How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Karin Sweeney'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 Karin Sweeney 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?
The municipal asset I would change is the Oak Bay Marina lands at Spewhung, and the change I would choose is genuine economic reconciliation.
Spewhung and the neighbouring coastline have been a village site for the Songhees and Xwsepsum (Esquimalt) Nations for thousands of years, yet the publicly owned marina lands have been leased to a private operator for over six decades. With the current lease expiring at the end of 2027, Council has its best opportunity in a generation to change that.
Xhamasung Holdings, a joint economic development partnership between the two Nations, has put forward a serious proposal: Indigenous ownership and operation, a longer-term lease running to 2052, and a vision for a culturally grounded waterfront hub featuring Indigenous art, language, food, and public gathering space, alongside continued marina services residents rely on.
Reconciliation beyond land acknowledgements is one of my core priorities. That is why I support moving forward with the Nations as operators of Spewhung. Building shared prosperity and genuine partnership is key to getting reconciliation right, and Oak Bay now has the chance to do it. - 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.
Karin Sweeney's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $1,000,000 Transit $500,000 Walking Infrastructure $1,500,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $1,500,000 Roadway Infrastructure $2,500,000 Policing $500,000 Fire & Emergency Services $500,000 Parks & Recreation $500,000 Arts & Culture $300,000 Climate Action & Environment $700,000 Unhoused Resident Services $200,000 Community-Based Clinics $300,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
I want Oak Bay to be a place of possibility for anyone who wants to live here. We have a rare combination of a stunning natural environment and a deep sense of livability that residents cherish, and I want to build on everything that makes this community special.
What I want to protect is a vibrant, livable community. One that is resilient and sustainable in the face of change, supported by a responsive local government that is ready to act. I want an Oak Bay that is active and accessible for everyone, with a planning approach that builds community while protecting the natural environment we all cherish.
Healthcare access
What Karin Sweeney 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.
One of my core priorities is the health of our residents, especially our aging population. I want the District of Oak Bay to keep advocating for redeveloping the former Oak Bay Lodge site into a seniors' campus of care. I also want us to explore a municipally-run primary care clinic for residents without a family doctor. And as part of advocating for retention and recruitment solutions to our region's family doctor shortage, I want to push for options that ease the administrative burden on physicians.
Transit
B- 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: Commits to all four measures on offer: 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. Backing every measure on the list is the widest commitment the question allows.
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.
Karin Sweeney chose 4 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 C
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 clear general parking from busy transit streets only where an individual scheme calls for it. No project is named and nothing is promised ahead of one coming forward, which is where a case by case answer lands.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: Commits to getting buses ahead of traffic on frequent corridors without ruling out the removal of a general purpose lane. The yes is given without conditions, which is the full commitment the question asks for.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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 bringing transportation decisions under one regional authority. The answer is a plain yes with nothing attached to it.
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = C-. A No is C- rather than F because this asks who should decide, not what should be built or funded, which puts it on the governance side of the CLI-03 split. Three earlier rows typed F and two typed C-; the governance rule was followed over the count. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Karin Sweeney 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: Backs new bus and bicycle links across parks, golf courses and public land when they would cut journey lengths by a wide margin. The yes is unconditional, which is the strongest answer available here.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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.
Unlike larger municipalities such as Victoria and Saanich, Oak Bay has no multi-lane arterials or high-volume corridors. That means transit improvements have to be planned project by project, carefully weighed against the risk of added local congestion or reduced emergency vehicle access. It also means balancing competing needs: protecting parking for our local businesses, preserving access for residents who depend on cars, and improving ridership, connectivity, and ease of use for everyone else.
Under our new OCP direction, that means actively encouraging transit use among students, employees, and seniors. It also means supporting transit-oriented growth, including reduced parking minimums and increased density near major transit corridors, to make ridership growth sustainable.
A connected, reliable bus network is key to diversifying transportation options and easing traffic congestion while staying connected to the wider regional network.
Housing
B- HFL-01 7 / 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
Karin Sweeney chose 7 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 8 / 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 8 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 4 / 6
Do you think your municipality should have target approval times for multifamily housing?
How this question is graded
6 points for 30/180 days, prorated for longer timelines. Housing delayed is housing denied. Long delays drive us costs for housing, increase the chance that they will be cancelled, and indicate a lack of clear published guidelines. A time limit on decisions prioritizes housing action and reforms.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 5 / 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 6 of 8 options - HFL-05 3 / 3
Do you believe that the municipality should pre-zone to the uses, heights and densities outlined in the Official Community Plan, so that OCP-compliant projects can be built without rezoning or public hearing?
How this question is graded
3 points for yes, 0 for no. An OCP sets out the direction and vision for a municipality with broad input from the community and council. Matching zoning to long term consensus-based plans reduces scarcity and allows incentivizes OCP compliant housing to be built quickly.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 2 / 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 6 options - HFL-07 3 / 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-08 1 / 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-09 5 / 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 7 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 6 / 6
The BC government set a housing target for Victoria at 4,902 homes over five years, which represents 75% of the estimated housing need for that period. Regardless of provincial requirements or penalties, do you believe the city should strive to build:
How this question is graded
6 points for too low, 1 for about right, 0 for too high. By definition, the provincial housing targets, being set as only 75% of estimated housing need is too low of a target to meet local housing needs.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-12 6 / 6
Municipal asset-management plans have identified substantial gaps between current funding and the amount needed to maintain and replace roads, water and sewer systems, public buildings, and other infrastructure. In Victoria, the 2024 Corporate Asset Management Strategy identified $570 million worth of infrastructure in poor or very poor condition. Which approaches would you prioritize to address this infrastructure problem? Select up to two.
How this question is graded
5 points for selecting more housing and commercial development, 1 for seeking additional provincial or federal funding, 0 points for increasing taxes or reducing infrastructure projects, and -2 points for increasing development charges, amenity contributions, and other fees imposed on new houses.
Karin Sweeney chose 2 of 6 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.
Karin Sweeney's answerBy the end of my first year, I want Oak Bay to have made real, visible progress on the housing projects within council's direct control. That means advancing pre-zoning to implement our new OCP, so compliant projects do not need rezoning. It means delegating minor variances and routine approvals to staff, so straightforward applications can move ahead without unnecessary delay. It means using design guidelines to provide certainty for both residents and developers. And it means setting transparent service standards for permits and approval timelines, so residents and applicants know what to expect.
By the end of my four-year term, I want Oak Bay to have made real progress toward our provincial target of 664 housing units by 2028. That means pre-zoning and process reforms need to translate into actual permits issued and homes built, including progress on non-market and family-sized housing specifically. It also means a council that works to remove barriers to the housing types identified in our new OCP, increasing supply in strategic locations like neighbourhood villages and along transit routes, and supporting the Cedar Hill/UVic development.
Above all, it means providing more diverse housing options for households at every stage of life; opportunities for first-time buyers, options that let seniors downsize in the community, rental housing for a range of needs, and below-market, subsidized housing.
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 on both forms and would take it to the regional table. The commitment is unqualified throughout.
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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Karin Sweeney 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 name climate a top three priority with money behind it. Other priorities keep equal standing.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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 fully to the pledge. Nothing in the answer preserves room to meet fossil fuel interests quietly.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: Yes, provided the municipal share is limited. The condition is the only thing separating this from the strongest answer.
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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-05 A
Will you support a zoning bylaw amendment that prohibits the approval of any new or expanded commercial gas stations within municipal boundaries?
Why this grade: Agrees to the amendment in full. Fossil fuel retail capacity would stop growing inside the municipality.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: A broad answer that keeps the spending measures in. Households get help rather than advice.
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.
Karin Sweeney chose 5 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - 8% of this topic CLI-07 A
Are you supportive of phasing out fossil fuel powered tools such as leaf blowers (following the lead of Oak Bay and other municipalities across the country)?
Why this grade: Supports phasing out fossil fuel equipment. No carve out is reserved for municipal operations themselves.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: A complete refusal. The strongest position available and it is stated without qualification.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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 climate risks and outlines several viable strategies to mitigate them that are relevant to Oak Bay.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerOak Bay is already feeling the effects of climate change. Drought and extreme heat, heavy rainfall, and wildfire smoke are no longer distant risks — but current realities. Sea level rise, along with coastal erosion and the flooding that accompanies it, is projected to become more frequent and severe along our coastline. Climate change also affects everything from the cost of living and housing to food security and health, and provincial and federal policy can only go so far in addressing local impacts. Municipalities are uniquely positioned to act, and I believe Oak Bay residents expect their local leaders to do exactly that.
Climate resilience is one of my core priorities. I want to see Oak Bay invest in climate action planning so our neighbourhoods, and everyone in them, are better prepared for future climate impacts. That's why I believe every decision at the Council table needs a climate lens.
My approach prioritizes both mitigation and adaptation, guided by solutions that protect our community while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Mitigation:
- Implementing the Corporate Climate Action Plan, including the EV-Ready Fleet Plan
- Following through on the Active Transportation Strategy
- Championing the Zero Carbon Step Code
- Improving outreach on clean energy retrofits and rebates
- Expanding EV-ready charging stations and support for electric bikes
- Bringing car-share access (Evo and Modo) to Oak Bay
Adaptation:
- Building infrastructure designed to withstand and respond to projected climate impacts
- Upholding the Urban Forest Management Strategy, Tree Protection Bylaw, and nature-based solutions — canopy cover reduces urban heat and manages stormwater
- Continuing to fund public climate-education opportunities, such as the Oak Bay Coolkit
- Supporting a Right to Cool bylaw to protect renters during heat events
- Integrating Indigenous knowledge and perspectives into climate adaptation strategies
Resilience:
- Increasing public education under the Oak Bay Emergency Program and strengthening the Emergency Response Plan
- Building infrastructure that can withstand and respond to climate impacts
- Supporting household-level resilience tools like the Oak Bay Coolkit
- Supporting First Nations co-governance approaches to adaptation planning
I am committed to seeing the District of Oak Bay's Community Climate Action Plan through to completion in 2027. This includes engaging the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations early on coastal adaptation and shoreline planning, ensuring Traditional Ecological Knowledge informs both the Community Climate Action Plan and the Urban Forest Management Strategy, and supporting co-governance approaches to adaptation planning, consistent with regional models already underway elsewhere on Vancouver Island. - 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: Clearly understands the importance of ecosystem connectivity and outlines strategies relevant to Oak Bay to maintain and improve it.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerUrban landscapes and ecosystem health should not be competing priorities. As we plan for more housing, we need to plan for canopy retention and green infrastructure alongside it. Nature-based solutions like mature trees and permeable surfaces on private lots are among our most effective tools for climate adaptation. For example, a healthy urban tree canopy manages stormwater, cools neighbourhoods during extreme heat, and connects biodiversity corridors, all while supporting outdoor recreation and community well-being that define life in Oak Bay.
My approach is to build community while also protecting our natural environment. This means:
- Upholding Oak Bay’s Urban Forest Management Strategy and its target of 40% canopy cover by 2045, and strengthening the Tree Protection Bylaw
- A public commitment to increasing tree planting on private property, alongside a District Parks Master Plan that enhances biodiversity corridors across Oak Bay
- Treating nature-based solutions, such as trees and green space, as core infrastructure
- Building tree retention, natural asset protection, setbacks, and climate resiliency directly into housing development standards
- Partnering with volunteer-led stewardship groups like Friends of Uplands Park and Friends of Bowker Creek, and with the Oak Bay Community Green Mapping Project, to advance community-led restoration and monitoring
- Recognizing and incorporating Indigenous knowledge systems and stewardship practices in how we manage parks and natural areas - 8% of this topic CLI-11 A
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Shows clear support for the idea and connects it to concrete strategies.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerYes, absolutely. Development must create opportunities to increase resilience to climate-related events. This means environmental building standards such as requiring blue-green infrastructure (permeable surfaces and rain gardens) to manage stormwater, applying the Zero Carbon Step Code so that new construction is not only energy efficient but also fossil fuel-free, and ensuring that our tree canopy and natural assets around development sites are protected, consistent with our Urban Forest Management Strategy. Climate resilience is also key to long-term housing affordability and the liveability of the neighbourhoods that depend on it. It is also far more economical to build in resilience from the start than to retrofit afterwards. - 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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 3 options
Arts
B- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 1 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Supports a thriving arts sector, evidenced through operating guidelines, and want of stable funding and partnerships, but provides limited evidence of a broader municipal strategic role.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: The municipality should support a thriving arts and culture sector by providing clear operating guidelines for arts and event organizers, offering stable, predictable funding, and fostering partnerships between cultural non-profits and community groups, including programs like Oak Bay's Arts Alive. - 16.67% of this topic ART-02 1 / 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: Commits in year one to advocating for increased CRD Arts Commission capacity rather than a direct Oak Bay municipal action; the four-year goal identifies potential municipal mechanisms for securing arts space, but also relies on increased CRD funding reaching Oak Bay without establishing municipal control over that regional allocation.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney's answerIn my first year, I will advocate for increasing the CRD Arts Commission's capacity to better support the arts across the region. By the end of my four-year term, I want to secure a new arts space in Oak Bay through a municipal lease, a non-profit partnership, or redevelopment, along with increased CRD Arts Commission funding that specifically reaches Oak Bay-based artists and organizations. - 13.33% of this topic ART-03 2 / 3
Cultural strategies are often adopted and then not implemented. Would you support a cultural space implementation framework with defined tools, timelines and public reporting? Select up to three components you would prioritize. Select your top three options.
Why this score: Selects regulatory review, a cross-coordinated regional strategy and public reporting, but does not select the higher-impact long-term affordability/stability or permanent-asset tools.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney 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: Selects a broad package of consequential permitting, event, coordination, zoning and disproportionate-cost reforms.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney 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 regional infrastructure funding, development/amenity contributions, municipal funding leverage, nonprofit acquisition and long-term municipal leases.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney 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: Explicitly supports maintaining or growing arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 5 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-07 3 / 3
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
Why this score: Supports replacement cultural space or an equivalent community benefit when redevelopment affects existing cultural space.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney 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 cultural-space requirements/incentives in major development, fee reductions, property-tax incentives for long-term affordable space and nonprofit property-tax relief.
How this question is graded
Karin Sweeney 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.
The arts are an important economic driver for our region. Oak Bay's Arts Alive program has proven this by drawing visitors, supporting local businesses, and establishing us as a destination for arts and culture.
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 Central Oak Bay Neighbourhood Bikeway, a route to Willows Elementary, Monterey Middle and Oak Bay High. The reasoning covers children and families making everyday trips and the north to south connections the district lacks.
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.
Karin Sweeney chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: I would prioritize the Central Oak Bay Neighbourhood Bikeway to provide a safe and direct route for children and families travelling to Willows Elementary, Monterey Middle, and Oak Bay High. It would improve north-south connectivity between neighbourhoods, parks, and community destinations, creating a calmer, family-friendly corridor for everyday trips. It also supports broader community goals such as active transportation, climate action, and healthy living, which our community-wide engagement process has identified as priorities most Oak Bay residents want to see. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 B
Will you commit (or continue to commit) to physical protection (not paint alone) as the standard for all new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets in your municipality?
Why this grade: Supports physical protection as the standard on busy streets, except where it is physically impossible. A standard with that escape clause is easier to set aside than to apply, because difficulty and cost tend to get read as impossibility.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: Will oppose removal, narrowing or downgrading of existing protected bike lanes and infrastructure built for all ages and abilities. No conditions on the commitment.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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 Cadboro Bay Road commuter route, connecting Foul Bay Road to Cedar Hill Road, and sets out why it matters: heavy traffic, buses and parked cars on a corridor linking the district to the university, the college and downtown. Builds on lanes already there rather than starting from nothing.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerI would focus on progressing the Cadboro Bay Road Commuter Route by connecting Foul Bay Road to Cedar Hill Road to strengthen regional connectivity between Oak Bay, UVic, Camosun College, and downtown Victoria. This is a busy corridor with heavy traffic, buses, and parked cars, making safety improvements especially needed. It supports safe access to schools, parks, and the Oak Bay Avenue commercial area, builds on existing bike lanes, and offers a logical, well-used commuter route. - 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: Spent the past year following council closely, helped facilitate the 2025 public engagement on walking and cycling, supported the spring go by bike campaign, took part in two cycling counts and joined an infrastructure tour. Hands on involvement across a range of local efforts, alongside riding daily.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerAs a new candidate, I have spent the past year following Council meetings closely to learn about active transportation and pedestrian safety in Oak Bay, and I have spoken directly with cycling and pedestrian safety advocates as part of my preparation to run for Council.
My involvement has also been hands-on. I took part in the 2025 active transportation public engagement, where I helped facilitate small-group discussions among participants with differing viewpoints — work that led the group to identify shared values by the end of the process. More recently, I supported the GoByBike challenge this past May, participated in two Pedal Poll counts in Oak Bay in June to help inform bike advocacy groups, and joined a Capital Bike infrastructure tour in August.
As an avid cyclist myself, I support active transportation daily, using my bike for errands close to home and commuting into downtown Victoria.
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.
Oak Bay needs a network of safe, connected streets for biking, walking, and rolling, not just isolated stretches. That means listening carefully to balance on-street parking, safe routes, and residents’ concerns, so that the solutions work for our streets.
I believe Oak Bay can find shared values around active transportation that support safe routes for people commuting to work or getting out for recreation, students heading to UVic, and parents and children biking to school. Together, these build the kind of community cohesion and healthy, active lifestyle that make Oak Bay a place people love to travel through, on foot or on wheels.
A more walkable, bikeable Oak Bay isn’t just good for the climate; it’s good for connecting us to each other and to our neighbouring communities. When we invest in active transportation and pedestrian safety, we build a stronger, more inclusive Oak Bay for every resident.
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?
Why this grade: Shows commitment to multimodal planning and transportation demand management.
How this question is graded
A = yes, even if it means removing driving lanes. C = yes, but not when it takes road space from drivers. F = no. Two steps between the two yeses because the adopted targets cannot be met without reallocating street space. Unsure and Decline to answer are both C- on this tab.
Karin Sweeney 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 sidewalks that are narrow, broken or hard to cross for the many residents using walkers, mobility scooters and strollers, and commits to a dedicated protected annual fund to deliver the sidewalk plan. Committing the money is what moves a plan off the shelf.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerThe pedestrian safety problem that concerns me most in Oak Bay is our sidewalks. This matters especially because most of Oak Bay's population is aging, with many residents over 65. Many apartment and condo dwellers no longer own cars and rely on walkers or mobility scooters to get around. Young families with strollers, along with others facing mobility challenges, regularly run into narrow sidewalks, broken or uneven pavement, curb lips, and inaccessible crosswalks.
That's why the one change I will commit to in my first term is building the political will to adopt a dedicated, protected annual capital fund to implement the Pedestrian and Sidewalk Master Plan, so all residents feel safe and connected in Oak Bay. - 10% of this topic WLK-03 A
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: Would vote to more than double the pedestrian share of transportation capital spending. That puts money behind the sidewalk gap rather than leaving it to future budgets.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: Supports seasonal or pilot car free streets rather than a permanent expansion. Support with a limit built into it.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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: When Council pursues the kind of consultation you envision, the message is that parents don't need to transport their children to school by car in order to assure their safety. Children are enabled to become more confident and independent when they learn to travel to their destinations by walking, cycling or riding the bus. Money in the budget to actualize safe modes of travel to school supports children's mental and physical health.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerI will establish direct, ongoing communication with Parent Advisory Councils at Oak Bay’s schools, partner with school administration to support walking audits to identify most-used and most-dangerous routes to school, and ask municipal staff to identify school zones as distinct design categories in both the Active Transportation Strategy and the Pedestrian and Sidewalk Master Plan implementation. - 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: Your answer indicates that you have observed and given thought to the barriers older adults and people with disabilities confront when travelling on foot. According to the most recent census report available, approximately 34% of Oak Bay residents are over age 65. Many of these folks, as well as many people of all ages who have a disability that prevents them from driving, require safe pedestrian infrastructure to travel confidently in the community. Some of these people have lived and paid property taxes for decades. A component of supporting their continued independence is Council support (as you describe) for safe pedestrian infrastructure.
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.
Karin Sweeney's answerIn a four-year term, I will:
1. Advocate for pedestrian infrastructure to receive the same priority as cycling infrastructure, including AAA-quality features such as safe crossings, curb cuts, adequate lighting, and sidewalks free of tripping hazards.
2. Fund the pedestrian projects already identified and set a timeline. I will advocate for a named funding source for the deferred pedestrian priorities in the next financial plan, and for staff to report back with cost estimates and dates.
3. Ensure that pedestrian upgrades are included in infrastructure work that is already being scheduled, which is the cheapest time to fix an adjacent sidewalk or add a curb bumpout.
4. Push for CRD-wide connectivity. Oak Bay should be connected to regional active transportation planning routes in Victoria and Saanich.
5. Build accessibility into staffing and reporting.
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.
Improving accessibility for people with disabilities and mobility challenges is one of my core priorities for Oak Bay. Our municipality has neglected pedestrian safety for too long. The 2024 Active Transportation Implementation Strategy Update identified three priority pedestrian projects, yet none were funded in the capital plan, and Oak Bay's Pedestrian and Sidewalk Master Plan remains unimplemented. Meanwhile, active transportation planning in Oak Bay and across the wider regional district has focused primarily on cycling infrastructure rather than pedestrian infrastructure.
Governance
A- 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.
Karin Sweeney 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: Says yes to a shared regional service for designing, building and maintaining local infrastructure, subject to full cost recovery locally. That proviso keeps the answer from being an unqualified yes.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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").
Karin Sweeney's answer1. Hire an economic development staff member who, among other things, reviews regional cost-sharing where duplication is costing residents.
2. Build market housing on municipal property to offset the cost of new facilities and reduce property taxes.
3. Increase our tax base by thoughtfully approving new housing projects. - 17% of this topic GOV-04 A
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 )
Karin Sweeney 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 ensuring local First Nations are represented on the bodies that govern transit in the Capital Region. A plain yes.
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.
Karin Sweeney 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.
Karin Sweeney 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.
Oak Bay needs to explore regional opportunities to reduce infrastructure maintenance and replacement costs. - 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.
I support meaningful First Nations governance and consultation in regional transit planning.
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).