Joe Gowing

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

I have already initiated work to examine the creation of a Municipal Housing Corporation that could use publicly owned land and other Regional assets, along with non-profit and private-sector partnerships, to create more affordable rental housing. I want that work to produce a financially responsible model with clear governance, measurable results and the ability to expand into supportive housing. At the same time, I have supported developing a clear encampment response framework before choosing locations. Temporary arrangements should only be considered when no safe and appropriate indoor alternative exists, and they must include standards for sanitation, safety, outreach and connections to housing. I also moved an amendment requiring regular public updates on A Better Tent City, including expenditures, resident assessments, transitions, safety and program performance. We need to know whether people are successfully moving into stable housing and whether public funding is producing results.

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

My approach has been to build permanent housing capacity while bringing greater structure and accountability to temporary responses. Encampments should not become normalized as permanent housing, but clearing a site without providing an appropriate alternative often just moves people, and the problem, to another location. Municipalities need clear responsibilities, the Region must provide coordinated leadership, and the Province must properly fund the mental-health, addiction and supportive services that cannot be sustained through property taxes alone. Success must be measured by how many people obtain stable housing and remain housed, not simply by how many tents are removed.

• Adjust signal timing, curb use, or intersection design
• Prioritize active transportation improvements during routine resurfacing
• Focus improvements around schools, transit corridors, and commercial areas

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

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

I have asked the Region to consider alternatives to simply placing more bicycle lanes beside vehicle traffic. Different corridors require different solutions, including separated multi-use paths, trail connections, safer intersections and signed routes that help cyclists avoid streets where protected infrastructure is not practical. Transit must remain central to regional growth, and I continue to support moving Stage 2 ION forward. At the same time, we must improve the reliability and efficiency of the service people use today. I support targeted affordability measures rather than eliminating fares for everyone. The Affordable Transit Program should be strengthened for residents who need it most, and initiatives such as the Older Adult Day Pass should be evaluated using ridership, accessibility, cost and measurable results before being expanded.

If you selected "Yes, for specific groups" above, which groups?candidate's own words

Seniors (ex. extend Older Adult Day Pass pilot), People with disabilities, Low-income residents

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

Long-term operational sustainability should not be compromised. Every expansion must include a credible plan to provide frequent, reliable and affordable service. Building new infrastructure is not enough if we cannot operate it effectively or connect it to housing, employment and essential services.

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

I would prioritize the Stage 2 ION corridor between Fairway Station and downtown Cambridge. While work toward the full LRT extension continues, we should improve the existing corridor through transit-priority measures, reliable bus service, safer intersections and better walking and cycling connections to stations. These near-term improvements should complement, not replace, Stage 2 ION.

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

I would incorporate energy-performance and lifecycle-cost analysis into the Facilities Strategic Plan that I brought forward and Regional Council approved. The Region needs a complete understanding of the condition, operating costs and future needs of its buildings before making major investments. Energy improvements should be prioritized when equipment reaches the end of its useful life or when reduced energy consumption can recover the investment through lower operating costs. This approach lowers emissions and utility expenses without prematurely replacing usable assets or placing unnecessary costs on taxpayers. Similar performance standards should be considered for new Region-owned and Region-funded affordable housing.

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

Sustainability has already been an important part of my work on Regional Council. I brought forward the Facilities Strategic Plan to improve long-term planning for Region-owned buildings. I also moved the motion that received unanimous Council support requesting a pause on new and expanded private water-taking permits in the Mannheim Service Area while the Water Supply Strategy is updated. I have advanced work on a larger residential greywater and rainwater-reuse pilot and pressed for measurable results from the Region’s expanded water-conservation programs. I have also consistently emphasized groundwater monitoring, aquifer recharge and the effects of growth on our long-term water supply. My approach is practical: protect essential natural resources, test new approaches through measurable pilots, consider the full lifecycle cost of infrastructure and prioritize investments that reduce both emissions and long-term operating expenses. Sustainability should be part of responsible asset management, not treated as a separate or symbolic spending exercise.

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

I would support creating an inventory of suitable, underused public land and piloting at least one new community-growing site in partnership with an experienced non-profit organization. The pilot should include soil testing, water access, accessible garden beds and opportunities to distribute surplus produce through local food-assistance organizations. I favour beginning with a measurable pilot, similar to the approach I advanced for residential greywater and rainwater reuse. We should track participation, the amount of food produced and distributed, operating costs and community benefits before expanding the program.

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

Food insecurity is largely an income and affordability problem. Municipal programs cannot replace adequate provincial and federal income supports, but the Region can help coordinate community organizations, make better use of public assets and remove barriers facing local producers and residents. During my term, Regional Council supported community environmental funding for projects that expand urban gardens and pay-what-you-can food markets. I have also worked to protect the resources on which our local food system depends. My motion requesting a pause on new and expanded private water-taking permits in the Mannheim Service Area received unanimous Council support, and I have consistently advocated for stronger groundwater monitoring, aquifer protection and safeguards for rural well owners. Protecting farmland means little if farms do not have dependable water, viable markets or opportunities for the next generation of producers. My approach is to protect those essential resources while supporting practical partnerships and programs with clear, publicly reported results.

1. Require detailed cost and risk analysis before approving
2. Prioritize infill and intensification where infrastructure
3. Use development phasing tied to infrastructure capacity
4. Limit outward growth unless full lifecycle infrastructure
5. 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 maintaining Kitchener’s as-of-right permission for up to four units on suitable residential lots and focusing additional density around transit, schools and commercial areas. Small-scale housing should not require a political hearing for every project when it meets established standards. Larger developments must be tied to confirmed water, wastewater, transportation and emergency-service capacity. Where new capacity is under construction, holding provisions or phased approvals can allow planning to continue without permitting development to move ahead faster than essential infrastructure can safely support it. This reflects the approach I have taken on Regional Council: finding ways for housing to proceed while insisting on transparent servicing information, groundwater protection and responsible infrastructure planning.

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 not support a settlement-boundary expansion or major greenfield development without a complete assessment of the long-term costs of water, wastewater, roads, transit, emergency services and infrastructure maintenance. I have already requested a detailed review of investments, infrastructure condition and available capacity in the Middleton Service Area. I also brought forward groundwater-protection measures in response to the Mannheim capacity constraint. These decisions demonstrate why growth approvals must be based on verified capacity and lifecycle costs rather than short-term development revenue alone. Where outward growth is necessary, it should proceed in phases tied to infrastructure delivery, environmental safeguards and a clear plan for recovering growth-related costs. Existing taxpayers should not be left with an infrastructure bill that was not fully understood when the development was approved.

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

Since January 2025, the Region no longer has direct land-use planning approval authority. However, it remains central to growth decisions through water and wastewater infrastructure, transit, Regional roads and affordable housing. I have used that role to push for better information about servicing capacity, stronger groundwater protections and long-term infrastructure planning. I also initiated work to examine a municipal housing corporation and partnerships that could put publicly owned land and assets to work creating affordable housing. Growth and infrastructure cannot be planned separately. We need more housing, but approving development without water capacity or a plan to maintain the resulting infrastructure simply transfers today’s pressure into tomorrow’s financial and environmental problem.

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

Municipalities should first create a transparent inventory of vacant, serviced development land and identify why approved projects have not proceeded. Some delays are legitimate, including financing, remediation or infrastructure constraints, so the policy must distinguish those circumstances from speculative land holding. I would support time-limited planning approvals where provincial legislation permits, servicing agreements with clear construction milestones and the reallocation of scarce water or wastewater capacity when a developer does not meet those milestones. Servicing capacity should not be reserved indefinitely for a project that is not moving forward while other housing remains stalled. Any new holding charge should undergo legal and financial analysis and include reasonable exemptions. The objective should be to encourage construction, not penalize owners whose projects are delayed by government approvals or infrastructure that has not yet been delivered.

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

I would support deferring a new or expanded Regional facility until there is clear evidence that existing space cannot be consolidated, adapted or shared more efficiently. I brought forward the Facilities Strategic Plan that Regional Council approved because we need a complete inventory of our buildings, their utilization, operating costs, condition and five-to-ten-year requirements. That information should come before committing taxpayers to new construction and decades of additional maintenance. When revenues are tight, maintaining existing infrastructure and protecting core frontline services should take priority over expanding the Region’s physical footprint. A tax increase should not be used to avoid making responsible decisions about underused assets or lower-priority spending.

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

My professional background in financial services and my work on Regional Council have taught me that neither automatic tax increases nor artificial tax freezes are responsible financial plans. I have pushed for stronger long-term facilities planning, closer examination of major contracts, measurable results from new spending and detailed reporting on programs such as A Better Tent City. Residents deserve to know not only how much government is spending, but what results that spending is producing. Before raising taxes, Council should examine service-delivery models, procurement, grants, partnerships, asset utilization and lower-priority spending. When an increase is necessary to maintain essential services or infrastructure, it should be moderate, predictable and clearly connected to a publicly explained need. One-time funding should not create permanent operating costs without a sustainable plan to pay for them.

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

Public budget documents are available, but availability does not always mean accessibility. Residents should receive a plain-language summary showing the proposed household impact, service changes, new spending, reductions, debt, reserve use and major capital commitments well before the final vote. Each major proposal should identify its full lifecycle cost, funding source and measurable outcome. The Region should also maintain a public dashboard showing whether major projects are on budget and schedule and whether approved service investments are achieving their intended results.

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. Pursue a Lake Erie pipeline connection with provincial and federal cost-sharing
4. Commission an independent technical review of all options before committing to major new infrastructure
5. Approve developments now and resolve water supply constraints in the future

Other priority not listed abovecandidate's own words

Protect existing groundwater through monitoring triggers, aquifer-recharge protection and a transparent well-interference process.

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

The Region should use the extensive technical and consulting work already completed through the Water Supply Strategy rather than paying another consultant to repeat it. Any additional independent expertise should be targeted to an identified gap, not become another broad and expensive review. Our immediate priorities should be conservation, demand management, infrastructure rehabilitation and water reuse. I have already advanced a larger residential greywater and rainwater-reuse pilot, supported measurable conservation programs and brought forward the motion—unanimously supported by Council—requesting a pause on new and expanded private water-taking permits in the Mannheim Service Area. At the same time, the Region must accelerate work on additional wells, connections between service areas, treated-water reuse and other potential sources. I also raised the possibility of a Lake Erie pipeline because we need to consider generational solutions, not only measures that carry us through the next few years. A pipeline should remain under active consideration, but it would require a strong technical and financial case, environmental and Indigenous consultation, and substantial provincial and federal cost-sharing. The Water Supply Strategy should establish the long-term direction and implementation schedule in 2027. Conservation, rehabilitation and smaller supply projects must continue immediately, with medium-term capacity delivered through the early 2030s. If a Lake Erie pipeline is ultimately selected, it would realistically be a decade-plus project and would likely not be operational until the mid-to-late 2030s. I supported an independent examination of how the capacity problem was identified, reported and communicated. That accountability work is different from paying to duplicate the technical studies already underway. We now need to use the information we have, fill any specific gaps and make decisions.