How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Kimberley Guiry'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 Kimberley Guiry 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?
This past term, we have come a long way in increasing transparency. From introducing Let’s Chat Langford, to expanding our budget process, to introducing our first development tracker, there is more information available now than ever before. However, I believe there is still more work to be done to improve transparency around how the community can engage with their local government and better understand the processes involved. I would like to improve our online resources and create a “How To” section to help residents understand how to navigate city systems, such as applying for permits, connecting with Council, and engaging in decision-making processes. Navigating municipal processes and accessing information is not always easy or intuitive. I believe there are improvements we can make to ensure these processes are more accessible and easier for residents to understand and participate in. - 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.
Kimberley Guiry's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $0 Transit $500,000 Walking Infrastructure $1,500,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $1,500,000 Roadway Infrastructure $1,500,000 Policing $0 Fire & Emergency Services $0 Parks & Recreation $2,000,000 Arts & Culture $1,500,000 Climate Action & Environment $1,000,000 Unhoused Resident Services $500,000 Community-Based Clinics $0 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
Langford has been exceeding its provincial housing targets. While affordable housing remains a need, the Affordable Housing Fund has funding available to support projects. Larger funding assistance is still needed, and Langford remains open to future funding streams and partnerships. As our community has grown, so has the need for public safety. This term, Langford invested in 27 firefighters for 24/7 service at Fire Hall #2, 15 RCMP officers, and an expansion of the RCMP building. While consistent operational funding will still be needed, one time funding generally used for capital is less useful here. With the opening of the Goldstream Medical Clinic, 12,500 residents will have access to 10 doctors. A future clinic is being explored, with funding and partnerships being pursued before considering direct City investment. While transit and unhoused resident services are generally outside the City’s scope, infrastructure upgrades can support our partners. Master plans identify funding needs for transportation, arts and culture, and climate action.
Healthcare access
What Kimberley Guiry 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.
By supporting the South Island Primary Care Society and allowing them to use their expertise in the medical space, the new clinic was quickly filled with 10 doctors, and over 12,000 residents were connected with care. Langford's role in the partnership meant understanding key community partners and identifying a location that removed further barriers, with adequate access to parking, major bus routes, active transportation corridors and infrastructure, plus micromobility options.
Transit
A- 20% of this topic TRN-01 A
Which fare measures would you actively advocate for at the VRTC? Select all that apply.
Why this grade: Would push for every option on the list, which runs to free travel for under 19s, cheaper fares for seniors, cheaper fares for people on income or disability assistance and a lower cost regional monthly pass. Support extends across all four groups of riders rather than stopping at one of them.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 4 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: Would reallocate kerbside space on busy transit streets at peak times, leaving parking in place for the rest of the day. Peak only is a condition that can be tested against a timetable, which keeps it a qualified 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 6 options - 30% of this topic TRN-03 A
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: Would deploy transit priority at pace on frequent corridors, accepting the loss of parking or a traffic lane where it is needed. The one thing this question tests, giving up road space, is conceded outright.
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.
Kimberley Guiry 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: Supports standing up a regional transportation authority for the area. The yes carries no caveat of any kind.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options - 10% of this topic TRN-05 A
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: Would build new connections reserved for buses and bicycles through public land, including parks and golf courses, where the time saved is substantial. Nothing is attached to the answer by way of a caveat.
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.
Kimberley Guiry 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.
Our recently adopted Master Recreation Plan found that traffic in many areas of Langford will progress to higher failing grades unless mode shift is embraced in both policy and funding. While vehicle use will continue to be an important part of transportation in Langford, there need to be functional, accessible, and safe opportunities to choose from for all those willing and able to make the change, as well as for those who cannot drive. Langford will continue to advocate for higher-order transit in order to provide efficient and cost-effective transit options throughout the region. The Master Transportation Plan considers the potential for either the reactivation of the E&N corridor and/or the evolution of bus-on-shoulder service to light rail on the #1 Highway. In addition to these main service routes, it will be important to partner to improve transit service delivery throughout the city and support last-mile active transportation, microtransit, and micromobility options.
Housing
C- HFL-01 4 / 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
Kimberley Guiry chose 4 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 6 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 6 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 6 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 4 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 6 of 8 options - HFL-05 0 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 1 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-08 2 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-09 4 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 6 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 1 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-10 6 / 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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerFirst year:
- At the end of this term, it was determined that an Advisory Design Panel would be beneficial for Langford. I would like to see it established and integrated into our city processes in the first year. While Council has delegated authority to staff to issue development permits, the panel should not significantly delay projects, while helping to achieve better outcomes and providing informed interpretations of current policies and guidelines.
- Establish an affordable housing liaison to help facilitate affordable housing projects through the municipal process.
- Create a suite of incentives to support family-friendly and intergenerational housing.
End of term:
- Langford is known for innovative solutions. I would like to apply that innovative energy to finding a path forward for a cooperative housing project in Langford.
- Evaluate opportunities to pre-zone for affordable housing that meets OCP requirements in areas where supporting infrastructure already exists.
- Achieve the provincial housing targets, including the suggested target for affordable housing.
- Develop a catalogue of housing designs that can be pre-approved to streamline approval processes.
- Establish a housing grants policy that provides clear, predictable funding for affordable housing projects and aligns municipal investments with housing priorities and affordability outcomes.
- Work with Threshold Housing Society to create new units for youth at risk of or experiencing homelessness.
30% of this topic Incumbent record 29 / 29What Kimberley Guiry 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: 100%
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: Supports the ban in full and commits to arguing it regionally. There is no hedge on either part.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Kimberley Guiry 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: Would put climate in the top three and pay for it. The plan would advance it without being shaped by it.
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.
Kimberley Guiry 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: Commits in full to declining those meetings. There is no carve out for local operations or for utilities.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-04 B
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: Would join with a limit on what the municipality contributes. Support is given and then bounded.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-05 —
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: Skipped the zoning question and answered the remainder of the climate section firmly. The row is dropped from the grade instead of being read as a refusal.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-06 A
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: Picks four measures and pays for two of them, with home assessments and guaranteed centre hours alongside the bylaw and the campaign. Breadth plus funding is what carries this to the top.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 4 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: Would phase out fossil fuel powered tools. Nothing is reserved for later negotiation.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-08 A
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: Rules out new data centres entirely. No conditions are needed because none are being offered.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-09 A
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 risks and provides concrete strategies grounded in their local context.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerLangford's Climate Action Plan identified wildfire, multi-hazard, and extreme heat as hazards with high likelihood and high to extreme risk. In order to mitigate the risk of wildfire, I would continue to support the FireSmart program and work with our neighbours in provincial and regional parks to manage fuel along the borders with Wildland Urban Interface areas. To respond to extreme heat and climate risks, I would support initiatives in the Urban Forest Management Plan that prioritize canopy growth in areas with less equitable access to green space, as well as the implementation of design guidelines that focus on planting trees in areas with high surface areas of pavement, such as parking lots. A multi-hazard risk requires a more holistic approach to protecting natural areas, strengthening infrastructure, and improving emergency preparedness. - 8% of this topic CLI-10 A
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: Identifies clear, actionable strategies to improve resilience through development relevent to their local context.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerI think there are opportunities, both large and small, to make improvements to urban areas that improve biodiversity and ecosystem health. Small-scale initiatives include pollinator gardens in city boulevards, increasing tree canopy on city streets and supporting naturescaping on public properties. On a larger scale, it means looking for opportunities to increase and diversify natural park areas across the city and support and celebrate new buildings that uphold the standards in the Design Guidelines and respond to climate and the natural environment. Additionally, as development occurs it is important to find opportunities to protect and enhance natural corridors through strategic park dedication. - 8% of this topic CLI-11 B
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Clearly supports improving resilience through development, but does not provide specifics about how this would take shape in their local context.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerWhen building is done with the climate crisis in mind, then yes, absolutely. Efficient buildings help reduce GHG emissions, are more comfortable to live in, and are more affordable due to lower energy needs. When building and land use are tied directly to transportation, this means we can make sure transportation options are affordable, accessible, and available, making it easier to achieve Langford's mode-shift targets. New standards set out in the Official Community Plan, Master Transportation Plan, Parks and Trails Master Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Design Guidelines were all created with the climate crisis in mind. This means the city we are building today is more resilient and is being built with the future in mind. - 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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded CLI-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to climate concerns with respect to your municipality or the region as a whole, feel free to share your thoughts below.
Langford's new Climate Action Plan is coming up for adoption before the end of the term. The plan considers Langford's climate context, provides a climate risk and vulnerability assessment, and provides a roadmap for meaningful climate action in Langford. There are opportunities for big moves and strategies with priority actions that will all need to be supported and implemented in the years ahead. I am committed to following and upholding the direction in the approved Climate Action Plan.
Arts
A- 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: Identifies Langford's recent Economic Development Strategy and Arts and Culture Strategy and identifies a full-time coordinator as a concrete implementation mechanism from that strategy, illustrating general knowledge and support from the candidate, however candidate does not sufficiently demonstrate specific munical intervention or knowledge of tools, policies and or impact of the A&C sector to earn a 3
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Langford's newly adopted Economic Development Strategy and Arts and Culture Strategy work hand in hand to support a thriving creative economy. The integration of these two strategies means initiatives are considered and interwoven into each objective. As an example, at the staff level, a full-time Arts, Culture & Economic Development Coordinator would create efficiencies for licensing and continuity for initiatives from both plans, thus fostering and supporting positive and welcoming relationships in the community. - 16.67% of this topic ART-02 3 / 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: Provides a concrete first-year placemaking action and a four-year theatre objective, citing potential partnerships and funding exploration with other municipalites and CRD. The outcome is framed as hoped-for progress rather than a fully defined measurable deliverable, just squeaked in at a 3 with level of specificity.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry's answerIn the first year, I would support the adoption of Langford's first placemaking strategy. This would look at placemaking opportunities in the community, a funding strategy, and a guide for implementation. A community group should be able to use this strategy as a way to guide their creative energy and create a sense of place through initiatives like art installations, little free libraries, gathering places, or visual storytelling.
By the end of the term, I would hope to have a clear path forward and a shovel-ready project with funding underway for a theatre in Langford. This could be in partnership with the Sooke School District and/or the Juan de Fuca Performing Arts Centre Society, depending on the size of the theatre, and would look to collaboration with the CRD and upper levels of government for funding opportunities. - 13.33% of this topic ART-03 3 / 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: Selects cultural-space inventory, affordability/stability tools and nonprofit permanent-asset partnerships, defined as a high impact municipal mix.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry chose 3 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 3 / 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 a comprehensive consequential regulatory/permitting package.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry chose 8 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: Supports development/amenity contributions, nonprofit acquisition, land trusts, municipal leverage and regional infrastructure funding.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry chose 5 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: Supports arts investment maintaining or growing alongside core services.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry 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: Explicitly supports preserving existing cultural space where feasible.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 16.67% of this topic ART-08 3 / 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 fee reductions, nonprofit tax relief, private-owner tax incentives and development-space requirements/incentives.
How this question is graded
Kimberley Guiry chose 4 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.
Langford is a relatively young city that made early investments in sport and recreation, but investments in arts and culture have been slowly catching up. The new Arts and Culture and Childcare Centre expands on successful programs and provides a dedicated space for programs to establish and grow. The newly adopted Arts and Culture Strategy provides a path forward for understanding the diverse community that Langford has grown into and how to support the community so that culture is seen and celebrated and the arts are integral to how the city operates.
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 Glen Lake Road sidewalk and bike lanes, already in the budget subject to a grant and identified as a safe route to school, with protected lanes on Goldstream Avenue from the parkway to Claude as the fallback if that money does not arrive. Two named links, with a frank account of what each depends on.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Glen Lake Road sidewalk and bike lanes were included in the most recent budget, pending grant availability, and was identified as an opportunity to improve safe routes to school. I would continue to support this project as a priority; however, in the absence of grant or adequate surplus funding, I would consider supporting protected bike lanes on Goldstream Avenue from VMP to Claude, as this would connect the E&N Trail to Langford's City Centre and the new John Horgan Campus. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 A
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: Holds physical protection, rather than paint, as the standard for every new and upgraded cycling route on a busy street. The commitment is stated flat, with no situation held back from it.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 15% of this topic ROL-03 A
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: Agrees to oppose removing, narrowing or downgrading protected lanes and all ages and abilities routes already in place. Nothing qualifies it.
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.
Kimberley Guiry 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 the walking and cycling overpass over the highway that the city's plan has already located, explaining that the highway divides the city and the existing overpasses are difficult enough to use that they stop people crossing at all. A specific project, with the barrier it removes described.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerOur city is currently divided by a major highway (#1) with overpasses that are challenging enough for active transportation users to create a barrier to crossing. Our Active Transportation Plan identified a location for a pedestrian overpass that would contribute to our active transportation network and provide a safe route to cross the highway. I would commit to being a strong advocate for getting this project planned and funded through partnerships with upper levels of government. - 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: In the 2024 budget, moved the general amenity fund off subsidising taxes and onto safe routes to school, advancing sidewalk infill by more than a decade in three years and finding over fifteen million dollars for this work. One of those projects was the redesign of Latoria Road for the new elementary school, which brought connectivity and safety gains beyond the school run.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerIn the 2024 budget, Council voted to end the use of the General Amenity Fund to subsidize taxes and put that funding towards active transportation projects that contribute to safe routes to school. This decision advanced our sidewalk infill initiative by over a decade in three years and, through this priority, found over $15 million from various funds for active transportation projects. One key project included the redesign of Latoria Road to support the opening of the new SĆIȺNEW̱ SṮEȽIṮḴEȽ Elementary School. While this project has many safe-routes-to-school benefits, there are safety and connectivity improvements that benefit the whole community.
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded ROL-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to the rolling and cycling in your municipality or the region as a whole, feel free to share your thoughts below.
Langford was the first community to consider a micromobility program through an RFP process that would meet our local community needs and had the potential to contribute to regional active transportation. So far, the initiative has been successful, with positive feedback from residents and businesses alike. While there is an abundance of painted infrastructure in Langford, AAA-protected infrastructure needs improvement. The regional trails through the city are well used and provide important regional connections; however, connectivity to those trails needs improvement, and more north/south routes are needed in order to make those important connections.
Walking
A- 10% of this topic WLK-01 A
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?
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-02 A
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 pedestrian infrastructure that is inconsistent in both continuity and accessibility, and commits to continuing to fund the sidewalk infill programme and to applying the accessibility standards in the municipality's plan. Funding and a standard, both named.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerPedestrian infrastructure is inconsistent in both continuity and accessibility. Over the next term, I would commit to continuing to fund the sidewalk infill program and following the Active Transportation Plan's accessibility standards to ensure pedestrians have a continuous and safe experience for their whole trip. - 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: Backs a modest rise in the pedestrian share. Concrete and capped.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-04 B
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
Why this grade: Would run temporary or seasonal closures. A limited form of the measure, backed clearly.
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.
Kimberley Guiry 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: You would keep supporting the regional initiative that brings parents together with the city, the school district, school administration, the public insurer, the transit authority, cycling advocates, the provincial transportation ministry and police, widen the walking school bus initiative, and advocate at the council table for funding for every safe routes to school effort as well as for the province to restore its active transportation grant. Advocating for the funding, and not only for the program, is what keeps this work moving when budgets tighten.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerThe CRD has a Ready, Set, Roll initiative that has been successful in Langford, as it brings parents together with members from the City, Sooke School District, school administration, ICBC, BC Transit, Capital Bike, BC MOTI, and the RCMP to identify challenges and opportunities for children to access their school outside of a vehicle. I would continue to support this initiative, as well as advocate for the expansion of the Walking School Bus Initiative facilitated by the Society of Children and Youth BC. In addition, I would continue to advocate at the Council table for funding for all safe-routes-to-school initiatives and advocate to the province to reinstate the BC Active Transportation Grant to help fund more projects. - 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: You point to the dedicated crossings and accessibility section of Langford's new active transportation plan, covering curb ramps, tactile walking surface indicators, refuge islands, raised crosswalks, markings, signs, lighting, leading pedestrian intervals and audible signals, and you would fund the sidewalk infill program and keep engaging the regional accessibility committee so the plan is adjusted as people use the new work. Continuing that engagement after construction, rather than only before it, is the part most plans skip.
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.
Kimberley Guiry's answerLangford's new Active Transportation Plan has a dedicated section on crossings and accessibility worked into plans for our future active transportation network. This section considers curb ramps, tactile walking surface indicators, pedestrian refuge islands, raised crosswalks, pavement markings, multi-use signage, lighting improvements, leading pedestrian intervals, and audible pedestrian signals. If elected, I would support a budget that moves the sidewalk infill program forward, as well as support improvements to pedestrian infrastructure that enhance accessibility. While the Active Transportation Plan considered engagement with the Capital West Accessibility Advisory Committee, I would support ongoing engagement so that adjustments can be made based on feedback from new improvements.
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded WLK-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to walking or pedestrian activity in your municipality, feel free to share your thoughts below.
Langford has a unique condition where the City has to work closely with the province on some of the major roadways that belong to the province. The #1 Highway, Veterans Memorial Highway, and Sooke Road are all provincial highways. Moving forward, it will be important to continue to work collaboratively with the province by following its new active transportation guidelines. Similarly, collaboration with the CRD will also be important for a consistent and safe experience whenever a regional trail intersects with a Langford roadway and ongoing advocacy is required for the extension of the E&N trail all the way to Goldstream Park.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-02 B
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
Why this grade: Backs the service on financial terms. The commitment is qualified rather than open.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-03 A
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").
Kimberley Guiry's answer1. Contribute to a capital asset management plan that ensures the maintenance and replacement of city assets is budgeted for and the lifecycles of infrastructure are considered. This would include both built/engineering infrastructure as well as green infrastructure.
2. I would support the policy proposed during this term that requires the development of a repayment plan for all new internal borrowing.
3. Support sub-regional services that provide cost-sharing opportunities and efficiencies that could not be achieved on our own. This includes the West Shore RCMP, West Shore Parks and Recreation, and the MOUs with the West Shore fire departments. - 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 )
Kimberley Guiry 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: Supports representation at the transit commission and the regional district alike. Nothing is qualified.
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.
Kimberley Guiry chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 A
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.
Kimberley Guiry 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.
Being at the table for regional decisions at the CRD is an important part of sharing resources and supporting collaborative relationships with neighbouring communities. The new CRD Regional Transportation Service is an important part of Langford's future. With a regional lens on transportation, there is an opportunity to improve the efficacy of our transportation systems, making it easier to get around the CRD in a way that works for residents. This creates a successful path forward to achieve mode-share targets while addressing traffic congestion and equity through mobility choices. Consistent application of standards across the region will lead to a consistent user experience, reducing frustration and conflicts. - 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.
Langford is unique in that it shares lands with eight different Nations. Relationship-building takes time, and while consultation is important and should be a priority, it should not be rushed for colonial governance reasons. I support going at the pace needed to support the integrity and growth of these relationships, while also keeping in mind that inaction is not helpful. In Langford, reconciliation has been integrated into our master planning process, including the Arts and Culture Strategy and the Economic Development Strategy. Going forward, it will be important to make sure initiatives are a priority, funded, and rooted in consultation.
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).