costs rise faster than revenues, I would strongly support adjusting regional development charges to fully capture growth costs, while deferring capital expansion projects that can wait to prioritize financial constraints. This will help to ensure that existing taxpayers are not forced to subsidize a budget shortfall for infrastructure designed to serve new builds, while allowing us to reevaluate policies affecting our long-term costs. By reevaluating our long-term policies to favor compact growth, we ensure that we aren't locking future generations into a permanent infrastructure deficit.

If you chose "It should be more transparent and accessible", please describe how.candidate's own words

Our regional budget process works best when it is fully transparent, welcoming, and easy for every resident to understand. While the Region of Waterloo manages complex finances, we have a wonderful opportunity to make these large budget documents much more accessible to the public. We can build on the excellent communication style used during the early stages of the ION Light Rail Transit (LRT) project, which successfully used clear pictographs and straightforward messaging to connect with our community. My goal is to support the creation of plain-language communication that clearly shows a friendly, dollar-for-dollar breakdown of how property taxes are invested in our services and to have it shared in multiple ways with residents. Hosting collaborative town halls with helpful visual tools, we can ensure residents feel truly included and heard throughout the entire budget planning process.

1. Prioritize immediate investment in water conservation programs and demand management
2. Accelerate exploration of alternative water sources (wells, treated wastewater reuse, inter-municipal supply)
3. Commission an independent technical review of all options before committing to major new infrastructure
4. Pursue a Lake Erie pipeline connection with provincial and federal cost-sharing
5. Approve developments now and resolve water supply constraints in the future

Describe your position on how the Region should resolve this issue and what timeline is realistic.candidate's own words

I believe our Region must focus on water conservation, public education, and smart growth instead of jumping into massive, expensive new infrastructure. We should manage our current water supply responsibly by pausing new development approvals until we are certain we have the water capacity to support them. This plan must protect our townships and the private wells that rural families rely on. Rural areas like Wilmot and Woolwich have paid the price for urban growth by dealing with dried-up wells and water being quietly diverted away from them. The Region needs to treat rural well owners fairly by bringing in independent experts to handle well complaints and by legally protecting the Waterloo Moraine aquifer. This approach is realistic because it focuses on timely, low-cost actions right now rather than multi-billion-dollar pipelines. By expanding local water-saving programs today and doing an independent technical review over the next few years, we can make the most of what we already have. This protects our environment and keeps our taxes down by forcing new developments to pay for their own impact.