How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Marianne Alto'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 Marianne Alto 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 build a new central library downtown. A library is everyone’s living room, and we need reliable accessible, public spaces and services to support our residents. A library is a refuge, a learning centre, a social space - it’s a welcoming place where people can feel safe to be themselves. - 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.
Marianne Alto's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $3,000,000 Transit $1,000,000 Walking Infrastructure $500,000 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $250,000 Roadway Infrastructure $0 Policing $750,000 Fire & Emergency Services $750,000 Parks & Recreation $500,000 Arts & Culture $250,000 Climate Action & Environment $0 Unhoused Resident Services $2,000,000 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.
Victoria is the best city in BC, one of the best cities in the world. In a time of heightened polarization and chaos, it is more important than ever to work together to solve challenges as a city and as a region. Victoria has incredible strengths – our spectacular environment, amazing unique local businesses, and people who are informed, creative, hardworking and committed to the city. If we can align those strengths with our friends around the region, we have the tools and resources to make life more affordable, safe, and welcoming in all our neighbourhoods. I’m excited about the opportunity to keep doing the work that makes our city excellent, and help facilitate using those tools for the region, too.
Healthcare access
What Marianne Alto 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.
In the previous question, allowing for only one answer assumes there is only one answer, and thus prevents the city from seizing every opportunity, in multiple models, to facilitate and drive new medical professionals’ practices in Victoria. We can’t limit ourselves to just one way, there are multiple paths to reward and support better health professionals’ relocation and operation in the city. We should explore and use them all. One example – the City of Victoria facilitated the establishment of a Victoria Primary Care Network clinic in a building that includes emergency response, health care and residential units – this is the kind of innovation that is needed.
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: Supports each fare measure put forward, covering free travel for under 19s, cheaper fares for seniors, cheaper fares for people on income or disability assistance and a lower cost regional monthly pass. The whole slate is endorsed, which is as far as this question can be answered.
How this question is graded
A count of ticks, because no option here is cheaper than the others in the way CLI-06's are. Four or more = A. Three = B. Two = C. One = C-. None = F. The rows graded before this rubric was written are not perfectly consistent with it at three and two ticks; they were left as typed and the majority letter was taken. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Marianne Alto 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: Supports clearing general street parking from frequent transit corridors and main arterials, but only during peak hours. The limit is specific enough to hold a council to, while still falling short of the whole corridor. 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.
Marianne Alto 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 moving quickly on transit priority along frequent corridors, including where that costs kerbside parking or a lane of general traffic. Support is unqualified rather than limited to the easier measures. 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.
Marianne Alto 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: Agrees that transportation across the region should sit with a single authority. It is the strongest response the question offers.
How this question is graded
Yes = A, No = C-. A No is C- rather than F because this asks who should decide, not what should be built or funded, which puts it on the governance side of the CLI-03 split. Three earlier rows typed F and two typed C-; the governance rule was followed over the count. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Marianne Alto 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 building new connections for buses and bicycles alone through parks, golf courses and public land where they would shorten trips substantially. Support is given without reservation.
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.
Marianne Alto 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.
In addition to the notes above, some of which has already been undertaken by Victoria, my transportation platform also includes conducting a sidewalk review to ensure that our walkable infrastructure is safe and accessible for all, installing more lit crosswalks in areas with high rates of accidents, and creating more bus priority lanes and HOV lanes along Douglas Street.
Housing
B- HFL-01 5 / 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
Marianne Alto chose 5 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-02 7 / 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.
Marianne Alto chose 7 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - HFL-03 2 / 6
Do you think your municipality should have target approval times for multifamily housing?
How this question is graded
6 points for 30/180 days, prorated for longer timelines. Housing delayed is housing denied. Long delays drive us costs for housing, increase the chance that they will be cancelled, and indicate a lack of clear published guidelines. A time limit on decisions prioritizes housing action and reforms.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-08 1 / 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto chose 5 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto's answerWe’ve seen good progress on housing in Victoria over my first term as mayor - we’ve upzoned the city, removed parking minimums, approved new renter protection policies, and approved record numbers of housing. We’re starting to see results, and rental prices have gone down in Victoria – but there is more work to do. After one year, I want to have created a renter’s advisory group through the Mayor’s office, have new established targets for housing permit timelines, extended our current development permit holiday, and have hosted new tenant-rights workshops. At the end of the term, I want to see rental prices decreased, the number and percentage of affordable and below market housing increase, and fewer renovictions, and we’ll do this by eliminating development fees for co-ops and non-market housing, improving tenant protection policies, and initiating new grants to support affordable, accessible, and family housing.
30% of this topic Incumbent record 28 / 29What Marianne Alto 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
B- 8% of this topic CLI-01 B
Would you support ending fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship on property, media and events controlled by your municipality, to the extent the law allows? And would you advocate for the same at the Victoria Regional Transit Commission for BC Transit vehicles and shelters?
Why this grade: Would clear the advertising and argue for the same on buses and shelters, while keeping sponsorship arrangements. The gap on sponsorship is what separates this from the top grade.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-02 C-
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: Handled where it fits the budget. The answer makes climate contingent rather than planned.
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.
Marianne Alto 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: Pledges not to take those meetings. The undertaking is stated without exception, which earns the top grade.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 3 options - 8% of this topic CLI-04 —
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: Did not take a position on joining the legal action, while answering the rest of the climate section in full and at strength. The row is set aside rather than counted as opposition.
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.
Marianne Alto 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 prohibiting new and expanded gas stations. The commitment is unconditional.
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.
Marianne Alto 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: Selects all five measures. The answer commits the budget as well as the bylaw.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 5 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - 8% of this topic CLI-07 A
Are you supportive of phasing out fossil fuel powered tools such as leaf blowers (following the lead of Oak Bay and other municipalities across the country)?
Why this grade: Supports the phase out. The answer follows a path other councils have already taken.
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.
Marianne Alto 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 new data centres. There is no version of a proposal the answer would let through.
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.
Marianne Alto 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.
Marianne Alto's answerClimate risks facing Victoria include extreme heat, cold, and other weather conditions, air quality issues and challenges with wildfire and smoke, degraded and damaged coastline and precarious ecosystems, damage to our water supply, etc. To support climate adaptation and resilience, I support active transportation initiatives, expansions of affordable, accessible transit while reducing reliance on cars, building climate resilience by protecting and promoting parks and urban green spaces, supporting access to gardens, and keeping public spaces open for shelter during extreme weather events. I also support building neighbourhood resiliency by enabling communities and agency partners to build emergency plans, kits, and resources. I will continue to work to reduce waste and plastic consumption, increase access to infrastructure to support electrification and green industry, and environmentally conscious building practices. I would explore an incentive program to encourage private property owners to plant trees and other climate resilience features. - 8% of this topic CLI-10 B
Ensuring ecosystem connectivity is an important adaptation strategy for climate change. How do you plan to maintain or increase ecosystem features across the urban landscape?
Why this grade: Clearly supports the concept of ecosystem connectivity but does not provide specifics about how protection and improvement would take shape in their local context.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = says what connectivity is and why it matters, with local examples, usually tied to data, a programme already running or the official community plan. B = practical examples with no local detail, or no link back to connectivity. C = general support with no project named, or an answer broad enough to fit any question. C- = agrees with the idea and offers nothing to do about it, or answers about something tangential. F is not used.
Marianne Alto's answerVictoria has found a decent balance between development and nature. The city’s blue-green networks are an integrated planning framework supporting a climate-forward, resilient urban ecosystem. The next steps in this vision are linear parkways connecting park-like public spaces that integrate natural assets with active, sustainable transportation. I will advance this work, and continue to protect park and green spaces across our city, moving forward on developing a downtown park, increasing tree planting in public parks and boulevards, and emphasizing the need for more green public spaces. - 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.
Marianne Alto's answerYes. Development gives us the opportunity to transition outdated infrastructure to new and improved infrastructure that better reflects climate response and resilience. For example, modular housing can be environmentally superior, we can use development to switch buildings to heat pumps or low-energy appliances, and we can construct buildings that are better adapted to changing climates. - 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.
Marianne Alto 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.
In a second term as mayor, I would like to the see the CRD take a bigger role in addressing regional climate emissions and concerns, including actions like further electrifying vehicle fleets. If I am elected for another term, I will work with the Youth Climate Corps to pursue a green jobs program for youth, which would support skills development, worker mobilization, climate, and youth engagement – paths to create climate-savvy future residents.
Arts
B- 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: Identifies multiple concrete municipal roles—local contracts, event support, venue support, funding, facilities and public opportunities—and connects arts to employment, tourism, livability and wellbeing.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Local governments should support artists through direct local contracts to employ local artists. They should facilitate and support events, and opportunities to highlight local arts. Where possible, they should support venues to host arts and artists. They can also fund arts programs, artists, facilities, and opportunities. Arts have a major role in employment, as well as livability and wellbeing. They are also important parts of our tourism economy, and generate social belonging. - 16.67% of this topic ART-02 2 / 3
If elected, what specific action will you commit to in your first year to strengthen your municipality's arts and cultural sector, and what measurable outcome should residents expect by the end of your four-year term?
Why this score: Commits to establishing a one-stop event hub (focused on navigating city processes) in year one, this is primarily a moderate administrative/operational improved acess, and identifies several four-year growth outcomes, but the desired changes are not expressed through sufficiently specific measurable targets or methods, tools, interventions. Support is indicated but only support for 'general' growth.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto's answerIf re-elected, I will establish a one-stop event-hub to support local artists, organizations, and non-profits navigate city processes and policies to host events in the region. This will make it easier for artists to engage with audiences and community, and support the arts sector to grow. At the end of the four-year term, I want to see growth in the arts industry as part of the economy, and growth in the number and variety of arts events hosted in the city, the number of artists that call Victoria home, and the availability of arts and maker spaces in the City. To accomplish this, I would prioritize local art in public spaces, and support programs to help the arts and artists grow in our city. - 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 cultural-space inventory, nonprofit partnerships for permanent assets, and zoning/permitting/regulatory review, providing a substantive implementation framework.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 3 of 11 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-04 3 / 3
Arts organizations and event producers identify permitting, zoning and regulatory requirements as barriers to cultural activity. What would you commit to? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Selects all available reforms, including simplified events, zoning review and disproportionate-cost review.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 8 of 10 options (up to 8 allowed) - 16.67% of this topic ART-05 3 / 3
If preserving and securing long-term cultural space requires additional municipal support, which approaches would you support? Select up to five.
Why this score: Combines development/amenity contributions, municipal resource reallocation and cultural land trusts with regional funding and leases, creating multiple structural interventions.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 5 of 16 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-06 0 / 3
Municipal budgets require difficult choices. Would you support maintaining arts and culture investment alongside other core municipal services?
Why this score: Declines to answer the question of whether arts investment should be maintained alongside core municipal services.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-07 3 / 3
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
Why this score: Explicitly requires replacement cultural space or equivalent community benefit.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 16.67% of this topic ART-08 3 / 3
Would you support municipal incentives to encourage private property owners and developers to provide affordable community & cultural space for nonprofits? Select all that apply.
Why this score: Selects a development-space requirement/incentive, a consequential supply mechanism, alongside municipal fee relief and support of existing eligible nonprofit-owned space tax relief, offering some expansion tactics, though not the strongest combination.
How this question is graded
Marianne Alto chose 3 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.
For the past four years, I’ve Chaired the CRD’s Arts Commission and the CRD Performing Arts Facilities Select Committee, the latter of which created the region’s first arts facilities service which will facilitate regional planning, development and funding for significant performing spaces. It has been an honour to support the arts, engage with artists, and champion arts and culture community growth. The CRD has a bigger role to play in supporting arts, and I will continue to advocate for more support, planning, and resources for the arts at the CRD.
Rolling & cycling
A- 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 making sure the city's connections to neighbouring routes line up and can be ridden safely, prioritising the areas near the boundary in Vic West, Burnside Gorge and Jubilee. Areas are named rather than a link, so the commitment covers a stretch of work rather than one project to finish.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Ensuring that the connections from Victoria to adjacent municipal active transportation routes are aligned, make sense, and can be safely navigated. I would prioritize areas around our border, particularly in Vic West, Burnside Gorge, and Jubilee, to name a few. - 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: Backs physical protection on busy streets except where it is physically impossible. A testable exception, which keeps the answer just below an unconditional yes.
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.
Marianne Alto 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: Commits to opposing efforts to remove, narrow or weaken protected lanes and all ages and abilities routes already built. No conditions.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic ROL-04 B
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: Argues the city's cycling network is close to completing its original plan and that the focus should now shift to accessibility and to the other ways people move on wheels and on foot. A reasoned change of priority, but no project is named.
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.
Marianne Alto's answerThe city’s cycling network is nearing completion of the initial plan, it’s now time to focus on other accessibility innovations, including how we move on foot and on all other kinds of wheels. - 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: Across every term on council, supported the plans and policies advancing walking, rolling, cycling, transit expansion and accessibility, including the bike valet and youth bus passes. A full record of votes, described in general terms but anchored by named programmes.
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.
Marianne Alto's answerIn all my terms on Victoria City Council, I have supported every plan and policy advancing walking, rolling, cycling enhancements, transit expansion, accessibility improvements, and other transportation innovations. This includes the bike valet, youth bus passes, and more. I will continue to explore such actions.
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.
As technology creates new and clever ways to move on wheels, local government policies and practises need to adapt and evolve to respond and enable such uses. Ensuring maximum ways to move about our increasingly dense city will mean our current and future residents have – and are part of – the transportation solutions we all need to be active and stay healthy.
Walking
A- 10% of this topic WLK-01 A
Municipalities, the CRD and the Province have all adopted targets to shift trips away from driving. Do you support meeting your municipality's adopted mode-shift targets, and would you vote for the necessary street-space and budgetary changes?
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-02 B
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 two problems, sidewalks that are too narrow to be accessible and crossing times that are too short at major intersections. The platform commitment is to an accessibility review, which identifies the work rather than delivering it.
How this question is graded
Free text, graded by a person against the two things the question asks for: a named local problem, and one change committed to in a first term. A = both, with the change specific enough to be delivered and usually tied to funding, a named corridor or an existing plan. B = the problem is named and the response is concrete but soft, narrow, or a review rather than a change. C = a problem is named and nothing is committed to, or the framing of the question is declined. C- = no local problem is settled on, or the answer is a general gesture. F = nothing responsive is offered. The bands come from the 31 rows graded before 2026-09-20 and were applied to the remaining 51 on that date. Decline to answer is F where nothing explains it, and the Grade is left blank where the candidate explained the decline in the topic's comment box or answered the rest of the topic solidly. Unsure is left blank. A blank Grade drops the row out of the category rollup entirely; N/A is reserved for a question that does not apply to a candidate and never means ungraded.
Marianne Alto's answerThere are two: wider, more accessible sidewalks, and longer pedestrian crossing times for major intersections. I have committed in my platform to do a sidewalk accessibility review to identify areas that need improvement, so our walking routes are safe and accessible for all of our community members. - 10% of this topic WLK-03 B
Sidewalk construction and maintenance is chronically underfunded across the region. Would you vote to increase the share of your municipality's transportation capital budget dedicated to pedestrian infrastructure?
Why this grade: Backs a limited increase. The answer chooses more spending over the status quo.
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.
Marianne Alto 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: Supports closures that can be undone. Clear support with a built in limit.
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.
Marianne Alto 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 bring students, parent advisory councils, school district staff and the city's transportation staff into collaborative planning informed by data, covering walking routes, street crossings and the paths to schools from nearby neighbourhoods, complementing the active transportation routes already built, and you would convene those groups yourself. Connecting school routes to the network that already exists avoids building safe stretches that end at an unsafe one.
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.
Marianne Alto's answerStudents, PACs, school district staff and the City’s transportation staff can join in collaborative planning based on data to inform where and what changes should be made to walking routes, street crossings, and paths to schools from nearby neighbourhoods. These should complement the active transportation routes already constructed between neighbourhoods. It is the responsibility of the police to enforce speeding, but as mayor, I would work to bring all stakeholders together to identify needs and concerns. - 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 commit to a sidewalk accessibility review and would work with seniors organizations, community groups, family care providers, city engineering and residents to evaluate what people actually experience and plan around it, with the work carried in regular active transportation planning and supported by budget decisions across a four year plan. Putting it in the ordinary planning and budget cycle rather than in a separate initiative is how it survives past one term.
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.
Marianne Alto's answerAs noted above, in my platform I commit to conducting a sidewalk accessibility review to address areas that need support. Working with seniors’ organizations, community groups, family care providers, city engineering and residents, we can evaluate the experience and thus the mobility needs of seniors and people with disabilities, and plan to respond to them accordingly. This work should be part of our regular active transportation planning and needs to be supported through budget decisions in a minimum four year plan.
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.
As our city’s demographics change, pedestrian infrastructure planning must address the changing pedestrian abilities of residents, and prepare the actions needed to respond. Our city is evolving, looking at new, diverse ways of moving around, our city planners need to anticipate and design for those changes, capacities and desires.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-02 —
Do you support creating a regional service that designs, builds and maintains local municipal infrastructure shared across Capital Region municipalities?
Why this grade: Undecided. An answer of this kind gives voters nothing to weigh, so it is set aside.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 5 options - 17% of this topic GOV-03 B
If elected, what three steps would you take to put your region or municipality on a firmer financial footing?
How this question is graded
“Real financial resilience comes from increasing the productivity of land that's already served by infrastructure: letting neighborhoods incrementally thicken, encouraging redevelopment where roads and pipes already exist, building more value per acre instead of more acres that need public maintenance.” The Strong Towns approach thinks about revenue vs liabilities and the cost of replacing infrastructure as a key driver of municipal financial success. Next-increment intensification or better allows improved use of pipes, roads, and wires, increasing the economic base for the city while lowering vacancies (examples, strongtowns.org , archive.strongtowns.org ). No credit was given for/against for either a) sharing costs with neighbouring governments or b) asking for money from higher levels of government, both of which may have additional merit beyond the boundaries of the muncipality. A-level (excellent) answer: 1. a comment about density being linked to financial wellbeing (revenue side), 2. a comment about efficient use of that revenue (expenses side), 3. thinking about infrastructure liabilities and how to pay for them given the intergenerational problems. B-level (good) answer considers some of these principles, but likely doesn't consider both revenue and expenses. C-level (mixed) - may have other ideas about arbitrary efficiencies and doesn't provide a mechanism for doing the work they propose (e.g. "fill up the reserve fund" -- with what money?). F - working in the opposite direction of resilience (e.g. arbitrary property tax increase caps), or doesn't answer the question (e.g. "my municipality is on firm financial footing").
Marianne Alto's answerExploring new direct revenue streams, such as collaborative branding partnerships within strict value statements and principles; a balanced review of existing and competing expenditures to inform the increasingly difficult choices local governments are facing given that other orders of government appear to be diminishing their contributions to social services; exploring inter-municipal collaboration in planning and delivering core services; implementing programs to support small business establishment and longevity; to start. There are many more paths to a more balanced and less precarious local economy. - 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 )
Marianne Alto 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: Yes. Representation is supported as a permanent arrangement rather than a gesture.
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.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 A
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
How this question is graded
A = significantly more consultation practices. B = somewhat more. C = the current amount is enough. Written answers take the same ladder: A commits to partnership with local First Nations, B wants better consultation without committing to a change, C questions whether more is wanted. Nothing here has been graded C- or F.
Marianne Alto chose 1 of 7 optionsConsultation is a specific and prescribed process, and as Mayor, I need and want to respect those formal processes. It is important to me that we make decisions at City Hall that reflect Indigenous ways of knowing and protocol.
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.
Governance may be one of the most critical, and overlooked, tools a local government can use. Clear, predictable policies and their calm application allow for consistency, clarity and effective planning, with intention and attention to consequence, cost, risk and possibility. If local governance works, it can adapt to the unexpected, and can grow to include a broader consideration of more efficient, more responsive planning and service delivery. - 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.
The city has nurtured a strong, rich relationship with the Xwsepsum and Songhees Nations, on whose territories the city sits in its entirety. Our cooperative commitment to Reconciliation is innovative, adaptable, and relies on a resilient base of mutual respect, curiosity and willingness to learn, grow, and evolve. While I am mayor, our efforts to nourish this critical partnership will continue.
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).