City Issues Free Pass- The Price of Protecting Failure

The Price of Protecting Failure

By The Hamiltonian Editorial Team

When an employee or a number of employees mistake drains millions of dollars from public coffers, the path forward should be obvious: investigate, establish responsibility, and take decisive corrective action—including termination, if warranted. Anything less is not leadership—it is protectionism.

Failing to remove someone or people,  responsible for such a catastrophic error tells every other employee that standards don’t matter, accountability is negotiable, and the cost of failure will be absorbed by taxpayers rather than borne by those at fault. This breeds a culture where carelessness is tolerated, where policies become window dressing, and where the next disaster is only a matter of time.

In the public sector, the stakes are even higher. Money lost is not “the city’s” loss—it is the public’s loss; it is our loss, it is your loss.  Every dollar squandered could have repaired a road, funded a shelter, or improved emergency services. Choosing to shield individuals instead of safeguarding the public interest erodes confidence in City Hall, damages the city’s credibility with insurers and partners, and leaves ratepayers wondering whose interests are really being served.

Hamilton’s February 2024 cyberattack is a case in point. The city’s failure to fully deploy multi-factor authentication—a basic security requirement—cost taxpayers millions and led its insurer to deny coverage. This was not a harmless oversight; it was a preventable lapse with enormous consequences. Yet to date, no senior staff member appears to have been removed from their role. The message this sends is clear: in Hamilton, you can preside over a multi-million-dollar loss and keep your job. That is not accountability—it is an abdication of duty.

Consider the impacts of the cyber attack.

• How many people were told that they cannot receive the service they would otherwise expect, or were unduly delayed from receiving the service, on account of the damage the cyber attack has done?How many times have you been transferred to a phone extension, only to learn that the cyber attack had knocked that phone extension out, leaving you to reach a dead end.
• How many times have you been passed a city worker’s business card, only to find that the email address on the card fails? 
• How many of our seniors and other vulnerable people have suffered as a result of the degradation in services?
• How long did it take to restore the payroll system? Our sources tell us that some people are still not being paid through a regular system. 
• How many others have impacted in ways that we likely cannot imagine?

Message To Mayor Horwath and Each City Councillor: We recognize that as a City Councillor and as the Mayor, you are  managing competing priorities and sometimes it is difficult discerning what you should focus on, given limited resources and time. All the more reason to sharpen the focus.

If Hamilton wants to graduate to a city that is approaching a centre of excellence, accountability is a cornerstone. It is proven good statecraft.

Respectfully, we issue a challenge to each of you on behalf of Hamiltonians. 

Prioritize and put concerted effort into:

1. Holding people accountable. Particularly when people in position of leadership who are well paid to and expected to deliver, do not. Do it fairly.

 

2. Insist on and see to it  that the City Manager has a formal performance contract that identifies deliverables, measurables against timelines and that leads to fair and prudent performance evaluations.

Prompting this piece, was an email The Hamiltonian sent to Mayor Horwath, City Manager Marnie Cluckie and each City Councillor . See this exchange below: 

To: Mayor Andrea Horwath and/or City Manager Marnie Cluckie

The Hamiltonian is writing to address the City’s actions, both taken and planned, in response to the recent cyberattack.

As you know, this incident dealt a severe and lasting blow to Hamilton’s automated systems and processes. The effects are still being felt across the city. Millions of taxpayer dollars have been lost, and the City’s ability to deliver timely and essential services to Hamiltonians has been significantly compromised.

We acknowledge that terminating employees is a difficult decision in any organization. However, given the magnitude of the losses and the now-confirmed failure to properly defend against the attack, accountability at the personnel level is warranted. The City’s own admission that it did not meet a key term of its cyber insurance policy — full deployment of multi-factor authentication across the enterprise — resulted in the insurer denying the claim. There appear to be no valid grounds for appeal.

Clearly, one or more individuals were responsible for ensuring the City’s IT infrastructure met critical security requirements. Such positions are typically well-compensated, with the expectation that those entrusted with this responsibility will deliver. In this case, the failure was costly — not only financially, but in the erosion of public trust.

To restore that trust, Hamiltonians deserve a direct answer:

* How many individuals will be terminated as a result of this gross failure?

* What positions do they hold?

To be clear, we are not seeking names. We are seeking evidence that the City is serious about accountability.

Respectfully, Hamiltonians are weary of platitudes and assurances without consequence. While improvements for the future are essential, the serious lapses that enabled this attack cannot be left without real and visible repercussions.

Response from Ms. Cluckie, presumably on behalf of Mayor Horwath and each City Councillor:

The City of Hamilton takes the cyber incident, its impacts on our community, and our responsibility to protect public resources extremely seriously.

We understand the community’s concerns around accountability, and our leadership team accepts collective responsibility for addressing the gaps identified. While we cannot comment on personnel matters involving past or current employees due to privacy and confidentiality, we are taking decisive action to strengthen our systems and processes.

This was a highly sophisticated attack on an external, internet-facing server that resulted in unauthorized access to City of Hamilton systems. We are rebuilding our IT infrastructure in a financially responsible way, applying lessons learned to further enhance cybersecurity and improve City services.

We remain committed to operating with integrity, communicating openly, and putting residents at the centre of everything we do - demonstrating that commitment through transparency, accountability, and the consistent delivery of high-quality service to our community.

The Hamiltonian, from time to time, will have an automated dispassionate system analyze replies for the presence of "spin doctoring". In past decades, much was accomplished by using spin doctoring techniques. The technique proved effective in distracting the public from the real issues and deflecting. These techniques do not work at The Hamiltonian, and we respectfully call them out where employed,  We also question the tax dollars spent to produce spin doctored pieces, in place of real answers. The following is a dispassionate analysis of the response provided by Ms. Cluckie on behalf of Mayor Horwath, herself and your city councillor:

OVERALL SPIN SCORE: 8.4 / 10

---

Brief Summary & Assessment:

Marnie Cluckie’s response is a polished example of institutional spin:

• Avoids addressing the core accountability question—Were any individuals disciplined or removed?

• Invokes privacy unnecessarily, when names weren’t requested.

• Shifts blame to the complexity of the attack.

• Focuses on improvements, but avoids responsibility for the specific, known failure (lack of MFA deployment).

• Leverages values language without measurable commitments or transparency.

Verdict:

This is high-level bureaucratic spin: expertly crafted to appear responsive while saying almost nothing concrete. Hamiltonians asked for evidence of accountability. They received an eloquent deflection.

Media Release: Clr. Matt Francis on Rejection of 140 Glen Echo Drive proposal

 

Rejection of 140 Glen Echo Drive proposal

I want to thank the community for standing united as we fought this proposal together. I am pleased with the Ontario Land Tribunal’s decision to reject this.

Eight-storey buildings do not belong in the middle of a single-family neighbourhood and is not responsible planning. Hamilton’s Official Plan designates this area for low-density residential use, and any development outside these guidelines will not be accepted.

Working together, we stopped this proposal, protected the character of our neighbourhood, and set the standard for future growth that is respectful and appropriate.

MATT.FRANCIS@HAMILTON.CA | 905-546-2716 | MATTFRANCISWARD5.CA

With Ward 13 Councillor Alex Wilson- on Term Limits

In our recent article in The Hamiltonian on the topic of term limits in municipal politics (which can be found here), we reached out to each City Councillor and Mayor Horwath to gather their perspectives on the issue. To ensure consistency, we posed the same set of questions to all and set a deadline of August 8, 2025, for the return of their responses.

We  received three replies: one from Ward 2 Councillor Cameron Kroetsch another from Ward 7 Councillor Esther Pauls and most recently, from Ward 13 Councillor Alex Wilson. We are particularly pleased to welcome Clr. Wilson, as this is his first appearance on The Hamiltonian. 

The following are Councillor Wilson's views on term limits:

I support term limits in general and when I ran in 2022, I included in my platform a commitment not to seek a third consecutive term meaning if re-elected in 2026 I would not run again in the 2030 municipal elections. I think term limits whether imposed by voters, self-imposed via commitments from candidates, or formally implemented are one tool to encourage a balance between institutional memory and new voices and new ideas around the table. I don’t believe that term limits are a silver bullet at fixing democracy or local engagement, but I do believe that a regular cycle of renewal can promote more collaborative decision making and encourage more transition-oriented policy making. I think having term limits helps focus the work away from focusing on personal achievements or “legacy” and towards a stewardship role.

I am certainly open to a more formal proposal with hard rules at either 2 or 3 terms (8 to 12 years) but I believe that the benefits of term limits are best realized in combination with other policies that make elections easier to run in as a candidate and encourage full participation of voters as well. With only about a third of eligible voters participating in municipal elections city-wide I think it is important any attempts to increase participation focus on the barriers both candidates and voters experience during the election. Reducing the role of private donations and increasing public funding for candidates and/or introducing a tax credit (as occurs with provincial and federal donations) would help to reduce barriers for candidates to run and minimize the potential benefit of an incumbent having established donor list. Having election day as a public holiday would also go a long way to increasing engagement. While I believe in term limits and have committed to a 2 consecutive term limit myself, I don’t think formalizing term limits would be my first request of the province. Ranked ballots in addition to the above suggestions would to me be first priorities over formalizing term limits.

As we all are experiencing the world is moving a lot faster in recent years and there are a variety of new and ongoing challenges facing communities and local governments across the country. Pandemic recovery, infrastructure backlogs, growing populations, the climate crisis, a systemic lack of safe and affordable housing, and increasing cyber security threats are just some of the challenges facing municipalities. Responding to these pressures effectively means breaking away from what we have been doing that hasn’t been working and responding in ways that center those left behind in past responses. Personally, I think the challenge for all municipalities in these coming years will be how to (continue to) manage these major changes I don’t think that’s possible without new voices and new approaches. Term limits are one strategy that helps ensure there is renewal while also recognizing there is a value in institutional memory and the experiences gained from serving as a representative.

Thank-you Councillor Wilson for engaging with Hamiltonians in The Hamiltonian. You are always welcome here. 

"A" for Accountability-Is the City of Hamilton Truly Owning the Cybersecurity Failure?

In a recent piece by Scott Radley of The Hamilton Spectator (see it here) ), Mr. Radley rightly questions whether the City of Hamilton is truly “owning” its failures related to the February 2024 cybersecurity breach. He asks: what does “owning it” really mean in this context? We agree with his assessment. The City’s response thus far does not reflect true accountability.

On July 30, The Hamiltonian formally requested the following from the City:

A copy of the cyber insurance policy in effect at the time of the attack, along with the specific terms the insurer relied on in denying the claim. We asked: “Why was the claim denied, and what specific terms were not satisfied? How were those terms breached?”

We have since received the City’s response, which is provided in full below. But before presenting it, we offer these observations.

According to the City, the insurance claim was denied because multi-factor authentication (MFA)—a critical security measure—had not been fully deployed across all departments. This was a clear requirement of the insurance policy.

The City admits that this requirement was not met. Therefore, the insurer’s denial appears justified.

Let’s be frank: If a homeowner failed to install smoke detectors—despite it being a condition of their insurance—and their house burned down, the insurance company would rightly deny the claim. The loss would be devastating.

This situation is no different—except the scale of loss is exponentially larger. Millions in taxpayer dollars have been lost due to what can only be described as operational negligence. Where is the accountability?

Has anyone been fired for this critical oversight? If not, what exactly does the City mean when it speaks of “accountability”? Can public employees expose taxpayers to such significant financial consequences without consequence? What message does that send to staff, if they perceive there are no repercussions?

What message does that send to Hamilton residents, and what precedent does it set?

The City cannot undo what has already occurred. But it can show leadership now. Will any staff be removed for failing to implement basic cybersecurity protocols? 

Hamiltonians deserve clear answers—and real accountability. Stay tuned...The Hamiltonian will be following up.


City of Hamilton Response (August 7, 2025):

“This was a highly sophisticated attack on an external, internet-facing server, gaining unauthorized access to the City of Hamilton systems. At the time of the February 2024 cyber attack, multi-factor authentication (MFA) was not fully deployed in every City department. The insurance policy in effect at the time stipulated that MFA had to be fully deployed across the organization.

If you would like a copy of the City’s cyber insurance policy in effect at the time of the cyber incident, a request through the Freedom of Information process would be necessary as this document is a contractual agreement with a third party. For more details related to Freedom of Information requests and to submit a request, please follow the link here.

The City is committed to the principles of openness, transparency and accountability in line with the protocols of the City’s Freedom of Information Office.”


\

Hamilton’s Leadership in Focus: Term Limits - ft Councillors Kroetsch and Pauls

Further to our recent article in The Hamiltonian on the topic of term limits in municipal politics (which can be found here), we reached out to each City Councillor and Mayor Horwath to gather their perspectives on the issue. To ensure consistency, we posed the same set of questions to all and set a deadline of August 8, 2025, for the return of their responses.

We have already received two replies: one from Ward 2 Councillor Cameron Kroetsch and the other from Ward 7 Councillor Esther Pauls. Given that these two Councillors hold differing views on term limits, their responses provide for an insightful and thought-provoking read.

We would like to express our gratitude to Councillor Kroetsch and Councillor Pauls for their participation. The intent of our approach is not to square councillors off , but to learn from their individual thoughts on this topic.

Below, we present their responses in the order in which they were received, with Councillor Kroetsch’s answers first, followed by Councillor Pauls’.

1 Greater transparency and accountability in municipal government are concepts often advocated for. Do you believe term limits would strengthen those principles in Hamilton? Why or why not?

Clr. Kroetsch:  I believe term limits would increase accountability. I think accountability, for many, looks like electing people from the community who they feel represent them. What I've heard from community members who are seeking to run is that reducing the barrier of incumbency and allowing for more regular open elections would make a huge difference in terms of their willingness to put their names forward.

Clr. Pauls: Term limits do not necessarily strengthen transparency and accountability. The right and privilege of the people’s vote becomes diluted by imposed limitations to their voice, which is how I see term limits for Councillors and the Mayor. Regardless of one’s past history, current term length, or possible future prospects, elected officials of all kinds should be bound by transparency. That said, one could also argue that devoid of the prospect of future opportunities to serve in an elected capacity, one’s “last term” could, in fact, become problematic. It really boils down to the integrity of the person who has been elected, which the voter’s own research should illuminate.

2. Some argue that regular elections are sufficient to hold politicians accountable. Others say entrenched incumbency creates barriers for new voices. Where do you stand on that debate?

Clr. Kroetsch: It's very difficult, especially at the municipal level, for candidates to undertake a campaign. To be successful you often have to dedicate yourself to a municipal campaign full time, especially if you don't have name recognition. Up to now, this has often meant taking leaves from work and putting personal and family commitments aside. For some, it can be a huge financial risk. Many are not willing to take this risk when they know they're facing an incumbent. Incumbency is a major reason why people are reelected. 

This isn't my opinion. It's been studied and the evidence indicates, overwhelmingly, that incumbency plays a huge role in electoral outcomes at the municipal level. If there were more open elections in wards, due to term limits, this would level the playing field and allow more candidates to participate in our democracy without having to fight the incumbent advantage. Regular elections have not been attended by the majority of the voting public in Hamilton for many decades. I don't think they're an accurate measure of the support any one politician has and I think we all have to do better to lower barriers to participation and to encourage all voters to participate in our democracy.

Clr. Pauls: New voices don’t necessarily need to win elections to make themselves heard. For instance, we have a process known as delegations, where residents and business owners frequently schedule time to speak in front of council members at committee meetings and whose presentations become part of the record. What delegates present often plants the seeds of future initiatives.

Dedicated councillors consider all voices and contrasting opinions that exist within their constituency, whether they’re new to the job or seasoned in the representation of their ward. I strive to keep a clear pulse on the often-varying sentiments within my own ward, to achieve a balanced and honest reflection of residents’ collective attitudes and beliefs. This involves regular one-on-one time with residents via phone calls, face to face conversations, and often, house calls.

3. Would you personally support provincial legislation that gives municipalities the option to implement term limits? If so, what structure (e.g., two consecutive terms) would you find appropriate?

Clr. Kroetsch: I would definitely support such Provincial legislation. To be clear, the Province is very aware of this issue and has purposely refused to implement it. Many of those who have been incumbents for decades at the municipal level have influence within Provincial governments and want to hold on to their seats. I have no faith the Provincial government will take on this issue. I would prefer the Province impose a two term limit for every seat, but I would also consider supporting a three term limit if there was a compelling case made for it. To date, I haven't heard one, but I remain open minded to that particular part of the discussion.

Clr. Pauls: I wouldn’t support this kind of legislation, which I find an imposition on the voter. I maintain a strong belief that if only new candidates are being offered, and none of them appeal to the voter, the voter’s voice may become silenced, and their civic engagement restricted. The option to vote for the person they like best in the candidate roster should remain as it is. I don’t see any term limitations as constructive or fair to voters. Further, a seasoned Councillor offers benefits such as first-hand historical knowledge and experience with City process and protocol, relationships with other elected officials at various levels of government and City partners, and has been a part of the evolution of the City to the point at which elections take place.

4. Do you believe that one factor contributing to the reluctance of some long-serving municipal politicians to step aside and make space for new representation is a fear of “what comes next” after public office? Put differently, do you think that for some individuals, politics has become so deeply embedded as a source of livelihood and identity that the desire to remain in power outweighs broader considerations of democratic renewal?

Clr. Kroetsch: I do think that plays a role, for sure. Whatever your reason for getting into politics, once you're an elected official, things change pretty drastically. Public life often involves sharing your views in public. Those views may be perceived positively, but also negatively, which can make it difficult to leave public life and transition to private life. I'm sympathetic to this challenge, but this is another reason why I support term limits. If every Councillor knew there was a time limit, they might be forced to plan differently.

 I think it's also important to point out that at the municipal level, in Hamilton anyway, there's no transition program like at other levels of government. Right now, MPPs and MPs who are not reelected are paid a severance and supported to transition back to private life. At the municipal level, you're basically on your own. I think this harsh reality can harden some seasoned politicians. All of this disincentivizes Councillors from moving on and entrenches them in their roles and their identities. With between 35,000 and 40,000 in every ward, there are many other people who could do this work very well. I think it's important for Councillors to help others take on this work, not block them using the incumbent advantage. Everyone would be better off having more voices at the table doing this work. Change can be good, even if it's difficult.

Clr. Pauls: I certainly wouldn’t want to comment on the motivation of other elected officials. Again, residents are empowered to discern for themselves the kind of leadership they prefer. The advantage voters have when scrutinizing any incumbent is the elected official’s tangible track record. The voter’s conscientious analysis of such is vital to the power of one’s own vote and should be sufficient for gauging the calibre of any incumbent.

As we receive more responses, we will publish them. Stay tuned...

The City and The Cybersecurity Update

At The Hamiltonian, we take a measured view of polished media releases—particularly those shaped by strategic messaging and so-called "spin doctoring." While such approaches may have been effective in the past, we believe our readers expect — and deserve — greater transparency, substance, and authenticity.

In a show of candour and post-crisis transparency however, the City of Hamilton has provided the public with a comprehensive breakdown of the February 2024 cyberattack that paralyzed municipal systems and tested the city's digital resilience. At the General Issues Committee meeting on July 30, 2025, four detailed reports laid bare the scale of the breach, the ransom demand — a staggering $18.5 million — and the city’s multi-million-dollar recovery efforts.

The Hamiltonian applauds the city for being forthright. Here is their media release: 

Cybersecurity Update: City of Hamilton provides more incident details, including ransom amount

Hamilton, ON – The City of Hamilton provided an update on the February 25, 2024, cybersecurity incident, including new details on how the sophisticated cybercriminals gained access to City systems and the ransom demand of approximately $18.5 million (CAD).

This information was presented at the July 30, 2025, General Issues Committee Meeting through four reports:

Building Better: Post-Cyber Project Portfolio Update (CM25007)
Cybersecurity Incident Summary (CM25008); including Appendix ‘A’ - Post Cyber Incident Summary by technical advisor CYPFER Canada Inc (CYPFER)
Cybersecurity Costing Update (CM24005(b))
Cybersecurity Resiliency Enhancements (CM25009)

“I understand why Hamiltonians are frustrated - this was a serious and costly breach," said Mayor Andrea

Kroetsch and Questions

It seems that comments recently made by Clr. Kroetsch at a police service board meeting regarding private funding for the new arena, are blowing up. Our friends at The Hamilton Spectator today feature an opinion piece by Scott Radley (see it here), where Mr. Radley argues that Clr. Kroetsch has missed the point concening the value of having a renovated arena in his ward. We are not so sure we agree.

It’s easy to be swept up in the excitement of a $300-million private investment — especially when it promises to revitalize a downtown that has struggled for decades. We recall not so long ago when the renovated Lister Block was supposed to be the missing link to a revitalized core.

Ward 2 Councillor Cameron Kroetsch's measured approach to the redevelopment of Hamilton's arena shouldn't be misread as a lack of enthusiasm. It is a reflection of his responsibility as a local representative committed to ensuring that the benefits of large-scale development are shared by those most impacted — his constituents.

Kroetsch's concern over community benefit is not obstructionist; it’s principled. Downtown Hamilton is not just a blank canvas waiting for private capital to paint over — it is home to thousands of residents, many of whom live on modest incomes, rely on accessible public space, and have historically borne the externalities of urban "revitalization" projects. To ask how profits will be reinvested in the community, how local infrastructure will bear increased foot traffic, and how policing and public safety costs will be addressed is not to undermine progress — it's to advocate for thoughtful, equitable planning.

Asking “who pays for added policing?” is a fiscal question every councillor should ask when private profits come with public costs. If the city is saving on operations and maintenance of the arena, why shouldn’t part of that savings — or new revenue from the project — be directed toward services that ensure local residents aren’t merely hosting success, but participating in it?

Being a steward takes courage. Councillor Kroetsch is doing what we should expect from our elected leaders — asking the right questions to ensure that possibility becomes prosperity for the people who call downtown home.

You have to get up bright and early to penetrate the concerns of Hamiltonians. They are a resilient bunch who have seen the promise of a revitalized downtown where everyone benefits, come and go many times. Keep asking those questions Councillor!

The Hamiltonian

Firm Limits: End Lifetime Politics

End Lifetime Politics 
By The Hamiltonian Editorial Team 

Hamilton is no stranger to long-serving municipal politicians. Some have remained in office for decades, gliding through election cycles with little substantive challenge. While institutional knowledge and experience can benefit governance, unchecked tenure risks calcifying power and eroding the democratic vitality that municipal leadership depends on.

Consider Councillor Tom Jackson, who has represented Ward 6 since 1988. While many residents hold his dedication in high regard, more than three decades in public office raises a fair and necessary question: Should any one individual preside over the same elected role for this long?

And Councillor Jackson is not alone. In the most recent municipal election, Hamilton voters witnessed the departure—voluntary or otherwise—of several long-serving councillors. This electoral shift signalled a growing appetite for renewal. Yet the underlying issue remains: without term limits, the system allows—and often encourages—lifetime political tenure.

A common argument against term limits is that elections themselves serve as the ultimate democratic mechanism: if voters desire change, they can simply vote an incumbent out. In theory, this is true. In practice, however, the playing field is far from level. Incumbents enjoy formidable advantages: name recognition, media familiarity, access to resources, and, often, the benefit of a disengaged electorate. Ever notice how potholes are patched, parks are cleaned, and newsletters are mailed with urgency— during election season?

Low voter turnout further compounds the problem. Municipal elections typically suffer from abysmal participation rates, and contests are often won not on bold vision, but on inertia. The longer someone holds office, the harder they become to unseat—not due to merit, but because the system subtly shields them from true competition.

Municipalities across North America have recognized this dynamic. In the United States, nearly all major cities—including New York, Los Angeles, Houston, and San Francisco—impose term limits on mayors and councillors, usually capping service at two or three consecutive terms. Even Mexico, once bound by an inflexible prohibition on re-election, now permits municipal officials to serve up to two terms before stepping aside.

Canada, by contrast, is an outlier. No Canadian municipality, including Hamilton, imposes term limits. Under current legislation, municipal politicians may serve indefinitely. And many do.

This is not an indictment of individual councillors. It is a systemic concern. Long tenure, regardless of intent, can lead to policy stagnation, insular networks, diminished transparency, and weakened public trust. It discourages diverse voices from emerging and reinforces the perception that municipal politics is a closed circle rather than a public trust.

It is also worth noting a troubling correlation. Many of the councillors who declined The Hamiltonian’s invitation to participate in a recent outreach initiative—designed to provide a platform for them to share their goals and perspectives—are multi-term incumbents. Councillor Jackson and his office, despite multiple contact attempts, did not respond at all. Communication barriers cannot be cited, as our requests were sent through multiple channels. Was his silence rooted in complacency? A sense of entitlement? Indifference toward a civic media platform? It is difficult to say when no effort is made to engage.

Term limits are not punitive—they are protective. They safeguard the spirit of democratic service by ensuring that elected office remains a temporary privilege, not a lifelong possession. Term limits foster urgency in leadership, innovation in policy, and fairness at the ballot box.

Democracy does not thrive when power is hoarded. It thrives when it is renewed, shared, and ultimately passed on.

We will end this piece by celebrating those Councillors and Mayor Horwath,  who have take the time to share their thoughts and leadership with The Hamiltonian, to the benefit of Hamiltonians.

Here is our list with links:

Mayor Andrea Horwath
Ward 2 – Cameron Kroetsch
Ward 3 – Nrinder Nann
Ward 4 – Tammy Hwang 

Ward 7 – Esther Pauls
Ward 9 – Brad Clark
Ward 10 – Jeff Beattie
Ward 15 – Ted McMeekin

Photo by Parker Johnson on Unsplash

MEDIA ADVISORY: City of Hamilton to break ground on new fire and police station in Waterdown

For Immediate Release July 28, 2025 HAMILTON, ON— To better service Waterdown’s growing community, the City of Hamilton is breaking ground on a new 43,000-square-foot fire and police station in Waterdown. The facility will improve emergency response times, modernize services and enhance public safety. Located at 20 Parkside Drive, the new station will include a 911 call centre and a collision reporting centre, giving residents easier access to critical services in one central location. The station, which will feature an environmentally sustainable design, is expected to be completed by August 2027. Once operational, the joint facility will include a shared fire and police dispatch centre, enabling faster, more coordinated emergency response and an improved resident experience.

The Adverse Impact of Automated Voice Technology on Customer Service

In today's fast-paced, tech-driven world, businesses across industries have adopted automated voice technology to streamline customer service operations. While the intention is to reduce costs and improve efficiency, this growing reliance on automated systems has sparked increasing frustration among customers who feel underserved by these digital interfaces. Rather than enhancing the customer experience, automated voice technology is often hindering meaningful interactions and eroding customer satisfaction.

 
Automated voice technology has become ubiquitous in customer service. From phone systems that prompt customers with endless menu options to artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots handling inquiries, businesses are increasingly turning to automation as a way to handle large volumes of requests quickly and without human intervention. On the surface, these systems promise greater efficiency and 24/7 availability — two key benefits that seem to appeal to businesses and customers alike.

However, the reality is more complicated.

One of the most significant complaints about automated systems is the lack of personalization and the increasing frustration they create. Customers who call customer service often find themselves trapped in an endless loop of prerecorded messages, with no option to speak to a live representative unless they can navigate a series of convoluted options. This disconnect not only results in wasted time but also exacerbates the stress that many customers already feel when trying to resolve issues.

While automated systems may be able to handle basic inquiries, they often fail to provide adequate solutions for more complex or nuanced problems. For instance, a customer trying to resolve a billing dispute or technical issue might find that the AI is not capable of understanding the specific details of their case. Without the human element, which is crucial for critical thinking and empathy, these systems leave customers feeling unheard and frustrated.

Customer service is, at its core, about building relationships and providing support during moments of need. A real person on the other end of the line can offer empathy, understanding, and nuanced solutions — things that an automated system simply cannot replicate. The advent of automated voice technology, particularly in the form of IVR (Interactive Voice Response) systems and chatbots, has been criticized for stripping away the very human connection that businesses once prided themselves on.

Automation also hinders the ability of customers to have their voices truly heard. When a system fails to comprehend the full context of a customer’s issue, it often defaults to generic responses or asks the same questions repeatedly. This lack of attention to detail leads to customers feeling as though their concerns are being brushed aside or ignored entirely.

The argument for automated systems is often rooted in efficiency. By reducing the need for live agents to handle routine tasks, businesses can save on labor costs, theoretically passing on these savings to the customer. however, there is no assurance that any savings will be passed on to the customer.  While automation may provide a short-term cost benefit, the long-term costs of alienating customers can be severe. Research has consistently shown that poor customer experiences lead to decreased loyalty, negative reviews, and a decline in repeat business. 

Automated voice technology has revolutionized customer service in many ways, but it has also introduced significant challenges that cannot be overlooked. While it promises efficiency and cost savings, it risks undermining the very essence of customer service — meaningful and empathetic communication. To ensure that businesses continue to meet their customers' needs, they must reconsider their reliance on automation and prioritize the human element that truly defines great service. 

Businesses and other entities must also refrain from sending unsolicited advertisements or irrelevant messages through outgoing communications, particularly those that have little or no connection to the customer's original inquiry or reason for calling.

Are you tired of shouting into the phone "real person please!?"....

Media Release: Increased risk for West Nile Virus in Hamilton

HAMILTON, ON – A batch of mosquitoes trapped this week in Hamilton tested positive for West Nile virus (WNV). These are the first WNV positive mosquitos for Hamilton this year, prompting Hamilton’s Medical Officer of Health to move the WNV risk from low to moderate.

Residents are reminded to protect themselves against mosquito bites and to remove standing water from private property to prevent mosquito breeding.

The City of Hamilton continually assesses the risk for human illness as part of a comprehensive West Nile Virus surveillance and prevention program. The City has completed its second round of larviciding treatments on city street catch basins.

While most people infected with West Nile virus will have no symptoms (approximately 80 per cent), others including older adults or those with weakened immune systems may experience West Nile fever (~20 per cent) or they may develop more severe illness including inflammation of the brain or the lining of the brain (~1 per cent). For any infection, if symptoms do occur, they appear two to 14 days after being bitten by an infected mosquito.

Protect yourself and your family from mosquitoes:Avoid being bitten by mosquitoes
Use a mosquito repellent (bug spray) containing DEET or Icaridin. 

Avoid areas where mosquitoes are known to be present or cover up by wearing light coloured long sleeves and long pants when in mosquito areas such as wooded areas, on the golf course, or in the garden, 

especially at dawn and dusk when mosquitoes are most active

Reduce mosquito breeding sites by removing standing water at least weekly from your property

“In the warmer months it is important to take precautions to avoid illnesses spread by insects including West Nile Virus and Lyme disease,” said Dr. Bart Harvey, Associate Medical Officer of Health. “Employing simple preventive measures such as using insect repellent containing DEET or Icaridin, and wearing loose fitting, light-colored clothing will reduce your risk while you enjoy the outdoors.”

For additional information on West Nile virus visit www.hamilton.ca/westnile or call 905-546-2489.
Additional Resources:

Webpage: Hamilton’s Standing Water By-law
• Webpage: Public Health Ontario – West Nile Virus Surveillance

A Long Walk for a Better Tomorrow: Esther Pauls’ Mission to Support Hamilton’s Men’s Residence

As the summer sun shines down on Hamilton, one local leader is stepping up to make a difference in the lives of men who face some of the city's toughest challenges. Esther Pauls, Councillor for Ward 7, is part of a team of 10 participants in the upcoming 72km “Long Walk Home,” set to take place on September 5th and 6th. The event, organized in support of the YMCA Hamilton, Burlington, and Brantford’s Men’s Residence, has set a goal of raising $50,000 to help fund the vital services that support men in need.

Pauls, a passionate advocate for those facing housing insecurity, has set her own ambitious fundraising goal of $5,000. With a community-focused mindset, she has already raised a fifth of that target, but there’s much more to be done.

As a member of the Hamilton City Council, Esther Pauls has long been aware of the rising rates of houselessness in our community. She knows firsthand the obstacles that many men in our city face, and how critical it is to provide more than just temporary solutions. The YMCA’s Men’s Residence provides far-reaching support, including housing, food, mental health services, addiction recovery programs, and employment resources. This holistic approach helps give men the tools they need to rebuild their lives and focus on long-term goals.

"The Men’s Residence isn’t just a place to sleep," says Pauls. "It’s a community hub that helps individuals gain confidence, develop skills, and regain a sense of purpose. I’m proud to be walking in support of this organization and the incredible impact they have on our city’s most vulnerable."

The impact of the YMCA’s Men’s Residence cannot be understated. Currently, it serves 174 men, offering them critical resources in their journey to recovery and stability. By supporting this initiative, Pauls hopes to keep more people off the streets, providing them not just with shelter, but with the support they need to build a better future.

For Esther, the Long Walk Home is more than just a fundraising event—it’s a statement of solidarity and hope for the men who benefit from the YMCA’s services.

If you’d like to learn more about Esther’s fundraising efforts or support her cause, you can visit her fundraising page here.

The Hamiltonian applauds Clr. Pauls!!!

Media Release: Hamilton Police Service Board- Newest Member

HAMILTON POLICE SERVICE BOARD ANNOUNCES ITS NEWEST PROVINCIALLY APPOINTED MEMBER

The Hamilton Police Service Board (Board) is pleased to announce the two year provincial appointment of Robin St. Jean to the Board. With this appointment, the Board has now reached its seven member capacity.

The Hamilton Police Service Board is the civilian body governing the Hamilton PoliceService. Through the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, the board is responsible for ensuring the delivery of adequate and effective policing in Hamilton and to provide accountability to the public through governance activities that contribute to locally responsive policing.

Robin brings numerous years of leadership experience, negotiating and conflict management skills to the Board. Since 1979, he has been actively involved in all facets of real estate. He is currently President of Michael St. Jean Realty and President of Durand Development Corporation, a real estate investment and development company since 1982.

Robin is committed to supporting several local charities, including the Christmas Tree of Hope, Operation Santa Claus, the Great Holiday Food Drive, and World Vision. He is an active motorcycle enthusiast and participant in organized sport shooting. Robin is a long-time resident of Hamilton and currently resides in Ancaster with his wife Teresa.They have two sons, Michael and Stephen, and are active members of the community.

Robin is a huge supporter of all things Hamilton and looks forward to contributing to the community and citizens of Hamilton. He values civic responsibility and is eager to continue to contribute to public safety and community well-being through his role on the Board.

"Get Smart" with Dr. Mark Carlotto

In this edition of "Get Smart":, we are fortunate to have Dr. Mark Carlotto with us. Dr. Carlotto is an accomplished scientist and engineer with over four decades of experience in aerospace imaging, signal processing, and remote sensing. A graduate of Carnegie Mellon University, he has worked on advanced technologies for satellite imaging and has contributed to the development of novel techniques in computer vision and pattern recognition.

Dr. Carlotto is widely known for his independent analysis of planetary imagery, including his pioneering work on the controversial "Face on Mars," where he applied rigorous scientific methods to examine potential anomalies in NASA photographs. His research, publications, and public commentary reflect a unique balance between scientific discipline and openness to unconventional inquiry, making him a respected voice in both mainstream and alternative scientific communities.

Enjoy our chat with Dr. Carlotto:

1. In your opinion, what is the most compelling piece of evidence suggesting past or present life on Mars? Or, do you believe such evidence exists?

There is some circumstantial evidence of past life on Mars including the 1976 Viking Lander experiments and microfossils in the ALH84001 Mars meteorite. Mars’ red color is due to the presence of iron oxide that could have only formed in an oxygen-rich atmosphere. On Earth, oxygen is produced by photosynthesis, which requires water. Evidence for water on Mars includes geological formations like river channels and valleys, and chemical compounds that form in water-rich environments. I would not be surprised if there are places underground, perhaps in caves, where ancient life may still exist.

2. You have applied advanced image analysis to controversial structures, such as the "Face on Mars." What did your analysis reveal, and how should we interpret these findings? Is the "Face on Mars" merely a photographic anomaly, or does it suggest something more significant?

Note: The following description provides context for the next question we asked Dr. Carlotto:

The "Face on Mars"  is a mesa located in the Cydonia region of Mars, first photographed by NASA's Viking 1 orbiter in 1976. The image captured a formation that appeared to resemble a human face, sparking widespread speculation about the possibility of ancient Martian civilizations. 

In light of this characterization, Dr. Carlotto's views are very interesting. Here is Dr. Carlotto's answer: 

I used a method developed in the early days of computer vision, known as shape-from-shading to generate 3-D views of an object from its 2-D image. My analysis, published in 1988 in the journal Applied Optics revealed that the impression of a face was not an optical illusion as NASA had claimed but persisted over different viewpoints and lighting conditions. 

I later went on to discover evidence the Face could be a purposefully-designed, highly symmetrical structure that has been eroded by the Martian environment over millions of years to produce the formation we see today. Adding to the possibility that the Face and surrounding structures could be artificial is their alignment in the direction of the summer solstice sunrise on Mars more than a quarter of a million years ago.

3. Elon Musk has long advocated for the possibility of humans living on Mars. Do you find his vision plausible? What are the major challenges to achieving this, and are they surmountable?

It is plausible. But while SpaceX’s rapid spiral development/iterative design methodology is good for rocket development, it would be a concern if extended to the establishment of a human colony of Mars or the Moon. 

4. Could you explain the concept of remote sensing technology, and how do your satellite and remote sensing techniques translate into practical applications here on Earth?

Remote sensing is the science of acquiring information about an object or area from a distance, without physical contact. It typically involves using sensors on satellites or aircraft to detect and measure electromagnetic radiation reflected or emitted by the Earth's surface or atmosphere. This data is then

Introducing "Get Smart,"

Introducing "Get Smart," a captivating new feature from The Hamiltonian, where we dive into the minds of big thinkers, visionary leaders, and groundbreaking scientists. Each instalment will showcase thought-provoking interviews that offer unique insights on a wide array of topics, from cutting-edge research to transformative ideas shaping our world. 

With "Get Smart," we aim to  inspire new ways of thinking through engaging conversations with the brightest minds of our time. Stay tuned for a series of discussions that promise to challenge perceptions and spark innovation. Our first guest will be fascinating! Stay tuned....

Reconciliation After Labour Disruption: A Path Forward- The Hamiltonian's View

Labour disruptions often have long-lasting, corrosive effects. Feelings of being undervalued breed resentment, which can damage relationships between management and employees, and at times, even among employees themselves. When this resentment deepens, the resulting entrenchment can lead to permanent fractures within these critical relationships.

At this juncture, the most important question is how to move forward. While forgiveness and forgetting may seem unattainable or unrealistic in the face of perceived or real injustices, there is wisdom in choosing to move on.

Moving forward does not mean accepting the outcomes or condoning the process. Nor does it mean walking away from unresolved issues. It means recognizing the value of maintaining professionalism, even when the circumstances are less than ideal. This approach, focused on self-preservation and the broader goal of progress, applies to both the City of Hamilton’s authorities and union members alike.

Public service workers deserve dignity, fairness, and acknowledgment of their essential roles in maintaining the infrastructure that sustains our city. At the same time, stewardship of public resources demands that negotiations remain transparent and equitable.

True reconciliation does not require forgetting the tensions that led to the impasse. Instead, it demands an honest acknowledgment of these tensions. This means that City leadership must demonstrate that lessons have been learned, with an emphasis on improving communication, improving negotiation practices, and instituting safeguards to prevent future breakdowns.

While The Hamiltonian has strived to remain neutral and represent the interests of Hamiltonians, it was difficult to observe the portrayal of union members merely as disruptors.  The Hamiltonian provided thorough, balanced reporting. To do otherwise would only serve to exacerbate the tension surrounding the labour disruption.

Reconciliation must also safeguard the broader public interest. We must demand a complete accounting of the financial impact of the strike, as promised, and ensure that future contracts are negotiated in a manner that balances workers’ rights with the city’s long-term sustainability. The Hamiltonian has made this request of the city and we will report back once we receive this information. See it here. 

Stay tuned to The Hamiltonian as we continue to follow this story. 

With Dr. Catherine Connelly- on Toxic Workplaces

 

Chances are, if you’ve spent time in the workforce, you or someone close to you has encountered a toxic work environment. This all-too-common reality can have profound and lasting effects on a person’s well-being, both professionally and personally.

The Hamiltonian is fortunate to have Dr. Catherine Connelly as our expert guest. Dr. Connelly is a Canada Research Chair in Organizational Behaviour at McMaster University’s DeGroote School of Business. Her work explores issues of workplace fairness, employee voice, precarious work, and organizational culture. Widely recognized for her research on toxic workplaces and non-standard employment, Dr. Connelly has advised both public- and private-sector organizations on how to create healthier, more inclusive work environments. She is a trusted voice in Canadian labour research and an advocate for better workplace policies that reflect the realities of today'sg evolving workforce.

Here is our Q/A with Dr. Connelly:

1. In your professional opinion, what are the most common characteristics of a toxic workplace, and how can individuals differentiate between temporary dysfunction and deep-rooted, systemic toxicity?

A toxic workplace is characterized by extreme worker mistreatment, which can take many forms. On the one hand, the abuse can be psychological, and consist of bosses who are engaging in name-calling, bullying, taking credit for others’ ideas, socially excluding people, or threatening to fire someone for minor mistakes. However, abuse can also include occupational health and safety violations such as failing to provide appropriate safety training or equipment, or wage theft – when the organization illegally underpays someone for the work they have done. 

At first it can be difficult to tell if a difficult workplace is truly toxic or if unfair treatment is an isolated incident. However, if the abuse is facilitated by an HR system (e.g., if the payroll system is set up to not pay you properly for overtime), is caused by several people, or no action is taken when you complain then the abuse is systemic.

2. With the rise of remote and hybrid work, how have workplace cultures been impacted, particularly regarding the emergence or concealment of toxic dynamics?

Some employees prefer to work from home because it helps them to avoid toxic coworkers. 

However, bullying can still happen online. Also, when workers are expected to answer emails and interact with colleagues at all hours there is a weaker separation between work and home. Workplace mistreatment can feel even worse when you work from home, because home is no longer a “safe haven”. 

3. Many individuals who find themselves victimized by toxic workplace environments often turn to internal policies for guidance on available recourses. However, the spirit of these policies can sometimes

IUOE 772 to Pursue FOI on Strike Costs

The IUOE Local 772 intends to file a Freedom of Information request application to the City of Hamilton, as early as today. We will request - replacement labour costs including City staff who did not perform their jobs, scabs and contractors, third party security, AFIMAC, costs for 24/7 coverage throughout City including accommodations at Sandman, costs for van service to transport replacement workers, privacy fencing around Woodward, water main breaks and repairs, overtime costs, training costs, penalties and overrun costs for HSR construction site operated by Pomerleau, and lost productivity for water distribution, wastewater collection crews, road crews and garbage pick ups, fire department attendance and associated damage at HSR main hub caused by bus idling indoors, extra City of Hamilton corporate security costs, meeting costs and any other strike associated costs.

We believe taxpayers have a right to know the cost of the decision to not agree to a parity cost of $300000 for 54 water employees.

Thanks again to the Hamiltonian for pursuing this important issue.

Greg Hoath
Business Manager IUOE 772

Striking Out

As the labour dispute between the City of Hamilton and its water workers continued, The Hamiltonian, along with the union, repeatedly requested a breakdown of the strike’s financial impact on Hamilton taxpayers. Given the availability of budgeting tools, spreadsheets, and project management systems, one would assume the City has the means to maintain a running tally of these costs.

Despite these ongoing requests, the City has yet to provide a cost breakdown. Most recently, it informed The Hamiltonian that a report will be presented at an upcoming General Issues Committee meeting—though no specific date has been shared.

This  only heightens public interest. Our detailed request can be found here, and we remain committed to pursuing answers on behalf of our readers. Stay tuned.

Update of Strike Ratification

Update from Greg Hoath Business Manager IUOE 772O

On Wednesday July 9th the bargaining unit ratified the agreement. We have secured the right to arbitrate the pay equity, market equality issue, key to the strike settlement.

With Special Guest- Iconic Music Producer Bob Ezrin

If you’ve  lived on planet Earth, it’s highly likely that you’ve encountered the work of the legendary music producer, Bob Ezrin.

Ezrin’s masterful production can be heard on iconic albums such as Pink Floyd’s The Wall and The Division Bell, Kiss – Destroyer, Alice Cooper – School’s Out and Billion Dollar Babies, Peter Gabriel – Car, U2 – Songs of Surrender, and Andrea Bocelli – Si.  His work spans decades, shaping the sound of multiple genres and artists.

In addition, throughout his career, Bob has collaborated with a diverse roster of talent, including Lou Reed, Jane’s Addiction, David Gilmour, Kansas, Julian Lennon, The Babys, Tim Curry, Hollywood Vampires, Dr. John, Johnny Reid, and many others. His work with these artists has left an indelible mark on the music world.

Bob was also instrumental in reshaping and making Beth  one of Kiss's biggest hits, displaying his knack for  transforming ideas into unforgettable music.

In a special feature for The Hamiltonian, we are thrilled to chat with Bob Ezrin, a friend of The Hamiltonian's  founder, Cal DiFalco. Here is our conversation  with the man who has help shape the soundtrack of countless lives.

1. You’ve described the role of a producer as “part psychologist, part technician, and part dreamer.” In your experience, does the heart of producing lie more in drawing out the artist’s best through trust and atmosphere, rather than prioritizing pure musicality? 

The art of Producing is in creating a relationship and environment that inspires and frees the artist to be their best. Musicality naturally follows. Leading from the other direction can result in technically good but artistically less than optimum results.

2. You’ve worked with iconic figures such as Pink Floyd, Alice Cooper, Kiss, Peter Gabriel, and Lou Reed—artists whose music has shaped generations. Does the global impact of your work ever feel surreal? Are there moments when you hear a song you produced on the radio and find yourself transported back to the studio where it all happened, or can you simply enjoy it as a listener?

More often than not, I have forgotten some of the elements in records that I produced and so, hearing them on the radio, often leads to a feeling of discovery. I listen to everything as both a fan and a practitioner. That doesn’t leave a lot of room for wandering back in time. There are some times that I hear something I have totally forgotten about, and when that happens it can trigger a lot of memories. Occasionally I will hear something that catches my ear and think “that sounds great.,.I wonder what it is” only to realize a few seconds later that it’s one of mine. I love those moments.

3. In the studio, how do you recognize when an artist has reached their peak during a session? Is there a moment you look for—an instinct—that tells you, “this is it,” and that any further takes might risk diminishing the magic rather than enhancing it?

It is pretty obvious to me when someone has hit their peak and also when they are flagging. I would think it’s less “instinct” than training and experience that allows me to make these judgements effectively.

4. The Wall* has become one of the most legendary and emotionally complex rock albums in history. What was the most creatively or personally intense moment for you during that project, and how did that experience help shape the final work?

There is no one moment that was the “most creative” or “most intense”. The project was a series of highs and lows, some pretty extreme, that continued over a period of months and months until we had finally built The Wall. During the process, we hit what were new highs and some new and unexpected lows for me, but mostly it was an intensely creative and thrilling time where almost anything was possible because we had all the resources, as much time as we wanted and unfettered imaginations. We were totally free to fly.

5. With home studios, accessible plugins, and increasingly affordable recording tools, how can independent producers and artists guard against overproduction? Do you believe “less is more” still applies in today’s digital age, and what advice would you give to maintain artistic authenticity in such a saturated environment?

I always insist on starting with the basic elements of a new work. I don’t want to start with production. Sometimes, one can start gilding the lily before it becomes a lily. And the flower that is the core of the work, wilts under the weight of it. If you are working in song form, then for me it’s all about the song - the story set to music. And I encourage people to sit down with whatever their instrument is and work out the melody and at least the basic lyrics to the piece before adorning it with production. I think a great song should be performable completely stripped down and still move people. Of course there are compositions that are more about the garden than the individual flower. These are soundscapes that are the bed the song gets planted in. But they are as important as the song itself. And there are some that are built on an instrumental motif - like a synth or guitar riff - where the instrumental hook is as important as the melodic and lyrical one. Whatever the memorable element in the work is, it should be perfected before it is embellished. That’s my opinion.

6. The music industry continues to evolve dramatically—with streaming, AI-generated compositions, and algorithm-driven platforms. From your vantage point, what does the future of true artistry look like? How can artists remain authentic in an increasingly automated world?

Artists always use tools to create. Whether the tool is as simple as language or as complex as Artificial Intelligence, the process is the same: an artist has a feeling or an idea and they need to find a way to express it. If they are painters, they start painting. If they are musicians, they start playing. They start using the available tools to express themselves. At the core of their work is the feeling or idea and for the work to have real validity those must be important and engaging. In the best cases, they are life altering. In the mediocre or worst cases, they end up being irrelevant.

7. If you could revisit one recording session from your storied career—not to change anything, but to relive it for the sheer joy of the moment—what session would it be, and why does it stand out so vividly in your memory?

It would be the sessions when the Beatles recorded She’s Leaving Home or Strawberry Fields - or when the Beach Boys recorded Good Vibrations. These three stand out because those recordings include almost every kind of modern music miracle. And of course, there’s the session when Pink Floyd recorded Comfortably Numb…wait…;-)


Note:

The list of recorded works mentioned above is by no means representative of Bob's entire body of work. He has produced many additional works.

Bob also has a big heart and has made generous contributions to charities of his choosing.

Thanks Bob for the inspiration and the music!

Teresa DiFalco, Publisher-The Hamiltonian

City of Hamilton Media Release:82 new units of affordable housing opened by CityHousing Hamilton

Community-focused affordable housing with future YWCA-operated child care centre transform former City Motor Hotel site

HAMILTON, ON – The City of Hamilton is increasing the supply of affordable housing with the opening of 55 Queenston Road and 1620 Main Street East, an innovative CityHousing Hamilton (CHH) development offering 82-units of affordable, near net-zero community-focused housing. The two buildings are located on the former City Motor Hotel site at the Queenston traffic circle in the city’s east end.

1620 Main Street East

Through the Rapid Housing Initiative funding from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, CityHousing Hamilton completed 1620 Main Street East at a rapid 13-month pace from construction start to occupancy. This six-storey, 42-unit mass timber building leverages offsite prefabricated construction to rapidly deliver affordable high-performance energy-efficient housing. 1620 Main Street East is one of the first multi-residential mass-timber passive house buildings in North America. This development represents a new standard for what is possible when modular construction, mass timber, and passive house principles come together in a fast and efficient delivery model.

“Stability, dignity, and opportunity - that’s what safe, affordable, and sustainable housing makes possible. I’m so excited that families, seniors and individuals will now have that here at Queenston Road and Main Street East,” said Mayor Andrea Horwath. “This site was home to the City Motor Hotel, a building that had become a blight in the neighbourhood. The City's foresight has led us to where we are today. This ribbon cutting is a sign of where Hamilton is headed: housing solutions that meet real community needs. These buildings show what’s possible when we work together to tackle the housing crisis with urgency, creativity and care."

“Having access to safe and affordable homes for all is key to improving the health and well-being of our communities. I am delighted to see that construction is complete for 1620 Main Street East and 55 Queenston Road. The official opening of these projects is another example of the federal government’s commitment toward ensuring that no one is left behind,” said Aslam Rana, Member of Parliament for Hamilton Centre. “Thank you to all our partners and people behind the scenes who helped bring these projects to completion, I wish the new resident’s great success on their new homes.”

55 Queenston Road

The first of the two-phase development, the project laid the groundwork for the blazing construction speed of 1620 Main Street East. Together with 20 deeply affordable rent-geared-to-income units, 20 moderately affordable mid-market units and a 26-space childcare centre operated by YWCA, 55 Queenston Road exemplifies an inclusive, sustainable, affordable and forward-thinking community-focused housing strategy. The development is part of CHH’s plan to ambitiously expand Hamilton’s affordable housing supply.

"These two buildings are another example of CityHousing Hamilton delivering tangible solutions to meet housing needs across the city, while also leading on climate resilience and providing broader social benefits and services to the community,” said CityHousing Hamilton Board President and Ward 3 Councillor Nrinder Nann. “Affordable and accessible childcare matters for our tenants and adjacent neighbours. Ensuring our buildings have a thriving multi-generational mix of tenancy is key to fostering healthy communities and we are proud to partner with YWCA Hamilton in making this happen. The power of effective partnership and a push rooted in excellence to deliver the project on an accelerated timeline is truly on display in the opening of these two buildings many will be proud to call home."

Key Highlights

Sustainability Focus:Both buildings will be passive house certified to deliver near net-zero energy performance and near net-zero carbon emissions, reinforcing CityHousing Hamilton’s commitment to sustainability and environmental responsibility.
1620 Main Street East is a mass timber construction project, using sustainably harvested wood in cross laminated panels that were prefabricated offsite for almost the entirety of the structure, including stairwells, elevator shafts and the exterior envelope.
Mass Timber almost eliminates greenhouse gas emission for the production of the structure of the building.Both projects include large solar arrays on the roofs that will generate approximately 30 per cent of each building’s annual electricity use.

Community and Family-Focused:The ground floor of 55 Queenston Road will be home to a future childcare centre, operated by the YWCA Hamilton, bringing 26 licensed, much-needed childcare spaces to the neighbourhood.

Transit-Oriented:Both buildings host innovative partnerships to provide affordable alternative transportation options through Communauto’s car-share program, with two car-share cars available directly on site.

All households will receive memberships to Hamilton Bike Share.
Both buildings are next to a future LRT station and are close to HSR bus stops.

“1620 Main and 55 Queenston are both buildings with remarkable stories,” said Adam Sweedland, CEO, CityHousing Hamilton. “55 Queenston exemplifies community benefit with a partnership with YWCA to provide affordable childcare spaces, and with 1620 Main Street East being completed at a remarkable pace.”

“The City of Hamilton is deeply committed to addressing the housing crisis with a comprehensive, sustainable approach that delivers real, affordable housing solutions,” said City Manager Marnie Cluckie. “These two CityHousing Hamilton projects reflect our community’s needs and demonstrate the power of strong partnerships. We’re building lasting change for the people and families who will call these 82 new units home.”

A breakdown of funding for the $27.5 million 55 Queenston Road project includes:$17.4 million from CityHousing Hamilton

$3 million in funding from the Federal Government’s Affordable Housing Fund
$1.7 million loan from First National Bank through the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s MLI select program
$5.4 million in to-be-announced funding

A breakdown of funding for the $25 million 1620 Main Street East project includes:$7.9 million from CityHousing Hamilton
$10.89 million in Rapid Housing Initiative funding from the Federal Government
$6.3 million from the City of Hamilton

Quick Facts:About CityHousing HamiltonCityHousing Hamilton has a portfolio of 7,142 units of affordable housing in the city, providing homes for more than 13,000 Hamiltonians.
CityHousing Hamilton manages close to 50 per cent of the purpose-built affordable rental stock in Hamilton.

About 55 Queenston RoadIn 2018, CityHousing Hamilton acquired the former City Motor Hotel with the aim to help increase the supply of affordable housing.

50 per cent of units are deeply affordable rent-geared-to-income, 50 per cent of units are moderately affordable ‘half-market’ rent.

25 one-bedroom units; 15 three-bedroom units; 20 per cent barrier free.
About 1620 Main Street East1620 Main Street East received the Third Award (Runner Up) for Sustainable Project of the Year in the 18th edition of the ReThinking the Future Awards.
100 per cent of units are deeply affordable rent geared-to-income.
38 one-bedroom units; 4 two-bedroom units; 20 per cent barrier free.

Additional Resources:CityHousing Hamilton 55 Queenston Road webpage
CityHousing Hamilton 1620 Main Street East webpageThe City of Hamilton Housing Secretariat Division webpage
Housing Accelerator Fund webpage
2022-2026 Council Priorities webpage