Confirmed candidates for the upcoming municipal elections across the Capital Regional District. Each candidate is graded across the policy areas the coalition evaluates. Search by name, filter by municipality, or narrow to candidates who meet a minimum grade in a given topic.
| Candidate |
All categories / General
|
Transit
|
Housing
|
Climate
|
Arts
|
Rolling & cycling
|
Walking
|
Youth / students
|
Healthcare access
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saanich | |||||||||
| Karen Harper | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Rishi Sharma | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Zac De Vrites | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Alex Cook | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Colin Plant | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Graham Wright | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Harjas Singh Popli | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Hollis Hodson | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Lorne DeLarge | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Matt McGeachie | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Nathalie Chambers | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Teale Phelps Banderoff | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tia Sibbald | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Victoria | |||||||||
| Marianne Alto | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Arthur McInnis | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dave Thompson | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Isabella Lee | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Jack Sandor | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Jeremy Caradonna | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Karen Rothe | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Krista Laughton | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Matt Dell | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Melissa Cseszko | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Susan Kim | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wendy Bowkett | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Owen Haley | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Esquimalt | |||||||||
| Duncan Cavens | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Rob Johnstone | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tara Todesco | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Oak Bay | |||||||||
| Kevin Murdoch | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Karin Sweeney | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Langford | |||||||||
| Scott Goodmanson | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Stew Young | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Bryson Hill | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Colby Harder | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Lisa Foxhall | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Mary Wagner | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
No candidates match your search.
Don’t see a candidate you care about?
Have a candidate you want represented on the scorecard? Email us at hello@livablecrd.ca and let us know.
How we grade — methodology
Livable CRD rates municipal election candidates on policy positions that shape how liveable the Capital Region is for everyone. Participating organizations are developing a shared questionnaire; responses and letter grades will be published before election day.
Note: We evaluate candidate positions, not municipal bylaws or past council votes. The topics below match the categories used in our coalition questionnaire.
Letter grades
- A Excellent
- Strong alignment with coalition standards across the topics we evaluate. Positions consistently support a more livable, inclusive Capital Region.
- B Good
- Mostly meets coalition standards. Some gaps remain, but the candidate generally supports progress on the questionnaire topics.
- C Mixed
- Minimally meets standards or has significant inconsistencies. Some positive positions, but notable shortcomings in one or more topic areas.
- F Poor
- Fails to meet coalition standards. Positions would stall or roll back progress on livability across the region.
Some ratings may use modifiers (for example, C−) when a candidate's positions fall between two levels.
Questionnaire topics
Each candidate is graded in every policy area, including a general category for cross-cutting items. See what each category covers for a description of every topic.
How grades are assigned
Participating organizations are finalizing the questionnaire. When complete, we will publish the full question set and weighting here. In general:
- Each participating group contributes the questions in its area of focus, and that same group grades candidates' responses to the questions it submitted.
- Points are awarded for positions that advance coalition goals within each topic.
- Each topic grade reflects the candidate's responses within that area, including general livability questions.
- Points are deducted for positions that would clearly undermine progress on housing, mobility, climate, healthcare access, or other priorities covered in the survey.
Candidates will have an opportunity to review their published responses before grades are finalized, consistent with fair voter-information practices.
Who writes — and grades — the questions?
Livable CRD is a coalition, and the questionnaire is built collaboratively. Each participating organization contributes the questions in its own area of focus — a transit group writes the transit questions, a housing group writes the housing questions, and so on across the policy areas we evaluate.
The same group that submits a set of questions also grades candidates' responses to those questions. Each group grades only within its own area of expertise, so no single organization assigns a candidate's full slate of grades alone. This keeps every topic in the hands of the people who understand it best, and keeps the overall scorecard a shared, coalition-wide effort.
All grading follows our published methodology so the process stays transparent and reproducible. Candidates will have an opportunity to review their published responses before grades are finalized.
What each category covers
Every candidate is graded across the policy areas below — the same categories used in the coalition questionnaire. Here's what each one means.
- All categories / General
- Cross-cutting questions that apply across topics or address overall vision for livability in the Capital Region. Example question “What is your overall vision for a more livable Capital Region, and how would you balance competing priorities?”
- Transit
- Public transit service, funding, and integration so more people can get around without driving for every trip. Example question “Would you support increasing municipal investment in frequent, all-day transit service?”
- Housing
- Affordable and diverse homes, gentle density, tenant protections, and land-use choices that help people of all incomes live here. Example question “Will you vote to allow more diverse, affordable housing types in established neighbourhoods?”
- Climate
- Climate action, emissions reduction, resilience, and aligning growth with a sustainable future. Example question “What concrete steps would you take to cut your municipality's greenhouse gas emissions?”
- Arts
- Creative spaces, cultural programming, and municipal support for arts and culture in everyday community life. Example question “Would you protect or expand municipal funding for arts spaces and cultural programming?”
- Rolling & cycling
- Safe bike lanes, rolling infrastructure, and policies that make cycling and wheeled mobility practical for more residents. Example question “Do you support building a connected network of protected bike and rolling routes?”
- Walking
- Walkable neighbourhoods, sidewalks, crossings, and street design that put people first on foot. Example question “Will you prioritize sidewalks, safe crossings, and pedestrian-first street design?”
- Youth / students
- Schools, youth services, student housing, and decisions that affect young people staying and thriving in the region. Example question “How would you expand housing, services, and opportunities for youth and students?”
- Healthcare access
- Access to clinics, mental health supports, and municipal actions that help residents get timely care close to home. Example question “What municipal actions would you take to improve residents' access to healthcare?”