Written by Darrell Brown in answer to our questionnaire, and published as given. Not our description of them.
Darrell Brown has over three decades of consulting and legal experience, serving major multinational corporations, charities, not-for-profits, national and international unions, governments and their regulatory authorities, and institutions such as USAID and the Asian Development Bank. He has consulted in fifteen countries with oversight responsibilities for projects on five continents, and was awarded a medal and commendation from the Ukrainian government for his work on social sector reforms there.
Darrell has advised on a wide range of topics, including government relations, judicial reform, pensions, provident funds, insurance, mutual funds, commercial law, bankruptcy procedure, securities law, non-bank financial services, institutional governance, and tax policy. His executive, managerial, and project management experience spans strategy development, financial assessment, operational planning, human resources, public relations, and technical implementation and performance measurement.
Beyond his international and domestic consulting, Darrell has worked in the arts sector and owned an art gallery in Toronto. Some of his most rewarding work has come from helping people in need, directly and through charities he has advised, work that has saved lives and reunited families. Darrell is the proud father of five children — three boys and two girls — whose heritage reflects a cultural mosaic of Guyanese, Ukrainian, and Canadian ancestry. Among his most recent successes, he raised $15 million to help the CNE survive COVID and avoid insolvency; it now holds the largest surplus in its history.
Our questionnaire
Darrell Brown’s own answers to the questions we put to every candidate, published as given — including, where they wrote one, their reasoning in their own words.
Blanket as-of-right ignores real differences in transit access across wards. I support targeted, well-sited housing — including supportive and 'missing middle' housing — under adopted Secondary Plans, not one-size-fits-all rules overriding local context.
Only if the offer is permanent housing with supports. Housing-first: once genuinely suitable, permanent housing is offered, remaining in an encampment isn't housing, it's warehousing. Offers must be real and permanent, not just shelter beds - pair any move with continued supports.
Congestion pricing has worked to reduce traffic by up to 30% (London). New York and Singapore are examples of success. How it is structured is key.
I have a comprehensive proposal on alternative revenue sources. Property tax revenue cannot service the needs of Torontonians. See my presentation at electdarrellbrown.ca
There is a serious transparency issue in Toronto and Ontario for that matter. We are years behind other jurisdictions on FOI and blanket publishing of contracts. Transparency breeds accountability.
Enforcement manages crises after they happen; crisis and prevention services stop them from happening. Mental-health response, addiction treatment and youth intervention are the same 'treatment first' logic behind my homelessness plan — investing upstream reduces the burden downstream.
Public safety funding should follow function, not headcount. Calls rooted in mental health, addiction and youth crisis are better and more safely handled by trained civilian responders — freeing police to focus on core policing, and delivering the crisis investment I outlined above.
Surveillance tools need the same accountability infrastructure I've proposed for FOI and conflict-of-interest reform: clear citywide rules on access, retention, auditing and data-sharing, adopted by Council directly rather than left to weak existing privacy law.
We can't wait for the next multi-decade build. Treating existing GO corridors as real rapid transit now, with frequent all-day service and fare integration, delivers benefits years before subway extensions open — and it's the lever the city can actually pull today.
Transit, walking and cycling move the most people per metre of street. It is the logic behind the BRT corridors (dedicated lanes, signal priority) I've proposed. Neighbourhood parking needs are addressed separately, through building-level requirements, not general curb allocation.
Zoning permissions and faster approvals won't produce deeply affordable or supportive housing on their own. The market doesn't build it. Solving homelessness means the city directly building and financing it. Public delivery is the lever within Council's control that gets people housed.
Direct public ownership guarantees permanence for supportive housing: critical to solving homelessness. But scale requires all three levers: partnering with non-profits, financing private supply, and building directly wherever the market and non-profit sector alone can't deliver.
Density should follow transit capacity, not blanket citywide rules. Corridors and rapid-transit nodes can absorb growth appropriately; low-rise interior neighbourhoods with poor transit access, like much of Scarborough, cannot without straining roads, parking and services.
Blanket as-of-right zoning and stripped standards override local planning control and neighbourhood context. The lever that actually lowers cost without those trade-offs is fiscal: reduce development charges and parkland levies, especially for affordable and supportive housing.
I've managed complex projects across five continents and helped turn around the CNE's finances. Toronto's overruns are a delivery-discipline problem. Rigorous project management, procurement and contracting stop cost blowouts before political scope changes make them worse.
Competitive procurement and outside delivery, tested against real service standards, is the same discipline behind the professional project management I called for above. Where the city does use arm's-length agencies, they need the same conflict-of-interest safeguards I've proposed elsewhere.
Property tax should track cost and growth, not become the default lever for new priorities. The investments I've proposed: supportive housing, crisis services, transit should be funded through provincial/federal cost-sharing and dedicated tools like congestion pricing, not property tax hikes.
Congestion charges and road-use fees put the cost on those who create it, fund transit and street investment directly, and avoid the trade-offs of higher property tax or development charges. However, municipal income tax is a progressive tax and is more affordable.
SOGR and expansion competing for the same pool is exactly the structural funding gap I've flagged before. The fix is a dedicated, protected maintenance revenue stream, not an annual scramble that leaves repair losing to ribbon-cuttings.
The province's TTC operating contribution sits near 9%, much of it one-off. That structural imbalance won't fix itself. Toronto needs to publicly press for a standing funding formula and real fiscal tools, not quietly align with provincial priorities hoping for scraps.
Strong mayor powers shouldn't override Council's collective judgment on housing or budget. That's the concentrated authority my transparency work warns against. The legitimate use is internal management: staffing decisions and departmental restructuring.
Scarborough absorbs a growing share of the city's development without matching investment in transit, roads, parks and local infrastructure. Ward 25's next term should close that gap before adding further growth pressure the current infrastructure can't support.
This is a loaded question. There should be multiple measures - housing, fiscal sustainability and specific measurable results at the ward level. A mayor has to lead on multiple fronts.
Finishing what's approved honours commitments already made and keeps momentum on safer , consistent with prioritizing transit, walking and cycling on constrained corridors. But further citywide reallocations should be evaluated case-by-case, not accelerated uniformly.
The same principle I've applied to surveillance and data governance applies here: neither blanket restriction nor unlimited disruption, but clear, published rules on locations, access routes and duration that protect the right to protest while keeping essential services running.
Public data and performance-measurement systems are the technology backbone of the FOI/COI reforms I've proposed — proactive disclosure, municipal scorecards and departmental accountability all depend on the city actually being able to measure and publish what departments do.
Before asking residents for more or cutting services, prove the administrative and procurement discipline I've called for elsewhere is actually being applied. Professional project management and competitive contracting should close gaps before taxes or services are touched.
Businesses locate where workers can get there, feel safe, and find space to grow, not where taxes are marginally lower. Scarborough's employment lands are already at risk from housing pressure; the real economic-development lever is transit, safety and infrastructure investment.
Same principle as the last answer: employers follow the same fundamentals residents need — affordable housing so workers can live near jobs, reliable transportation, safety, and a functioning public realm. Chasing individual companies with bespoke deals is a weaker, less durable strategy.
Boom-bust public capital spending is exactly the instability I've flagged elsewhere. It discourages contractors and workers from investing in local capacity. A stable, multi-year pipeline of public housing and infrastructure projects is what lets that capacity actually get built.
This is the same principle as my infrastructure-backlog answer: protect the basics first. Clean, well-maintained roads, sidewalks, parks and washrooms are what residents actually rely on daily before the city commits to fewer, flashier signature projects.
There is a demonstrable cost/benefit produced from cultural activities. A dollar in produces multiple dollars out if structured correctly. Arts and culture keep a city vibrant.
Again, these are not mutually exclusive categories. Data disclosure and service obligations are essential. That said, we have to look at labour impact when speaking about anything autonomous.
Each card is one question, with Darrell Brown filed under the answer they gave and their own words underneath it. The other options offered are not shown, nor how the rest of the field answered.
How the whole city answeredRegistered candidates from the City Clerk’s official list, refreshed daily. Campaign sites are linked as published by the candidate; a link is not an endorsement.