How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Krista Loughton'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 Krista Loughton 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 it were legally possible, I would require higher levels of government to fulfill their jurisdictional obligations and provide adequate housing and the appropriate healthcare for people experiencing visible unsheltered homelessness.
Overnight sheltering between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. is only permitted in designated municipal parks because court rulings mandate a conditional exception when adequate indoor shelter space is unavailable. These court decisions carry immense weight, and the legal work done to protect vulnerable people is necessary and important. That said, the courts are ultimately a blunt instrument. They address only the specific question brought before them; they do not suggest better ways forward or provide the policy tools needed to solve a multifaceted humanitarian crisis. Relying on court rulings as a substitute for actual housing and healthcare policy on homelessness creates an unsustainable status quo that leaves everyone worse off.
Tents in parks should never qualify as emergency shelter spaces when indoor facilities are full. Doing so strips vulnerable residents of their dignity, misleads the public into thinking the City is responsible for healthcare and housing, and lets upper-level governments off the hook as municipal parks become Canada's de facto shelter system.
Instead of upper-level governments stepping up to do their jobs, municipalities are left paying for an issue they cannot solve. Municipalities collect 9 cents of every tax dollar in Canada, while the remaining 91 cents are split between the provincial and federal governments. Yet the City of Victoria spent over $14,000 a day in 2025 to manage unsheltered homelessness, totalling $5.2 million for bylaw enforcement, public works cleanups, and park remediation alone. Notably, this excludes the millions spent on police and fire responses.
This situation is devastating for the approximately 200 unsheltered people living outside in the City of Victoria, who face a life expectancy half that of the average resident in British Columbia. It also overtaxes the systems and residents affected by unsheltered homelessness, including first responders (police, fire, and paramedics), bylaw officers, hospital emergency rooms, public facilities like libraries, front-line mental health and outreach workers, and local businesses and residents.
This does not mean the City can simply step back. We must continue to advocate and work every day to support unhoused residents and help move people indoors with proper healthcare support, while keeping public spaces safe and accessible for everyone. However, the City cannot do this alone. Neither the City of Victoria nor any other municipality in the country has the jurisdiction, capacity, or tax base to manage healthcare and housing systems for the unhoused.
Unless municipalities push back and demand that upper-level governments fulfill their obligations, or join together to force them to provide housing or use their own land for emergency sheltering, local governments will remain stuck in a position where they cannot make real upstream or preventive change.
Ending the reliance on municipal parks as Canada's de facto shelter system, and forcing upper-level governments to provide real indoor housing and healthcare solutions, is the number one change I would make, because this unsustainable status quo hurts our entire community. - 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.
Krista Loughton's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $1,000,000 Transit $1,000,000 Walking Infrastructure $1,000,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $0 Roadway Infrastructure $1,000,000 Policing $0 Fire & Emergency Services $0 Parks & Recreation $1,000,000 Arts & Culture $1,000,000 Climate Action & Environment $2,000,000 Unhoused Resident Services $1,000,000 Community-Based Clinics $1,000,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
Community safety is a regional issue, and our police and fire services need to reflect that. Victoria is home to 100,000 people, but our downtown core supports a regional population of 450,000. Spreading these safety costs fairly across the region is the only way to build a system that works for the long term.
Healthcare access
What Krista Loughton 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.
Victoria has several hospitals alongside a mix of public and private healthcare services. While the growth of Urgent Care Centres improves access to doctors, we should also explore alternative care models that integrate a wider range of healthcare providers and reduce overall reliance on physicians.
For example, the Cool Aid Community Health Centre uses an integrated team model where primary care is shared across nurses, nurse practitioners, and support staff rather than depending solely on doctors. This approach expands patient capacity and improves health outcomes. We should review this model to see how it can be adapted or supported across other local facilities.
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 advocate for all four fare measures on the list: 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. Every option offered is taken up, and no cheaper subset is preferred to the whole.
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.
Krista Loughton chose 4 of 6 options (up to 4 allowed) - 30% of this topic TRN-02 A
Do you support removing general on-street parking (excluding accessible parking spaces) from frequent transit corridors and main arterial streets in your municipality, and reallocating that space to bus lanes, loading zones, and walking and cycling infrastructure?
Why this grade: Commits to the whole corridor version of reallocating street parking on frequent transit routes and main arterials. No condition is attached about timing or about which projects would qualify. Note: Victoria is home to the highest number of FTN corridors of any municipality in the region, chief among them the Douglas Corridor which will be seeing substantial redevelopment and transit priority in the coming years. This question is of critical importance to Victoria, and the CRD at large with respect to tranist priority.
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.
Krista Loughton 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: Would move at speed on bus priority along frequent routes, including at the cost of a lane of general traffic. Nothing is held back from the toolkit, including the measure the question turns on. Note: Victoria is home to the highest number of FTN corridors of any municipality in the region, chief among them the Douglas Corridor which will be seeing substantial redevelopment and transit priority in the coming years. This question is of critical importance to Victoria, and the CRD at large with respect to tranist priority.
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.
Krista Loughton 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. 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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 3 options - 10% of this topic TRN-05 B
Do you support building new bus-only and bike-only connections through parks, golf courses or public land when doing so would substantially shorten transit and cycling trips?
Why this grade: Supports new connections for buses and bicycles through parks, golf courses and public land, provided no mature trees are lost in building them. Because the limit is specific and verifiable, it qualifies the yes without emptying it.
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.
Krista Loughton 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.
While answering these questions, I am looking 20-plus years down the road. As global temperatures rise, the policies we create today must deliver real climate action for the next generation and beyond.
At the same time, expanding transit makes life more affordable by cutting the need for every household to own a car.
Housing
A- 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
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 3 options - HFL-06 6 / 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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 6 options - HFL-07 3 / 3
A housing proposal has been reviewed by staff and they recommend approval. It requires rezoning because the existing zoning has not been updated. If it faces substantial neighbourhood opposition, how would you generally vote?
How this question is graded
3 points for a), 0 otherwise. Housing approval rules must be predictable and clear for those building housing, or it will lead to scarcity. If municipal planning staff have adequately considered objections to a project and still recommend approval it should be approved. If unanticipated issues are raised, policies should be clarified to ensure staff can work with applicants on future projects.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton chose 7 of 9 options (up to 7 allowed) - HFL-11 6 / 6
The BC government set a housing target for Victoria at 4,902 homes over five years, which represents 75% of the estimated housing need for that period. Regardless of provincial requirements or penalties, do you believe the city should strive to build:
How this question is graded
6 points for too low, 1 for about right, 0 for too high. By definition, the provincial housing targets, being set as only 75% of estimated housing need is too low of a target to meet local housing needs.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton chose 2 of 6 options - HFL-10 7 / 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.
Krista Loughton's answerSober recovery housing, like Johnson Manor in Victoria, needs its own distinct classification in our housing policy. The CRD is facing a severe shortage of these facilities, yet they are vital for helping people maintain their sobriety after leaving treatment.
First Year Commitments
*Advocate for at least one new sober recovery housing facility in the region.
*Cut approval and permitting delays for all housing types through Victoria’s Planning and Development Department.
*Work directly with non-profit housing providers to help meet their operational needs.
*Push the provincial government to bring back the Community Housing Fund.
*Press Build Canada Homes to prioritize federal housing dollars for the City of Victoria.
Four-Year Term Commitments
*Hit all municipal and provincial housing targets to ensure Victoria builds the homes our growing community needs.
*Advocate for at least four new sober recovery housing facilities across the region to close this critical gap in our local healthcare and housing systems.
*Advocate for non-market affordable housing projects through the Capital Region Housing Corporation (CRHC) if elected to the CRD Board.
*Advocate that all new purpose-built rentals use the Affordable Housing Revitalization Tax Exemption to lock in 10% of units at 30% of median income, bringing one-bedroom rents down to around $1,400 a month compared to the $2,100 market rate.
*Partner with non-profits, faith organizations, and government agencies to open up underutilized land for non-market housing.
*Mandate pre-approved architectural designs for missing-middle housing like townhomes and multiplexes to speed up permits, get homes built faster, and make them compatible within residential neighbourhoods.
30% of this topic Incumbent record 29 / 29What Krista Loughton did about housing during their current term, scored by Homes for Living. This is not a questionnaire answer: no candidate was asked it.
Why this score: 100%
Scored from Homes for Living's vote tracker.
Climate
A- 8% of this topic CLI-01 A
Would you support ending fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship on property, media and events controlled by your municipality, to the extent the law allows? And would you advocate for the same at the Victoria Regional Transit Commission for BC Transit vehicles and shelters?
Why this grade: Would end fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship outright and take the argument further. Nothing is held back for later.
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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Krista Loughton 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: Climate first, with everything else measured by it. The answer commits to more than spending.
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.
Krista Loughton 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: Will not meet fossil fuel lobbyists at all. That is the top of the scale on this question.
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.
Krista Loughton 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: An unreserved yes to joining. The candidate takes on the risk of the action rather than capping it.
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.
Krista Loughton 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: Supports the ban. Expansion is covered as well as new sites, and the candidate accepts both.
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.
Krista Loughton 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 complete selection. Breadth is matched by willingness to spend, which is what this question tests.
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.
Krista Loughton 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: A clear yes. Fossil fuel powered equipment would be phased out of use.
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.
Krista Loughton 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: Takes the outright opposition option. No site would be approved on any basis.
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.
Krista Loughton 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.
Krista Loughton's answerRising temperatures mean we need to act now to protect our community.
To tackle extreme heat, we must meet our 40% tree canopy target, add more municipal misting stations, and protect vulnerable residents without air conditioning or heat pumps. That work starts with working towards a 26°C maximum indoor temperature cap, starting with multi-family apartment buildings hit hardest during the 2021 Heat Dome.
We also need to make walking and cycling safer, cut red tape for active transportation, and work toward free, efficient transit across the region. - 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.
Krista Loughton's answerProtecting local wildlife means connecting fragmented green spaces so animals and pollinators can move safely across our region.
We need to protect key natural areas and build wildlife corridors along major routes like the Galloping Goose, Lochside, and E&N trails. At the same time, regional cleanup efforts like the Bowker Creek project show how Victoria, Saanich, and Oak Bay can work together to restore waterways from headwaters to the ocean.
In our city neighbourhoods, we can build natural stepping stones that connect parks like Beacon Hill and PKOLS. That means planting native trees like Garry Oaks and Douglas Firs to hit our 40% canopy target, especially in paved areas that get the hottest. It also means using rain gardens along streets and requiring native plants and green roofs on new developments. Simple policy changes like these give local wildlife the food, shelter, and pathways they need to survive. - 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.
Krista Loughton's answerNew housing is our chance to prepare Victoria for a changing climate.
Building apartments and shops along major transit routes puts everyday needs within walking distance. When people can easily walk, roll, or take a bus, they don't need to rely on a car. That cuts traffic, lowers carbon emissions, and keeps our neighbourhoods affordable.
Smart design also makes new buildings safer and greener. Requiring electric heat pumps in new builds gives residents efficient heating in winter and essential cooling during extreme heat waves. At the same time, saving mature native trees on build sites, planting new ones to hit our canopy targets, and making sure new homes are wired for clean energy will keep Victoria 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.
Krista Loughton 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.
Victoria and the CRD face massive pressures, from affordable housing and social equity to aging infrastructure. Climate action must be our top priority because rising temperatures and severe weather will only worsen those problems.
Unpredictable weather strains emergency services, stresses our water supply, and hits vulnerable residents the hardest. Unchecked climate impacts multiply our social and economic pressures, and bold climate action is needed to address this.
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: Explicitly identifies arts and culture as a core part of Victoria's economy and proposes investment, venue support, regulatory reform and integration into long-term planning and the nighttime economy.
How this question is graded
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Victoria needs to actively invest in and protect arts and culture as a core part of our economy and community. Local governments need to act as key partners by funding creative spaces, live venues, and public art, knowing these investments support small businesses, attract talent, and keep money circulating in our local economy.
The City also has a direct role in supporting the night-time economy. By updating zoning and policies to back live music, theatres, night markets, and late-night events, we can keep our streets safe, active, and economically strong after standard business hours.
Embedding arts and culture into our long-term planning ensures that as Victoria grows and adds density, we don't lose our unique character, strong neighbourhood connections, or vibrant year-round energy. - 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 to a first-year cultural-space review and increased infrastructure funding, with a four-year target for an implemented strategy, protections, expanded funding, land-use changes and nighttime-economy integration.
How this question is graded
Krista Loughton's answerIn my first year, I will initiate or support a full review of Victoria’s cultural spaces to identify which arts venues are at risk of closing or need updates, renovations, and accessibility upgrades. I will also support increased funding for the Cultural Infrastructure Grant Program.
By the end of my four-year term, we will have a fully working Cultural Space Strategy up and running. This plan will put real protections in place, offer reliable city funding through expanded grants, and update local land-use rules so we can protect, fix up, and build affordable, long-term space for artists across Victoria. On top of that, I will ensure the nighttime economy is officially integrated into our City's overall economic plan before my term is up. - 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 priority-space identification, long-term affordability/stability tools and a municipal cultural-space strategy, providing meaningful implementation mechanisms with a strong policy focus.
How this question is graded
Krista Loughton 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
Krista Loughton 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 existing infrastructure funding, regional funding, municipal leverage funding, nonprofit acquisition and resource reallocation, providing multiple consequential mechanisms for cultural-space security.
How this question is graded
Krista Loughton 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
Krista Loughton 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: Commits to requiring replacement cultural space or equivalent community benefit as part of redevelopment.
How this question is graded
Krista Loughton 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, combining cultural-space expansion with protection of existing capacity.
How this question is graded
Krista Loughton 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.
If the post-pandemic years taught us anything, it’s that nothing brings people together like celebrating our culture, our local spaces, and each other. Arts and culture are at the heart of what makes Victoria and the CRD feel like a real community.
Over the last four years, we’ve seen neighborhoods come alive through local festivals, public events, and community venues. A great example is the award-winning OUR DWTN initiative, which brought pop-up events, public art, and gatherings right to the core of our city. By funding accessible arts and culture for everyone, we build civic pride, support local businesses, and create a happier, more connected city.
Rolling & cycling
A- 15% of this topic ROL-01 A
Will you commit to funding and completing at least one 'missing link' in your municipality's Active Transportation Plan during your four-year term? If yes, which one would you prioritize?
Why this grade: Commits to connecting the existing protected bike and roll lanes downtown through to the Dallas Road infrastructure. A named gap between two pieces already built.
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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: I would prioritize the existing protected bike and roll lanes to connect downtown to the Dallas Road infrastructure. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 B
Will you commit (or continue to commit) to physical protection (not paint alone) as the standard for all new and upgraded cycling infrastructure on busy streets in your municipality?
Why this grade: Would hold physical protection as the standard except where it is physically impossible. The exception is the weakness, because what gets called impossible is usually a matter of budget and of how far alternatives are pursued.
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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 5 options - 15% of this topic ROL-03 A
Will you oppose efforts (current and future) to remove, narrow or downgrade existing protected bike lanes and other all-ages-and-abilities (AAA) cycling infrastructure in your municipality during your term?
Why this grade: Will oppose removal, narrowing or downgrading of existing protected bike lanes and all ages and abilities infrastructure. No conditions attached.
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.
Krista Loughton 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 regional connections and the last mile gap as the priority, linking the city's lanes to Saanich, Oak Bay and Esquimalt and to the Galloping Goose and Lochside trails. The reasoning is that a safe route ending at a municipal boundary or a transit stop is where people give up on the trip.
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.
Krista Loughton's answerThe most important active transportation project I will focus on is fixing our regional connections and solving the "last-mile" gap. That means seamlessly linking Victoria's bike lanes with Saanich, Oak Bay, Esquimalt, and major routes like the Galloping Goose and Lochside trails.
Active transit breaks down when a safe lane suddenly ends at a city border, or when you step off a bus and have no easy way to finish the last few blocks to your destination. If we want people to drive less, getting from a transit hub or a neighbouring municipality into downtown Victoria needs to feel safe and connected the whole way.
Victoria has built a solid local grid, but we need to finish the job. Connecting our streets directly to regional trails, transit hubs, and neighbourhood spots closes that last mile and makes cycling a real option for everyday commuters. Fixing these cross-border gaps cuts traffic, lowers emissions, and makes getting around the region safer and easier for everyone. - 35% of this topic ROL-05 A
If you have previously served in local government, what did you do to advance walking, rolling, cycling or transit? If you have not, what in your record outside of council shows the same commitment?
Why this grade: Supported completing the bike lane and active transportation network across the city, introduced the electric bike rental programme and voted for lower speed limits, alongside support for rapid transit, free transit for youth and bike valet. Votes cast and programmes delivered while in office.
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.
Krista Loughton's answerI supported completing the bike lane and active transportation network across the city, as well as introducing the e-bike rental program. I also voted for changes to city speed limits to make streets safer for pedestrians, cyclists, commuters, people with disabilities, and drivers. On top of that, I support rapid transit, free transit for youth, and bike valet to better connect our community.
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.
Victoria has taken on the challenge of becoming Canada's most bikeable and accessible city, and I’m proud of the work we’ve done to advance that network. Creating safe, affordable, and accessible alternatives to driving prepares us for a warming climate, improves health, and makes our streets and communities safer for all modes of transportation.
Walking
A- 10% of this topic WLK-01 —
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: Supports 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.
Krista Loughton 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 injuries at uncontrolled intersections and long gaps between crossings, and commits to better lighting, speed readers and cameras, and more controlled crossings where the gaps are longest. Also commits to holding crossings to the municipality's accessibility standards.
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.
Krista Loughton's answerToo many pedestrian injuries still occur due to vehicle interactions, especially at uncontrolled intersections or where high-traffic areas lack crosswalks. I’d commit to improving lighting, installing speed readers and cameras, and adding more controlled crosswalks in high-traffic areas with long gaps between crosswalks.
All of our crosswalks and intersections should meet the highest standards for accessibility and safety for seniors, children, and people with disabilities; I would ask staff to keep working toward implementing our accessibility standards. - 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: Supports doubling the pedestrian share of capital spending at least. Nothing is attached to the commitment.
How this question is graded
Yes, a substantial increase, meaning more than double what is currently spent = A. Yes, a modest increase, meaning more but less than double = B, because that is a real commitment with a ceiling on it. No, the current amount is sufficient = F, because the question is about money for infrastructure, which is the funding side of the split. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-04 A
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
Why this grade: Supports making pedestrian priority streets permanent. The answer accepts the political cost of not reversing them.
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.
Krista Loughton 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 would convene targeted consultations with the school districts and parent advisory councils to identify the hazards around schools and playgrounds, then advocate dedicated funding for traffic calming, better crosswalks and road safety education, alongside automated speed cameras and police presence at peak drop off and pick up hours. Attaching dedicated funding to whatever those consultations turn up is what carries a concern through to a built improvement.
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.
Krista Loughton's answerAs both a city councillor and regional director, my priority would be to ensure our children can travel safely through our neighbourhoods. I would work directly with city staff and the regional transportation committee to convene targeted consultations with local school districts and Parent Advisory Councils (PACs). By engaging families directly, we can identify specific safety hazards around our schools and playgrounds and deploy practical, high-impact solutions.
To address these risks, I will advocate for dedicated funding toward traffic-calming infrastructure, better crosswalks, and road safety education programs for students, parents, and school staff. Additionally, I will support modern enforcement measures, including automated speed camera technology and increased police presence during peak drop-off and pick-up hours, to slow down drivers and keep school zones safe. - 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 remove physical barriers and calm traffic on high risk corridors with speed reader boards, better lighting, controlled crossings, raised crosswalks and tighter turning radii, and bring every crossing to a high accessibility standard with low slope curb ramps, tactile warning paving, extended crossing times, audible and visual signals and refuge islands, opening the term with a council member motion and a staff report carrying deliverable dates. Starting with a motion that obliges staff to report back with dates is a practical way to make the timeline real.
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.
Krista Loughton's answerEnsuring our streets are safe and accessible for seniors and people with disabilities is a top priority for the city and region. I am committed to upgrading our pedestrian infrastructure by removing physical barriers, improving visibility, and calming traffic along high-risk corridors.
To address safety on busy streets, I will advocate for speed reader boards, improved street lighting, and new controlled crosswalks where traffic volumes are high and gaps between current crossings are too wide. Physical traffic-calming measures, including raised crosswalks and tighter turning radii, will slow drivers down and create safer crossing conditions for vulnerable pedestrians.
I will also direct staff to ensure every crosswalk and intersection meets the highest accessibility standards. This means installing low-slope curb ramps, tactile warning paving, extended crossing times, and accessible pedestrian signals with audible and visual cues. On wider streets, adding pedestrian refuge islands will provide safe stopping points, helping keep our community safe and navigable for everyone.
This work would begin with a Council Member Motion at the start of next term, and staff would provide a report with deliverable timelines.
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.
Victoria is one of Canada’s most walkable cities, and making it safer and easier to get around on foot benefits everyone. Pedestrian access and safety must remain central to city and regional planning. That means improving connections to local transit, expanding access to shared options like e-bikes, and making it simpler for people to travel between neighbourhoods without relying on a car.
It also means using smart zoning and development to bring everyday needs closer to home. I will continue supporting neighbourhood hubs across the city and region so residents can easily walk to local businesses, services, recreation, and amenities.
Governance
A- 17% of this topic GOV-01 A
Do you support expanding shared or regional delivery of municipal services in the Capital Region?
How this question is graded
Yes/Partly = A, Unsure = C, No = F.
Krista Loughton 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: Supports pooling design, construction and maintenance regionally. No precondition is set.
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.
Krista Loughton 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").
Krista Loughton's answer1. Victoria’s 100,000 residents shouldn't pay the full bill for police, fire, and emergency services that support 450,000 people across Greater Victoria. I will push for shared regional funding so neighbouring municipalities pay their fair share for the public safety infrastructure their residents use every day.
2. Different planning rules across 13 municipalities delay housing and drive up costs. I will work to align permit processes, zoning rules, and building standards across the region. Cutting red tape and using pre-approved housing designs will lower construction costs, speed up building, and bring in new tax revenue sooner.
3. Running 13 separate municipal systems for services that cross borders wastes taxpayer money. I will push to combine shared services, starting with transit planning, emergency response, and specialized policing. Joining these operations cuts duplicate management costs and puts more money into direct service. - 17% of this topic GOV-04 A
Do you commit to eliminating mandatory parking minimums for all land uses in your municipality by 2030?
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No/Decline = F. Parking minimums are pseudoscience that should be eliminated from city codes everywhere, and have been eliminated in Vancouver, Edmonton, Regina, Ottawa, and others across North America without any negative consequences (archive.strongtowns.org )
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-01 A
Do you support ensuring that local First Nations are represented in transit governance, such as on the Victoria Regional Transit Commission and the CRD Transportation Commission?
Why this grade: Supports including local First Nations in the governing bodies. The commitment is plainly given.
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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 B
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
Why this grade: Qualified 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.
Krista Loughton chose 1 of 7 optionsReconciliation is about real partnership, not just transactional consultation. True engagement means working together from day one, listening to Indigenous priorities, and making decisions side by side. Respecting rights and building genuine trust grounded in reciprocity is the only way to create local projects that succeed for everyone.
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.
Running 13 separate municipal systems to solve regional problems wastes taxpayer money and slows down work on roads, housing, and public projects. Good governance means spending money wisely, cutting duplicate administration, and making decisions transparently.
Infrastructure costs must be shared fairly. Victoria taxpayers currently pay for roads, parks, and transit hubs used by people from across the region. Funding for major projects and ongoing maintenance needs to be split based on who actually uses them.
Combining back-office work like bulk equipment buying, IT systems, and emergency logistics across municipalities saves money. I will push for financial scrutiny on all regional spending and make sure Victoria’s interests come first. - 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.
First Nations and urban Indigenous residents must be full, equal partners in regional decision making. Right now, many reserve and band lands sit far from doctor's offices, grocery stores, and community spaces. When you combine that isolation with lower average incomes and fewer people with cars, safe and affordable public transit becomes essential for both reserve communities and urban Indigenous families. Putting Indigenous needs at the center of transit planning will close these service gaps and build a better, more connected system for our whole 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).