How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Rishi Sharma'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 Rishi Sharma 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 would change how Saanich engages with its residents.
Throughout this campaign, one of the strongest messages I've heard is that people don't simply want to be informed after decisions have largely been made — they want a meaningful opportunity to help shape them.
I would introduce more town halls, neighbourhood meetings and opportunities for direct dialogue with Mayor and Council, including regular Mayor's open-door hours. For major projects and policy changes, engagement should happen early enough that public input can actually influence the outcome.
We won't always agree, and Council still has to make difficult decisions. But residents should understand how and why decisions were made, what we heard from them, and how their input was considered.
My Master's research focused on how difficult conversations can strengthen relationships and trust. I believe Saanich can do a much better job of having those conversations.
Listen earlier. Engage genuinely. Report back. Build trust. - 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.
Rishi Sharma's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $1,500,000 Transit $2,500,000 Walking Infrastructure $750,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $250,000 Roadway Infrastructure $1,000,000 Policing $750,000 Fire & Emergency Services $750,000 Parks & Recreation $1,000,000 Arts & Culture $250,000 Climate Action & Environment $750,000 Unhoused Resident Services $250,000 Community-Based Clinics $250,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
I believe Saanich also needs a stronger conversation about responsible, low-impact economic growth.
We need housing and infrastructure, but we also need good jobs — particularly opportunities that allow our young people to build careers and futures here. Saanich is well positioned to work with local businesses, UVic and Camosun, the technology and environmental sectors, construction and skilled trades, agriculture and other employers to create those opportunities.
Economic growth also matters to affordability. A healthy and sustainable commercial tax base can help fund the services residents value while reducing the pressure continually placed on residential property taxpayers.
Throughout this campaign I've heard from businesses concerned about rising costs and whether Saanich remains an affordable place to operate. We need to listen to them too.
My vision is not growth at any cost. It's thoughtful, low-impact economic development that creates jobs, supports local businesses, broadens our tax base and helps keep Saanich affordable for the next generation.
Healthcare access
What Rishi Sharma 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.
Access to primary care is one of the most important issues facing families in our community. I don't believe municipal government should simply say health care is someone else's responsibility when there may be practical ways we can help.
Before this campaign, I worked with a local physician and community advocates exploring innovative options for a Saanich medical centre, including a model similar to what Colwood was developing. I met with the previous Mayor to discuss the idea, but unfortunately it didn't move forward.
I would like to restart those conversations with the physicians and advocates I worked with and examine what we can learn from Colwood and other local models.
The Province remains responsible for health care, but municipalities can be partners — through facilities, zoning, partnerships or innovative delivery models. If there is a financially responsible way to help more Saanich residents access a family doctor, I believe it's worth pursuing.
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: Would push for every option on the list, which runs to 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. Nothing on the list is left unticked, which is the fullest answer available here.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 4 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 B
Do you support removing general on-street parking (excluding accessible parking spaces) from frequent transit corridors and main arterial streets in your municipality, and reallocating that space to bus lanes, loading zones, and walking and cycling infrastructure?
Why this grade: Would reallocate kerbside space on busy transit streets at peak times, leaving parking in place for the rest of the day. Restricting the change to peak hours is a real and checkable limit on the yes rather than an open ended one. Note: Saanich is home to several potential rapid transit corridors, most noteworthy McKenzie Ave, and Saanich is simultaneously home to some of the steepest transit delay points in the region—commitment to this question is of particular importance to Saanich
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Supports rapid transit priority on busy corridors, with parking and a traffic lane both on the table. Nothing is held back from the toolkit, including the measure the question turns on. Note: Saanich is home to several potential rapid transit corridors, most noteworthy McKenzie Ave, and Saanich is simultaneously home to some of the steepest transit delay points in the region—commitment to this question is of particular importance to Saanich
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Backs setting up a single regional body to run transportation across the region. Support is given outright, without qualification.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 3 options - 10% of this topic TRN-05 A
Do you support building new bus-only and bike-only connections through parks, golf courses or public land when doing so would substantially shorten transit and cycling trips?
Why this grade: Supports running new bus and bicycle routes through parks, golf courses and other public land to shorten journeys. The yes is unconditional, which is the strongest answer available here.
How this question is graded
Yes = A. Yes, if no mature trees are lost during construction = B. No = F. Losing no mature trees is a named and checkable condition, so it takes the conditional-yes B. A No is F because the question is about building a connection, which is infrastructure. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Rishi Sharma 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 want us to think more creatively about transit. Better service isn't simply adding buses to existing routes — it's finding new ways to connect people to their communities.
I would like Saanich to work with BC Transit on innovative options such as smaller community shuttles, on-demand service and better connections between neighbourhoods, recreation centres, shopping, health services and major transit routes.
This is particularly important for seniors, youth and people with accessibility needs who may not drive or live close to frequent transit. Affordable, accessible transportation can mean greater independence and less isolation.
We should also listen directly to residents about where the gaps are. My goal is a transit system that is reliable and affordable, but also flexible enough to reach further into our communities and help people get where they actually need to go.
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
Rishi Sharma chose 7 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 8 / 8
Which of the following items do you support to minimize tenant displacement and maintain/grow the supply of affordable housing? Select up all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point per strategy to max of 8. To tackle tenant displacement local governments must take an all of the above approach to reduce the impacts associated with renovictions and evictions.
Rishi Sharma chose 8 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 6 / 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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 4 / 5
If there was a type of housing you wanted to see more of (e.g., affordable, non-market, family-sized, townhouses, etc.), what do you think are effective methods of getting more of it? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). To increase the building of certain desireable types of housing (affordable, family sized, etc), cities need to pursue a broad approach of both removing barriers and targetted incentives. Mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning) have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore reducing housing construction or increasing costs.
Rishi Sharma chose 6 of 8 options - HFL-05 3 / 3
Do you believe that the municipality should pre-zone to the uses, heights and densities outlined in the Official Community Plan, so that OCP-compliant projects can be built without rezoning or public hearing?
How this question is graded
3 points for yes, 0 for no. An OCP sets out the direction and vision for a municipality with broad input from the community and council. Matching zoning to long term consensus-based plans reduces scarcity and allows incentivizes OCP compliant housing to be built quickly.
Rishi Sharma 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.
Rishi Sharma 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.
Rishi Sharma 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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-09 5 / 6
Non-market housing often faces additional challenges getting approved. Which of the following measures do you support to improve the prospects for below-market housing construction? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). Building homes is hard, building non-market homes is substantially harder. This has serious socio-economic consequences for certain members of society. With the exception of mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning), which have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore a deterrent to new construction, a broad and flexible approach is needed to help non-market housing across the approval finish line.
Rishi Sharma chose 7 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 1 / 6
The BC government set a housing target for Victoria at 4,902 homes over five years, which represents 75% of the estimated housing need for that period. Regardless of provincial requirements or penalties, do you believe the city should strive to build:
How this question is graded
6 points for too low, 1 for about right, 0 for too high. By definition, the provincial housing targets, being set as only 75% of estimated housing need is too low of a target to meet local housing needs.
Rishi Sharma 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.
Rishi Sharma chose 2 of 6 options - HFL-10 6 / 7
If elected, what do you hope to have accomplished on the housing file at the end of your first year, and end of your four-year term?
How this question is graded
To receive full marks, candidates receive a point up to 7 for referencing impactful housing ideas in their answer including but not limited to: a rental vacancy rate target, a quantitative target regarding annual homes built, pre-zoning commitments / OCP alignment, non-profit by right commitment, commitment to tenant production aligned with platform, commitment to regulate and enforce Airbnb rules, delegate more rezoning / variance decisions to staff, a continuation of policies that have been working, developing a pre-approved catalog of housing designs, loosening design guidelines or other restrictive regulations, minimizing tenant displacement, increasing the regional housing fund, enhancing partnerships with other levels of government, the private sector, co-ops, and non-profit housing developers, streamlining regulations, and shorten requirements.
Rishi Sharma's answerFirst year – listen earlier; Change how Saanich engages residents on housing. I recently met a neighbour who was in tears over a large affordable-housing project next to her home. What struck me was that she supports affordable housing; she simply felt she had no meaningful opportunity to be heard while changes were still possible. We can build housing faster and engage people better. Those goals are not incompatible.
First year – predictable approvals; Establish clear target timelines for housing applications, particularly OCP-aligned projects, and publicly report how we're performing. Applicants shouldn't spend years navigating an uncertain process.
First year – Housing Accountability Charter; Track approvals, permitting times, housing completions and municipal costs, and identify unnecessary procedural barriers and duplication.
First year – partnerships; Work with non-profits, senior governments, post-secondary institutions and responsible builders to accelerate affordable, rental, student, seniors and family housing.
Four years – more housing choices; Deliver meaningful growth in rental and non-market housing, family-sized homes, attainable ownership and gentle density, with greater density directed to appropriate centres and corridors where infrastructure can support it.
Four years – affordability and municipal costs; Regularly review DCCs, fees and other municipal costs and use targeted incentives where they produce measurable affordable housing.
Four years – rebuild trust; I want residents and builders to experience a Saanich where expectations are clear, decisions are timely and people are listened to before decisions are effectively made.
My goal; the right homes, in the right places, delivered faster — with residents at the table.
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: Yes on municipal property and yes at the transit commission. The position is the same in both places.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Rishi Sharma 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 treat climate as the overriding concern of the term. That puts it above any competing budget priority.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Answers yes to the pledge. The commitment is about who gets time with an elected official, and it is given in full.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Votes yes and sets no ceiling. Producers would be pursued for a share of the adaptation bill.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-05 A
Will you support a zoning bylaw amendment that prohibits the approval of any new or expanded commercial gas stations within municipal boundaries?
Why this grade: Would prohibit new and expanded stations through zoning. The answer is unqualified.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Picks all five. The answer commits to paying for assessments, retrofits and centre hours as well as to regulating and informing.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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 without conditions. The municipality would act rather than wait.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-08 A
Large data centres can add substantial electricity and water demand. Under what conditions, if any, would you support a new data centre in your municipality?
Why this grade: Opposes all of them. The answer forecloses the question rather than setting terms for it.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-09 A
What are the primary climate risk(s) facing your community, and what actions would you take to support adaptation and resilience in your community?
Why this grade: Clearly identifies risks and provides concrete strategies grounded in their local 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.
Rishi Sharma's answerSaanich faces increasing risks from extreme heat, wildfire and smoke, drought, severe storms and flooding. Climate adaptation needs to be practical, local and focused on protecting people, infrastructure and the natural environment.
I would strengthen emergency preparedness, including accessible cooling and clean-air spaces, with particular attention to seniors and people with accessibility needs. We need to protect and improve our urban forest, biodiversity, watersheds and natural areas, while managing vegetation and invasive species using sound science.
We also need resilient infrastructure. Asset management, drainage and stormwater capacity, water conservation and emergency planning should all account for changing climate conditions.
Finally, adaptation requires partnerships with First Nations, the CRD, senior governments and community organizations. We should also listen to residents — they often see emerging problems in their neighbourhoods before Municipal Hall does. - 8% of this topic CLI-10 A
Ensuring ecosystem connectivity is an important adaptation strategy for climate change. How do you plan to maintain or increase ecosystem features across the urban landscape?
Why this grade: Identifies clear, actionable strategies to improve resilience through development relevent to 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.
Rishi Sharma's answerSaanich has important environmental strategies, but we need stronger implementation, monitoring and accountability. Community members involved in Resilient Saanich have raised concerns with me about how expert recommendations are followed and monitored once the technical work is complete.
Ecosystem connectivity should be central to our climate adaptation work. We need to protect and restore wildlife corridors, Garry Oak ecosystems, wetlands, watersheds and our urban forest, while improving invasive-species management and connecting parks and natural areas.
I also believe Council needs to remain engaged in monitoring results rather than leaving implementation solely to administration. When independent experts volunteer their time and provide evidence-based recommendations, we need to listen, publicly track what has been implemented and explain when recommendations are not followed.
Good environmental policy requires expertise, measurable outcomes and accountability. - 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.
Rishi Sharma's answerYes. Development is an opportunity to make Saanich more resilient, but climate adaptation needs to be considered from the beginning rather than added as an afterthought.
New development should help manage stormwater, protect watersheds and important ecological connections, retain trees and vegetation where practical, and reduce risks from extreme heat, wildfire and flooding. We should encourage durable, energy-efficient buildings that provide healthy indoor environments during heat and wildfire-smoke events.
Infrastructure capacity matters too. Before approving significant growth, we need to understand whether drainage, water, sewer, roads and emergency services can support it under changing climate conditions.
I also believe we need to listen to residents and technical experts. Neighbours often understand local drainage, flooding and environmental conditions extremely well. Development can provide needed housing while also leaving our infrastructure, neighbourhoods and natural environment more resilient. - 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.
Rishi Sharma 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.
Saanich has done considerable work on climate and environmental policy. My concern is making sure those plans translate into measurable action, resilience and accountability.
We need a stronger focus on adaptation: extreme heat, wildfire and smoke, drought, flooding, stormwater, infrastructure resilience and protection of our natural environment. As our community grows, climate resilience should be considered alongside housing, infrastructure and affordability.
I also believe we need to listen to the experts and community members who have contributed significant time and knowledge to initiatives such as Resilient Saanich. Their recommendations shouldn't simply sit on a shelf. Council should remain engaged, monitor implementation and publicly report on progress.
Climate leadership isn't just about adopting another strategy. It's about implementing what works, measuring results, listening to expertise and being accountable to residents.
Arts
A- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 3 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Clearly integrates arts and culture into the local economy and identifies municipal roles in space, regulation, tourism, business and partnerships.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Arts and culture contribute to both quality of life and a strong local economy. The municipality should be a partner and facilitator — supporting local artists and cultural organizations, providing accessible spaces for performances, exhibitions and community events, and helping remove barriers to creative activity.
I also see opportunities to connect arts and culture with tourism, local business, economic development and opportunities for young people. Public art and cultural programming can help create vibrant neighbourhoods and gathering places.
At the same time, municipal support should be responsible and transparent. We should work with community organizations, First Nations, businesses and other levels of government to leverage partnerships and funding rather than assuming taxpayers must fund everything directly.
Arts and culture help make Saanich a place where people want to live, visit, create and do business. - 16.67% of this topic ART-02 3 / 3
If elected, what specific action will you commit to in your first year to strengthen your municipality's arts and cultural sector, and what measurable outcome should residents expect by the end of your four-year term?
Why this score: Commits in year one to completing the Cultural Arts Strategy with measurable actions, timelines and accountability, and identifies measurable four-year results including programming, space use, partnerships, outside funding and public reporting.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma's answerIn my first year, I would work with Saanich's arts and cultural community to establish clear priorities for strengthening arts and culture, including completing the Cultural Arts Strategy with measurable actions, timelines and accountability.
I would also look for practical ways to make municipal spaces more accessible for local artists, performers and community organizations, while building partnerships with First Nations, schools, businesses and other levels of government.
By the end of four years, residents should be able to see measurable results: more opportunities for local arts and cultural programming, greater use of municipal and community spaces, stronger partnerships and outside funding, and transparent reporting on what has actually been accomplished.
Arts and culture don't always require building something new. Sometimes local creativity needs a space, fewer barriers and a municipality willing to be a good partner. - 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 measurable targets/timelines, public reporting and zoning/permitting review, combining accountability mechanisms with meaningful regulatory implementation.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma chose 3 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 3 / 3
Arts organizations and event producers identify permitting, zoning and regulatory requirements as barriers to cultural activity. What would you commit to? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Supports a comprehensive set of permitting, zoning and regulatory reforms including service standards, simplified events, coordination and review of disproportionate nonprofit costs.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma chose 8 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - 16.67% of this topic ART-05 3 / 3
If preserving and securing long-term cultural space requires additional municipal support, which approaches would you support? Select up to five.
Why this score: Supports increased infrastructure funding, development contributions, resource reallocation, a dedicated levy and better use of municipal properties through partnerships, providing multiple consequential funding and space mechanisms.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma chose 5 of 16 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-06 3 / 3
Municipal budgets require difficult choices. Would you support maintaining arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services?
Why this score: Explicitly supports maintaining or growing arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma 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 preserving the existing cultural space where feasible, which is a strong cultural-space protection commitment under the locked ART-07 calibration.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 5 options - 16.67% of this topic ART-08 3 / 3
Would you support municipal incentives to encourage private property owners and developers to provide affordable community & cultural space for nonprofits? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Supports development requirements or incentives, fee reductions, private-owner property-tax incentives and nonprofit property-tax relief, including mechanisms that can expand affordable cultural-space supply.
How this question is graded
Rishi Sharma 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 and culture are an important part of what makes a community feel like a community. They bring people together, give young people opportunities to participate and create, support local businesses and artists, and contribute to a vibrant local economy.
I would like Saanich to look creatively at how we can make it easier for arts and cultural activities to happen — including better use of existing municipal and community spaces, fewer unnecessary regulatory barriers, and stronger partnerships with First Nations, non-profits, schools, businesses and other levels of government.
We should also look beyond municipal boundaries. Arts and culture are regional, and there may be opportunities to share spaces, programming and resources across Greater Victoria.
Supporting the arts doesn't always mean spending more. Sometimes it means opening doors, removing barriers and being a better partner.
Rolling & cycling
C- 15% of this topic ROL-01 B
Will you commit to funding and completing at least one 'missing link' in your municipality's Active Transportation Plan during your four-year term? If yes, which one would you prioritize?
Why this grade: Commits to a missing link but will not settle on one until the network data and the municipality's recent bikeway prioritisation work have been reviewed, with an interest in neighbourhood bikeways and quieter secondary streets. The commitment holds, though nothing is named that progress could be measured against.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: My priority would be based on safety, actual network connectivity, usage and value for taxpayers. I am particularly interested in neighbourhood bikeways and quieter secondary streets where they can provide safe connections without unnecessarily reducing capacity on major transportation corridors. Before committing to a specific project, I would review the current network data and Saanich's recently completed bikeway-prioritization work. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 F
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: Rejects physical protection as the standard for new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets. Separation is what makes a busy street usable by people of all ages and abilities, and declining the standard leaves paint in its place exactly where traffic is heaviest.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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 take removal, narrowing or downgrading of existing protected infrastructure case by case. Treating built routes as open questions puts the investment already made back on the table.
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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic ROL-04 A
What is the most important active transportation project in the municipality that you will be focused on progressing? Please provide your reasoning.
Why this grade: Names the Gordon Head Road and Feltham Road corridor from the municipality's plan, connecting neighbourhoods, schools, Lambrick Park, the recreation centre and the existing trails. A specific corridor with the destinations it serves and the design questions set out.
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.
Rishi Sharma's answerI would prioritize completing an important missing connection in Gordon Head, particularly the Gordon Head Road/Feltham Road corridor identified in Saanich's Active Transportation Plan. This could improve connections between neighbourhoods, schools, Lambrick Park and Gordon Head Recreation Centre, existing trails and the broader cycling network.
I would want the final design developed with the community and based on safety, connectivity, traffic impacts and value for taxpayers. I am particularly interested in solutions that make use of neighbourhood bikeways, trails and quieter streets where they can provide safe connections without unnecessarily reducing capacity on major transportation corridors. - 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: Was one of the founders of a neighbourhood initiative pressing for safety improvements on Ash Road after living along it, and organised rather than complained. Genuine advocacy, though it covers one street and general road safety rather than a broader record on walking, rolling, cycling or transit.
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.
Rishi Sharma's answerI have not served on municipal council, but I have a record of advocating for safer transportation in my own community.
I was one of the founders of Fix Ash Road Now, a neighbourhood initiative advocating for improvements to make Ash Road safer for everyone — people walking, cycling, driving and living along the corridor.
Having lived in three different homes on Ash Road, I saw firsthand the concerns around speeding, pedestrian and cycling safety, crossings and how street design affects neighbourhood livability. Rather than simply complain, we organized and advocated for improvements.
That experience continues to shape my approach to transportation. I support safer walking and cycling connections, better sidewalks and crossings, and improved access to transit, schools, parks and recreation. I believe transportation planning works best when we listen to the people who actually use and live along our streets every day.
Walking
A- 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: Modest 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.
Rishi Sharma chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-02 A
Which pedestrian safety problem in your municipality concerns you most, and what is the one change you would commit to in your first term to make walking safer and more attractive than driving for short trips?
Why this grade: Names neighbourhood roads where people do not feel safe walking to schools, parks and transit, and points to the resident led campaign the candidate founded on one corridor. Commits to a neighbourhood safe routes programme working with residents on missing sidewalks, crossings, calming and lighting.
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.
Rishi Sharma's answerThe pedestrian safety issue that concerns me most is unsafe neighbourhood roads where people don't feel comfortable walking to schools, parks, recreation centres or transit stops.
I helped found Fix Ash Road Now, a resident-led effort to make Ash Road safer for everyone—people walking, cycling, driving and living along the corridor. That experience showed me how local knowledge can help identify practical safety improvements before someone gets hurt.
In my first term, I would launch a Neighbourhood Safe Routes Program that works directly with residents to identify and prioritize missing sidewalks, safer crossings, traffic calming and better lighting around schools, parks and transit stops.
If we want more people to choose walking for short trips, we have to make it feel safe, convenient and welcoming—not just tell people to leave the car at home. - 10% of this topic WLK-03 A
Sidewalk construction and maintenance is chronically underfunded across the region. Would you vote to increase the share of your municipality's transportation capital budget dedicated to pedestrian infrastructure?
Why this grade: Votes for more than double the current share. The answer commits the budget rather than the intention.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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 conditional yes, with the condition being that the change is reversible. That is one step from permanent expansion.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Founding a resident led road safety campaign taught you that parents, school staff and neighbours know the dangerous crossings long before they appear in a municipal report, and you would convene them with municipal transportation staff and police to set priorities across speeds, crossings, sidewalks, visibility, traffic calming and accessibility, reporting back on what will be done and when. Closing the loop with parents on timing is what keeps a consultation from feeling like a formality.
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.
Rishi Sharma's answerAs one of the founders of Fix Ash Road Now, I learned how important it is to listen to the people who experience a street every day. Parents, school staff and neighbours often know where the dangerous crossings, speeding problems and missing connections are long before they appear in a municipal report.
I would bring parent groups, school staff, municipal transportation staff and, where appropriate, police together to identify safety concerns around schools and playgrounds and establish priorities for action.
That means looking at speeds, crossings, sidewalks, visibility, traffic calming, accessibility and safe walking and cycling routes to school.
When there is a genuine conflict between convenient traffic flow and the safety of children travelling to school or a playground, children's safety should come first.
We should also report back to parents about what we heard, what will be done and when they can expect it. - 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: Over four years you would make accessibility a measurable part of planning, publicly ranking missing sidewalks, unsafe crossings, damaged surfaces and curb cuts around seniors housing, recreation centres, health services, shopping and transit, working directly with seniors, people with disabilities, advocates and neighbourhoods and publishing timelines, while also pressing for smaller community shuttles and on demand service. Recognizing that reaching the bus stop can itself be the barrier extends the question in the right direction.
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.
Rishi Sharma's answerOver a four-year term, I would make accessibility a measurable part of Saanich's pedestrian infrastructure planning. We should identify and publicly prioritize missing sidewalks, unsafe crossings, damaged or uneven surfaces, curb cuts and other barriers, particularly around seniors' housing, recreation centres, health services, shopping and transit.
I would work directly with seniors, people with disabilities, accessibility advocates and neighbourhoods to identify problem areas, establish priorities and publish timelines so residents can see what is being fixed and when.
But we also need to think beyond sidewalks. I want Saanich to work with BC Transit on innovative options such as smaller community shuttles and on-demand services that reach further into neighbourhoods. For someone who no longer drives or has mobility challenges, getting to the bus stop can itself be the barrier.
Accessibility should mean being able to participate in your community, not simply being able to travel along a sidewalk.
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 safely shouldn't depend on whether you live in an urban neighbourhood or rural Saanich.
I was one of the founders of Fix Ash Road Now, where neighbours came together because we were concerned about speeding and the safety of people walking, cycling and living along the road. That experience taught me that residents often know exactly where the problems are — and we need to listen.
Rural Saanich presents different challenges. Traditional sidewalks may not always be appropriate, but residents still need safe places to walk. We should consider context-sensitive solutions such as safer shoulders, pathways, improved crossings, traffic calming and better connections to parks, schools and transit.
I also want greater attention to seniors and people with accessibility needs. Whether it's Ash Road, a rural road or a busy urban corridor, the goal should be the same: people should be able to move safely through their own community.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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: Would create the regional service. The answer treats shared delivery as worth doing on its own terms.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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").
Rishi Sharma's answer1. Complete a 100-day fiscal and core-services review. Examine spending, procurement, consulting costs, major projects and service delivery to identify sustainable efficiencies and demonstrate value for taxpayers.
2. Strengthen capital and asset management. Understand what Saanich owns, its condition, replacement costs and future debt obligations before committing to major new spending. Improve cost controls and public reporting on capital projects.
3. Grow our tax base responsibly. Support thoughtful, low-impact economic growth that creates jobs, supports local businesses and broadens our commercial tax base, helping reduce pressure on residential taxpayers.
Underlying all three is transparency and listening: residents should understand where their money goes, what they're getting for it, and have a meaningful voice in setting priorities. - 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 )
Rishi Sharma 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: Would guarantee representation in transit governance. Nothing is left conditional.
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.
Rishi Sharma 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:
Why this grade: Strong support for reconciliation
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.
Rishi Sharma 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.
Good governance starts with listening, transparency and accountability. Residents should have meaningful opportunities to influence decisions before they are made and understand how their tax dollars are being spent.
I support shared or regional services where there is a clear business case showing better service, reduced duplication or measurable savings. Regionalization should not be an objective in itself — value for residents should be.
Saanich also needs to prioritize its significant infrastructure and asset-management needs. My proposed 100-day fiscal and core-services review would look for sustainable efficiencies that could be redirected to core priorities. We should also responsibly grow our commercial tax base and pursue senior-government partnerships and funding.
Before asking taxpayers for more, we should demonstrate that we're making the best possible use of what they already provide. - 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.
Meaningful consultation with First Nations should happen early enough to influence decisions, not after plans are largely complete. I believe in respectful government-to-government relationships built through listening, consistency and trust.
Transit planning should recognize First Nations as important partners in our regional transportation network. Better connections can improve access to employment, education, health care and community services.
I support collaboration with First Nations, BC Transit, the CRD and neighbouring municipalities on transit planning and governance, while respecting Indigenous rights and the distinct priorities of each Nation.
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).