How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Kathleen Burton'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 Kathleen Burton said
- Not graded GEN-01
If you could change one policy, bylaw, feature, or municipal asset (i.e, facility or infrastructure) in your municipality, what would it be and why?
If I could change one thing, I would work toward strengthening Health Care. While this is primarily a provincial responsibility, municipalities have an important role to play in creating communities where people can access the services and supports they need. I would like to see Saanich work more closely with the Province, Island Health, healthcare providers and community organizations to identify gaps and explore practical ways the municipality can help.
That could include making municipal facilities and spaces available where appropriate, supporting partnerships and advocating for healthcare services that reflect the needs of our growing and aging population.
It comes back to listening. Municipal government cannot solve every healthcare challenge, but we can understand what residents are experiencing, bring the right people together and advocate for practical, lasting solutions. - 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.
Kathleen Burton's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $1,250,000 Transit $750,000 Walking Infrastructure $750,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $500,000 Roadway Infrastructure $1,000,000 Policing $100,000 Fire & Emergency Services $1,250,000 Parks & Recreation $1,000,000 Arts & Culture $250,000 Climate Action & Environment $750,000 Unhoused Resident Services $750,000 Community-Based Clinics $750,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
My approach would be to invest in both people and the infrastructure they rely on every day. Housing, and healthcare have a direct impact on community wellbeing. I would also seek to maintain strong investments in roads, fire and emergency services, parks and recreation and active transportation.
I will be but one voice, but I would want these dollars to leverage partnerships wherever possible, particularly the provincial and federal governments, Island Health, BC Transit and neighbouring municipalities. The goal would not be simply to spend $10M but to use it strategically to build capacity, address gaps and create lasting value for Saanich residents.
Healthcare access
What Kathleen Burton 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.
I encourage readers to visit the following website: https://healthywestshore.ca/
The Saunders Foundation has worked across the province to bring ideas forward to the Province and local government. I worked with them to set up a meeting with the Mayor of Saanich, the Saanich Community Associations Network and the Camosun Community Association at our Annual General Meeting.
Transit
C- 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: Backs the full slate of free travel for under 19s, cheaper fares for seniors, cheaper fares for people on income or disability assistance and a lower cost regional monthly pass. The whole slate is endorsed, which is as far as this question can be answered.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 4 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 C
Do you support removing general on-street parking (excluding accessible parking spaces) from frequent transit corridors and main arterial streets in your municipality, and reallocating that space to bus lanes, loading zones, and walking and cycling infrastructure?
Why this grade: Would remove general street parking from frequent transit corridors only where a particular project makes it necessary. The position depends entirely on what is put in front of council rather than on a standard set now.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 6 options - 30% of this topic TRN-03 C-
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: Supports rapid deployment of transit priority on frequent corridors, but not where it would cost a lane of general traffic. What is excluded is precisely what was asked, so the answer sits near the bottom while still leaving other measures open.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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: Would establish a regional transportation authority covering the whole area. It is the strongest response the question offers.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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: Would build new bus and bicycle routes through parks and public land so long as no mature tree is felled. A condition this precise narrows the commitment without leaving it to discretion.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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 support looking creatively at public land and existing corridors to improve regional connectivity. If a bus or cycling connection through public land can substantially reduce travel time, improve access I think it is worth considering.
Each project, however should be evaluated for environmental impacts, accessibility, safety, cost and the impact on the existing use of the land. Parks and other public spaces have important purposes that also need to be respected.
The goal should be to connect communities more efficiently while protecting the places that we love in Saanich.
Housing
C- 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
Kathleen Burton chose 7 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 6 / 8
Which of the following items do you support to minimize tenant displacement and maintain/grow the supply of affordable housing? Select up all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point per strategy to max of 8. To tackle tenant displacement local governments must take an all of the above approach to reduce the impacts associated with renovictions and evictions.
Kathleen Burton chose 6 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 2 / 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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 5 / 5
If there was a type of housing you wanted to see more of (e.g., affordable, non-market, family-sized, townhouses, etc.), what do you think are effective methods of getting more of it? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). To increase the building of certain desireable types of housing (affordable, family sized, etc), cities need to pursue a broad approach of both removing barriers and targetted incentives. Mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning) have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore reducing housing construction or increasing costs.
Kathleen Burton chose 5 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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 1 / 6
Beyond the three to four units Bill 44 already requires, what is the most housing you think should be legal to build by-right (i.e. without rezoning) in traditional single-family areas of your municipality?
How this question is graded
a) 0 points b) 1 points c) 2 points d) 5 points e) 6 points. With little room for new single family developments, housing abundance relies on density. People unable to afford a single family house should not be relegated to living only on busy arterials where high density is legal, but should have a diversity of housing options in every neighbourhood.
Kathleen Burton 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.
Kathleen Burton 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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-09 6 / 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.
Kathleen Burton chose 6 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 1 / 6
The BC government set a housing target for Victoria at 4,902 homes over five years, which represents 75% of the estimated housing need for that period. Regardless of provincial requirements or penalties, do you believe the city should strive to build:
How this question is graded
6 points for too low, 1 for about right, 0 for too high. By definition, the provincial housing targets, being set as only 75% of estimated housing need is too low of a target to meet local housing needs.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-12 6 / 6
Municipal asset-management plans have identified substantial gaps between current funding and the amount needed to maintain and replace roads, water and sewer systems, public buildings, and other infrastructure. In Victoria, the 2024 Corporate Asset Management Strategy identified $570 million worth of infrastructure in poor or very poor condition. Which approaches would you prioritize to address this infrastructure problem? Select up to two.
How this question is graded
5 points for selecting more housing and commercial development, 1 for seeking additional provincial or federal funding, 0 points for increasing taxes or reducing infrastructure projects, and -2 points for increasing development charges, amenity contributions, and other fees imposed on new houses.
Kathleen Burton chose 2 of 6 options - HFL-10 5 / 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.
Kathleen Burton's answerAt the end of my first year, I would want Saanich to have made meaningful progress toward a faster, clearer and more predictable housing approval process, Particularly for small scall multi unit and non market housing.
I would want to see municipal land and other municipal resources identified as opportunities for affordable and on market housing, while strengthening partnerships with non profit housing providers, the Province, federal government and neighbouring municipalities.
By the end of my fourth year, I would want to see tangible results, such as more housing choices, more affordable and non market housing underway or completed, stronger protections for existing renters and a development process that is more predictable and responsive.
I expect housing decisions to be tied to infrastructure and the services that make communities work. Growth needs to be supported by transportation, recreation, parks utilities and other essential infrastructure.
Climate
B- 8% of this topic CLI-01 B
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: Clears advertising and sponsorship at home, then leaves the transit question undecided. Strong on the part within reach and quiet on the part that takes persuasion.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Kathleen Burton 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 among the top three with its own money. That is delivery without primacy.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-03 C-
Will you pledge to never take meetings from fossil fuel company lobbyists?
Why this grade: Will keep meeting whoever asks, fossil fuel lobbyists included. That is a refusal of the standard rather than opposition to climate action.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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: Backs the legal action if spending is capped. That qualification places the answer below an outright yes.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-05 F
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: A no on prohibiting new stations. The municipality keeps approving fossil fuel retail it has the power to stop.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-06 A
Extreme heat, wildfire smoke and wildfire risk all affect people living in existing homes. What would you have your municipality do to protect them? Select all you support.
Why this grade: A full slate. Nothing is deferred and nothing is left to be paid for by residents alone.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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. The commitment covers the equipment across the municipality.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-08 C
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 decide per application. That gives no advance protection on power use or on water.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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: Clearly identifies relevant risks and provides generalized ideas for how to mitgate them, but does not go into specifics relevant to their context.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = names a climate risk specific to the municipality and specific actions against it, usually tied to data or a programme already running. B = one half only, a risk with no action or actions with no risk named, or backing an existing plan without either. C = general support with nothing local in it, a list of risks and nothing else, or the work handed to the region. C- = a risk gestured at and nothing more. F = an answer that is not about climate.
Kathleen Burton's answerSaanich faces many climate risks including extreme heat, wildfire and wildfire smoke, drought and water stress, and more frequent and intense storms. These risks can affect public health, infrastructure, nature areas and vulnerable residents.
A focus on practical adaptation measures that make Saanich more resilient is needed. This includes protecting and expanding the tree canopy, maintaining healthy forests and natural areas, improving wildfire preparedness, and supporting measures that help homes and business buildings stay cool and maintain good indoor air quality during extreme heat and smoke events.
Adaptation needs to be community focused. I would like to work with residents, First Nations, neighbouring municipalities, the CRD (why I am also running there), the Province and community organizations to identify risks and develop practical solutions. - 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: Clearly supports the concept of ecosystem connectivity but does not provide specifics about how protection and improvement would take shape in their local context.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = says what connectivity is and why it matters, with local examples, usually tied to data, a programme already running or the official community plan. B = practical examples with no local detail, or no link back to connectivity. C = general support with no project named, or an answer broad enough to fit any question. C- = agrees with the idea and offers nothing to do about it, or answers about something tangential. F is not used.
Kathleen Burton's answerBy focusing on protecting and strengthening the natural connections that allow wildlife and ecosystems to move and adapt as our climate changes.
By protecting the tree canopy, wetlands, streams, natural corridors and other connected green spaces, while looking for opportunities to restore connections that have been fragmented by development.
Saanich needs to incorporate more ecosystem connectivity into land use and development decisions, including protecting important habitat and requiring appropriate mitigation where development affects natural areas.
For this to come to fruition, partnerships will be important. Again I would want to work with residents, First Nations, environmental organizations, neighbouring municipalities and our regional partners to identify priority areas and coordinate conservation efforts.
Growth and environmental protection should go hand in hand and not be treated as opposing goals. With thoughtful planning and a systems thinking approach, Saanich can accommodate growth while maintaining the natural systems that make it resilient. - 8% of this topic CLI-11 B
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Clearly supports improving resilience through development, but does not provide specifics about how this would take shape in their local context.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = yes, with how and why, naming strategies or a local policy that ties development to resilience. B = yes with relevant examples but no account of how they build resilience or how they get built. C = general support and nothing past what the building code already requires. C- = a bare yes, or support that doubts it is possible. F = does not accept that development can make a community more resilient.
Kathleen Burton's answerNew developments can incorporate energy efficiency, heat and smoke resilience, water conservation, stormwater management, drought tolerant landscaping, tree canopy and natural infrastructure. It can also help create more walkable neighbourhoods and improve access to transit, reducing reliance on (not an elimination of) cars.
I see development as an opportunity to strengthen climate resilience into the community from the start of a project rather than trying to repair and retrofit things later.
It is important to build for the climate we are experiencing but equally important to prepare for the climate we know is coming. - 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.
Kathleen Burton 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 would support clear, predictable standards that encourage resilient building practices while using incentives such as density or expedited approvals where appropriate to encourage stronger environmental outcomes.
Development provides an opportunity to restore, reconnect, natural areas, daylight natural water ways, and improve drainage and stormwater infrastructure.
Arts
C- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 1 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Identifies the municipality as a community partner and enabler rather than sole funder/provider, but does not specify sufficiently consequential economic-development tools or execution mechanisms. Offers only general recognition.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: The municipality should be a community partner in arts & culture, enabling and partnering rather than the sole funder or provider of arts & culture in our community. - 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 working with the sector to identify barriers and develop an action plan, with four-year measures including participation, municipal-space use, partnerships and opportunities. The first-year action is concrete, but the four-year outcomes used defined metrics, but lack of defined targets, tools, policies, or implementation processes, so is insufficient for a 3.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton's answerIn the first year, I would commit to working with the arts & cultural community to identify barriers, gaps and opportunities, and to develop a practical action plan that support local artists, cultural organizations and community events.
I would measure progress at the end of four years through participation, use of municipal spaces, partnerships established and the number and diversity of arts & cultural opportunities available.
Supporting the arts and cultural events is an investment in the vibrancy and connectedness of Saanich. - 13.33% of this topic ART-03 3 / 3
Cultural strategies are often adopted and then not implemented. Would you support a cultural space implementation framework with defined tools, timelines and public reporting? Select up to three components you would prioritize. Select your top three options.
Why this score: Selects municipal affordability/stability tools, nonprofit partnerships for permanent cultural assets, and measurable implementation targets/timelines, providing a strong implementation framework at municipal level.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton chose 3 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 3 / 3
Arts organizations and event producers identify permitting, zoning and regulatory requirements as barriers to cultural activity. What would you commit to? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Selects the full range of administrative and consequential reforms, including simplified events, zoning review and disproportionate-cost review.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton 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: Combines development/amenity contributions, nonprofit acquisition, municipal leverage funding and long-term leases, providing multiple consequential municipal interventions.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton chose 5 of 16 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-06 3 / 3
Municipal budgets require difficult choices. Would you support maintaining arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services?
Why this score: Explicitly supports maintaining or growing arts and culture alongside core services.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-07 3 / 3
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
Why this score: Explicitly prioritizes preserving existing cultural space where feasible.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton 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: Selects development-space requirements/incentives and private-owner property-tax incentives for long-term affordable cultural space, both consequential mechanisms, alongside fee relief and nonprofit tax relief.
How this question is graded
Kathleen Burton 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.
Arts & Culture and an important part of a healthy, connected community and should be considered alongside housing, infrastructure, parks and economic development.
Rolling & cycling
C- 15% of this topic ROL-01 C
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: Says yes to a safety light or crossing where cycling routes already exist and to more connectors onto routes such as the Galloping Goose, but not to more bike lanes if that means taking a car lane or slowing emergency vehicles. Those conditions rule out the main way missing links get closed, and no link is named.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: If it means putting a safety light or crossing light where existing cycling exists yes.
If it means adding more cycling connectors to routes like the galloping goose yes.
I am not currently in favour of putting in more bike lanes if it means reducing car lanes or impeding emergency vehicles to call outs. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 —
Will you commit (or continue to commit) to physical protection (not paint alone) as the standard for all new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets in your municipality?
Why this grade: Is unsure whether physical protection should replace paint as the standard on busy streets. An unsure answer states no position, so the row is left blank and drops out of the topic total.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 15% of this topic ROL-03 C
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: Would weigh each proposal to remove, narrow or weaken an existing lane on its own rather than opposing them as a class. Case by case names no threshold and commits to nothing.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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: Would rank projects by safety, connectivity, access to transit and how many people benefit, and wants a network that works for all ages and abilities including people using mobility devices. That describes how a choice would be made, not which project would be progressed.
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.
Kathleen Burton's answerI would prioritize projects based on safety, connectivity, access to transit and the number of people who can benefit. Active transportation need to work for people of different ages and abilities, including people who use mobility devices.
If the goal is a connected network that makes walking, rolling and cycling practical than Saanich needs to look a things differently. - 35% of this topic ROL-05 C
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 a project on transport gaps through work for a member of the legislature, learning where the pinch points are and passing the information on so the easiest could be resolved. One relevant piece of work in a supporting role, with no leading part described.
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.
Kathleen Burton's answerIn my day job, I supported the MLA I work for with a Mind the Gap project, aimed and learning the pinch points and sharing the information to try to resolve the low hanging fruit.
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.
Infrastructure should be safe, connected and accessible for people of all ages and abilities. Saanich needs to prioritize closing networks gaps, improving safety at intersections and creating practical connections to schools, transit, parks and neighbourhoods.
Walking
B- 10% of this topic WLK-01 C
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 little support for multimodal planning and TDM.
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.
Kathleen Burton 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: Wants students to have at least painted crossings on the way to school and reports being surprised that this is not already the case. The gap is named and nothing is committed to closing it.
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.
Kathleen Burton's answerI recently did a video about this, I would like to see students have at the very least, painted crosswalks available to them to cross to get to school safely. I was surprised and disappointed to learn this is not always the case. - 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 a moderate budget shift towards pedestrian infrastructure. The scale keeps it off the top grade.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-04 B
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
Why this grade: A yes for trials only. The commitment ends when the season does.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 6 options - 20% of this topic WLK-05 A
How will you work with parent groups, school staff, and municipal staff to assure that children’s safety is prioritized over convenience and flow of motor traffic?
Why this grade: You distinguish what falls to school trustees from what is municipal, and would work with the school districts, parent groups and municipal staff to identify concerns and fix the municipal share through safer crossings, sidewalks, traffic calming and active transportation routes, with the safety of children placed above vehicle convenience. Being clear about which body owns which fix is useful, because it stops a genuine hazard being passed back and forth.
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.
Kathleen Burton's answerWhile school trustees have direct responsibility for these matters, I would work with the school districts, parent groups, municipal staff to identify safety concerns around schools and address what falls with municipal responsibility. That includes safer crossings, sidewalks, traffic calming and active transpiration routes, with safety of the children prioritized over vehicle convenience. - 20% of this topic WLK-06 A
What will you do, in a 4 year term, to identify, prioritize and set time-lines to assure that pedestrian infrastructure is improved to meet the needs of the older and disabled members of your community?
Why this grade: You would work with seniors, people with disabilities and accessibility organizations to identify barriers, map the priority areas and set a multi year improvement plan ranked by safety, accessibility and need, with clear timelines and progress reporting, and new infrastructure designed for all ages and abilities from the outset. Designing to that standard from the start costs less than retrofitting later and is the habit that stops the backlog growing.
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.
Kathleen Burton's answerI would work with seniors, people with disabilities and accessibility organizations to identify barriers, map priority areas and establish a multi-year improvement plan. Projects would be prioritized by safety, accessibility, and need, with clear timelines and progress reporting. New pedestrian infrastructure should be designed for all ages and abilities from the outset.
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.
Walking should be a safe and practical option for all of you, not just those who are young or able bodied. I think it is important to connect sidewalks, safe crossings, lighting, traffic calming and accessible routes. Slight improvements can often make a significant difference for people with disabilities, recovering from an injury or seniors and their families.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-02 A
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
Why this grade: Backs the arrangement as put. The strongest answer available on this question.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-03 C
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").
Kathleen Burton's answer1. We need clearer multi year financial planning that connects spending decisions to infrastructure needs, population growth and future operating costs. We need to know not just what it cost to build it but what it will cost to maintain it over its lifetime.
2. Reviewing municipal services for opportunities to reduce duplication, improve procurement and share costs or expertise with neighbouring municipalities. Where regional delivery makes sense, I would support exploring it. Every tax dollar should be treated as an investment that needs to demonstrate value.
3. We need to invest in infrastructure and services even if Saanich was not growing and it is, making it all the more important. We need to prioritize projects based on need, urgency, long term value and our ability to pay, while actively pursuing provincial and federal funding and partnerships to reduce the burden on taxpayers. - 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 )
Kathleen Burton 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: A yes with no exceptions. Transit governance would change to include local First Nations.
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.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 A
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
How this question is graded
A = significantly more consultation practices. B = somewhat more. C = the current amount is enough. Written answers take the same ladder: A commits to partnership with local First Nations, B wants better consultation without committing to a change, C questions whether more is wanted. Nothing here has been graded C- or F.
Kathleen Burton chose 1 of 7 optionsShort answer is YES! That said, I would first want to know how the Elders would like to be included, if this is to be a true act of reconciliation it should be because they want it not because we assume they do.
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.
Good governance starts with listening, transparency and accountability. I believe municipalities should look beyond their borders and work collaboratively with neighbouring communities when shared services or regional infrastructure can deliver belter value for residents.
We need to take a long term approach to asset management, prioritizing critical infrastructure and make sure we understand the full lifecycle cost of major projects. - 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 believe meaningful relationships with First Nations should be built on respect, early engagement and genuine collaboration. Consultation should not be treated as a final step in a decision making process, but as an ongoing relationship the begins early enough for Indigenous perspectives to meaningfully shape the plans and the outcomes.
Good governance means moving beyond simply checking a consultation box. It means building relationships, communicating openly, respecting Indigenous rights and working together toward practical solutions that benefit communities across the region.
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).