Anna Meksavanh

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.