How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Colin Plant'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 Colin Plant 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?
There are so many ideas and options that come to mind when addressing this question but the one I will select and discuss is the renewal of the Gordon Head Recreation Centre and Park area that we refer to as the Gordon Head Campus.
This is an exciting and unprecedented opportunity in Saanich.
This very special area is currently in a re-visioning process where we are looking at the future of this space for the next 50 years and looking at how we can ensure the recreational, environmental and athletic needs of our growing community.
The incoming Council will likely set the direction and budget for any future redevelopment of the campus. With the acknowledged lack of ice space and swimming pools in our region, it is important that we get it right and yet design a program that is financially viable, attracts partnerships from other orders of government and protects what is already an incredible park area.
This is an exciting initiative and I hope everyone in Saanich participates in shaping its future. I chose this example because it is an example of planning for our future and planning to ensure our community remains a healthy place to live! - 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.
Colin Plant's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $2,000,000 Transit $800,000 Walking Infrastructure $500,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $500,000 Roadway Infrastructure $200,000 Policing $1,000,000 Fire & Emergency Services $1,000,000 Parks & Recreation $2,000,000 Arts & Culture $1,000,000 Climate Action & Environment $1,000,000 Unhoused Resident Services $0 Community-Based Clinics $0 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
I think our region is an amazing place that needs to recognize that with our unique governance structure of 13 municipalities and 3 electoral area that we need to work together and look at ways for efficiency, shared services and coordination in the delivery of services. Continuous improvement is something we should always strive towards.
I love that our region has both rural and urban areas and that in Saanich we have an Urban Containment Boundary that helps shape our future growth in an identified area.
Healthcare access
What Colin Plant 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.
This is a difficult one for me as I absolutely support the need for more healthcare in Saanich but I am concerned about taking over the responsibility the provincial government has to develop and fund health care services in BC.
So often municipalities express concerns about downloading from the province but in this situation, I feel it is important to find a positive way forward where we improve our municipal frameworks, work with the province at providing services but also advocate for more funding and investment in healthcare.
That being said I am open to innovative approaches and how Saanich can contribute to improving municipal frameworks that would see more doctors and health care being provided in Saanich.
Transit
A- 20% of this topic TRN-01 A
Which fare measures would you actively advocate for at the VRTC? Select all that apply.
Why this grade: Backed free travel for under 19s, cheaper fares for seniors, and cheaper fares for people on income or disability assistance. The lower cost regional monthly pass was the only measure left off, so every group the question named is covered.
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.
Colin Plant chose 3 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 B
Do you support removing general on-street parking (excluding accessible parking spaces) from frequent transit corridors and main arterial streets in your municipality, and reallocating that space to bus lanes, loading zones, and walking and cycling infrastructure?
Why this grade: Supports clearing general street parking from frequent transit corridors at peak hours only, so the bus lanes and the space for walking and cycling would appear and disappear through the day. That is partial support for the right change, which is why it sits below a full yes.
How this question is graded
Yes, across the whole corridor = A. Yes, only during peak hours = B. Kind of, only when a specific project requires it = C. No = F. Peak hours only is a real, testable limit on a yes, so it takes the conditional-yes B. Only when a specific project requires it names no project and commits to nothing in advance, which is the case-by-case answer CLI-08 puts at C. A No is F because the question is about street space, which is infrastructure. Eight of the earlier rows put the case-by-case option at B and nineteen put it at C; the nineteen were followed. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Colin Plant 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: A clear yes to moving fast on transit priority along frequent corridors, even where parking or a general traffic lane has to go. Nothing conditional in the answer.
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.
Colin Plant 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 creating a regional transportation authority, with no conditions set on the yes.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 3 options - 10% of this topic TRN-05 B
Do you support building new bus-only and bike-only connections through parks, golf courses or public land when doing so would substantially shorten transit and cycling trips?
Why this grade: Supports new bus and bike connections through parks, golf courses and public land, but only where no mature trees are lost building them. That condition would rule out many of the routes the question is about, so it falls short of a full yes.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, if no mature trees are lost during construction = B. No = F. Losing no mature trees is a named and checkable condition, so it takes the conditional-yes B. A No is F because the question is about building a connection, which is infrastructure. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded TRN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to transit in your region, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I think BC Transit Governance in the CRD needs to be moved from the Victoria Regional Transit Commission to the CRD Transportation Service.
I think the province and VRTC (eventually CRD) should expand fare-free transit for youth in our region by adding a year of eligibility each year (13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 years etc) to provide a fiscally realistic way of expanding the fare-free program. This can be paid for by the province expanding as well as a potential CRD requisition increase.
We need to create life-long transit users.
We need to continue to both grow the service and keep costs as low as possible.
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
Colin Plant 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.
Colin Plant 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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 4 / 5
If there was a type of housing you wanted to see more of (e.g., affordable, non-market, family-sized, townhouses, etc.), what do you think are effective methods of getting more of it? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). To increase the building of certain desireable types of housing (affordable, family sized, etc), cities need to pursue a broad approach of both removing barriers and targetted incentives. Mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning) have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore reducing housing construction or increasing costs.
Colin Plant chose 4 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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 5 / 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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 6 options - HFL-07 0 / 3
A housing proposal has been reviewed by staff and they recommend approval. It requires rezoning because the existing zoning has not been updated. If it faces substantial neighbourhood opposition, how would you generally vote?
How this question is graded
3 points for a), 0 otherwise. Housing approval rules must be predictable and clear for those building housing, or it will lead to scarcity. If municipal planning staff have adequately considered objections to a project and still recommend approval it should be approved. If unanticipated issues are raised, policies should be clarified to ensure staff can work with applicants on future projects.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-08 2 / 2
Do you support eliminating minimum parking requirements for new developments or suites?
How this question is graded
1 point for yes, 2 points for yes with transportation demand management measures, 0 points for no. A single additional parking space can add tens of thousands to the cost of a home. However, a development without parking and without offsetting remedies can impact livability for the eventual occupants of a home.
Colin Plant 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.
Colin Plant chose 7 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 1 / 6
The BC government set a housing target for Victoria at 4,902 homes over five years, which represents 75% of the estimated housing need for that period. Regardless of provincial requirements or penalties, do you believe the city should strive to build:
How this question is graded
6 points for too low, 1 for about right, 0 for too high. By definition, the provincial housing targets, being set as only 75% of estimated housing need is too low of a target to meet local housing needs.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-12 5 / 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.
Colin Plant 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.
Colin Plant's answerAFTER ONE YEAR
-I will have advocated for Saanich to review, expand and improve its Inclusionary Zoning program.
-I will have continued to support Saanich to expediting non-market housing applications ahead of market applications.
-I will have supported Saanich continuing to waive DCCS and CACS for non-market and rental builds.
-I will have seen Saanich continue to be a partner with the Capital Region Housing Corporation to both expand and renew current facilities.
-I will have worked to see Saanich provide Saanich-owned land to non-profit builders to build subsidized housing.
AFTER FOUR YEARS
-Greater than 50% of all units being approved are below-market in Saanich.
-Saanich will explore the creation and have implemented programs to see the local, federal and provincial governments work with home builders to see below-market units included in market builds. The current model of only NGOs building non-market housing is not happening fast enough and not meeting the demand.
-More non-market housing in Saanich is being planned for Saanich for 2030 onwards.
-Saanich has identified and entered into long-term leases with non-profit builders to build affordable housing on at least 3 three Saanich-owned lands.
30% of this topic Incumbent record 24.46875 / 29What Colin Plant did about housing during their current term, scored by Homes for Living. This is not a questionnaire answer: no candidate was asked it.
Why this score: 92.50%
Scored from Homes for Living's vote tracker.
Climate
A- 8% of this topic CLI-01 A
Would you support ending fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship on property, media and events controlled by your municipality, to the extent the law allows? And would you advocate for the same at the Victoria Regional Transit Commission for BC Transit vehicles and shelters?
Why this grade: Ends the advertising and the sponsorship deals alike, and takes the position to the transit commission too. Neither part is hedged.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Colin Plant 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 rank climate in the top three and fund it. Other decisions would not have to answer to it.
How this question is graded
The overriding priority, other decisions should be tested against it = A. One of the top three priorities, with a dedicated budget = B. One priority among many, addressed where affordable = C-. Not a municipal priority = F. The ladder skips C on purpose: a dedicated budget is the line between a priority and a sentiment, so addressing climate only where affordable drops two steps rather than one. Handing the file to another order of government is F. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Colin Plant 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: Says yes to never meeting fossil fuel lobbyists. No conditions are attached, so nothing is left open to interpretation later.
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.
Colin Plant 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: Supports joining, but only if municipal costs are capped. A conditional yes is real support with a limit attached, which puts it below an open commitment.
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.
Colin Plant 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: Yes to the zoning change. The commitment covers expansion as well as new sites, which is the harder half of it.
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.
Colin Plant 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: Chooses breadth and puts money behind it, covering assessments, retrofits and staffed clean air space. Households in existing homes would see something arrive.
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.
Colin Plant 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 the phase out plainly. Electric equivalents exist, and the answer accepts the switch.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-08 B
Large data centres can add substantial electricity and water demand. Under what conditions, if any, would you support a new data centre in your municipality?
Why this grade: Would approve one only under binding conditions on waste heat and on water. A specific condition can be written into a permit and checked, which puts this above a case by case answer and below outright opposition.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-09 B
What are the primary climate risk(s) facing your community, and what actions would you take to support adaptation and resilience in your community?
Why this grade: They indicate strong support and identify an existing climate plan specific to Saanich, but within this answer they do not identify specific climate risks or provide examples of what kinds of adaptation strategies would address them.
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.
Colin Plant's answerSaanich is like many jurisdictions where climate change is impacting our environment, infrastructure and quality of life. The impact has costs both financially, environmentally and socially.
That is why I was so proud to support Saanich's new “100% Renewable & Resilient Saanich” Climate Plan. This plan has clear and obtainable ways to get us to a sustainable and new way of doing things in Saanich.
We also need to support (and learn from) regional, provincial, federal and international movements to address adaption and resilience efforts. - 8% of this topic CLI-10 B
Ensuring ecosystem connectivity is an important adaptation strategy for climate change. How do you plan to maintain or increase ecosystem features across the urban landscape?
Why this grade: They cite three specific, current frameworks developed by Saanich that directly address ecosystem connectivity, but within this answer they do not outline relevant strategies or examples from within those plans.
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.
Colin Plant's answerSaanich needs to consider and minimize the impact to the environment with every land use decision made in the urban landscape. It has to be a lens which decision-making is made.
I will continue to support and fund the following frameworks:
-Resilient Saanich Environmental Policy Framework
-Biodiversity Conservation Strategy
-Urban Forest Strategy - 8% of this topic CLI-11 B
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Provides several relevant, specific exmaples. Does not provide thoughts on how to get developers to make these commitments.
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.
Colin Plant's answerDevelopment should be an opportunity to build climate resilience through energy-efficient buildings, better stormwater management, increased tree canopy and natural-area protection, water conservation, wildfire and extreme-weather preparedness, and walkable communities that reduce reliance on cars. - 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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 3 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded CLI-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to climate concerns with respect to your municipality or the region as a whole, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I do not believe Climate concerns should be an "either/or" proposition. It needs to be viewed as a "yes and" proposition.
Saanich needs to continue to be a partner in the region's efforts.
Arts
A- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 2 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Supports a comprehensive local arts policy, local and regional funding, public art and a standing arts/culture/community committee, showing clear strategic alignment.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: The municipality should have a Comprehensive Arts Policy, should fund arts locally and also participate in regional arts services the CRD provides.
I also support maintaining Saanich's policy of 1% of capital projects being dedicated to Public Art displays.
I support maintaining Saanich's Arts, Culture and Community Well-Being Committee.
I support enhancing Saanich working with community associations and partners to provide more public art and murals. - 16.67% of this topic ART-02 2 / 3
If elected, what specific action will you commit to in your first year to strengthen your municipality's arts and cultural sector, and what measurable outcome should residents expect by the end of your four-year term?
Why this score: Commits to first-year local/regional funding and renewal of the Comprehensive Arts Policy, but does not provide a clearly measurable four-year outcome.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant's answerI am committed to seeing Saanich continue to fund its arts programs both locally and regionally and ensure that the new Regional Performing Arts Facilities Services is funded in its first year of existence at the CRD. While the service has been established, it has not yet been funded.
Also in my first year I am committed to ensuring Saanich begins to renew its Comprehensive Arts Policy which is outdated. - 13.33% of this topic ART-03 3 / 3
Cultural strategies are often adopted and then not implemented. Would you support a cultural space implementation framework with defined tools, timelines and public reporting? Select up to three components you would prioritize. Select your top three options.
Why this score: Supports priority-space identification, long-term affordability/stability tools and nonprofit partnerships for permanent assets.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant chose 3 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 3 / 3
Arts organizations and event producers identify permitting, zoning and regulatory requirements as barriers to cultural activity. What would you commit to? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Supports the full set of consequential permitting, event, coordination, zoning and disproportionate-cost reforms.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant 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 funding, a dedicated municipal levy/fee, nonprofit acquisition, municipal loan guarantees and long-term leases.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant 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 arts and culture maintaining or growing alongside other core services.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-07 3 / 3
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
Why this score: Supports replacement cultural space or equivalent community benefit in redevelopment.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant 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 development requirements/incentives, fee reductions, property-tax incentives for affordable space and nonprofit property-tax relief.
How this question is graded
Colin Plant 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 a core aspect of why I want to serve as an elected official. They are not "nice to have" but are essential to who we are and how we express ourselves.
I am committed to ensuring the Arts thrive and expand in Saanich and the CRD.
The Arts are not an afterthought for me.
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: Names the Wilkinson corridor, today a patchwork of working infrastructure and none at all, and frames finishing it as turning an east to west route into a genuine regional link. A named corridor with the deficiency described.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: The Wilkinson corridor.
Currently it is a patchwork of effective infrastructure and non-existent infrastructure. We need connectivity and improvements in our Active Transportation network. This important east/west corridor needs addressing to make it a truly regional network link. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 B
Will you commit (or continue to commit) to physical protection (not paint alone) as the standard for all new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets in your municipality?
Why this grade: This question asks about supporting a design standard to establish a level of safety. Infrastructure is not "physically impossible"; it is a question of cost and assessing alternatives. Qualifying an answer with "except where physically impossible" leaves an easy out because many obstacles initially appear impossible to overcome. Hard work is needed to identify viable solutions.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, except where physically impossible = B. No = F. Except where physically impossible is a condition that can be checked against a street, so it takes the conditional-yes B, and that is where the 19 rows graded before this rubric existed put it. A No is F because the question sets a construction standard, which is infrastructure. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Colin Plant 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 all ages and abilities infrastructure. 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.
Colin Plant 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: Response does not identify a specific project buty cites support for the ATP which incorporates implementation.
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.
Colin Plant's answerSaanich has a long-term Active Transportation plan and I will continue to support, renew, evaluate, fund and advocate for it.
If anything I will look at ways to expedite its implementation. - 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: Supported creating and funding the municipality's active transportation plans and establishing the regional transportation service both locally and at the regional district, and sits on the transit commission working to protect and grow service. Votes and roles that carried the file, alongside riding and walking 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.
Colin Plant's answerI supported the creation and funding of Saanich's Active Transportation Plans and the establishment of the Regional Transportation Service both in Saanich and the CRD.
I am a member of the Victoria Regional Transit Commission and work hard to protect and grow the services BC Transit offers in the region.
I am also an e-bike rider and public transit user and when I do drive, have an e-vehicle. I walk approximately 40k per week to work and back.
I like to think of myself as someone who "walks and rides the talk."
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.
We must continue to create safe spaces for alternative modes of active transportation that provide options for residents to travel safely and conveniently and helps us lower our carbon footprint. We all benefit when those who are able choose to not use their automobiles.
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 to increase transportation system efficiency.
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.
Colin Plant 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 missing sidewalks as the core problem and commits to delivering the municipality's walking and cycling plan, using community amenity money and budget surpluses to move it faster. Ties the commitment to funding rather than leaving it as an intention.
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.
Colin Plant's answerLack of sidewalks in our municipality.
I am committed to following through our Active Transportation Plan which addresses this deficit and would also look at using community amenity funds and budget surpluses to expedite these plans.
We need to ensure people can move around the municipality and their neighbourhoods safely. We know if people feel safe they will walk more. - 10% of this topic WLK-03 B
Sidewalk construction and maintenance is chronically underfunded across the region. Would you vote to increase the share of your municipality's transportation capital budget dedicated to pedestrian infrastructure?
Why this grade: Would vote for more spending on pedestrian infrastructure, at a modest level rather than a substantial one. The commitment is genuine but limited in size.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-04 A
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
Why this grade: Would pursue permanent pedestrian priority and car free streets in the municipality's centre. A full commitment rather than a seasonal test.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 6 options - 20% of this topic WLK-05 B
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: Seeking ongoing consultation with parents, school staff and municipal staff is important to building safe routes to schools. In Saanich, a dangerous intersection that is yet to receive attention is at Quadra and Cook/Cloverdale. The safe route to schools on Linwood behind Cloverdale School is great, but the children coming to school from across Quadra don't have a convenient safe route. The crossing guard at the Quadra/Cook-Cloverdale intersection needs to be consulted, as do parents whose children need to cross Quadra to get to school. It's important that staff, along with Councillor representation, show up in the morning and after school to asses risks for children crossing Quadra. This safety recommendation applies to any school in Saanich where there is a safe route to school for children coming from one direction but not from another.-*-
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.
Colin Plant's answerI consider myself an incredibly responsive and collaborative person and meet with everyone who asks to meet.
In this situation, I would ask schools that have (and do not yet) have Safe Routes to School programs to create or review them with us annually or biannually. I would also include school PACS, daycare/after school care providers and Community Associations if they were interested in these discussions by proactively inviting them to meet with Saanich staff.
I will continue to support Saanich funding to the School Crossing Guard program.
I absolutely agree that protecting children's safety is a priority. - 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: Ensuring that re-evaluations of the Active Transportation Plan will occur every term needs to be written into the plan. Consultation with older adults and people of all ages with disabilities is essential. Staff (and Councillors) benefit greatly from hearing accounts of the lived experiences of these pedestrians. It is important to meet with people on the street to view first hand their concerns. It is important to meet at the times of day when safety risks are considered to be greatest.
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.
Colin Plant's answerI will continue to support our Active Transportation Plan and ensure it is updated each term. This plan identifies Saanich's priorities and provides general timelines as to when work will occur.
I would prioritize completing sidewalk gaps, improving pedestrian safety and accessibility, and ensuring new development contributes to a connected, walkable network.
The regular evaluation of the plan must occur and will be an opportunity to ensure progress is being made.
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.
I walk to work most days and see first-hand the value of appropriate infrastructure (and the lack thereof). It is a major motivation for me to see improvement in all areas of Saanich.
I hear from residents regularly about how their community lacks this important infrastructure and I am committed to helping residents see their communities become safer and more pedestrian-friendly.
We all benefit when more people get out and walk.
Governance
B- 17% of this topic GOV-01 A
Do you support expanding shared or regional delivery of municipal services in the Capital Region?
How this question is graded
Yes/Partly = A, Unsure = C, No = F.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-02 —
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
Why this grade: Answered unsure on a regional service that would design, build and maintain local infrastructure shared across the region. An unsure states no position, so the row is left out of the grade rather than scored as partial support.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-03 B
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").
Colin Plant's answerImpossible to answer with just three, so I apologize in advance.
Fiscal sustainability is a harsh reality municipalities must face head-on and I'm here for it.
-I think Saanich needs to continue to expand its commercial tax base to take the pressure off of property tax payers.
-Saanich needs to continue to advocate for a new fiscal framework that the Federation of Canadian Municipalities has advanced at a national level. Property taxes are an outdated method for paying for municipal services and have shown that it is not able to keep up with our needs.
-Prudent budgeting and careful interpretation of feedback from residents/business owners during budget deliberations.
-Applying for as many provincial/federal grants as possible.
-Work with our municipal partners to look for cost-savings via appropriate sharing of service delivery. - 17% of this topic GOV-04 F
Do you commit to eliminating mandatory parking minimums for all land uses in your municipality by 2030?
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No/Decline = F. Parking minimums are pseudoscience that should be eliminated from city codes everywhere, and have been eliminated in Vancouver, Edmonton, Regina, Ottawa, and others across North America without any negative consequences (archive.strongtowns.org )
Colin Plant 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: Backed First Nations representation on the commissions that govern transit in the Capital Region. A plain yes, with nothing attached to it.
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.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 B
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
How this question is graded
A = significantly more consultation practices. B = somewhat more. C = the current amount is enough. Written answers take the same ladder: A commits to partnership with local First Nations, B wants better consultation without committing to a change, C questions whether more is wanted. Nothing here has been graded C- or F.
Colin Plant chose 1 of 7 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded GOV-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to governance, shared services, and municipal infrastructure, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I believe local government governance is best delivered by independent individuals who are elected by their community to work together as a team and deliver good for the municipality.
I am committed to continuing to advocate that Saanich is a partner working with other municipalities in the delivery of shared services. The unification of the four-core municipalities' Fire Departments is where I would continue to work towards.
While it is true that we can always do more, Saanich has not been a laggard in dealing with its infrastructure. We have added capital funding annually via a property tax increase to deal with the shortfall.
However, as the current fiscal framework of property taxes is showing to be a limiting factor in addressing real costs for the municipality, Saanich must advocate for news ways of funding infrastructure. We must remember municipal governments only receive approximately 9 cents of every taxpayer dollar. - 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 am so proud of my work at the CRD and Saanich to create Memorandums of Understanding with Local First Nations and local governments. This is a real way to move from talking about reconciliation and turning it into "reconcili-action."
I consider it a privilege to do the important work of reconciliation and consider it a priority for Saanich and the CRD.
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).