How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Judy Brownoff'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 Judy Brownoff 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?
I wd like to change building code where all, even the Provincial Small Scale Multi Unit Housing projects, all have cooling in each unit, we do not need any more deaths from the “heat dome” impacts we experienced. Plus we shd be pushing the Provincial Bldg Code to do more around climate resiliency. - 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.
Judy Brownoff's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $1,000,000 Transit $1,000,000 Walking Infrastructure $1,000,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $500,000 Roadway Infrastructure $500,000 Policing $500,000 Fire & Emergency Services $500,000 Parks & Recreation $2,000,000 Arts & Culture $300,000 Climate Action & Environment $2,000,000 Unhoused Resident Services $600,000 Community-Based Clinics $100,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
The above question on distribution of new annual funding … I have guessed at amounts bearing in mind what we currently have roughly, in our annual budget. Technically, I wd have rather based amounts on priority needs like areas with greatest climate impacts such as flooding, etc.
Healthcare access
What Judy Brownoff 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.
Saanich currently looking at whether, with new development, developers cd look at health care space. The issue is, it’s still needs staffing, which is a Provincial responsibility.
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: Checked free travel for under 19s along with cheaper fares for seniors and for people on income or disability assistance. What went unticked was the regional monthly pass rather than any group of riders, so the affordability measures are fully backed.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 3 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 A
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 removing general street parking across the full length of frequent transit corridors, with that space going to bus lanes, loading zones and walking and cycling. The strongest answer the question allows.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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 deploying transit priority quickly, including where parking or a general traffic lane has to give way. No conditions were added.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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 the creation of a regional transportation authority, answering yes outright.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 3 options - 10% of this topic TRN-05 —
Do you support building new bus-only and bike-only connections through parks, golf courses or public land when doing so would substantially shorten transit and cycling trips?
Why this grade: Answered unsure about new bus and bike connections through parks, golf courses and public land. No position is taken for or against, so there is nothing here to credit as support.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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.
It’s important that transit stops, especially in high frequency areas, have safe shelters, seating, accessibility to the stop and lighting. Plus at all stops, design must capture the ability to lower the transit ramp on the bus for easy on and off loading of people with mobility aids.
Plus any “free” transit fare programs need to be covered through the Provincial Gov’t not on local property taxes.
Housing
F- HFL-01 4 / 8
What kinds of housing could your municipality use more of? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point per selected type to max of 8. Housing exists on a continuum and different types are appropriate for different households. All housing is needed and positively affects other types via vacancy chains
Judy Brownoff chose 4 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 2 / 8
Which of the following items do you support to minimize tenant displacement and maintain/grow the supply of affordable housing? Select up all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point per strategy to max of 8. To tackle tenant displacement local governments must take an all of the above approach to reduce the impacts associated with renovictions and evictions.
Judy Brownoff chose 2 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 0 / 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 2 / 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 2 of 8 options - HFL-05 0 / 3
Do you believe that the municipality should pre-zone to the uses, heights and densities outlined in the Official Community Plan, so that OCP-compliant projects can be built without rezoning or public hearing?
How this question is graded
3 points for yes, 0 for no. An OCP sets out the direction and vision for a municipality with broad input from the community and council. Matching zoning to long term consensus-based plans reduces scarcity and allows incentivizes OCP compliant housing to be built quickly.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 0 / 6
Beyond the three to four units Bill 44 already requires, what is the most housing you think should be legal to build by-right (i.e. without rezoning) in traditional single-family areas of your municipality?
How this question is graded
a) 0 points b) 1 points c) 2 points d) 5 points e) 6 points. With little room for new single family developments, housing abundance relies on density. People unable to afford a single family house should not be relegated to living only on busy arterials where high density is legal, but should have a diversity of housing options in every neighbourhood.
Judy Brownoff 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-08 0 / 2
Do you support eliminating minimum parking requirements for new developments or suites?
How this question is graded
1 point for yes, 2 points for yes with transportation demand management measures, 0 points for no. A single additional parking space can add tens of thousands to the cost of a home. However, a development without parking and without offsetting remedies can impact livability for the eventual occupants of a home.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-09 0 / 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 2 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 0 / 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-12 1 / 6
Municipal asset-management plans have identified substantial gaps between current funding and the amount needed to maintain and replace roads, water and sewer systems, public buildings, and other infrastructure. In Victoria, the 2024 Corporate Asset Management Strategy identified $570 million worth of infrastructure in poor or very poor condition. Which approaches would you prioritize to address this infrastructure problem? Select up to two.
How this question is graded
5 points for selecting more housing and commercial development, 1 for seeking additional provincial or federal funding, 0 points for increasing taxes or reducing infrastructure projects, and -2 points for increasing development charges, amenity contributions, and other fees imposed on new houses.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 6 options - HFL-10 3 / 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.
Judy Brownoff's answer- more non market accessible, supportive housing for seniors
- more family housing especially townhouses
- more opportunity for intergenerational housing
- working with govts to create programs for home ownership ie Habitat for Humanity
30% of this topic Incumbent record 27.36875 / 29What Judy Brownoff 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: 94.10%
Scored from Homes for Living's vote tracker.
Climate
A- 8% of this topic CLI-01 A
Would you support ending fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship on property, media and events controlled by your municipality, to the extent the law allows? And would you advocate for the same at the Victoria Regional Transit Commission for BC Transit vehicles and shelters?
Why this grade: A yes on both counts, with the transit advocacy included. Nothing here depends on another body acting first.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-02 A
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 run the four year plan with climate at the top. Other decisions get tested rather than merely balanced.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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 to never taking those meetings. No exception is carved out for briefings, courtesy calls or anything else.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-04 A
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, stated flatly. Recovering adaptation costs from producers is treated as worth doing on its own terms.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-05 —
Will you support a zoning bylaw amendment that prohibits the approval of any new or expanded commercial gas stations within municipal boundaries?
Why this grade: Declined this one while answering the rest of the climate section strongly, including yes to ending fossil fuel advertising, yes to the lobbyist pledge and yes to the recovery action. Left ungraded on the strength of those surrounding answers.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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: Supports the whole list without trimming it. The funded measures carry the answer into the top band.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 4 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - 8% of this topic CLI-07 A
Are you supportive of phasing out fossil fuel powered tools such as leaf blowers (following the lead of Oak Bay and other municipalities across the country)?
Why this grade: Agrees to phase out gas powered tools. The answer places no burden of proof on the change itself.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-08 —
Large data centres can add substantial electricity and water demand. Under what conditions, if any, would you support a new data centre in your municipality?
Why this grade: Declined this question while answering the rest of the climate section strongly, including support for ending fossil fuel advertising and for the cost recovery action. Left ungraded on the strength of those surrounding answers.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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: Identifies several issues relevant to Saanich and references the Climate Plan, but does not offer any specific actions or intitiatives from it or strategies to address the issues.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerHeat, drought, and sea level rise on our natural assets, parks and trails, structures, as well the impact of wild fire in our drinking water supply area on our drinking water quality, and the impact of wildfire in our parks.
Our updated Climate Plan has just over 91 initiatives, which Saanich has adopted. - 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 reference several current strategies that show support for ecosystem connectivity, but do not provide specifics within their answer about what they will do in the upcoming term. In what ways will the Tree Bylaw be updated to support ecosystem connectivity?
How this question is graded
Free text. A = says what connectivity is and why it matters, with local examples, usually tied to data, a programme already running or the official community plan. B = practical examples with no local detail, or no link back to connectivity. C = general support with no project named, or an answer broad enough to fit any question. C- = agrees with the idea and offers nothing to do about it, or answers about something tangential. F is not used.
Judy Brownoff's answerSaanich has adopted an Urban Forest Strategy that has a reserve fund to pay for some initiatives. We have also adopted our Biodiversity Strategy. We are planting more and more trees, 10,000 this term. Engage neighbourhoods to plant more trees. Updating our Tree Bylaw, and review Official Community Plan for any updates as it is coming forward this term for updating. - 8% of this topic CLI-11 C
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Misses the mark on this question by identifying issues with development but not providing any specifics on how to address those issues or actions they can take to do so.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerUnfortunately more impacts. Tree and biodiversity loss. No mandate to install cooling in all units. No mandate, especially with Small Scale Multi unit housing, for cooling, no designs to help naturally reduce heat impacts or covenants to protect trees or no build zones. If development was a smaller footprint and retained more trees or biodiversity, and climate design including material use, it cd increase some resilience to climate events. - 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 3 options
Arts
C- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 2 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Supports arts opportunities through community recreation and regional grant partnerships, but provides limited strategic detail.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Provide art opportunities , any type, thru community recreation programs.
Work with partners in the region for regional art grants. - 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: Identifies existing arts infrastructure and regional participation rather than a new first-year action or measurable four-year outcome.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff's answerSaanich already has a dedicated Arts Centre at Cedar Hill Centre.
Saanich is also a member of the new CRD Arts service - 13.33% of this topic ART-03 1 / 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 only a cross-coordinated regional cultural-space strategy, providing limited implementation architecture.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 2 / 3
Arts organizations and event producers identify permitting, zoning and regulatory requirements as barriers to cultural activity. What would you commit to? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Supports simplified events, departmental coordination, a single permitting point and disproportionate-cost review—meaningful but narrower reforms.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff chose 4 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - 16.67% of this topic ART-05 2 / 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 a regional cultural infrastructure funding program, defined as a high impact lever, but no direct municipal supports denoted.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 16 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-06 2 / 3
Municipal budgets require difficult choices. Would you support maintaining arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services?
Why this score: Supports arts and culture only if new revenue sources are identified, making the commitment conditional.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff 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
Judy Brownoff 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 requiring or incentivizing cultural space in major development projects, a high-impact policy mechanism.
How this question is graded
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed)
Rolling & cycling
B- 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: Settles on Tillicum to Harriet along the Gorge, together with network segments tied to Safe Routes to School, after saying the choice is a hard one. A link is named and the reasoning behind the second priority is clear.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Tough question and I wd not know which one to pick. I wd say probably Tillicum to Harriet along the Gorge. Plus any part of the network which is part of any Safe Routes to School program - 15% of this topic ROL-02 C
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: Unsure whether physical protection should be the standard for new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets. This is the design decision that determines whether a route is usable by all ages and abilities, and the answer takes no position on it.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, except where physically impossible = B. No = F. Except where physically impossible is a condition that can be checked against a street, so it takes the conditional-yes B, and that is where the 19 rows graded before this rubric existed put it. A No is F because the question sets a construction standard, which is infrastructure. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Judy Brownoff 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. Nothing conditions 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic ROL-04 C
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: Declines to name a project and frames the choice as an operational and budget matter that will require a staff report. Council sets the priorities and funds them, so deferring the question leaves no commitment to point to.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerAgain, tough question. Technically an operational and budget issue, which will have to provide report on “why” this project. - 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: As chair of the transit commission, worked with the UVic and Camosun student societies to build the UPASS program and introduced the first bike racks on buses, which are now standard equipment. That is followed by continued support for walking, rolling and cycling investment including trails, and by chairing Saanich's bike, pedestrian and active transportation committees.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerWhen Chair of VRTC worked with UVic and Camosun Student societies to develop the UPASS program. We also introduced the first bike racks on buses … now standard equipment.
Have continued to support investment in walking, rolling, cycling infrastructure, including trails. Plus continued improvements at Transit Shelters.
I have been chair of Saanich’s Bike Cte, Pedestrian and Bike Cte, and lastly the Active Transportation Cte.
Walking
B- 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-02 C
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 safe routes to school and outdated crosswalks as the concerns. No commitment follows, so there is nothing stated that would change either in a first term.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerSafe Routes to School and older out dated crosswalks. - 10% of this topic WLK-03 B
Sidewalk construction and maintenance is chronically underfunded across the region. Would you vote to increase the share of your municipality's transportation capital budget dedicated to pedestrian infrastructure?
Why this grade: Supports increasing pedestrian infrastructure funding by less than double what is spent now. A real but measured commitment.
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.
Judy Brownoff 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: Backs permanent expansion of pedestrian priority and car free streets. The commitment goes beyond testing the idea.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 6 options - 20% of this topic WLK-05 C
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: To understand and improve pedestrian safety for children at their schools, Council and staff need to meet with parents and teachers to hear their concerns. Meetings are most effective if held on the streets where parents have concerns and during the hours when children are walking (or being dropped off) before and after school. Staff need to consider the routes children walk to school. In some cases there is a single safe route to school for children coming in one direction and few safety measures for children coming from another direction. Cloverdale School is a good example of where that occurs. Once Council and staff have met with parents and teachers and heard what's needed, there needs to be funding to make the recommended improvements. To assure funding is available, a commitment to funding for pedestrian infrastructure on school routes needs to be in place. If costly improvements needed exceed the budget available, quick fixes can be put in place. Safety can't be bypassed and postponed.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerSaanich already does this and we have created our Safe Routes to School program at majority of schools and have been implementing the improvements. - 20% of this topic WLK-06 B
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: Saanich has made a number of safety improvements over the past two decades. Progress has been slow,(though much improved over the past four years), but the additional safety on major routes like the Shelbourne Valley, Cedar Hill X-Road, McKenzie, and Tattersal have made a positive difference for all road users. The question asks what role you expect to play in advocating for pedestrian safety measures for older adults and people with disabilities. To better understand the pedestrian safety needs of this demographic, it's important to hear about their lived experience directly and to get out on the streets to see first-hand where barriers to safe walking occur. It's necessary to speak up for funding that assures that progress toward Vision Zero continues.
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.
Judy Brownoff's answerSaanich has been improving the pedestrian environment especially where higher older adults live. We started with this thru our original work with the WHO Age-Friendly Communities. Good examples are count down pedestrian crossing lights on Shelbourne at Cedar Hill extra time at start before time kicks in for over 25 and extra time at end. Tested with seniors. New corner curb cuts, tactile designs, and more. New raised pedestrian crosswalks with new lights.
Governance
C- 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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-02 C-
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
Why this grade: Does not support a shared regional service for designing, building and maintaining local municipal infrastructure. The answer rules out the pooled approach the question asks about.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-03 F
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").
Judy Brownoff's answerLook at more digitizing of applications such as signs, antennas, etc. Saanich is currently doing more of this on line.
Look at more partnership or protocol agreements with local govts like we do for some services provided thru police and fire. More integrated units. Or the LIFE program with recreation.
Look at more opportunities for small commercial neighbourhood development in Centres and Villages. - 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 )
Judy Brownoff 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 local First Nations holding a place in transit governance, including both regional commissions named. A clear commitment.
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.
Judy Brownoff chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 C
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
Why this grade: Indicates moderate 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.
Judy Brownoff 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.
Saanich’s Official Community Plan bylaw also has adopted Development Permit Guidelines included, which has initiatives that are supportive of our Climate Plan - 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.
CRD Transportation Service has opportunity for FN participation. Transit, which is a Provincial Board, is up to them. Saanich and CRD have MoUs with FNs.
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).