Manikantan Nair

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

I would support a City & Region Housing and Encampment Response Program that identifies suitable underused City-owned land and existing buildings for conversion or development into deeply affordable and supportive housing. The City and Region should partner with non-profit and community housing providers to move people from encampments into stable housing, while providing outreach, mental-health and addiction supports where needed. At the same time, encampments should have clear standards for sanitation and safety, with enforcement tied to the availability of appropriate indoor alternatives. This approach addresses the immediate need for safe public spaces while building a permanent pathway out of homelessness.

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

Kindly Check Out My Housing Priority : https://www.votefornair.ca/post/kitchener-housing-policy-paper-draft

• Adjust signal timing, curb use, or intersection design, Focus improvements around schools, transit corridors, and commercial areas, Use a practical, data-driven approach that improves walking, cycling and transit without unnecessarily compromising road access, safety, emergency response, or the needs of residents and businesses. Prioritize improvements where they will deliver the greatest measurable benefit. Kindly Checkout https://www.votefornair.ca/post/a-safer-kitchener-starts-with-streets-designed-for-people

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

Yes, but roads should take priority; sidewalks cleared after

Yes, for all residents

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

We also need On-Demand Transit.

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

Long-term financial and operational sustainability should not be compromised. Transit investments must provide reliable service and meaningful benefits to residents while ensuring that the ongoing operating and maintenance costs are affordable and sustainable. We should invest for the long term, not create infrastructure that future taxpayers cannot afford to operate

Other priority not listed abovecandidate's own words

Prioritize transit investments based on measurable ridership demand, housing and employment growth, connectivity, and long-term financial sustainability. Every major investment should have a clear business case, realistic funding plan, and measurable outcomes for residents.

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

I would prioritize the Victoria Street corridor, particularly the connection between downtown Kitchener, Victoria Park and the Victoria Street North employment and residential areas. I would support targeted improvements to transit reliability, safer cycling connections, pedestrian crossings and intersection design, while maintaining appropriate access for businesses, residents and emergency services. The goal would be a connected, multimodal corridor that makes it easier to choose transit, walking or cycling without treating automobile access as an afterthought.

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 prioritize incentives for energy-efficient and low-carbon buildings, such as expedited approvals or modest planning incentives for developments that exceed provincial energy-performance standards. This approach can reduce greenhouse gas emissions without imposing blanket costs on every new development. The focus should be on measurable outcomes, with incentives tied to demonstrated performance and designed so that environmental improvements do not unnecessarily increase housing costs or the financial burden on taxpayers.

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

Sustainability should be part of responsible municipal decision-making, but it must be balanced with housing affordability, economic growth, infrastructure needs and fiscal responsibility. I support practical, measurable actions that reduce emissions, improve resilience and lower long-term operating costs. We should focus on outcomes rather than mandates for their own sake, use incentives where they can achieve better results, and ensure that major investments are evaluated on their full lifecycle costs and benefits. Most importantly, Kitchener and Waterloo Region should work together so that environmental, economic and community priorities are addressed through a coordinated long-term plan.

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 establishing a Regional Local Food Hub partnership that brings together farmers, food processors, non-profits, educational institutions and local businesses. The Region could help identify suitable public or partner facilities for shared processing, storage, distribution and low-barrier market space, while working with other levels of government to secure funding. This would reduce costs for small producers, create local jobs and strengthen our food supply chain while protecting productive farmland from unnecessary development pressure.

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

A strong local food system is about more than food security, it is also about protecting productive farmland, supporting farmers and creating local economic opportunities. The Region should work with municipalities, farmers, businesses, non-profits and other levels of government to reduce barriers to local production, processing and distribution. Growth should be planned carefully to avoid unnecessary loss and fragmentation of agricultural land, while recognizing that a healthy agricultural sector can contribute to jobs, investment and the long-term resilience of Waterloo Region.

Other priority not listed abovecandidate's own words

Protect the agricultural land base while supporting value-added agriculture, local food processing, and farm-based businesses that create jobs and strengthen the Region’s local economy. Growth and development should be planned in a way that minimizes unnecessary loss or fragmentation of productive farmland.

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 would support as-of-right permissions for missing-middle housing in established neighborhoods, particularly where existing water, wastewater, roads and transit infrastructure can support additional residents. This would reduce delays and uncertainty in the approval process while creating more housing choices without relying solely on large apartment developments. Where infrastructure capacity is a constraint, I would support targeted upgrades and phasing rather than simply rejecting needed housing.

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 expanding the settlement boundary for a new greenfield development unless a transparent lifecycle-cost analysis demonstrates that the required roads, water, wastewater, stormwater, transit and other infrastructure can be sustainably funded, including long-term maintenance and replacement. Where expansion is justified, I would support phased development tied to infrastructure capacity and appropriate cost recovery, while prioritizing existing communities where infrastructure is already in place.

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

Growth is necessary, but how we grow matters. I support a balanced approach that increases housing choices, makes better use of existing infrastructure, protects productive agricultural land, and ensures new growth contributes fairly to the infrastructure and services it requires.

Other priority not listed abovecandidate's own words

Growth decisions should consider the full lifecycle cost to taxpayers, not just the upfront cost of building infrastructure. New development should contribute fairly to the infrastructure it requires, including long-term maintenance and replacement, while protecting existing taxpayers from unsustainable future liabilities.

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 and the Region should have better tools to discourage long-term land banking, particularly where land has already received approvals or has access to significant public infrastructure. I would support a vacant land registry and transparent reporting, along with reasonable holding charges or servicing agreements that establish clear construction timelines for approved developments. These tools should distinguish between genuine development constraints and speculative holding, with appropriate exemptions where servicing, environmental, market or other legitimate factors prevent construction. The goal should be to encourage housing and productive use of land, not to unfairly penalize property owners.

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

If costs were rising faster than revenues, I would support deferring a lower-priority capital project rather than immediately increasing property taxes to fund it. Essential services and state-of-good-repair work should come first. Before proceeding with a major project, Council should review its lifecycle costs, available funding, expected public benefit and long-term operating impact. Projects that do not demonstrate sufficient value or financial sustainability should be delayed, redesigned or cancelled until the fiscal position improves.

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

Budgets should be more than annual spending documents. They should be a clear plan for the community's future. Residents deserve to know where their tax dollars are going, what services and outcomes they are receiving, and what long-term commitments are being created. I support disciplined spending, transparent reporting, regular review of programs and projects, and clear explanations when tax increases are necessary. My approach would be to protect essential services, maintain existing infrastructure, and ensure that major new spending demonstrates measurable value for taxpayers.

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

Residents should be able to understand not only how much government is spending, but also what they are receiving for that money. I would support clearer, more accessible budget information, including plain-language explanations of major spending decisions, long-term infrastructure and debt obligations, and measurable outcomes. Greater transparency should make it easier for residents to understand the trade-offs Council is making and hold elected officials accountable.