How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Scott Goodmanson's mark for it on the right; the key underneath says what each mark means. Open a row to read what they answered. 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.
Scott Goodmanson returned the questionnaire after the grading deadline. Their answers are published without grades.
General
What Scott Goodmanson 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 feature in our municipality, it would be the lack of a pedestrian overpass across the TCH.
The highway is a serious barrier for those wanting to cross to-and-from north Langford. For children, the lack of an overpass means that walking to school is a foreign concept, even when they can see the school across the highway. No longer would parents be forced to drive their children before and after school and bicycle commuters on the north side of the highway would have a safer route to connect to the regional trail network. - 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.
Scott Goodmanson's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $0 Transit $0 Walking Infrastructure $750,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $0 Roadway Infrastructure $0 Policing $0 Fire & Emergency Services $4,000,000 Parks & Recreation $2,000,000 Arts & Culture $1,000,000 Climate Action & Environment $750,000 Unhoused Resident Services $500,000 Community-Based Clinics $1,000,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
One-time funding can not be used for operations. Therefore the question above lends itself for small to medium sized capital projects.
For example, in Langford, we are already in the middle of our RCMP detachment expansion project, but we need to begin saving for an eventual new fireball.
The climate action funding can go toward some of the actionable items from our new Climate Action Plan.
We have a working model with a non profit, medical, society and the $1 000 000 could go towards the tenant improvements for a new clinic.
We are a rapidly growing municipality that needs to fund for a variety of infrastructure and amenity needs.
Healthcare access
What Scott Goodmanson 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.
Municipalities region wide are grasping with how to engage in the healthcare field, that has previously been considered the mandate of the Provincial Government.
Four out of the five Westshore municipalities have committed municipal resources to create the opportunity for residents to have the possibility of a primary care professional.
In Langford we have secured a small drs office from closing and keeping 2500 -3000 patients from losing their primary care representative.
We have opened up a new clinic with ten doctors which will serve 12 500 - 15 000 patients and recently closed a RFP for a housing, drs office, and commercial/ retail building on City owned land.
Transit
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded TRN-01
Which fare measures would you actively advocate for at the VRTC? Select all that apply.
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.
Chose 4 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - Not graded TRN-02
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 6 options - Not graded 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?
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.
Chose 1 of 6 options - Not graded TRN-04
Do you support the creation of a regional transportation authority?
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded TRN-05
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - 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.
Transit and transportation in the CRD have often been stewarded under multiple different groups that do not always talk together.
Transit under BC Transit and the Victoria Transit Commission, and general transportation falling under the municipal governments, each on their own.
Today, in the CRD we find ourselves working into a new setting with the creation of the CRD’s Regional Transportation Service that will allow transit and transportation to work hand in hand all across the CRD.
Housing
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded HFL-01
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
Chose 6 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - Not graded HFL-02
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.
Chose 5 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - Not graded HFL-03
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded HFL-04
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.
Chose 6 of 8 options - Not graded HFL-05
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded HFL-06
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.
Chose 1 of 6 options - Not graded HFL-07
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded HFL-08
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.
Chose 1 of 4 options - Not graded HFL-09
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.
Chose 6 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - Not graded HFL-10
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.
I would like the city to have achieved some of the direct actions that were identified in our recently passed official housing strategy.
We were close to having a nonprofit housing development started but the funding was lost at the last minute, during the last provincial budget.
I would like to achieve something similar in the next four years. - Not graded HFL-11
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.
Chose 1 of 4 options
Climate
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded CLI-01
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded CLI-02
The Capital Regional District declared a climate emergency in 2019. How should your municipality treat climate action in its next four-year plan?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded CLI-03
Will you pledge to never take meetings from fossil fuel company lobbyists?
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded 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?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded CLI-05
Will you support a zoning bylaw amendment that prohibits the approval of any new or expanded commercial gas stations within municipal boundaries?
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded CLI-06
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.
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.
Chose 5 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - Not graded CLI-07
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)?
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded CLI-08
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded CLI-09
What are the primary climate risk(s) facing your community, and what actions would you take to support adaptation and resilience in your community?
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.
The primary climate risks facing the City of Langford are mainly related to heat.
The heat dome in 2021 showed the inequities of cooling and shade across the city and the negative effects of planning decisions from years past.
The fire interface hazard has been an issue for Langford for decades. As both temperatures and development into greenfield areas increase, so does the fire interface hazard.
The City already has a strong program for fire-smart awareness and a dedicated member of Langford Fire Rescue administers the program. We also provide the ability to visit individual properties at no cost to the property owner to advise on fire smart responses that can be carried out.
The city has also just adopted our first ever Climate Action Plan which is a roadmap for ways the city can improve our responses to climate change and how we can mitigate our own affects on the climate. - Not graded CLI-10
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?
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.
The City passed its first ever Parks and Trails master plan in December of 2025 that outlines the vision for the City’s parks and trail system. It also identifies gaps in parks, trails, unstructured outdoor recreation opportunities in the city.
To complete this vision we have outlined 9 objectives, 30 strategies, and 118 actions we can take directly.
I encourage everyone to go to Langford.ca and read up on this formidable plan. - Not graded CLI-11
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
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.
Yes.
Responsible development is an essential way we can increase our resilience to climate change effects.
For example, by maintaining our tree canopy we can lower the heat island effects, lesson the effects of windstorms, and avoid slope failures and landslides that can occur with stripped hillsides.
By densifying smartly we can maintain much of the remaining wilderness around us, while provide solid, safe, housing for future generations.
This is where our new OCP, Parks and Trails master plan, new Master Transportation plan, Active transportation plan, and Climate Change plan can work in harmony to produce better results than working alone.
We have done the hard work to see these plans passed and now it is our job to ensure they are implemented into the operations of the City over the next term. - Not graded CLI-12
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - 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.
By focussing on a series of nine master, and sub-master plans over the previous four years, the City has created an environment where were can now plan for our future in a wholesome fashion that incorporates information from a variety of City resources all at once.
No longer will needed information be absent when we are looking at the complete-city scale of Langford.
Now we can plan our housing, roads and trails, parks, arts and cultural spaces, together, instead of a piecemeal - add hoc fashion of past years.
Arts
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded ART-01
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
How this question is graded
Chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: The creation and advocacy for arts and cultural spaces is just as important for city as the creation and advocacy for sports and leisure spaces.
While few municipalities can provide these amenities on their own, by working with public and private partnerships we can leverage municipal plans and resources with the resources of outside organizations. - Not graded ART-02
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?
How this question is graded
Langford passed its first ever Arts and Cultural Development Strategy this year planning the way forward for the future of these needed amenities in our city.
This 50+ page document is the high level blueprint for our way forward that can be incorporated into a variety of of other master plans to ensure that the arts and cultural aspect of the city is viewed in a lens of that specific master plan.
I will continue to advocate that this document is implemented into the running of their city and continue to advocate for the Arts at the CRD with its new Arts service. - Not graded ART-03
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.
How this question is graded
Chose 3 of 11 options - Not graded ART-04
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.
How this question is graded
Chose 7 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - Not graded ART-05
If preserving and securing long-term cultural space requires additional municipal support, which approaches would you support? Select up to five.
How this question is graded
Chose 5 of 16 options - Not graded ART-06
Municipal budgets require difficult choices. Would you support maintaining arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services?
How this question is graded
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded ART-07
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
How this question is graded
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded ART-08
Would you support municipal incentives to encourage private property owners and developers to provide affordable community & cultural space for nonprofits? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
Chose 4 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - 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.
The Arts are a needed and vital part of any city, and stand on equal footing with sports and leisure. Municipalities need both to help ensure we are representing the full breadth of interests, activities, passions and wonders that can exist across a municipality. Arts access done not always have to be loud and flashy. The number of venues for a variety of arts spaces is just as important as the size and scale of those spaces.
I often refer to the City of Saskatoon, which around 2010, was voted the number one city in Canada for Arts access. That doesn’t mean it had all of the largest shows or the biggest crowds. But across the City the accessibility for the number and arts venues, shows, programs, was the top in Canada.
I would love to see the CRD working together to create such an environment here.
Rolling & cycling
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded ROL-01
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: While there are a number of worthy and needed projects in our list for the City of Langford, and some I personally am more biased towards due to my own interests, no single Mayor or Councillor can state that this is the project that the city will work on
All projects go through a variety of filters including budget, hierarchical needs, possible grant funding or partnership opportunities, etc within the City. If funding is needed through requisition then the decision is one of Council as a whole that makes a decision and no individual council member has anything more than a single vote.
It is the sum total of council that makes decisions, not an individual
While it is not the top priority of the city, I believe finishing the E&N rail trail to Humpback Rd is attainable and much needed to allow easy access to Langford Lake, the Langford Aquatic Centre and beyond - Not graded ROL-02
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded ROL-03
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded ROL-04
What is the most important active transportation project in the municipality that you will be focused on progressing? Please provide your reasoning.
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.
Technically a pedestrian overpass across the TCH would be the City’s number one priority as it would serve both commuters and students alike, needing to cross the TCH.
This would be a multi-year project for planning alone.
Unfortunately any such project, (or the similar one over Sooke Rd), needs both permission from, and planning with MOTT and the Province.
Without those, no project will commence.
The City has already begun the process with our first Master Transportation Plan that identifies this project. This shows the Province the project is one of importance to the City and the hierarchy of the project.
Now is the opportunity to advocate with the Province for planning purposes. - Not graded ROL-05
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?
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.
Over the last four years I have continually advocated for all forms of walking, rolling, cycling and transit.
As a member of the CRD Transportation committee and now sitting as the Vice Chair, we have continued to seek out partnerships and projects to advance these actions.
Whether it was supporting the CRD widening and lighting of the Galloping Goose/Lochside Trail and trestle surfacing replacing or advancing the final creation of the CRD’s first Regional Transportation Service
Municipally I have advocated for and voted with the creation of multiple sidewalk infill projects and an off the road multi-use path. None of these would have been brought forward in any nears future if we had continued to rely on direct-location development to advance these projects and/or applied for and received funding grants to complete the project.
Walking
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded WLK-01
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded WLK-02
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?
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.
Our patchwork network of sidewalks is a chief concern for me. While there are larger projects needing addressing, this is one that has the ability to help a larger amount of people within a quicker timeframe. By continuing to infill the needed portions of sidewalk, we are permanently addressing the barrier to walking that effects the safety of so many. - Not graded WLK-03
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded WLK-04
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
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.
Chose 1 of 6 options - Not graded WLK-05
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?
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.
The City of Langford already has a strong track record for working with Sooke School District 62, and individual schools alike.
City and District staff meet regularly, while senior staff and I meet twice a year with the Board Chair and District Senior staff. Further, both the Board and Council meet twice a year.
I have met numerous times with school PAC members in my office, attended their public events and continued the conversations to foster an even stronger partnership between the Municipality and school district. - Not graded WLK-06
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?
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.
Once again the question is asking us to identify, and prioritize items in a timeframe that a Mayor or single Councillor legislatively cannot achieve on their own.
This term the City has completed multiple sidewalk infill projects allowing students and seniors alike to be able to walk safely on newly created pathways.
This has been achieved not by individual councillors working in silos, but by Council as a whole, working with staff on projects that meet the up to date criteria the City is working with.
This has worked well over the previous four years and I see no reason to alter from a proven course. - 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.
For most of its’ history, the City of Langford has relied on development to create sidewalks as part of required frontage improvements.
While this may have been advantageous at the time, it left areas of the city with a patchwork of sidewalks with no timeframe for completion.
Today with the growth the City is realizing, and our increasing visitor counts, we can’t wait for future developments to fulfill needed sidewalks and multi-use paths and trails.
The City will have to regularly continue with the sidewalk infill and addressing areas still lacking sidewalks completely.
Governance
What Scott Goodmanson said
- Not graded GOV-01
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded GOV-02
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
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.
Chose 1 of 5 options - Not graded GOV-03
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").
I would continue with the work that we have already started in this last term.
#1, Removed the use of amenity funds, (collected from development for city-wide amenities), which were used to lower the tax rate and portray a false narrative to the true costs of running the city.
#2 Ensure that the five-year financial plan continues to lead to a stabilized tax rate, including the funding for the city’s first ever asset management plan.
#3 Further the work of the city’s first official economic development plan to increase our economic diversity and build upon last years record setting business licence applications. - Not graded GOV-04
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 )
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded REC-01
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?
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.
Chose 1 of 3 options - Not graded REC-02
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.
Chose 1 of 7 options - 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.
We are used to the CRD supplying us with regional and subregional services that are traditionally provided across the CRD, such as sewer, water, solid waste, etc.
This last four years has seen the regional municipalities join together on new initiatives such as regional transit planning and the arts which cross municipal boundaries as well.
Shared resource use and planning, be it between neighbours or across the region is the future of creating smarter, more efficient responses to needed, infrastructure and governance demands. - 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.
Participation in the VTC is under provincial regulation and any new members must be authorized by the Province.
While we can advocate, the final decision comes down to them.
The Reconciliation Corridor Initiative for the E&N corridor is a regional rail concept involving five levels of government, (Federal, Provincial, Regional, First Nations, and Municipal) that is being lead by the Kosapsum and Songhees First Nations.
In this case the two nations are leading the way to help restore rail to the corridor and create future economic prosperity, between Langford and Victoria.
Finally on September 22 2026, the City of Langford signed an official MOU with the Tsartlip First Nation and the Tseycum First Nation. The first mou the City has signed with any First Nation. This is not an end goal, but an official starting point for further discussions with each Nation towards a deeper understanding and partnership for years to come.
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).