Jon Massimi

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

I support establishing an Adaptive Reuse Policy to rapidly convert underutilized commercial and municipal buildings into interim shelter and supportive housing. This creates immediate indoor beds paired with non-profit addiction and mental health supports, establishing a direct pathway from temporary shelter to permanent housing that protects public parks and addresses root causes.

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

My perspective on housing comes down to good design, proper scale, and environmental protection. We should avoid massive, out-of-scale developments that clash with established neighbourhoods or encroach on sensitive ecosystems like the Huron Natural Area. I support gentle density, such as townhomes, accessory units, and building conversions. This approach creates accessible housing choices for young families and seniors while keeping local infrastructure in step. New builds must only happen when our roads, parks, stormwater management, and green spaces are fully ready to support them.

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

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

Yes, for specific groups

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, Post-secondary students

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

Whatever transit investments we make, we have to ensure we can actually afford to run, maintain, and support them for the long haul. Expanding coverage or building big infrastructure projects without a solid, long-term plan for maintenance and daily operating costs usually leads to service cuts or sudden fare hikes down the line.

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

Huron Road corridor between Janet Metcalfe Public School and Huron Heights Secondary. Prioritizing safe crossing designs, signal adjustments, and connected multi-use paths along this stretch ensures students and families can navigate the corridor safely.

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

Heating and operating municipal buildings accounts for a huge chunk of local government emissions. By prioritizing energy-efficient upgrades, HVAC updates, and heat recovery systems in city-owned properties, we cut emissions where we have direct control. At the same time, it lowers ongoing utility bills for taxpayers and protects the city budget against rising energy costs down the line, all without adding extra red tape or expenses for private homeowners and local businesses.

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. Encourage and support local landowners to rent to newcomer farmers
4. Develop a local food strategy, including research on how land-use change affects the food system
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

Setting up flexible, low-barrier pop-up markets on city-owned land in our growing suburban neighbourhoods. Instead of building expensive bricks-and-mortar infrastructure, the city can open up under-utilized public spaces, like community centre lots or plazas, and drop the steep fees for local growers and small vendors. It keeps money in the pockets of regional farmers, brings fresh food right into expanding neighbourhoods that lack nearby options, and creates easy local gathering points. Ontario pocket market models have already proven this out, boosting healthy food access and helping small food businesses thrive without adding heavy costs to the municipal budget.

1. Prioritize infill and intensification where infrastructure
2. Limit outward growth unless full lifecycle infrastructure
3. Use development phasing tied to infrastructure capacity
4. Require detailed cost and risk analysis before approving
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 as-of-right zoning for missing-middle housing—like duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes—across established neighbourhoods. It is all about balance. Instead of jamming massive towers onto single streets or expanding outward onto farmland, we allow gentle, step-by-step growth across the entire city. It puts our existing pipes, roads, and neighbourhood parks to good use, cuts through months of municipal red tape, and gives growing families flexible, practical housing choices while keeping the feel of our neighbourhoods intact.

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

Prioritizing state of good repair for our existing pipes, roads, and community facilities before taking on new expansion projects. It comes down to protecting taxpayers. If we keep building outward without accounting for long term maintenance, we end up saddling future budgets with huge repair deficits. By focusing capital on upgrading the infrastructure we already own and making infill density work, we keep the city fiscally sound while using the capacity we have already paid for.

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

I support taking direct municipal action against land banking to get shovels in the ground. By tying water and sewer allocations directly to strict build out timelines, we can ensure landowners lose their servicing rights if they fail to build. Establishing a vacant land registry with targeted tax rates makes holding prime urban property purely for speculation financially unappealing. Combine that with phased planning approvals and holding charges, and if a site sits idle, the owner pays for nearby city infrastructure maintenance instead of leaving taxpayers with the tab.

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 support deferring major new capital expansion projects, like non-essential facilities or decorative upgrades, so we can focus our budget on keeping essential roads, water mains, and community centers in good repair. When costs outstrip revenue, we have to protect core services first. Pushing back non-urgent expansions keeps property taxes predictable for local families and stops us from taking on future maintenance debts we cannot afford. It is all about taking care of what we already have before building new

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

We need to stop burying residents in 500-page, jargon-filled PDFs. I’d love to see plain-language, visual breakdowns showing exactly how tax dollars are spent, paired with informal budget workshops at our local community centres. Bringing these conversations directly into our neighbourhoods makes it easy for everyday residents to share input on local parks, roads, and services before the final vote is cast.