How to read this page. Each row below is one policy area, with Susan Kim'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 Susan Kim said
- Not graded GEN-01
If you could change one policy, bylaw, feature, or municipal asset (i.e, facility or infrastructure) in your municipality, what would it be and why?
I would change some city-owned parking lots and hardscapes into spaces for managed encampments with access to various support and health services for our unhoused friends. Not only would this save on bylaw enforcement and public works costs, but it would also minimize the trauma unhoused community experiences from ongoing displacement and impounding of belongings. - 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.
Susan Kim's allocation of ten million dollars Housing $3,000,000 Transit $0 Walking Infrastructure $0 Rolling & Cycling Infrastructure $0 Roadway Infrastructure $0 Policing $0 Fire & Emergency Services $0 Parks & Recreation $0 Arts & Culture $0 Climate Action & Environment $2,000,000 Unhoused Resident Services $3,000,000 Community-Based Clinics $2,000,000 - Not graded GEN-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to communicate about your region, generally, feel free to share your thoughts here.
I'm most keen to see how the region can collaborate - not only on the regional development of affordable housing stock and social services, but also on a local circular economy for materials and services. For example, could Sooke offer some land for a regional native tree and plant nursery, and the City of Victoria would be able to provide publicly produced asphalt? Let's find out!
Healthcare access
What Susan Kim 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.
Mental health and harm reduction services are currently under-resourced, and I would advocate for expanding the CRCL program to operate 24/7 sustainably in order to meet community demand.
Where possible, with provincial and health authority collaboration, I would like to see greater access to voluntary mental health care, outreach services, and harm reduction programs, alongside more accessible public washrooms and hygiene facilities.
I am also interested in exploring a community health centre model, similar to that used in Colwood, where residents can access a range of preventative health services in one location.
Finally, let's get the CRHC to explore non-market housing in the Jubilee area for targeted to healthcare staff housing coupled with childcare facilities better accommodate the shift schedules of hospital workers.
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: Backs the full slate of free travel for under 19s, cheaper fares for seniors, cheaper fares for people on income or disability assistance and a lower cost regional monthly pass. Support extends across all four groups of riders rather than stopping at one of them.
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.
Susan Kim 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. The commitment is made in advance rather than left to individual schemes. 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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 6 options - 30% of this topic TRN-03 A
Do you support rapid deployment of transit priority measures on frequent transit corridors, even where this requires removing on-street parking or a general-purpose traffic lane?
Why this grade: Supports rapid transit priority on busy corridors, with parking and a traffic lane both on the table. No carve out is attached, so the hardest part of the change is accepted along with the rest. 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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 6 options - 10% of this topic TRN-04 A
Do you support the creation of a regional transportation authority?
Why this grade: Supports creating a regional transportation authority. The yes carries no caveat of any kind.
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.
Susan Kim 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: Agrees to new links for buses and bicycles across public land where they would make trips materially shorter. No condition is placed on the commitment.
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.
Susan Kim 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.
Let's keep pushing for Island Rail to come back, but in a way that works with First Nations partners and respects their traditional lands.
Of course, I would continue advocacy to the province to better fund transit. This goes hand-in-hand with my desire to work on behalf of improving drivers' working conditions and wages.
Housing
A- 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
Susan Kim chose 5 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 5 options - HFL-04 5 / 5
If there was a type of housing you wanted to see more of (e.g., affordable, non-market, family-sized, townhouses, etc.), what do you think are effective methods of getting more of it? Select all that apply.
How this question is graded
1 point for each option, but -1 for choosing mandated requirements (d). To increase the building of certain desireable types of housing (affordable, family sized, etc), cities need to pursue a broad approach of both removing barriers and targetted incentives. Mandated requirements (or inclusionary zoning) have a track record of acting like a tax and therefore reducing housing construction or increasing costs.
Susan Kim chose 5 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 4 options - HFL-12 5 / 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.
Susan Kim 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.
Susan Kim's answer1 YR
- Managed and supported shelter and encampment options
- Expanded rent supplement contributions
- Streamlined development, business, event licensing application and permitting processes
4 YRS
- Double city contributions to the Housing Reserve Fund so non-profit and affordable housing developments can access seed capital
- Increased vacancy rate
- Vacancy control province-wide!
- Renoviction bylaw coupled with a reviewed tenant protection bylaw
30% of this topic Incumbent record 29 / 29What Susan Kim 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: 99.80%
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: Yes on advertising, yes on sponsorship, and yes on taking it further. Nothing is missing from this answer.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 6 options Follow-up: Susan Kim 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: The strongest treatment available, with climate as the standard others are held to. No competing priority is named above it.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-03 C-
Will you pledge to never take meetings from fossil fuel company lobbyists?
Why this grade: Does not accept the pledge. Refusing to close the door is the weaker answer here, although it commits the candidate to nothing harmful.
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.
Susan Kim 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: Supports joining and attaches nothing to it. That is the top answer on this question.
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.
Susan Kim 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: Backs the amendment without reservation. Approval of new fossil fuel retail would end.
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.
Susan Kim 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: Assessments, retrofit financing and guaranteed centre hours are all selected, with a campaign alongside. The spending is the substance here.
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.
Susan Kim chose 4 of 7 options (up to 5 allowed) - 8% of this topic CLI-07 A
Are you supportive of phasing out fossil fuel powered tools such as leaf blowers (following the lead of Oak Bay and other municipalities across the country)?
Why this grade: Would support the phase out. The answer treats the problem as one a bylaw can solve.
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.
Susan Kim 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: No to all of them. The answer needs no enforcement to hold up.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 5 options - 8% of this topic CLI-09 A
What are the primary climate risk(s) facing your community, and what actions would you take to support adaptation and resilience in your community?
Why this grade: Clearly identifies risks and provides concrete strategies grounded in their local context.
How this question is graded
Free text. A = names a climate risk specific to the municipality and specific actions against it, usually tied to data or a programme already running. B = one half only, a risk with no action or actions with no risk named, or backing an existing plan without either. C = general support with nothing local in it, a list of risks and nothing else, or the work handed to the region. C- = a risk gestured at and nothing more. F = an answer that is not about climate.
Susan Kim's answerThe primary climate risks facing our community include extreme heat, severe storms, flooding, shoreline erosion, and threats to local food security. To support adaptation and resilience, I would prioritize expanding cooling and warming centres, ensuring they are accessible to vulnerable residents, and creating systems to check on neighbours during extreme weather events. I would also support increasing parks, tree canopy, shade infrastructure, and public access to waterways to reduce urban heat island impacts. Other priorities include strong implementation of integrated rainwater and stormwater management plans, restoring waterways such as Bowker Creek to reduce flooding, addressing shoreline erosion, strengthening local and regional food systems, and providing safe, dry spaces for unhoused residents during cold and wet conditions. I'm also open to hiring goats to help tackle some invasive vegetation, too! - 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.
Susan Kim's answerMaintaining and increasing ecosystem connectivity requires a coordinated approach to urban forestry, habitat restoration, and green infrastructure. I would support implementing the Greenways Plan, updating the Urban Forest Master Plan and Tree Protection Bylaw, and establishing an Urban Tree Advisory Committee with representation from local First Nations, neighbourhoods, and businesses. Priorities would include city-coordinated tree planting to create connected urban ecosystems, expanding the production of local tree species, using native plants in public landscaping, and enhancing pollinator habitat through measures such as bee homes in more parks. I would also work in partnership with the Songhees and Xwsepsum Nations on ecosystem restoration initiatives, including invasive species management and the use of traditional stewardship practices such as controlled burns. - 8% of this topic CLI-11 A
Do you see development as an opportunity to increase resilience to climate-related events, and if so, how?
Why this grade: Shows clear support for the idea and connects it to concrete actions relevant to 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.
Susan Kim's answerYes, development can play a key role in building resilience to climate-related events. I would support requiring heat pumps in new developments to provide efficient heating, cooling, and air filtration; I would support promoting green roofs where feasible to reduce urban heat, expand green space, and help manage stormwater. I would also work with community organizations to establish accessible emergency cooling centres and ensure all neighbourhoods have community spaces that can serve as resilience hubs during extreme weather events. Increasing the supply of affordable and supportive housing is also essential to protect vulnerable residents from the impacts of extreme heat, cold, and other climate-related hazards. - 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.
Susan Kim 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 addition to reducing emissions, our community should focus on preparing for the impacts of a changing climate that are already being felt. Key priorities include planning for higher maximum temperatures, supporting the retrofit of older buildings to improve cooling and resilience (while maintaining existing affordable housing stock), and creating more accessible all-weather community spaces where residents can gather safely during extreme weather events. Expanding access to nature through parks, urban forests, and connected green spaces will also be important for improving public health, biodiversity, and climate resilience across the municipality and the region as a whole - to that end, I am keen to remove parking fees at all CRD parks and expand transit access to these natural gems in our region.
Arts
A- 6.67% of this topic ART-01 2 / 3
Do you consider arts and culture to be a core part of your municipality's economic development strategy?
Why this score: Establishes a clear municipal role, citing it being the most important, and identifies the impact it has on social and wellbeing, but does not provide much detail specific to strategic economic-development and or execution.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: When municipalities support arts and culture through material and financial means, municipalities are actually sending the signal that social and affective wellbeing of its residents matter. The most important role municipalities play is defending the arts as we continue to face growing austerity and political uncertainty. - 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: Provides multiple concrete first-year actions and identifiable four-year deliverables, including process completion, funding supports and venue/community-rate outcomes.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim's answer1 YR
- Comprehensive review of approval processes and administrative requirements, with a focus on reducing barriers and simplifying procedures through direct engagement with the arts community. Expand municipal support for event delivery, including assistance with insurance and equipment access.
- Collaborate with the Accessibility Advisory Committee and venue operators to undertake accessibility assessments and improve access to arts and cultural spaces for all residents.
4 YRS
- Complete review and streamlining of processes
- Work with pre-existing in-house business services supports at the City of Victoria to help artists develop financial plans and long-term seed funding opportunities (instead of having to rely on one-time one-off grants)
- Open a Local Champions program stream specifically for artists and cultural workers
- All major publicly owned venues offer community rates for venue rentals - 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 a strong implementation combination involving affordability/stability, permanent cultural assets and regulatory review.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim 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 consequential permitting/regulatory package.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim 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 multiple structural cultural-space funding/acquisition mechanisms.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim 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: Supports maintaining or growing arts investment alongside core services.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim chose 1 of 5 options - 10.00% of this topic ART-07 3 / 3
When a major development project affects an existing cultural space, what should your municipality prioritize?
Why this score: Supports preservation/replacement or equivalent cultural benefit.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim 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 high-impact municipal incentives for cultural space.
How this question is graded
Susan Kim chose 5 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.
My priorities include creating more year-round, all-weather public gathering spaces, expanding free and low-cost arts, recreation, and cultural programming across all neighbourhoods, and ensuring accessible places where seniors and other residents can participate and stay connected. Addressing housing affordability is also critical so that artists can continue to live and work in our community without fear of gentrification. In addition, I would support expanding the Art in Public Spaces Fund eligibility to cover maintenance and upkeep costs for arts venues, and dedicating a portion of community amenity contributions from new development to support arts and cultural infrastructure.
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: Says yes, then turns to refreshing the city's mobility plan from 2019 and covering the growing need for curb space for buses. The commitment stands, but the answer names no missing link, so nothing specific is on the hook.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 4 optionsFollow-up: Go Victoria, the City's mobility plan, was published in 2019 and could use a refresh in order to better reflect the growing community's needs. Moreover, BC Transit communicated earlier that curb space for transit is becoming a pressing need, and I would like to see that covered in a Go Victoria refresh as a part of a public communications plan. - 15% of this topic ROL-02 A
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: Commits to physical protection rather than paint as the standard on busy streets. Nothing is carved out.
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.
Susan Kim 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: Agrees to oppose efforts to remove, narrow or weaken protected lanes and all ages and abilities routes. An unconditional yes.
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.
Susan Kim 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: Would improve the existing all ages and abilities network for bikes, electric bikes, scooters and mobility devices with curb cuts, turning lanes and smoother connections at intersections, and pair that with bike bus programmes, cycling education in schools and automated speed enforcement where collisions cluster. Concrete measures with safety and everyday use as the reasons.
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.
Susan Kim's answerImproving the pre-existing all-ages-and-abilities (AAA) cycling network to better accommodate bikes, e-bikes, scooters, and other mobility devices is of high importance. I would focus on building a stronger culture of active transportation through initiatives such as bike bus programs and expanded cycling education in schools, in partnership with organizations like Capital Bike. Infrastructure improvements to the AAA network could include adding curb cuts, turning lanes, and smoother connections at protected bike lanes and intersections I would also support the use of automated speed enforcement at high-collision and busy multi-modal intersections to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and drivers alike. - 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: Voted for a council motion to harmonise the bike network with the neighbouring municipality, took part in the commuter bike challenge over several years, and has defended the youth bus pass through successive budgets, including by extending paid parking hours and rates to fund it. Votes and budget decisions rather than support in principle.
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.
Susan Kim's answerI supported the ongoing rollout of bike network infrastructure, happily voting in support of a Council Member Motion this past term that looked to harmonize bike network infrastructure between Saanich and Victoria. Moreover, I had a great time as a regular cyclist participant for a few years in the Go By Bike Week commuter challenge and celebrations. Finally, I continue to defend the youth bus pass during yearly budget deliberations, including extending downtown parking hours and increasing rates to support that program.
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.
The CRD is a promising vehicle (pun intended!) to review bikeshares across the region as pilot contracts wind down; let's look for interoperability between jurisdictions. Finally, I continue to support the ongoing call for mobility scooters to be allowed in bike lane networks.
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?
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.
Susan Kim 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 the growing conflict between people walking and electric mobility devices on sidewalks, and commits to a connected network for all ages and abilities so those devices have somewhere else to go. Also commits to filling sidewalk gaps, naming two streets where one side is missing.
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.
Susan Kim's answerTo make walking safer, I would focus on creating a more complete and connected all-ages-and-abilities (AAA) active transportation network that gives people on bikes, e-bikes, and scooters safe alternatives to using sidewalks. A pedestrian safety issue of concern to me is the growing conflict between pedestrians and e-mobility devices on sidewalks. A proposed measure would include updating signage and infrastructure to clearly accommodate a wider range of mobility devices. As well, I would also prioritize filling gaps in the sidewalk network, particularly on streets where sidewalks are missing on one side. Examples include half of Young Street, or Oliphant between Park and Vancouver. - 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 more than doubling the share. The answer accepts that closing sidewalk gaps costs real money.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 5 options - 20% of this topic WLK-04 A
Do you support expanding pedestrian-priority and car-free streets in your municipality's downtown, main street or village centre?
Why this grade: Backs permanent pedestrian priority in the downtown or village centre. No trial period is attached.
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.
Susan Kim 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 parent advisory councils, school staff, neighbourhood associations and municipal staff together to identify concerns and develop traffic calming around schools including a school street pilot, expand walking and biking school buses with volunteer hours for high school students helping younger children travel safely, and keep pressing for traffic enforcement at peak drop off and pick up times. Combining a physical pilot with a program that gets more children walking addresses both the street and the habit.
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.
Susan Kim's answerI would seek collaboration between Parent Advisory Councils, school staff, neighbourhood associations, and municipal staff to identify safety concerns and develop traffic-calming measures around schools, including piloting School Street. I would also support expanding walking and cycling initiatives such as bike buses and walk buses throughout the school year, including opportunities for high school students to earn volunteer hours by helping younger children travel safely to and from school. (I mean, how cute would that be!) In addition, I would continue advocating for increased traffic enforcement around schools during peak drop-off and pick-up times for improved traffic compliance. - 20% of this topic WLK-06 A
What will you do, in a 4 year term, to identify, prioritize and set time-lines to assure that pedestrian infrastructure is improved to meet the needs of the older and disabled members of your community?
Why this grade: Over four years you would have city staff replicate the road maintenance program as a dedicated sidewalk assessment and renewal program with clear priorities, timelines and public reporting, partner with the accessibility advisory committee and national accessibility organizations to review sidewalk quality standards, accessibility metrics and maintenance practices, and invite neighbourhood associations and residents to name the gaps and hazards near them. Borrowing a delivery model the city already runs well is a practical way to get sidewalks the treatment roads receive.
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.
Susan Kim's answerOver a four-year term, I would ask City staff to duplicate its incredible road maintenance program for a dedicated sidewalk assessment and renewal program. Clear priorities, timelines, and public reporting through the Major Projects webpage would be a part of the accountability and public education component.
Moreover, I would partner with the Accessibility Advisory Committee, CNIB, the Rick Hansen Foundation, and other accessibility advocates to review and update sidewalk quality standards, accessibility metrics, and maintenance practices. To that end, I would also invite direct engagement with neighbourhood associations and residents to identify sidewalk gaps, hazards, and accessibility barriers in their communities.
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.
Susan Kim 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 a regional body doing this work. The answer accepts that some control moves with it.
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.
Susan Kim 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").
Susan Kim's answer- Explore regional financial stabilizing and revenue developing models within a circular economy, i.e. sharing of facilities, materials, skills where possible
- Regionalization of services like the police
- Through grants and exemptions, functionally introduce progressive property taxation - 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 )
Susan Kim 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 guaranteed First Nations representation. The answer needs nothing added to it.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 3 options - 17% of this topic REC-02 A
Concerning our municipal government’s First Nations’ reconciliation and consultation practices, I support:
Why this grade: Strong support.
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.
Susan Kim chose 1 of 7 options
Also shared, ungraded
- Not graded GOV-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to governance, shared services, and municipal infrastructure, feel free to share your thoughts below.
- Participatory budgeting and/or a "light" citizens' assembly model for budgeting input
- Unlock granting streams through the City's Advisory Committees in order to allow funding for needs informed by the community directly
- Expand resources to City's Advisory Committees so their expertise and input can be sourced more regularly, sustainably and deeply - Not graded REC-GEN
If you have anything you'd like to add in regards to First Nation transit governance or consultation practices, feel free to share your thoughts below.
I'd love to work with First Nations neighbours to gauge interest in employment opportunities in transit with an eye to exploring community-based transit options where there is traditionally a lack of transit services.
I'd also like to review the development of CRD MOUs with First Nations partners in order to include automatic escalating CPI-based compensation.
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).