How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Meagan Brame's mark for it on the right; the key underneath says what each mark means. Open a row for the questions behind that mark, what they answered, and why each answer scored as it did. The control above the list opens all of them at once. At the foot of the page you can print this scorecard or share it as an image.
General
What Meagan Brame said
- Not graded GEN-01
If you could change one policy, bylaw, feature, or municipal asset (i.e, facility or infrastructure) in your municipality, what would it be and why?
If I could change one thing, I would change the way we approach growth in Esquimalt — making sure that new development is planned alongside the infrastructure and amenities that make a community work.
I am not against growth. We need housing, and I think Esquimalt has an important role to play in providing different types of housing for families, seniors, young people and people who want to stay in the community. But I also think we have to be honest about what happens when we add more people and more buildings without making sure our roads, sewers, parks, transportation, parking, community spaces and other services can keep up.
For me, it comes down to thoughtful density rather than simply adding density wherever we can. I would like to see more of our growth focused along appropriate corridors and in areas where the infrastructure can support it, with buildings that transition respectfully into the surrounding neighbourhoods. And when we are approving significant development, I want us to be asking: What does this community need in return? Do we need a daycare? A grocery store? More green space? Better transportation? Community space?
I also think we need to be careful about what we lose as we grow. Trees, neighbourhood character, usable outdoor space and the feeling of being connected to your neighbours are all part of what makes Esquimalt special. We shouldn't have to choose between housing and a livable community. Good planning should allow us to have both.
Having served on Council before, I know that municipal decisions are rarely as simple as they look from the outside. There are competing needs, provincial requirements, financial realities and residents with very different perspectives. I don't believe there is a magic answer. But I do believe we can do a better job of bringing all of those pieces together before we make decisions that will shape Esquimalt for decades.
I want us to grow, but I want us to grow well. That, to me, is the difference between simply building more and actually building a stronger community. - Not graded GEN-02
Your municipality has received $10 million in new annual funding and must spend all of it. How would you allocate it across the following areas? Your answers must total $10 million.
Meagan Brame's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $1,000,000 Transit $0 Walking Infrastructure $500,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $500,000 Roadway Infrastructure $1,000,000 Policing $0 Fire & Emergency Services $0 Parks & Recreation $1,000,000 Arts & Culture $1,000,000 Climate Action & Environment $2,000,000 Unhoused Resident Services $1,000,000 Community-Based Clinics $2,000,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
I think Esquimalt is a pretty special community, and I’m proud of where we are today. We have good transit, our cycling and walking infrastructure continues to improve, and we are making important investments in things like our new fire services building. We also have a strong sense of community, and I think that is something we need to protect as we grow.
For me, the next step is about making sure we are investing in the things that contribute to people’s quality of life and keep our community healthy and connected.
We are already spending a significant amount on policing, and I think we need to be thoughtful about where additional tax dollars are directed. I would like to see more emphasis on recreation and accessible programs for people of all ages — especially programs that get children, youth, families and seniors active and connected. Recreation isn't just a nice extra; it contributes to physical and mental health, helps build community and can prevent some of the bigger challenges we end up trying to address later.
I would also like to see the Township continue to work with our health-care partners and other levels of government around access to doctors and other health services. I recognize that health care is primarily a provincial responsibility, but municipalities still have a role in advocating, creating partnerships and looking at what we can do locally to support the health and well-being of our residents.
I don't think Esquimalt needs to reinvent itself. I think we need to build on what is already working, be thoughtful about where we spend our money, and make sure that as our community changes, we don't lose the things that make Esquimalt feel like Esquimalt.
For me, that's what good local government is about — listening to residents, looking at the whole picture and making practical choices about where our limited resources can have the greatest impact.
Healthcare access
What Meagan Brame said
- Not graded HLT-01
What role should your municipality play in establishing new primary care clinics?
Why we ask this
Ungraded. Mainly curious about how you'd approach expanding healthcare access in your region.
Chose 1 of 4 options - Not graded HLT-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to healthcare in your municipality, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I think the Township's role is to be a willing partner and advocate. We need to keep working with all levels of government and our local health agencies to understand what Esquimalt actually needs, and then ask the people working in health care how they think we can best help.
I don't think we should assume that Council knows what the answer is on its own. The people working in health care understand the challenges and may see opportunities that we don't.
Where the Township has tools that can help, such as zoning, density, tax exemptions or making space available, I think we should be open to using them when there is a good opportunity.
For me, it's about being open, listening and being willing to help where we can. Health care is not something the Township can solve on its own, but we can be a strong advocate and a good partner.
Transit
B- 20% of this topic TRN-01 B
Which fare measures would you actively advocate for at the VRTC? Select all that apply.
Why this grade: Backed cheaper fares for seniors, cheaper fares for people on income or disability assistance, and a lower cost regional monthly pass, but left free travel for under 19s unticked. Youth are the one group of riders the answer passes over, which keeps it short of the full ask.
How this question is graded
A count of ticks, because no option here is cheaper than the others in the way CLI-06's are. Four or more = A. Three = B. Two = C. One = C-. None = F. The rows graded before this rubric was written are not perfectly consistent with it at three and two ticks; they were left as typed and the majority letter was taken. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 3 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 B
Do you support removing general on-street parking (excluding accessible parking spaces) from frequent transit corridors and main arterial streets in your municipality, and reallocating that space to bus lanes, loading zones, and walking and cycling infrastructure?
Why this grade: Supports clearing general street parking from transit corridors during peak hours only, so bus lanes and space for walking and cycling would exist for part of the day and vanish for the rest. That is real but partial support, which places it below a full yes.
How this question is graded
Yes, across the whole corridor = A. Yes, only during peak hours = B. Kind of, only when a specific project requires it = C. No = F. Peak hours only is a real, testable limit on a yes, so it takes the conditional-yes B. Only when a specific project requires it names no project and commits to nothing in advance, which is the case-by-case answer CLI-08 puts at C. A No is F because the question is about street space, which is infrastructure. Eight of the earlier rows put the case-by-case option at B and nineteen put it at C; the nineteen were followed. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 6 options - 30% of this topic TRN-03 —
Do you support rapid deployment of transit priority measures on frequent transit corridors, even where this requires removing on-street parking or a general-purpose traffic lane?
Why this grade: Unsure about deploying transit priority quickly where it would cost parking or a general traffic lane. No commitment either way is on the record here. Note: Esquimalt is home to three FTN Routes (the 14, 15, and 26), and so Braume's uncomitted answer to this question is dissapointing since these routes presently serve the community and are often substantially delayed and overcrowded, though since no answer is provided, no grade is alloted either.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, but not at the cost of a general-purpose travel lane = C-. No = F. The question asks specifically about giving up a traffic lane, so a yes that rules the lane out withholds the one thing being asked for and cannot take the conditional-yes B. C- rather than F because the rest of the toolkit is still on the table. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 6 options - 10% of this topic TRN-04 A
Do you support the creation of a regional transportation authority?
Why this grade: A plain yes to creating a regional transportation authority, with no qualifiers on it.
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = C-. A No is C- rather than F because this asks who should decide, not what should be built or funded, which puts it on the governance side of the CLI-03 split. Three earlier rows typed F and two typed C-; the governance rule was followed over the count. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - 10% of this topic TRN-05 B
Do you support building new bus-only and bike-only connections through parks, golf courses or public land when doing so would substantially shorten transit and cycling trips?
Why this grade: Supports new bus and bike connections through parks and public land, provided construction takes no mature trees. That proviso would block many of the routes the question contemplates, so it lands under a full yes.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, if no mature trees are lost during construction = B. No = F. Losing no mature trees is a named and checkable condition, so it takes the conditional-yes B. A No is F because the question is about building a connection, which is infrastructure. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded TRN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to transit in your region, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I think Esquimalt has a strong transit system, and we should recognize the work that has already been done. Transit is an important part of making our community accessible, particularly for seniors, youth, people who don't drive and those who rely on it for work, school or appointments.
Where I think we have room for improvement is regional connections, particularly getting from Esquimalt to the Westshore. As people live, work and access services across the region, getting around shouldn't require unnecessarily long travel times or multiple transfers.
I would like to see the Township continue working with BC Transit and regional partners to improve those connections while continuing to support walking, cycling and transit as practical choices for getting around.
Housing
C-- HFL-01 2 / 8
What kinds of housing could your municipality use more of? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point per selected type to max of 8. Housing exists on a continuum and different types are appropriate for different households. All housing is needed and positively affects other types via vacancy chains
Meagan Brame chose 2 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 2 / 8
Which of the following items do you support to minimize tenant displacement and maintain/grow the supply of affordable housing? Select up all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point per strategy to max of 8. To tackle tenant displacement local governments must take an all of the above approach to reduce the impacts associated with renovictions and evictions.
Meagan Brame chose 2 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 4 / 6
Do you think your municipality should have target approval times for multifamily housing?
How this question is graded
6 points for 30/180 days, prorated for longer timelines. Housing delayed is housing denied. Long delays drive us costs for housing, increase the chance that they will be cancelled, and indicate a lack of clear published guidelines. A time limit on decisions prioritizes housing action and reforms.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 3 / 5
If there was a type of housing you wanted to see more of (e.g., affordable, non-market, family-sized, townhouses, etc.), what do you think are effective methods of getting more of it? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). To increase the building of certain desireable types of housing (affordable, family sized, etc), cities need to pursue a broad approach of both removing barriers and targetted incentives. Mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning) have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore reducing housing construction or increasing costs.
Meagan Brame chose 3 of 8 options - HFL-05 3 / 3
Do you believe that the municipality should pre-zone to the uses, heights and densities outlined in the Official Community Plan, so that OCP-compliant projects can be built without rezoning or public hearing?
How this question is graded
3 points for yes, 0 for no. An OCP sets out the direction and vision for a municipality with broad input from the community and council. Matching zoning to long term consensus-based plans reduces scarcity and allows incentivizes OCP compliant housing to be built quickly.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 0 / 6
Beyond the three to four units Bill 44 already requires, what is the most housing you think should be legal to build by-right (i.e. without rezoning) in traditional single-family areas of your municipality?
How this question is graded
a) 0 points b) 1 points c) 2 points d) 5 points e) 6 points. With little room for new single family developments, housing abundance relies on density. People unable to afford a single family house should not be relegated to living only on busy arterials where high density is legal, but should have a diversity of housing options in every neighbourhood.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 6 options - HFL-07 0 / 3
A housing proposal has been reviewed by staff and they recommend approval. It requires rezoning because the existing zoning has not been updated. If it faces substantial neighbourhood opposition, how would you generally vote?
How this question is graded
3 points for a), 0 otherwise. Housing approval rules must be predictable and clear for those building housing, or it will lead to scarcity. If municipal planning staff have adequately considered objections to a project and still recommend approval it should be approved. If unanticipated issues are raised, policies should be clarified to ensure staff can work with applicants on future projects.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-08 0 / 2
Do you support eliminating minimum parking requirements for new developments or suites?
How this question is graded
1 point for yes, 2 points for yes with transportation demand management measures, 0 points for no. A single additional parking space can add tens of thousands to the cost of a home. However, a development without parking and without offsetting remedies can impact livability for the eventual occupants of a home.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-09 1 / 6
Non-market housing often faces additional challenges getting approved. Which of the following measures do you support to improve the prospects for below-market housing construction? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). Building homes is hard, building non-market homes is substantially harder. This has serious socio-economic consequences for certain members of society. With the exception of mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning), which have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore a deterrent to new construction, a broad and flexible approach is needed to help non-market housing across the approval finish line.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 6 / 6
The BC government set a housing target for Victoria at 4,902 homes over five years, which represents 75% of the estimated housing need for that period. Regardless of provincial requirements or penalties, do you believe the city should strive to build:
How this question is graded
6 points for too low, 1 for about right, 0 for too high. By definition, the provincial housing targets, being set as only 75% of estimated housing need is too low of a target to meet local housing needs.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-12 1 / 6
Municipal asset-management plans have identified substantial gaps between current funding and the amount needed to maintain and replace roads, water and sewer systems, public buildings, and other infrastructure. In Victoria, the 2024 Corporate Asset Management Strategy identified $570 million worth of infrastructure in poor or very poor condition. Which approaches would you prioritize to address this infrastructure problem? Select up to two.
How this question is graded
5 points for selecting more housing and commercial development, 1 for seeking additional provincial or federal funding, 0 points for increasing taxes or reducing infrastructure projects, and -2 points for increasing development charges, amenity contributions, and other fees imposed on new houses.
Meagan Brame chose 2 of 6 options - HFL-10 4 / 7
If elected, what do you hope to have accomplished on the housing file at the end of your first year, and end of your four-year term?
How this question is graded
To receive full marks, candidates receive a point up to 7 for referencing impactful housing ideas in their answer including but not limited to: a rental vacancy rate target, a quantitative target regarding annual homes built, pre-zoning commitments / OCP alignment, non-profit by right commitment, commitment to tenant production aligned with platform, commitment to regulate and enforce Airbnb rules, delegate more rezoning / variance decisions to staff, a continuation of policies that have been working, developing a pre-approved catalog of housing designs, loosening design guidelines or other restrictive regulations, minimizing tenant displacement, increasing the regional housing fund, enhancing partnerships with other levels of government, the private sector, co-ops, and non-profit housing developers, streamlining regulations, and shorten requirements.
Meagan Brame's answerI think Esquimalt has done a good job of creating new housing, particularly market rental housing, and we have already met our housing targets in many areas. Where I think we still have work to do is in creating more below-market housing options.
At the end of my first year, I would want to have a clear understanding of where the greatest opportunities are to increase below-market housing and what tools the Township can realistically use to encourage it. I would want to be working with developers, non-profit housing providers, the Province and other partners to identify opportunities and make sure below-market housing is part of the conversation from the beginning of a development.
I don't want below-market housing concentrated in one area or treated as something separate from the rest of our community. I would like to see it mixed into different types of housing and incorporated into a variety of developments throughout Esquimalt. Having people with different incomes and at different stages of life living alongside one another makes for a stronger, healthier community.
By the end of a four-year term, I would hope we could point to real, tangible progress — more below-market housing options, including family-sized units, and more opportunities for people who may be working, raising a family, aging in place or simply finding it difficult to afford market housing.
I don't think the Township can solve the housing challenge on its own, and I don't think we should pretend that we can. But we can use the tools available to us, build strong partnerships and make thoughtful decisions about the housing we are encouraging.
We have already shown that Esquimalt can meet its housing targets and add market rental housing. Now I would like to see us focus our energy on the piece where we still have a gap — creating more below-market housing and making sure those homes are part of the broader community, not set apart from it.
30% of this topic Incumbent record 29 / 29What Meagan Brame did about housing during their current term, scored by Homes for Living. This is not a questionnaire answer: no candidate was asked it.
Why this score: 97.40%
Scored from Homes for Living's vote tracker.
Climate
A- 8% of this topic CLI-01 A
Would you support ending fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship on property, media and events controlled by your municipality, to the extent the law allows? And would you advocate for the same at the Victoria Regional Transit Commission for BC Transit vehicles and shelters?
Why this grade: A yes to both, followed by a yes on transit. The candidate goes as far as the question allows in both places.
How this question is graded
Two commitments in one question, so the menu answer alone cannot reach the top. The menu sets a base and a Yes on the follow-up about advocating at the Victoria Regional Transit Commission raises it one step. Yes, both advertising and sponsorship = B, and A with the follow-up. Yes, advertising only or Yes, sponsorship only = C, and B with the follow-up. No = F, because ending the advertising is something the municipality controls outright. A follow-up written as free text rather than ticked is a judgement about the candidate and is graded by hand. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-02 B
The Capital Regional District declared a climate emergency in 2019. How should your municipality treat climate action in its next four-year plan?
Why this grade: Climate gets a dedicated budget and a place near the top. Strong, and not the standard the rest of the plan is tested against.
How this question is graded
The overriding priority, other decisions should be tested against it = A. One of the top three priorities, with a dedicated budget = B. One priority among many, addressed where affordable = C-. Not a municipal priority = F. The ladder skips C on purpose: a dedicated budget is the line between a priority and a sentiment, so addressing climate only where affordable drops two steps rather than one. Handing the file to another order of government is F. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-03 A
Will you pledge to never take meetings from fossil fuel company lobbyists?
Why this grade: Agrees to the pledge as written. The answer closes off lobbying access rather than promising to manage it carefully.
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = C-. The No is C- rather than F because of the split the grading settled on: a plain No is C- where the question is about governance or conduct and F where it is about infrastructure, land use or funding. This one asks a candidate to give up a channel of access to themselves, which is conduct. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-04 —
Climate-related damage and adaptation costs increasingly fall on municipal budgets. Would you vote to have your municipality join other BC local governments in legal action to recover a share of those costs from major fossil fuel producers?
Why this grade: Records no view on whether the municipality should join the suit. Left ungraded, since there is nothing here to score either way.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, if municipal costs are capped = B, because a conditional yes is B wherever one appears and a cap on municipal exposure lands there. No = F, because the question is about spending to recover costs, which is the funding side of the split CLI-03 sits on the other side of. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-05 A
Will you support a zoning bylaw amendment that prohibits the approval of any new or expanded commercial gas stations within municipal boundaries?
Why this grade: Commits to the amendment. The answer accepts that some applications would be refused outright as a result.
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = F. A land use question, so a No is F rather than C-. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-06 B
Extreme heat, wildfire smoke and wildfire risk all affect people living in existing homes. What would you have your municipality do to protect them? Select all you support.
Why this grade: Backs three of the five. It is real support, short of the breadth and the funding the top band asks for.
How this question is graded
Up to five measures may be ticked. Four or more ticks including at least two of the three the municipality has to pay for (subsidized home assessments, grants or financing for retrofits, designated centres with guaranteed opening hours) = A. Three or more ticks = B. Two = C. One = C-. None of the above = F. The funding floor is there because a straight count of ticks would let a candidate reach the top on the two cheapest options, a vegetation bylaw and an information campaign, while committing no money to anyone actually living in an overheating home. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 3 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - 8% of this topic CLI-07 A
Are you supportive of phasing out fossil fuel powered tools such as leaf blowers (following the lead of Oak Bay and other municipalities across the country)?
Why this grade: Supports removing fossil fuel powered tools. Both the emissions and the noise are addressed by the same measure.
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = F. A regulatory phase-out, graded on the same footing as CLI-05. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-08 B
Large data centres can add substantial electricity and water demand. Under what conditions, if any, would you support a new data centre in your municipality?
Why this grade: Support conditional on waste heat recovery and no added potable water draw. Naming the conditions is what earns the credit here.
How this question is graded
Oppose all new data centres = A. Support only with waste-heat recovery and no net increase in potable water use = B. Support only under conditions set case by case = C. Support without special conditions = F. The two conditional options are separated by whether the condition binds. Waste-heat recovery and no net potable water increase is a testable commitment, so it takes the conditional-yes B. Conditions set case by case name nothing and commit to nothing, so it takes the C that a depends-case-by-case answer gets everywhere else. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-09 B
What are the primary climate risk(s) facing your community, and what actions would you take to support adaptation and resilience in your community?
Why this grade: Clearly identifies climate risks and outlines general thoughts on being ready to mitigate them. Does not provide evidence or any specific actions that could be taken to address this.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = names a climate risk specific to the municipality and specific actions against it, usually tied to data or a programme already running. B = one half only, a risk with no action or actions with no risk named, or backing an existing plan without either. C = general support with nothing local in it, a list of risks and nothing else, or the work handed to the region. C- = a risk gestured at and nothing more. F = an answer that is not about climate.
Meagan Brame's answerThe two biggest risks I think about for Esquimalt are sea-level rise and earthquakes. We are a waterfront community, so we need to think about what rising sea levels could mean for our roads, infrastructure and some of our neighbourhoods over time. And, of course, we live in an earthquake zone and need to be prepared for the possibility of a major event.
I think the best thing we can do is plan ahead. When we are replacing or building infrastructure, we should be thinking about how we make it more resilient and avoid putting off work that we know will eventually need to be done.
I also think emergency preparedness is really important. We need to make sure our emergency plans are current and that residents know what to do, where to get information and how to be prepared for a few days if services are disrupted.
We can't prevent an earthquake or stop sea levels from rising, but we can make sure Esquimalt is as prepared and resilient as possible. - 8% of this topic CLI-10 B
Ensuring ecosystem connectivity is an important adaptation strategy for climate change. How do you plan to maintain or increase ecosystem features across the urban landscape?
Why this grade: Clearly outlines the connection between ecosystem connectivity and development and shows support for maintaining connectivity. Provides some general examples, but does not offer specifics about strategies to improve ecosystem connectivity.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = says what connectivity is and why it matters, with local examples, usually tied to data, a programme already running or the official community plan. B = practical examples with no local detail, or no link back to connectivity. C = general support with no project named, or an answer broad enough to fit any question. C- = agrees with the idea and offers nothing to do about it, or answers about something tangential. F is not used.
Meagan Brame's answerAs Esquimalt grows, I think it is important that we pay attention to the natural features that make our community special. Trees, parks, shoreline areas and green spaces all contribute to the health of our environment and our quality of life.
For me, this means considering tree retention and replacement, planting native species where appropriate and making sure green spaces and natural areas remain connected as development occurs. We need to think about how parks, trails, boulevards and public spaces work together, not as isolated pieces but as part of a larger network.
I don't think growth and environmental protection need to be at odds with one another. With thoughtful planning, we can add housing and welcome new residents while also protecting and enhancing the natural spaces that support wildlife, pollinators and healthy communities. - 8% of this topic CLI-11 A
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Shows general support for the idea and provides some examples, and begins to elaborate on specific strategies to support this.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = yes, with how and why, naming strategies or a local policy that ties development to resilience. B = yes with relevant examples but no account of how they build resilience or how they get built. C = general support and nothing past what the building code already requires. C- = a bare yes, or support that doubts it is possible. F = does not accept that development can make a community more resilient.
Meagan Brame's answerYes. I think development can be an opportunity to improve climate resilience, particularly when new buildings are designed and built to current standards. Building codes and construction practices continue to evolve, with greater attention to energy efficiency, extreme weather, water management and other climate-related risks.
New development also gives us an opportunity to improve infrastructure and incorporate things like better stormwater management, landscaping, tree retention and energy-efficient buildings.
That doesn't mean every new development automatically makes a community more resilient. We still need to look at the bigger picture and make sure development is appropriate for the location and that the surrounding infrastructure can support it.
For me, the goal is to use new development as an opportunity to build better and more resiliently, while making sure we are protecting the things that already work well in our community. - 8% of this topic CLI-12 A
The UBCM passed several resolutions saying municipalities should be able to have climate action lens and climate considerations in development and housing mandates. Do you support blue-green infrastructure upgrades as a requirement of developments for climate readiness?
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = F. Graded by RUSH from 2026-09-01; the mapping is recorded so the remaining rows match the ones already typed. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options
Arts
C- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 2 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Clearly supports a municipal role in arts and culture and its relationship to community life, though the strategic framing is less developed than the strongest responses.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Yes. I think Esquimalt has a lot to be proud of when it comes to arts, culture and community events. We have a really nice variety, and they bring people into Esquimalt from all over the Island and sometimes even farther afield.
I especially like that many of our events are free or very affordable. That takes away some of the barriers to participating and means more people can enjoy them. They bring our community together, but they also give people from outside Esquimalt a chance to see what a great community we are.
I think the Township's role is to support and encourage these opportunities and work with the groups, artists, businesses and volunteers who make them happen. We don't have to do everything ourselves, but we can help make it easier for good ideas to happen.
To me, arts and culture are about more than entertainment. They help bring people together, support local businesses and are a big part of what makes Esquimalt feel like Esquimalt. - 16.67% of this topic ART-02 2 / 3
If elected, what specific action will you commit to in your first year to strengthen your municipality's arts and cultural sector, and what measurable outcome should residents expect by the end of your four-year term?
Why this score: Identifies concrete first-year support/action, but the four-year component is primarily continuation rather than a clearly measurable new outcome.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame's answerIn my first year, I would commit to maintaining the funding Esquimalt provides for arts and culture through our local grants and our participation in the CRD Arts Commission.
The Arts Commission is a little different from many of the services the CRD provides because it is not mandatory. Each municipality chooses whether to participate, and Esquimalt has chosen to be part of it for many years. I think that is a good reflection of how much we value arts and culture in our community.
Over my four-year term, I would like to see that support continue. I want our local artists, groups and organizations to know that the funding they have relied on will continue to be there and that we value what they bring to Esquimalt.
I don't think we always need to create something new to make a difference. Sometimes continuing to support something that is already working well is exactly what we should be doing. - 13.33% of this topic ART-03 2 / 3
Cultural strategies are often adopted and then not implemented. Would you support a cultural space implementation framework with defined tools, timelines and public reporting? Select up to three components you would prioritize. Select your top three options.
Why this score: Supports a meaningful moderate impact frame including reviews of zoning, permitting and regulatory barriers, establishing concrete targets and timlines and communicating progress.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 3 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 2 / 3
Arts organizations and event producers identify permitting, zoning and regulatory requirements as barriers to cultural activity. What would you commit to? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Supports consequential regulatory changes, but the package is narrower than the strongest responses.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 3 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - 16.67% of this topic ART-05 3 / 3
If preserving and securing long-term cultural space requires additional municipal support, which approaches would you support? Select up to five.
Why this score: Strong structural package including cross-regional coordination, nonprofit acquisition partnerships, and inventory review of vulnerable venues.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 2 of 16 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-06 3 / 3
Municipal budgets require difficult choices. Would you support maintaining arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services?
Why this score: Explicitly supports arts and culture maintaining or growing alongside other core services.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-07 3 / 3
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
Why this score: Supports replacement cultural space or equivalent community benefit in redevelopment.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 16.67% of this topic ART-08 2 / 3
Would you support municipal incentives to encourage private property owners and developers to provide affordable community & cultural space for nonprofits? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Supports requiring or incentivizing cultural space in major development projects, a high-impact policy mechanism, but no other supports indicated.
How this question is graded
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed)
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded ART-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to the arts in your municipality or the region as a whole, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I think arts and culture have both a health and an economic benefit for Esquimalt. They give people a reason to get out, connect with others and be part of their community. They also bring people into Esquimalt and give us a chance to show visitors what a great community we are.
Looking at the region as a whole, I think there is an opportunity for another larger arts and performance space in the Westshore. We have wonderful facilities like the Royal Theatre and McPherson Playhouse, but they are both in Victoria. We know people travel from all over the region to attend events there, so having a similar space further west could make arts and culture more accessible to people in those communities.
Esquimalt is lucky to be right in the middle, so we can easily access facilities in either direction. But I think it would be great to see more opportunities for the western communities to enjoy arts and culture closer to home.
Rolling & cycling
A- 15% of this topic ROL-01 A
Will you commit to funding and completing at least one 'missing link' in your municipality's Active Transportation Plan during your four-year term? If yes, which one would you prioritize?
Why this grade: Commits to the last section of Esquimalt Road, the piece that would finish a corridor already largely built. One named link with no hedging.
How this question is graded
Yes + Project surfaced = A; Yes + No specific project in mind, or vague project = B; Combination of No and/or a lack of project ideas = C-F, depending on severity.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: The last section of Esquimalt Rd - 15% of this topic ROL-02 B
Will you commit (or continue to commit) to physical protection (not paint alone) as the standard for all new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets in your municipality?
Why this grade: This question asks about supporting a design standard to establish a level of safety. Infrastructure is not "physically impossible"; it is a question of cost and assessing alternatives. Qualifying an answer with "except where physically impossible" leaves an easy out because many obstacles initially appear impossible to overcome. Hard work is needed to identify viable solutions.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, except where physically impossible = B. No = F. Except where physically impossible is a condition that can be checked against a street, so it takes the conditional-yes B, and that is where the 19 rows graded before this rubric existed put it. A No is F because the question sets a construction standard, which is infrastructure. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 15% of this topic ROL-03 C
Will you oppose efforts (current and future) to remove, narrow or downgrade existing protected bike lanes and other all-ages-and-abilities (AAA) cycling infrastructure in your municipality during your term?
Why this grade: Would take removal, narrowing or downgrading of existing protected infrastructure case by case. Routes already built were funded because the need was identified, and reopening each one leaves that investment provisional.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Depends, case-by-case = C. No = F. Depends case by case names no test and commits to nothing, which is the C it gets on CLI-08 and TRN-02; 13 of the 14 rows graded before this rubric existed agree. A No is F because the question is about keeping built infrastructure in place. An answer of N/A is a claim that the question does not apply to that municipality, which is a judgement about a candidate and is passed in by hand, like an excused decline. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic ROL-04 A
What is the most important active transportation project in the municipality that you will be focused on progressing? Please provide your reasoning.
Why this grade: Names finishing the gap left in the middle of the Esquimalt Road improvements, then turning to Admirals Road, which carries traffic but also a bike lane and the connection to the E&N trail. A specific unfinished section first, with the reasoning that leaving it incomplete wastes the progress already made.
How this question is graded
A = Candidate is able to identify a project in their community and speak to its importance. B & C = Candidate has a general idea of something that can be improved but it isn't high on their priority list. F = Candidate does not think any improvements can/should be made.
Meagan Brame's answerMy priority would be completing the active transportation improvements along Esquimalt Road. There is still a gap in the middle, and I think it would be silly to leave an unfinished section when we have already made progress. We need to figure out the best solution for that remaining piece and finish the connection.
Looking beyond that, Admirals Road is an area I think deserves some attention. It is a busy road that is important for moving vehicles through the community, but it also has a bike lane and connects to the E&N Trail. I strongly support safe cycling infrastructure, but I also recognize that there has to be a balance. Admirals is a good example of where we need to look carefully at how we can keep cyclists safe while still allowing traffic to move efficiently.
For me, the goal is not simply to add bike lanes. It is to create safe, connected routes while recognizing how our roads are used by everyone. - 35% of this topic ROL-05 A
If you have previously served in local government, what did you do to advance walking, rolling, cycling or transit? If you have not, what in your record outside of council shows the same commitment?
Why this grade: Served previously on Esquimalt council and supported the Esquimalt Road improvements now nearing completion, along with added sidewalks and improved pedestrian crossings elsewhere in the community. Concrete work delivered in office, with a stated intent to keep making routes safer and better connected.
How this question is graded
Free text, graded by a person on what the record shows about advancing walking, rolling, cycling or transit. A = delivered work, meaning budgets moved, plans adopted, infrastructure built, or a sustained organisational role with results behind it. B = substantial relevant advocacy or a directly relevant role, with less account of what it produced. C = a record from a different office, or advocacy confined to one location or issue, or no previous term with nothing offered in its place. C- = personal experience or unrelated work with no advocacy behind it. F = nothing relevant offered, or a record that closed the question rather than advancing it. The bands come from the 79 rows graded before 2026-09-20. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame's answerDuring my previous time on Esquimalt Council, I supported improvements that made it easier and safer for people to walk, roll, cycle and use transit in our community.
One project I am particularly pleased to see nearing completion is the improvements along Esquimalt Road. We have also added sidewalks and improved pedestrian crossings in a number of places throughout Esquimalt.
I believe our streets need to work for everyone — people walking, rolling, cycling, taking transit and driving. I also think this is one of the harder things for a municipality to get right. Finding a balance between all of these needs is not easy, and sometimes what makes things better for one group can create challenges for another.
I support continuing to improve active transportation and make routes safer and more connected, while recognizing that our roads also need to work for people who rely on their vehicles.
For me, it is about giving people choices, keeping people safe and finding a balance that works for our community.
Walking
B- 10% of this topic WLK-01 C-
Municipalities, the CRD and the Province have all adopted targets to shift trips away from driving. Do you support meeting your municipality's adopted mode-shift targets, and would you vote for the necessary street-space and budgetary changes?
Why this grade: Shows a lack of knowledge and commitment to multimodal planning and transportation demand management.
How this question is graded
A = yes, even if it means removing driving lanes. C = yes, but not when it takes road space from drivers. F = no. Two steps between the two yeses because the adopted targets cannot be met without reallocating street space. Unsure and Decline to answer are both C- on this tab.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-02 B
Which pedestrian safety problem in your municipality concerns you most, and what is the one change you would commit to in your first term to make walking safer and more attractive than driving for short trips?
Why this grade: Names crossing busy roads on dark wet winter evenings as the main worry and points to pedestrian triggered crossings with good lighting as the fix, some of which are already going in. The commitment is to keep adding them where most needed, which is real but softer than a firm first term promise.
How this question is graded
Free text, graded by a person against the two things the question asks for: a named local problem, and one change committed to in a first term. A = both, with the change specific enough to be delivered and usually tied to funding, a named corridor or an existing plan. B = the problem is named and the response is concrete but soft, narrow, or a review rather than a change. C = a problem is named and nothing is committed to, or the framing of the question is declined. C- = no local problem is settled on, or the answer is a general gesture. F = nothing responsive is offered. The bands come from the 31 rows graded before 2026-09-20 and were applied to the remaining 51 on that date. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame's answerOne of the things that concerns me most is pedestrian safety when crossing busy roads, particularly on those dark, wet winter evenings we know so well in Esquimalt. Pedestrian-triggered crossings with good lighting make a real difference in helping drivers see people who are waiting to cross.
We have started adding these crossings, and I would like to see us continue to add them in locations where they are most needed. A crossing that is easy to see and gives pedestrians a clear and safe way across a busy road can make a big difference in whether someone feels comfortable walking for a short trip.
I think we should keep looking for practical improvements like this that make walking safer and more appealing, while still recognizing that our roads need to work for everyone. - 10% of this topic WLK-03 B
Sidewalk construction and maintenance is chronically underfunded across the region. Would you vote to increase the share of your municipality's transportation capital budget dedicated to pedestrian infrastructure?
Why this grade: Supports a modest increase in the budget share for sidewalks and crossings. Support for more funding, kept well below the strongest option available.
How this question is graded
Yes, a substantial increase, meaning more than double what is currently spent = A. Yes, a modest increase, meaning more but less than double = B, because that is a real commitment with a ceiling on it. No, the current amount is sufficient = F, because the question is about money for infrastructure, which is the funding side of the split. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-04 F
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
Why this grade: Answered not applicable instead of taking a position on expanding pedestrian priority and car free streets. Esquimalt Road and the shops along it are the kind of main street the question asks about, so a position was available and none was given.
How this question is graded
Yes, and I would pursue a permanent expansion or implementation = A. Yes, but only temporary, seasonal or pilot closures = B, because it is a yes with a stated limit on it. No = F, because the question is about street space, which is infrastructure. An answer of N/A is not on this list: it is a claim that the municipality has no downtown, main street or village centre, which is a judgement about a candidate and is passed in by hand. It has been left blank where that is true of the municipality and graded F everywhere the question plainly does apply. Unsure was typed C on two rows before 2026-09-13 and those rows were reset to blank on 2026-09-20, so the question now follows the shared policy. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 6 options - 20% of this topic WLK-05 A
How will you work with parent groups, school staff, and municipal staff to assure that children’s safety is prioritized over convenience and flow of motor traffic?
Why this grade: Understanding the issues so clearly, as you do, and having clear strategy to work with parents and staff, is the way to achieve results.Walk On Victoria has conducted a Jane’s Walk and several walk audits in Esquimalt over the past four years. Improvements in sidewalk infrastructure and crosswalks are there for everyone to see. In asking residents on the streets where sidewalks have been reconstructed what they think of the new pedestrian infrastructure, the responses have been 100% positive. This kind of upgrading is high standard. Good, sincere commitment backed by funding gets results.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = names parents, school staff and municipal staff and attaches something concrete: an audit, measures, funding, timelines, or work delivered. B = one half only, consultation without measures or measures without consultation. C = points at an existing programme as enough. C- = vague, deflects, or denies the problem. Blank only where Walk On cannot judge local conditions. F is not used.
Meagan Brame's answerI think Esquimalt already does a good job with school and playground signage, and the Township provides funding to support the crossing-guard program. I would like to build on that rather than start from scratch.
I would continue working with VicPD on speeding and safety concerns around schools, including increased patrols before school starts and periodic enforcement throughout the year.
I also think there is an opportunity to work more closely with the school district. If we are supporting crossing guards and other safety measures that benefit students, I would like to explore how we can share that responsibility and cost.
Our school PACs are also doing some great work, including starting walking and riding “school buses.” I think having a Council liaison connect with these groups would be valuable. They hear directly from parents and students about what is working, what isn't and where the gaps are.
For me, children's safety should come first. The best way to achieve that is by listening to the people who use these routes every day and working together on practical solutions. - 20% of this topic WLK-06 A
What will you do, in a 4 year term, to identify, prioritize and set time-lines to assure that pedestrian infrastructure is improved to meet the needs of the older and disabled members of your community?
Why this grade: Uneven curb cuts with curb lips, poor sight lines at crossings, and slant of pavement (a big risk of tipping for motorized mobility devices) are all concerns that older and disabled pedestrians cite. The smooth curb cuts at crossings on new sidewalk construction in Esquimalt should be the model for all the CRD. Support to continue the work Esquimalt has been doing, along with continued attempts to meet timelines, are exactly the kind of commitments Walk On Victoria advocates.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = names what to fix and the order it gets fixed in: an audit, named priorities, consultation with older and disabled residents, a timeline inside the term. B = real improvements with no process behind them, or continuing existing work. C = states the need and defers it, or one fix with no plan. C- = a problem with no action, or an answer about something else. Blank only where Walk On cannot judge local conditions. F is not used.
Meagan Brame's answerI would like to see us move faster on this, 100%. I do think Esquimalt has been making progress with sidewalks, crossings and other pedestrian improvements, and we have a sidewalk master plan to help guide that work. I would want to make sure we keep moving forward with the priorities identified in that plan.
Over a four-year term, I would like to see clear timelines for the highest-priority improvements and make sure they are reflected in our capital planning and budgets. I would also be willing to put some additional funding toward this work if that is what is needed to keep things moving.
Making sidewalks, curb cuts and crossings safer and easier to navigate is particularly important for older adults and people with disabilities. It can make the difference between someone feeling confident getting around their community independently or feeling like they have to stay home.
We have a plan. Now we need to keep working through it, prioritize the areas of greatest need and make sure the work actually gets done.
Governance
B- 17% of this topic GOV-01 A
Do you support expanding shared or regional delivery of municipal services in the Capital Region?
How this question is graded
Yes/Partly = A, Unsure = C, No = F.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-02 —
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
Why this grade: Undecided on pooling the design, construction and upkeep of local infrastructure into a regional service. Nothing was committed either way, so the row carries no letter and drops out of the category grade.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, only if full cost recovery is guaranteed for my municipality = B. No = C-. Full cost recovery is a named, checkable condition on a yes, so it takes the conditional-yes B. A No is C- rather than F because the question is about how services are organised and who runs them, which is the governance side of the split CLI-03 sits on the other side of. Unsure was typed C on three rows before 2026-09-13 and those rows were reset to blank on 2026-09-20, so the question now follows the shared policy. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-03 C
If elected, what three steps would you take to put your region or municipality on a firmer financial footing?
How this question is graded
“Real financial resilience comes from increasing the productivity of land that's already served by infrastructure: letting neighborhoods incrementally thicken, encouraging redevelopment where roads and pipes already exist, building more value per acre instead of more acres that need public maintenance.” The Strong Towns approach thinks about revenue vs liabilities and the cost of replacing infrastructure as a key driver of municipal financial success. Next-increment intensification or better allows improved use of pipes, roads, and wires, increasing the economic base for the city while lowering vacancies (examples, strongtowns.org , archive.strongtowns.org ). No credit was given for/against for either a) sharing costs with neighbouring governments or b) asking for money from higher levels of government, both of which may have additional merit beyond the boundaries of the muncipality. A-level (excellent) answer: 1. a comment about density being linked to financial wellbeing (revenue side), 2. a comment about efficient use of that revenue (expenses side), 3. thinking about infrastructure liabilities and how to pay for them given the intergenerational problems. B-level (good) answer considers some of these principles, but likely doesn't consider both revenue and expenses. C-level (mixed) - may have other ideas about arbitrary efficiencies and doesn't provide a mechanism for doing the work they propose (e.g. "fill up the reserve fund" -- with what money?). F - working in the opposite direction of resilience (e.g. arbitrary property tax increase caps), or doesn't answer the question (e.g. "my municipality is on firm financial footing").
Meagan Brame's answer**1. Prioritize what residents need most.**
Municipal budgets are about choices. Before adding programs or services, we need to look at what we already provide, what residents value and what is essential. We need to protect core services while being thoughtful about what we add.
**2. Look for efficiencies first.**
Council and staff should continually look at how services are delivered, whether we can work more efficiently, share services or reduce duplication. Before increasing property taxes, we should ask, “Is there a better way to do this?”
**3. Plan ahead.**
Infrastructure and municipal assets are expensive to replace. We need strong long-term financial planning, appropriate reserves and realistic capital plans, while being careful about taking on new ongoing costs without knowing how we will pay for them.
Esquimalt is not a business, but we have a responsibility to provide services, invest in our community and be responsible with the money residents entrust to us. - 17% of this topic GOV-04 F
Do you commit to eliminating mandatory parking minimums for all land uses in your municipality by 2030?
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No/Decline = F. Parking minimums are pseudoscience that should be eliminated from city codes everywhere, and have been eliminated in Vancouver, Edmonton, Regina, Ottawa, and others across North America without any negative consequences (archive.strongtowns.org )
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-01 A
Do you support ensuring that local First Nations are represented in transit governance, such as on the Victoria Regional Transit Commission and the CRD Transportation Commission?
Why this grade: Says yes to local First Nations holding seats in transit governance, including the Victoria Regional Transit Commission and the CRD Transportation Commission. Nothing qualifies the answer.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. No = C-, on the same reasoning as GOV-02 and TRN-04: the question is about who sits at the table, not about what gets built or funded. No candidate has answered No, so that letter is a rule rather than a record of how anyone was graded. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 B
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
How this question is graded
A = significantly more consultation practices. B = somewhat more. C = the current amount is enough. Written answers take the same ladder: A commits to partnership with local First Nations, B wants better consultation without committing to a change, C questions whether more is wanted. Nothing here has been graded C- or F.
Meagan Brame chose 1 of 7 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded GOV-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to governance, shared services, and municipal infrastructure, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I support using a combination of tools to address infrastructure needs; there is no single answer.
Esquimalt has already made the difficult decision to add money to property taxes to help catch up on infrastructure renewal. I support this kind of long-term planning when needed, but property taxes are a significant burden for many residents, so we need to look at other options before continually increasing that burden.
I support **thoughtful housing and commercial development** as one way to grow the tax base and help support infrastructure. I would not support development simply because it increases revenue. Growth needs to make sense for the community and be supported by the infrastructure, services and amenities residents need.
I also support sharing services, expertise and costs with neighbouring municipalities where it makes sense. Good governance means maintaining what we have, planning ahead, finding efficiencies and making thoughtful choices with limited resources. - Not graded REC-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to First Nation transit governance or consultation practices, feel free to share your thoughts below.
We always need to keep our First Nation's partners in the conversation.
Livable CRD is a registered local elections advertising sponsor with Elections BC. Election advertising on this site is authorized by Livable CRD, [email protected]. Elections BC explains what that means in its Guide for Local Elections Third Party Sponsors in B.C. (PDF).