Eglinton-Lawrence

More supply is essential — but it can't be blank-check upzoning. Density must deliver affordable units, parks and flood protection to the neighbourhood where it lands.

I support responsible development that strengthens our community, but I oppose overdevelopment, especially in established single-family home neighborhoods. Growth should be balanced with the character, infrastructure, traffic, and quality of life of existing residents.

Yes but with proper planning. Im not saying demolish all single family homes. Im saying public consultation and proper planning.

Parks belong to everyone — but a real offer must come with supports, not a sweep that leaves people with nowhere to go.

I believe parks are meant to be shared community spaces, not places to live. If suitable indoor housing is available that meets a person’s needs, I believe they should be supported in moving indoors, where they can have a safer and more sanitary environment.

I 100% believe that if you are offered a home and you choose to stay in a park there's far much more needing to be discussed. I have the lived experience 2nd to none on this issue to help both the homeless folks as well as my future colleagues.

No. Fund transit through the commercial parking levy, billboard tax and development charges — not new tolls on working families

I am not in favour of road-pricing measures. I believe we should focus on a practical, sustainable traffic-management plan that addresses congestion and environmental needs without placing additional taxes or costs on residents.

I would have to dig a little deeper and get specifics. I am not a driver at all so on this issue I will get back to you.

Yes. Deferring maintenance costs more later — the flood backlog west of the Allen proves it. But make corporations and developers pay, not homeowners.

I believe additional revenue may be necessary if budgets are responsibly managed and funding is still insufficient. Before asking residents to pay more, however, I feel we should first look carefully for waste and ensure existing tax dollars are used wisely.

We need to do it all. We need all hands on deck to ensure we manage the $ responsibly while providing the needs of everyone involved.

As a City Councillor, accountability, efficiency, and transparency will be my priorities.

I believe transparency is important, and residents should be able to clearly see how their tax dollars are being spent. Providing project budgets, timelines, and regular updates would help build trust and accountability.

I would say yes and no on this one. I believe deals should be made 100% transparent but direct details of the build etc might serve as a security risk.

This supports safer communities through stronger enforcement, accountability, and a visible presence to deter crime and improve public confidence.

"The streets west of the Allen are darker, dirtier and less maintained than the east. Lighting, maintenance and active use fix safety before you need a badge."

I support all three areas, but I lean toward enforcement, particularly addressing weapon offences. I also believe prevention, treatment and better-maintained public spaces can play an important role in improving safety.

The fact is they need to do all 3. So many issues have arisen with youth violence and retail thefts across the whole city. Time to say enough. Thats why I applaud those in Lawrence Heights who are mentoring the youth to a better future.

Supports safety and growth.

Hold the police budget roughly flat after inflation — and put new money into prevention, crisis response and lighting, not a bigger badge.

I would support an increase above inflation only to ensure TPS is properly staffed. Once staffing needs are met, funding could track inflation, while using civilian services for appropriate entry-level responsibilities may help reduce overall costs.

Here is another question that can be answered multiple ways. Proper public consultation & a willingness of council and the police board to work together is key.

Balances safety and privacy with clear rules, limits, and oversight of technology use.

Permit it with citywide rules — limits on access, retention, auditing and data sharing, so the watchers are watched too.

I would support strict rules to make sure information is only used for its intended purpose. Clear limits on access, retention and sharing would help protect privacy while still allowing the technology to support public safety.

I don't know enough on this issue to comment. I will read up on it and provide details at a later date.

Toronto needs long-term solutions that increase capacity, reduce congestion, and support housing growth along transit corridors.

Concentrate growth on Eglinton and near rapid transit, where density is supported — with CBA benefits staying in the corridor.

I lean toward expansion, especially where new rapid-transit lines can connect underserved areas and support future growth. At the same time, I think funding should still maintain existing infrastructure and improve service reliability so the system we have continues to work well

Certain areas are underserved. We simply need to continue what we started on finch and eglinton.

This reflects a focus on keeping the city functioning safely and efficiently, ensuring emergency response, essential services, and economic activity are not disrupted.

Deliveries keep small businesses alive. Emergency vehicles keep people safe. Accessibility keeps everyone in. Essentials first — then we sort the rest.

I think a balanced approach is important. Streets should support transit, walking and cycling, but also deliveries, trades, accessibility, essential vehicle access and reasonable parking. Good planning should try to accommodate these needs wherever possible.

I would choose all 3 answers if we could. All 3 are key factors to such a situation as this.

Enable private housing through faster approvals, lower development charges, and less red tape so builders can deliver more supply efficiently.

Build and finance affordable and supportive housing for working families under $100K — funded through the commercial parking levy and development charges, not resident taxes.

I believe reducing approval times and development charges should be the priority. Lowering the cost and time required to build housing can increase supply and reduce costs passed on to buyers and renters, improving overall affordability.

This question has 2 correct answers but i could only choose 1 😆

Toronto’s role should be to enable housing, not build it. The City should focus on faster approvals, less red tape, and predictable rules so builders can deliver more housing efficiently.

City supplies land, funding and incentives to non-profit and private providers — and negotiates CBAs so the benefits land where the buildings go up.

I think Toronto should continue providing affordable housing while working with experienced developers and operators. Given the challenges TCHC has faced, these partnerships could improve building quality, maintenance, safety and accountability.

More needs to be done.

We should build more housing where there is already transit and infrastructure, while keeping growth planned, focused, and respectful of neighbourhoods.

Concentrate growth on Eglinton and near rapid transit, where density is supported — with CBA benefits staying in the corridor.

I support focusing new housing along major corridors and near transit. I think this would allow Toronto to grow while respecting established neighbourhoods, and could also help reduce traffic, car dependence and environmental impacts.

As long as there's proper public consultation and studies etc

Reduces delays and costs by cutting red tape and helping builders deliver housing faster.

Speed is the tax the city hides. Automate routine permits and expand as-of-right — with CBA and affordable-unit conditions attached, not stripped.

I support lowering municipal charges to help reduce the cost of building housing. I believe this could encourage more construction and make housing more affordable for buyers and renters.

The first 2 answers work. Decreasing parking is not usually a good starting point for potential owners or renters.

Improves delivery and accountability through better project management and closed contracts to control costs and reduce delays.

The Crosstown was a procurement and project-management failure. Strengthen contracting, ban repeat offenders, and enforce what's actually in the contract.

I support stronger professional project management, procurement and contracting. I also think limiting scope changes and fully funding projects upfront are important, with changes only when needed to address a genuine viability issue.

Stop the $58M consultant churn. Rebuild permanent city capacity so the people doing the work answer to taxpayers, not a billing clock.

I support using competitive contracts where they provide better value, along with specialized agencies with clear performance expectations. I think both approaches can improve efficiency while maintaining accountability and quality.

Residential property tax grows below inflation. New spending is funded by the commercial parking levy, billboard tax and fraud penalties — not the homeowner.

I support keeping property-tax increases roughly in line with inflation and population, but only if we can first get spending under control and make sure tax dollars are being used responsibly.

Relying on growth related revenue with the use of technology to improve efficiency, reduce red tape, and speed up approvals.

Commercial parking levy and development charges. Corporations and developers pay the costs their activities generate — not working families.

I would choose property taxes as the least disruptive option, but I don’t believe new taxes should be introduced. Property-tax revenue should support responsible spending, with the focus on controlling costs rather than continually raising revenue.

It’s important to address decades of decline in existing assets.

Dedicated infrastructure levy from commercial sources, reserved exclusively for maintenance — not siphoned into consultant contracts or pet projects.

I support reducing the city’s asset base where properties are no longer needed. Selling or consolidating surplus properties could reduce costs for taxpayers while putting valuable assets to better use

Queen's Park writes cheques when it wants to. The city should plan on no new provincial money — and fund its priorities through the commercial parking levy and development charges.

I support stronger advocacy with the province. Toronto should have greater authority to make decisions on local issues, while continuing to work with the province where cooperation is needed.

Strong mayor powers should be used sparingly and not concentrated in one area or function.

If strong-mayor powers exist, deploy them for housing supply — with CBA and affordable-unit conditions attached, not stripped in the override.

I believe decisions should not rest on one person’s views. We should listen to different perspectives and work toward practical solutions that reflect the needs and priorities of the majority.

All three priorities are important for the ward, including growth, safety and order, and strong core services.

I support all three priorities, but I would put safety first. I believe a safe and well-managed community provides the foundation for growth, strong core services and a good quality of life.

Safety is also a concern here in Ward8. But if we can update and maintain on all things from infrastructure to transit to homelessness then we will be on the right path.

I believe all four areas should be considered when measuring performance. Clear, measurable results should reflect housing, finances, services, safety and the specific needs of the ward.

We need all of the above. It is all about community building TOGETHER😃

Finish what's approved and measure it — but don't rip out parking and lanes on commercial streets where small businesses need deliveries.

I believe safety should always come first when reviewing road lanes. Changes should be based on clear evidence, while also considering how they affect congestion, traffic flow and the needs of all road users.

Protest is protected — but with clear, published rules for locations, access routes and duration, so hospitals and small businesses can plan.

I believe everyone should have the right to demonstrate peacefully and safely. At the same time, transportation and access to essential services should remain open, with a respectful balance between protest rights and the needs of others.

Public data and outcome metrics — so departments know they're being watched and taxpayers can see what their money bought.

I selected resident services because technology should make life easier for residents. I also believe investments should be used wherever they make sense to improve efficiency, accountability and the quality of public services.

Cut the consultant and admin bloat first — the $58M consultant class — before touching services or raising taxes.

I support reducing or redesigning lower-priority services first. I also believe Toronto should maintain an emergency reserve and bank appropriate year-end surpluses to help manage unexpected costs without immediately raising taxes.

Delay is what killed 300 Eglinton businesses. Accelerate permits, inspections and approvals — speed is the cheapest business incentive.

I support lowering commercial taxes and fees. I believe this could help small local businesses stay open, support local employment and strengthen Toronto’s economy.

No more customized deals for the connected. Fix housing, transit and safety, and employers come because the city works — not because we bribed them.

I lean toward targeted tax reductions or incentives for major employers and investments that can provide clear economic benefits to Toronto, including jobs, investment and long-term growth.

Recognize international credentials and expand apprenticeships — we have the people, they're locked out of the trades by paperwork.

I support keeping a steady pipeline of projects while expanding apprenticeships and training. I believe combining predictable work with a skilled workforce can increase construction capacity and support good local jobs.

Basics first — clean streets, clear sidewalks, working washrooms. The west end has waited long enough for routine care.

I support prioritizing basic maintenance and keeping existing infrastructure in good repair. I believe maintaining what we already have is more responsible and cost-effective than continually adding new infrastructure.

I support simpler permits and rules for arts, culture and nightlife, but without changing current hours.

Little Jamaica waited 9 years for heritage protection. Preserve venues and cultural spaces before they're priced out.

I support reducing barriers for arts, culture and nightlife. Making it easier and more affordable to operate can help local businesses, artists and cultural organizations thrive while contributing to vibrant and active communities.

Accessibility, geographic coverage and minimum standards — the whole city gets served, not just the profitable downtown core.

I support mandatory data disclosure so Toronto can understand how autonomous taxis affect safety, congestion, curb use and transportation planning. Good data will help the city make informed decisions and adjust policies when needed.