Woolwich — Ward 2
1 candidate responded · 0 of 0 section answers were “did not respond”
Sheryl Tilley See responses
It should be more transparent and accessible
- Increased cost recovery by increasing user fees (e.g. recreation programs, parking, transit fares)
- Area-specific levies where residents in a defined area receive or request a distinct level of service
- Ensure new development pays a greater share of long-term infrastructure costs
- Reduce discretionary programs to protect core services
- Prioritize maintenance and state-of-good-repair over expansion
- Defer or cancel capital projects with low long-term return on investment
Please describe one concrete example of a trade-off you would support (or oppose) when costs rise faster than revenues.candidate's own words
Cut all non-essential, non-core programs such as DEI. That should save about $11million annually. Under Ken Seiling and Mike Murray, there were 8 staff in the CAOs office, Under Karen Redman and Bruce Lackner, that ballooned to 30 staff, the majority of which were associated with very costly DEI staff positions pandering to special interest groups.
Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on budgets?candidate's own words
Significant cost projects (new builds) must go to the public on a referendum. It's our money, we have the right to decide how it's spent.
If you chose "It should be more transparent and accessible", please describe how.candidate's own words
All councillors should have access to Crystal Reports, not just the final, massaged numbers produced by Finance. All motions before Council that have budgetary impact shall consist of three options (option A: high cost, high impact, Option B: low cost, low impact, Option C: do nothing pro/con). That allows for more informed voting, not just rubber stamping a final report with an outcome that has already been predetermined by staff.
On the ballot but have not responded to survey (1)
- Steven Haase
Full candidate list: CBC Waterloo Region election coverage ↗