Before the Ballot- With Ward 14 Candidate Kojo Damptey

Welcome to this instalment of Before the Ballot featuring Ward 14 Candidate Kojo Damptey

What motivated you to run for council, and why do you believe now is the right time for new leadership in your ward?

As a resident of Ward 14, I see the continuous lack of attention to civic governance, I see the lack of proactive long-term planning for the Ward and the city, I see the lack of urgency to address long-standing issues. Residents across our city are facing acute, unprecedented economic, social, and municipal challenges. The response we see from Council is talking about the challenges ad nauseam without bringing forward tangible solutions and actions. For example, on the Mountain, we are experiencing an increase in youth crimes/violence. Critical questions would be: what strategies are the City, school boards and young people developing to tackle this issue? How are we engaging with parents, youth-led groups, and other interested parties to come up with an action plan to work with youth?

As one of the candidates in the 2022 election, I talked about establishing a youth Council from the high schools in Ward 14 to serve as a conduit for understanding youth concerns. These are some of the ideas, actions, and strategies we need from Councillors to create a city where youth feel they are heard, valued, and are part of the solutions.

From 2019 to 2021, I worked diligently with the City of Hamilton staff to develop Hamilton’s first Community Safety and Well-Being Plan (this plan is mandated by the Provincial government). The plan highlighted the need for a robust coordinated plan to address the following concerns: hate crimes, violence/crime, substance use, mental health stigma, access to income, and homelessness. Five years later, we are still dealing with these issues on a magnified scope. This is another example of the lack of urgency in addressing long standing issues.

I highlight these two examples to point out that we need people on Council who can bring forward ideas, solutions, strategies, and plans that address the overall governance of property taxes, develop sound policy decisions, and represent residents with truth, integrity, and accountability.

With over 10 years of executive leadership experience managing operational budgets and departments, I would bring a wealth of budgeting expertise to ensure that the city’s financial and administrative resources are spent efficiently for residents.

One of the important roles of a Councillor that most people don't pay attention to is understanding policy, implementing it, and making policy decisions that require community engagement with residents, collaboration with other Councillors, and working with city staff. One of the initiatives I am proud of is working with community organizations, health experts, and others to restructure Hamilton’s Board of Health, which was adopted by Council unanimously in 2025.

I am a civic leader, change-maker, community builder, and educator; these skills are what are needed at Council to offer solutions to the challenges we all experience and face.

Every ward has its own unique challenges. What do you believe are the top three issues facing residents in your ward today, and how would you address them?

Inclusive Financial Policy - With unprecedented financial pressures facing families and seniors in Ward 14, city policy and decisions should value interdependence and connectivity. Resilient cities focus on balancing inclusive financial policies that provide services for residents while taking financial strain into account. As City Councillor, I will reduce the tax impact on seniors (+65) by expanding and modernizing the hardship & seniors deferral program. I propose increasing the income threshold from $45,000 ($236 credit) to $65,000. We know seniors are on fixed incomes and the financial strain they are going through needs to be addressed through material policies that allow them to thrive in their homes without undue stress.

Building a sense of Community & Participatory Local Governance - One of the problems I see with Hamilton municipal politics, is that Councillors don’t create spaces for resident input on local Ward decisions. In Ward 14, if you are not on the mailing list of the Councillor’s office you are most likely to miss out on meetings and other information. Ward 14 comprises 9 neighbourhoods: Carpenter, Falkirk, Fessenden, Gilbert, Gilkson Gurnett, Westcliffe, Mountview, and Scenic Woods. While each neighbourhood thrives in solitude, there isn't a sense of collaboration among neighbourhoods and sharing of information among residents across neighbourhoods. I would address this concern by (1) introducing volunteer neighbourhood councils (made up of Ward 14 residents) in all neighbourhoods as a way to build civic capacity and engagement across the Ward, (2) establish a Ward 14 Community Volunteer Council made up of Ward 14 residents to inform City policy and budget decisions at Council and budgeting for Ward 14 projects. These volunteer councils will be a space for resident feedback and concerns.

Transparency at City Hall, Crumbling Infrastructure, Speeding, & Parking - Ward 14 residents are exhausted with the constant mishaps at City Hall - cyberattack, Tiffany debacle, aging infrastructure, and many more. They see these mishaps as taking away from Ward and city improvements for streets, parks, rec centres, libraries, etc. When it comes to street safety, families are concerned about continuous speeding on neighbourhood streets, and parking issues are also top of mind for residents. In 2021, when former Councillor Whitehead was on leave, I worked with City staff to host an online Complete Safe Street meeting. Since then, the Complete Safe Streets plan has slowly been adopted. I will accelerate the street safety enhancements in the Ward 14 Complete Streets Plan. This issue goes back to my concerns about the lack of information presented to residents and how residents are involved in street safety enhancements. This is why I believe it is crucial to have a Councillor who understands community engagement as a way to hear from residents, get feedback, and be accountable to residents.

Municipal government often requires balancing competing interests and difficult budget decisions. How would you approach making tough decisions at City Hall?

I believe the missing ingredient in municipal governance in Hamilton is meaningful community engagement with residents that leads to meaningful action for residents. For example, how many Councillors had town halls before the recent budget for the City? Yes, they may have received several emails from residents stating their displeasure with the tax increase. But did they actually hear from residents in a public setting where consensus is built between residents and the Councillor? This rarely happens. This leads to Councillors blaming each other and the Mayor for tax increases, while they aren’t fulfilling their duty to offer solutions in collaboration with residents, Council colleagues, and city staff.

As I mentioned earlier, my approach to municipal governance is to center community engagement as a space for input, debate, feedback, and implementation TOGETHER. I would hold community town halls in all Ward 14 neighbourhoods to hear from residents about what priorities should inform the budget. Decisions made at these town halls will be integrated into suggestions from city staff and other Councillors. With ample resident feedback and my experience running departments, I will make the difficult decisions regarding financial redundancies.

One idea I would really pursue is holding town halls with other Mountain Councillors (Wards 6, 7, & 8) to discuss the budget and other city concerns. This is a proactive approach to municipal governance that integrates residents into decision-making.

What experience, skills, or perspective do you bring that distinguishes you from other candidates seeking the same council seat?

My work as a change-maker, community builder, civic leader, musician, and educator provides a breadth and depth of knowledge and skills required to take on the role of City Councillor. Now more than ever, we need multi-talented individuals who can juggle the financial, social, economic, and political pressures facing Hamilton. Hamilton and Ward 14 deserve leaders who are willing to roll up their sleeves and deliver for the residents of Hamilton. No more complaining ad nauseam, it is time for solutions and actions and that is what I will bring to Council.

Changing policy at City Hall- Worked with community and health experts to restructure the Board of Health.  https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/board-of-health-reform-1.7085021

One of the platform points I proposed in 2022 was restructuring Hamilton’s Board of Health to include health experts to govern Hamilton Public Health, instead of having 15 Councillors and a Mayor who had no background in health. In 2025, City Council unanimously voted to restructure the Board of Health to include 6 Councillors and 6 community health experts.

From 2019 to 2021, I worked diligently with the City of Hamilton to develop Hamilton’s first Community Safety and Well-Being Plan (this plan is mandated by the Provincial government). The plan highlighted the need for a robust coordinated plan to address the following concerns; hate crimes, violence/crime, substance use, mental health stigma, access to income, and homelessness.

Addressing community & public safety in Hamilton- Worked with the community to develop an independent online platform for reporting hate crimes/incidents in Hamilton.

According to Statistics Canada, in 2019, Hamilton had the highest number of hate crimes per capita in the whole country. As the former executive of a not-for-profit organization, I asked Hamilton Council to take a severe, proactive approach to tackle hate in Hamilton. I met with Members of the Provincial Parliament to discuss these threats. A few Members of the Provincial Parliament understood the dire need to address the potential threat of hate, but wouldn't bring forward any legislation to take this issue head-on. So the only option was to come up with a community response; through research and working with McMaster faculty, we developed an independent user-friendly community platform for reporting hate (www.wesupporthamilton.ca)

Showing up for Mountain Residents- Growing up in Ghana, my parents would say, “Every human being is born into a community; thus, you have to be involved in your community.”- An individual is lost without his/her/their community. This philosophy has shaped my civic participation and civic duty in Hamilton. During the COVID-19 pandemic, I founded the Mountain Mutual Aid Network (MMAN) with fellow Ward 14 residents. The Mountain Mutual Aid Network (MMAN) collected and redistributed donations from caring neighbours to those who lacked systemic support. The Network ran out of Saint Andrew’s United Church and provided food and hygiene products to over 100 Mountain residents.  Volunteered with the Community Fridge in the Gilkson neighbourhood and the community pantry at St Andrew’s United Church. 

What is the best way for voters to contact you and/or learn more about you?

Anyone can email me at kojoforward14@gmail.com, they can also find us on social media with the handle @kojoforward14 (Facebook, Instagram, TikTok).

Thank-you Kojo for engaging with Hamiltonians in The Hamiltonian!

Are Hamiltonians Being Served?

As Hamilton approaches another municipal election cycle, it is easy to focus solely on personalities — the mayor, councillors, campaign messaging, and political narratives. However, voters should focus just as carefully, if not more so, on results.

In this special analysis, The Hamiltonian examines how Hamilton compares to several comparable Ontario municipalities across key measures including infrastructure, taxation, public confidence, downtown conditions, housing delivery, governance, and overall execution. The record matters, and it should inform decisions at the ballot box.

For years, Hamilton has positioned itself as a city on the rise — a community poised for transformation, investment, intensification, and economic growth. Yet when Hamilton is measured against comparable Ontario municipalities, a more concerning picture emerges: a city increasingly struggling with execution, transparency, infrastructure performance, downtown conditions, safety, housing delivery, and public confidence. This is not a matter of political ideology. It is a matter of measurable outcomes.

Hamilton residents now carry one of the heavier urban tax burdens in Ontario while continuing to confront deteriorating roads, visible disorder in the downtown core, rising infrastructure deficits, controversial governance decisions, sluggish project delivery, gun violence concerns, and persistent questions surrounding fiscal discipline and accountability.

The issue is no longer whether Hamilton faces challenges. Every municipality does. The more important question is whether Hamilton is keeping pace with comparable cities facing many of the same pressures.

Increasingly, the evidence suggests it is not.

Hamilton is often compared either to Toronto — a global city with vastly different scale and resources — or to municipalities lacking Hamilton’s urban complexity. More appropriate comparator cities include:

• London
• Kitchener
• Waterloo
• Windsor
• Oshawa
• Mississauga
• Burlington

These municipalities face many of the same pressures:
• aging infrastructure,
• housing growth targets,
• downtown revitalization challenges,
• policing and social service pressures,
• transit demands,
• and economic transition pressures.

Yet several of these municipalities appear to be outperforming Hamilton in key areas that directly affect residents’ quality of life.

Hamilton’s infrastructure deficit has become one of the defining policy failures of the modern city. Road conditions remain a constant source of public frustration. Sidewalk deterioration is widespread. Flooding vulnerabilities continue to expose weaknesses in stormwater systems. Recreation infrastructure renewal remains uneven, while major capital projects frequently face delays, redesign controversies, or escalating costs.

Comparable municipalities also face infrastructure pressures, yet several appear to execute renewal projects with greater consistency and less dysfunction. Cities such as Mississauga and Burlington have generally maintained stronger public confidence in core municipal service delivery while avoiding the level of civic frustration increasingly evident in Hamilton.

Meanwhile, Hamilton taxpayers continue to hear a recurring message: there is never enough money. Yet residential property taxes continue to climb aggressively. That disconnect is becoming increasingly difficult for residents to reconcile.

Hamilton homeowners have experienced repeated tax increases while simultaneously watching visible conditions deteriorate in parts of the city. Increasingly, residents are asking a fundamental question:

Where is the return on investment?

In many neighbourhoods, citizens point to:
• deteriorating roads,
• rising encampment pressures,
• public safety concerns,
• downtown disorder,
• lengthy project timelines,
• inconsistent bylaw enforcement,
• and declining public trust in City Hall decision-making.

This is where Hamilton’s challenge becomes particularly serious. A city can survive high taxes if residents believe services are improving. A city can survive difficult circumstances if residents trust leadership is effectively managing them. However, when taxes rise while public confidence declines, the political and civic consequences become significant.

Perhaps nowhere is the comparison more striking than in downtown Hamilton.

For decades, civic leaders have spoken about downtown revitalization as though it were perpetually just around the corner. Yet many residents and business owners increasingly describe the downtown core using terms such as unsafe, unpredictable, fragmented, and unmanaged. A phrase heard with growing frequency is: “I would not go downtown after dark.”

Encampments, open drug use, vacant storefronts, social disorder, infrastructure neglect, and public safety concerns have significantly altered public perceptions of the core- and the tragic killings.

Other Ontario cities also face homelessness and addiction crises. However, several comparator municipalities have maintained stronger perceptions of order, cleanliness, predictability, and commercial confidence within their downtowns.

Cities such as Kitchener and London continue to advance downtown intensification, technology-sector attraction, and public realm improvements with fewer visible signs of systemic paralysis. Hamilton’s downtown, by contrast, increasingly feels like a city struggling to maintain basic civic equilibrium.

Hamilton also faces growing criticism surrounding housing delivery timelines and development uncertainty. Developers, residents, and industry observers have repeatedly raised concerns regarding approval delays, policy unpredictability, planning friction, appeals, and shifting political direction.

This matters economically. Cities perceived as difficult, unpredictable, or politically unstable risk losing investment momentum to competing municipalities. Increasingly, Hamilton’s reputation within policy, development, and civic circles is becoming associated with conflict, delay, and inconsistency.

Perhaps the most damaging issue facing Hamilton is not infrastructure or taxation. It is trust.

Hamilton has faced repeated criticism surrounding transparency, disclosure practices, communication controversies, and public accountability. In today’s edition of The Hamiltonian, readers will also find coverage regarding the City’s continued refusal to disclose to the water workers’ union and Hamilton taxpayers the full costs associated with managing the water workers strike. That refusal has now triggered additional proceedings before the Information and Privacy Commissioner — resulting in yet more taxpayer-funded legal and administrative costs.

Ultimately, Hamilton taxpayers continue to pay for both the original issue and the resulting disputes surrounding disclosure.

The growing perception among some residents is that information too often emerges reluctantly rather than proactively. History has demonstrated that controversies involving withheld or delayed information — including the Red Hill Valley Parkway Inquiry and the sewage spill controversy — can carry serious political consequences.

Modern municipal governance depends heavily on legitimacy and public confidence. When residents begin to believe decisions are opaque, selectively communicated, politically managed, or shielded from scrutiny, cynicism accelerates rapidly. Cynicism, once entrenched, is difficult to reverse.

Hamilton increasingly risks becoming known not merely for governance problems, but for defensiveness surrounding governance problems.

Hamilton’s central challenge may ultimately be summarized in one word: Execution.

The city does not lack studies.
It does not lack strategies.
It does not lack consultants.
It does not lack vision statements.
It does not lack plans.

Hamilton has plans for nearly everything.

What residents increasingly question is whether City Hall can consistently execute at the level taxpayers should reasonably expect.

For example, while City Manager Marnie Cluckie has publicly indicated progress on customer service improvements, residents still do not have access to a public-facing performance dashboard, clearly defined service metrics, or a formalized public performance contract tied to executive accountability.

Comparable municipalities have generally demonstrated stronger performance in:
• project completion,
• downtown management,
• housing facilitation,
• fiscal predictability,
• communications,
• and civic confidence.

Hamilton, meanwhile, often appears trapped in a cycle of:
study,
delay,
controversy,
revision,
reassessment,
and political fragmentation.

Over time, that cycle erodes confidence not only in elected officials, but in the institution itself.

Significant municipal mismanagement is not beyond Hamilton’s experience. The cyberattack that occurred under the watch of the current council resulted in the shutdown of critical municipal systems, widespread operational disruption, and substantial financial costs to taxpayers. The incident became particularly concerning when the City’s own insurance provider reportedly declined coverage, citing failures related to appropriate system protection and verification protocols.

Hamilton still possesses enormous strengths. Its geography remains strategic. Its healthcare and education sectors remain major assets. Its arts and culture community is vibrant. Its industrial and logistics advantages remain significant. Its neighbourhood character continues to be deeply valued.

Most importantly, Hamiltonians themselves remain resilient, engaged, and passionate about the future of their city. But civic goodwill is not unlimited. The danger facing Hamilton is not sudden collapse.

The danger is normalization.

Normalization of deteriorating standards.
Normalization of disorder.
Normalization of delays.
Normalization of weak accountability.
Normalization of rising taxes paired with declining public confidence.

Cities rarely decline all at once. More often, they gradually condition residents to expect less. Hamilton does not require perfection. But it does require measurable improvement.

Residents deserve:
• clearer accountability,
• stronger execution,
• greater transparency,
• improved fiscal discipline,
• safer and more predictable public spaces,
• and infrastructure performance that reflects the taxes they pay.

The question facing Hamilton is no longer whether change is needed. The question is whether the city’s political and administrative culture is prepared to confront the scale of change required.

Because when Hamilton is measured against comparable Ontario municipalities, the uncomfortable reality is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore:

Too often, Hamilton is not leading the pack. It is struggling to keep up. 

Transparency Denied: Union Appeals City’s Refusal to Disclose Water Strike Costs

For months, questions surrounding the true financial impact of Hamilton’s water workers strike have lingered without meaningful public answers. Now, the matter is escalating further.

The Hamiltonian has learned that the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 772 (IUOE) has formally appealed the City of Hamilton’s refusal to disclose records related to strike costs to Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC).

In an update provided to The Hamiltonian this week, IUOE Business Manager Greg Hoath confirmed:

“The union counsel has sent our formal appeal to the IPC in early May.”

The statement marks the latest development in an ongoing dispute over public transparency and accountability tied to one of Hamilton’s most significant labour disruptions in recent years.

Earlier correspondence reviewed by The Hamiltonian showed the union had received an access decision from the City under FOI #26-052. Following that decision, the union indicated it intended to challenge the refusal through the IPC process.

At issue is a straightforward but important public-interest question: how much did the strike actually cost Hamilton taxpayers?

Despite repeated public discussion about operational pressures, emergency measures, management responses, and broader impacts during the strike, the City has thus far resisted disclosing the underlying financial details being sought through the freedom-of-information process.

That refusal raises legitimate concerns.

Municipal governments frequently speak about transparency, accountability, and public trust. Yet those principles become most important precisely when the information requested may be politically uncomfortable or financially sensitive.

Taxpayers fund municipal operations. Taxpayers absorb the consequences of labour disputes. Taxpayers therefore have a reasonable expectation to understand the financial implications of major municipal events — particularly one involving essential infrastructure and public services. The city's ongoing denial will not play well in an election year where taxpayers want to know how their money is spent. 

The issue extends beyond labour relations.

This is fundamentally about whether the public can meaningfully evaluate decisions made by municipal leadership during a major civic disruption. Without disclosure, residents are left to speculate about:
• overtime expenditures,
• contingency staffing costs,
• external contractor expenses,
• operational impacts,
• legal costs,
• and the broader fiscal consequences associated with the strike response.

When governments withhold this type of information, public confidence can erode quickly. The Red Hill Expressway issue and "Sewagegate" serve as stark reminders of how denying information to Hamilton residents, can have a disastrous impact at the polls.  

Freedom-of-information legislation exists specifically to prevent governments from becoming the sole gatekeepers of politically consequential information. While there are legitimate exemptions under Ontario’s access laws, blanket resistance to disclosure involving taxpayer expenditures inevitably invites scrutiny.

The City may ultimately argue that portions of the requested records fall within statutory exemptions. However, the IPC appeal process will now test whether those exemptions were applied appropriately — or too broadly.

Importantly, this matter is no longer merely a political disagreement or media inquiry. It has now entered a formal oversight process before Ontario’s independent privacy and access watchdog.

That development matters. The outcome could establish an important precedent regarding how far municipalities can go in shielding labour-dispute-related financial information from public view.

For Hamilton residents, the broader principle remains clear: transparency should not depend on whether disclosure is convenient; something you may wish to consider when determining who you will cast your vote for. 

Public trust is strengthened when governments provide information willingly — not only when compelled through appeals and oversight mechanisms.

The Hamiltonian will continue following the IPC appeal process and any future rulings or disclosures connected to FOI #26-052.

Topics covered to date in our “Before the Ballot: A Candidate’s Guide” series.

Based on the positive feedback The Hamiltonian has been receiving from readers — particularly individuals considering or running for public office for the first time — we are pleased to provide the following summary of topics covered to date in our “Before the Ballot: A Candidate’s Guide” series.

Designed to inform, encourage, and prepare prospective candidates for the realities of municipal campaigning and public service, the series continues to explore the practical, strategic, and personal dimensions of seeking elected office in Hamilton.

As the municipal election season progresses, The Hamiltonian will continue expanding this series with additional insights, interviews, and guidance for both candidates and voters alike.

Click on the topics below to access each article:

Build a Winning Ground Game

Building a Credible Platform

The Campaign Team

Fundraising

Door to Door Canvassing

The Hamiltonian- More Than Coverage

Before the Ballot- Candidate's Guide- Door to Door canvassing

If you are a serious candidate in the upcoming election, it is time to armour up. The Hamiltonian's series, Before the Ballot- the Candidate's Guide offers insights that will optimize your chances of being the next Mayor, Councillor or School Trustee. In this edition, we tackle door to door canvassing.

For all the changes in modern campaigning, one reality remains remarkably consistent in municipal politics: voters still respond to direct, personal contact. In Hamilton, where neighbourhood identity and local relationships carry significant weight, door-to-door canvassing remains one of the most effective tools a campaign can use. But successful canvassing is not about talking the most. It is about listening well, staying disciplined, and leaving a positive impression.

Remember the purpose of canvassing. The goal is not to “win” every conversation. The goal is to:
– introduce the candidate,
– identify supporters,
– understand voter concerns,
– and build familiarity and trust.
Candidates who approach canvassing as a performance often miss the most important part: hearing what residents are actually saying.

Start with a clear, respectful introduction.
The opening matters. Keep it simple:
– who you are,
– what office you are seeking,
– and why you are there.
Avoid launching immediately into a speech or platform summary. Most voters decide within seconds whether the interaction feels respectful and genuine.

Ask questions early.
Strong canvassers speak less than they listen. A simple question such as: “What issues matter most to you right now?” often produces far more valuable information than a long policy explanation. Voters remember candidates who appeared interested in their concerns—not just in delivering talking points.

Keep answers concise. When residents raise issues, respond clearly and directly. Avoid overexplaining or trying to solve every problem at the doorstep.
Municipal voters generally appreciate candidates who:
– answer honestly,
– stay grounded,
– and avoid sounding rehearsed.
Short, focused responses tend to be more persuasive than lengthy ones.

Avoid arguing. Not every voter will support you. Some may strongly disagree with your views or already support another candidate. Do not get drawn into confrontational exchanges. Respectful disagreement handled calmly often leaves a better impression than trying to “win” the argument. A simple: “I appreciate your  perspective. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me.” is often the best way to end an unproductive conversation.

Do not overpromise. One of the most damaging habits in municipal campaigning is making commitments simply to satisfy the moment. Voters are increasingly sensitive to promises that sound unrealistic or beyond municipal authority. If you do not know the answer to a question, it is entirely acceptable to say “That’s something I’d want to look into more carefully.” Honesty is usually more credible than improvisation.

Respect time and boundaries. Some residents want detailed discussions. Others do not. Strong canvassers recognize the difference quickly.
If someone appears rushed or uninterested:
– thank them politely,
– leave literature if appropriate,
– and move on.
Persistence should never become pressure.

Pay attention to tone and body language.
Canvassing is not only about words. Voters often respond to:
– eye contact,
– attentiveness,
– calm energy,
– and professionalism.
A candidate who appears rushed, distracted, or overly aggressive can undermine their own message regardless of what they say.

Use literature properly. Campaign literature should support the conversation, not replace it. A clean, readable handout with:
– the candidate’s name,
– core priorities,
– and contact information
is usually sufficient. Overly dense or cluttered material is less likely to be retained

Track what you learn. Every conversation provides useful information:
– supporter identification,
– recurring issues,
– neighbourhood concerns,
– or potential volunteers.
Campaigns that systematically record and use this information gain a major strategic advantage later in the race.

Stay consistent over time.
Canvassing effectiveness compounds through repetition. Voters who see a candidate multiple times—in person, online, and in the community—begin forming familiarity and trust. Consistency often matters more than intensity.

A final note

Municipal campaigns remain deeply personal. Long after policy details blur together, voters often remember how a candidate made them feel at the door. The strongest canvassers are not necessarily the most polished speakers. They are usually the candidates who appeared:
– respectful,
– informed,
– approachable,
– and genuinely interested in the community they hope to represent.

In Hamilton’s municipal environment, that kind of connection still matters enormously.

Enjoying this series, or know of someone who would benefit from this article? Share it with them. It's as easy as clicking the envelope icon near the comments field below. 

The Gloves Are Off- Gillespie vs. Horwath

The gloves appear to be off as Mayoral candidate Scarlett Gillespie didn't hold back in a Facebook post in which she alleges that Mayor Andrea Horwath is "virtue signalling" disingenuously. 

Scarlett Gillespie’s decision to publicly and directly accuse Mayor Andrea Horwath of “virtue signalling” marks a noticeable escalation in the tone of Hamilton’s emerging mayoral race. Up until now, much of the pre-campaign atmosphere has been relatively measured, with candidates carefully positioning themselves around affordability, public safety, infrastructure, and trust in government. Gillespie’s remarks suggest at least one challenger may be prepared to move beyond policy disagreements and into more confrontational political territory.

The political impact of this could cut both ways. For some voters frustrated with what they perceive as symbolic politics or carefully managed messaging from City Hall, Gillespie’s comments may resonate as blunt authenticity and a willingness to challenge the incumbent directly. In an era where many voters say they are tired of scripted political language, sharp criticism can sometimes energize supporters looking for a candidate willing to “say what others won’t.”

At the same time, aggressive attacks carry risk. Hamilton voters have historically shown an appreciation for candidates who remain composed and solutions-focused, particularly at the municipal level where residents often prioritize practical leadership over ideological conflict. If the campaign becomes overly personal or divisive, some voters may view it as unnecessary negativity rather than constructive accountability.

What this moment likely signals most clearly is that the race may become far more competitive — and far more combative — than many initially expected. If challengers believe Mayor Horwath is politically vulnerable, voters can expect sharper contrasts, tougher scrutiny, and a campaign environment where narrative and perception may matter just as much as policy itself.

 While Ms. Horwath has yet to register to run again for Mayor, we expect her to at some point.

The Hamiltonian has reached out to the Mayor for comment on Ms. Gillespie's statement and we will publish the Mayor's comment in full, should she provide one. 

Before the Ballot- So Far

The following links are to those who have participated in the Before the Ballot series thus far. This material presents an opportunity to get to know candidates and their views, prior to considering who you will be supporting. This list will be updated and reposted regularly as we approach the election. We will post in alphabetical order by last name. Click on their names to go to their responses to our questions.  

Mayoral Candidates

Scarlett Gillespie

Keanin Loomis


Councillor Candidates

Mark Daly - Ward 7

Kojo Damptey- Ward 14

Esther Pauls - Ward 7
Jonathan Stahakos - Ward 9

If you did not receive an invite to participate in this series, it is likely because you have not registered to run in the election, or you have, but did not include an email address to be contacted at. If you have registered and would like to participate and have not received an invite, email us at admin AT thehamiltonian DOT info 

Before the Ballot- With Ward 9 Candidate Jonathan Stathakos

Welcome to this instalment of Before the Ballot featuring Ward 9 candidate Jonathan Stathakos.

What motivated you to run for council, and why do you believe now is the right time for new leadership in your ward?

Upper Stoney Creek is my home. I was born and raised here, by a single mother on a fixed income. Growing up in that household shaped everything I believe about affordability, opportunity, and what it means when hard work has to stretch every dollar.

Like a lot of my neighbours, I've watched our community grow tremendously over the past decade. But I've also watched our roads, our services, and our quality of life fall behind.

Every week I hear the same thing at the doors and at community events. Families are working harder than ever and still falling behind. Property taxes keep climbing. Auto theft and reckless driving have changed how people feel in their own neighbourhoods. The smell from GFL is disrupting daily life. And the LINC and Red Hill are jammed every morning and every night.

It doesn't have to be this way. 

Hundreds of residents have encouraged me to run, and since announcing, the response has been

Before the Ballot: The Candidate’s Guide - Fundraising That Works in a Municipal Race

One of the most uncomfortable realities for many first-time municipal candidates is this: campaigns cost money. Even modest races require signs, printed literature, digital tools, event materials, and operational expenses. Without a fundraising plan, campaigns quickly become constrained—not just financially, but strategically.

In Hamilton’s municipal environment, successful fundraising is less about large-scale donor networks and more about organization, credibility, and consistency.

Start fundraising earlier than feels comfortable. Many candidates delay fundraising because they feel awkward asking for support. That hesitation can create early disadvantages that are difficult to recover from later. Campaigns need resources at the beginning—not just at the end. The strongest municipal campaigns begin outreach shortly after registration opens, while momentum and interest are highest.

Begin with people who already know you. Early fundraising usually comes from personal and

Common Sense, Different Directions: The Ward 7 Race

Hamilton’s Ward 7 race is shaping up as one of the more philosophically distinct contests in the 2026 municipal election. Incumbent Councillor Esther Pauls and challenger Mark Daly are presenting voters with two markedly different visions of leadership, governance, and municipal priorities.

Both candidates speak directly to frustrations around taxes, deteriorating infrastructure, public safety, and confidence in City Hall. Yet the tone, emphasis, and political instincts behind their responses reveal important contrasts that may ultimately define the race.

At the heart of Pauls’ campaign is continuity, visibility, and constituent advocacy. Her responses consistently frame herself as a hands-on councillor deeply embedded in the day-to-day realities of Ward 7. She emphasizes years of relationship-building, accessibility to residents, and persistence in advancing projects she believes improve quality of life — from the Inch Park All Abilities Playground to road rehabilitation efforts, Macassa Lodge expansion, and affordable housing developments.

Pauls positions herself as an experienced municipal operator who already understands the machinery of City Hall and can “hit the ground running.” Her rhetoric leans heavily into themes of public safety, support for police services, opposition to certain taxes, and skepticism toward what she sees as

Before the Ballot- With Ward 7 Candidate and Incumbent Esther Pauls

Welcome to this instalment of Before the Ballot featuring Ward 7 candidate and incumbent, Esther Pauls.

Looking back on your current term, what accomplishments are you most proud of in Ward 7? Please elaborate.

Hamilton has seen a lot of changes and challenges since my first term started in 2018. I’ve stood my ground on the collective views that Ward 7 residents have asked me to represent, whether it be putting an end to encampments in parks, steadfast support for the Hamilton Police Service whose job keeping residents safe is increasingly more dangerous and demanding, pushing for road rehabilitation and increased safety, and making Ward 7 parks the very best they can be. These things take tenacity and time to bring to fruition and don’t happen overnight. But as I look back at where things were when I started in 2018, I’m grateful for the progress we have made in Ward 7, with the City’s help and with the involvement of Ward 7 residents.

I’m excited about two new affordable housing complexes opening soon (one in late fall of 2026 and the other opening next year).

As Hamilton’s senior population increases, Ward 7’s Macassa Lodge refurbishment and additional wing offers 64 more beds to some of our city’s most vulnerable.

Everyone knows I’m deeply passionate about park enhancements, and of all the park improvements I’ve championed, I’m especially proud of Inch Park’s All Abilities Playground which will be ready this year. Children of all ages and physical abilities will be able to enjoy this park as a community space they all feel safe and supported in. Children whose physical abilities may prevent them from enjoying other area parks will be able to play and enjoy this park. I don’t know of any others like it anywhere in the Niagara area.

Looking back on your current term, what things do you wish had gone differently? Please elaborate.

I definitely wish we’d been able to reallocate funds to our roads in greater amounts and sooner – Hamilton infrastructure is overdue in overhauls! I think this past winter has made that fact more obvious than ever.

There are several taxes that have been imposed upon residents that I was surprised got passed. While I voted against these taxes, knowing the increased financial burden they would place on people already

Before the Ballot- With Ward 7 Candidate Mark Daly

Welcome to this instalment of Before the Ballot featuring Ward 7 candidate Mark Daly

What motivated you to run for council, and why do you believe now is the right time for new leadership in your ward?

It was never my plan to run for City Council, but after the last several years of dramatically rising taxes, deteriorating roads and infrastructure, and too little accountability at City Hall, I decided to put my name forward as a candidate for Ward 7.

I have lived in Ward 7 since 1995 and raised my family here. I spent 34 years in Catholic education, including 14 years as a secondary school principal. In that work, I was responsible for managing budgets, leading large teams, solving problems, and making difficult decisions that affected students, families, staff, and the broader community. I believe I have the experience, ability, and energy to help get Hamilton back on track.

My decision to run began right here in Ward 7, driving on Hamilton roads.

In June 2024, my wife Rowena made custom cupcakes for the graduation class at Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Elementary School. She asked me to drive carefully so the cupcakes would arrive intact. Driving from our neighbourhood near Limeridge and Upper Sherman, we could barely get above 40 km/h because

Taking it to the limit? Hamilton’s Latest Development Charge Gamble Raises a Bigger Question: Who Is Really Paying for Growth?

Hamilton council’s decision to increase its development charge exemption from 20 per cent to 24 per cent may appear, on the surface, to be a relatively modest adjustment designed to position the city for access to billions in provincial and federal infrastructure funding. But beneath the policy mechanics lies a much deeper and more politically significant question: who should ultimately bear the cost of Hamilton’s growth?

Council’s move reflects the increasingly difficult balancing act municipalities across Ontario now face. On one hand, senior governments are aggressively pressuring cities to accelerate housing construction and infrastructure expansion. On the other, municipalities remain heavily dependent on property taxes and development charges to fund the very infrastructure growth requires — roads, sewers, fire halls, transit, recreation facilities, and water systems.

Hamilton is now attempting to thread a narrow political and financial needle: appear sufficiently “pro-development” to qualify for outside funding while avoiding the perception that taxpayers are subsidizing private-sector profits. That tension was visible throughout council’s debate.

Supporters of the exemption framed the decision as strategic positioning. Councillor Brad Clark’s “pay to play” characterization reflects a growing municipal reality in Ontario: cities increasingly feel compelled to align themselves with provincial housing priorities to remain competitive for infrastructure dollars. In many respects, municipalities are no longer merely governing communities — they are competing in an intergovernmental funding marketplace.

The challenge is that the public often hears two seemingly contradictory messages at the same time:
• developers say projects are becoming financially unviable;
• municipalities say they desperately need development charges to pay for growth.

Both statements can simultaneously be true. The development industry is facing genuine pressures. High borrowing costs, softening condo demand, rising labour costs, material inflation, and market uncertainty have slowed projects across Ontario. Hamilton is not immune. If projects stall, housing targets become harder to achieve, construction employment weakens, and broader economic activity slows.

At the same time, municipalities cannot simply waive billions in infrastructure-related revenue without consequences. Roads still need widening. Pipes still need replacement. Emergency services still need expansion. Someone pays eventually.

That is why Councillor Nrinder Nann’s concern deserves particular attention. Her warning about normalizing exemptions year after year goes to the heart of long-term municipal sustainability. Temporary incentives can quickly become politically difficult to reverse once industries begin pricing them into future expectations. The broader issue may not actually be Hamilton’s decision itself, but rather the structural dysfunction of municipal finance in Ontario.

Cities are being asked to solve national housing affordability problems using local tax tools that were never designed for challenges of this scale. Municipalities possess limited revenue powers, yet are increasingly expected to absorb responsibilities tied to housing, homelessness, transit expansion, infrastructure renewal, climate adaptation, and population growth.

The result is predictable: councils are forced into uncomfortable tradeoffs where every option carries political and financial risk.

Mayor Andrea Horwath’s remarks about all three levels of government attempting to solve the same problem point toward an important reality. The housing crisis cannot realistically be solved by municipalities alone, nor can cities fully fund the infrastructure needed to support rapid growth without meaningful and sustained provincial and federal partnership. 

Still, skepticism from councillors like Alex Wilson reflects a legitimate public concern. Residents who already feel strained by rising property taxes may reasonably question why additional concessions are being extended to developers without guaranteed returns in affordability, housing starts, or infrastructure outcomes.

Ultimately, Hamilton’s vote is less about four per cent than it is about the evolving role of municipalities in Canada’s housing economy. Cities are increasingly being asked to function simultaneously as regulators, infrastructure providers, economic stimulators, housing accelerators, and fiscal shock absorbers — all while relying primarily on property taxes. 

That model may be reaching its limits.

More Than Coverage: The Hamiltonian’s Emerging Role in Election Season

As Hamilton’s municipal election season begins to take shape, local civic discourse is increasingly being shaped not only by traditional media outlets, but also by independent community-based platforms that have carved out a dedicated and highly engaged readership.

Among them is The Hamiltonian, a volunteer-driven civic publication that has steadily expanded its presence within Hamilton’s political and community landscape through candidate interviews, issue analysis, opinion pieces, and accountability-focused reporting.

While municipal elections are often influenced by ground campaigns, endorsements, and voter turnout operations, political observers note that independent local media play an important role in shaping public conversation — particularly among engaged voters, volunteers, donors, neighbourhood advocates, and community leaders who often influence broader discussions within the city.

Unlike provincial or federal campaigns, municipal elections frequently turn on relatively small margins, making issue framing and public perception especially significant.

Over the past several months, The Hamiltonian has launched a number of election-focused initiatives, including its “Before the Ballot” series examining campaign strategy, governance, communications, and leadership. The publication has also begun engaging directly with declared and prospective candidates through policy questions and feature interviews.

The response from candidates themselves suggests that local independent media is becoming an increasingly relevant part of Hamilton’s political ecosystem. Some campaigns have responded quickly and thoughtfully to Hamiltonian outreach efforts, recognizing the importance of engaging with community-based audiences and alternative civic platforms. The who haven't are incurring risk.

Political communication experts often note that influence in municipal politics is measured by the level of engagement and connectivity among readers. In Hamilton’s case, highly engaged residents — including neighbourhood leaders, advocacy groups, volunteers, faith communities, and politically attentive citizens — can have an outsized impact on public opinion and voter mobilization.

The Hamiltonian’s growing role reflects a broader trend occurring in many municipalities across Canada, where independent digital platforms are helping fill gaps left by shrinking traditional local newsrooms.

At the same time, with greater visibility comes greater responsibility. Maintaining fairness, factual accuracy, professionalism, and editorial neutrality will remain essential for any publication seeking to contribute constructively to civic life and democratic engagement.

As Hamilton moves closer to the 2026 municipal election, one thing is becoming increasingly clear: local political conversations are no longer shaped exclusively by legacy institutions. Community-driven civic media platforms are now part of the conversation — and, in some cases, helping define it.

The Hamiltonian- Hamilton's Tastemaker

Mayor Calls for Hamilton Youth Wellness Hub Amid Growing Concerns Over Youth Violence

In the wake of ongoing concerns surrounding youth violence, mental health, addiction, and social isolation in Hamilton, Mayor Andrea Horwath has announced a new push for the creation of a Hamilton Youth Wellness Hub.

In a public statement released following a recent council decision, Horwath said Hamilton has been forced to confront “very real and difficult conversations” over the past year regarding the struggles facing young people in the city.

The mayor referenced recent incidents of youth violence and discussions held through Hamilton’s Community Safety Summit, where families, educators, frontline workers, community organizations, and youth themselves voiced concerns surrounding mental health, trauma, addiction, and disconnection.

“One thing has become very clear: we need to do more for our youth,” Horwath stated. “Too many young people are carrying struggles they shouldn’t have to carry alone.”

Council has now approved a motion requesting that the Province of Ontario establish a Hamilton Youth Wellness Hub in partnership with local youth-serving agencies and community organizations.

According to the mayor’s statement, the proposed hub would provide a centralized and accessible space where youth could obtain support services without barriers. The vision includes access to:
Mental health and addiction supports
Peer support programs
Education and employment resources
Community-based services and outreach

The proposal comes at a time when concerns over youth safety and violence have intensified across Hamilton, particularly following the recent fatal shooting of a teenager inside Jackson Square.

While the Youth Wellness Hub proposal focuses primarily on prevention and intervention, it also reflects a broader shift in civic discussion toward addressing root causes rather than relying solely on enforcement measures.

Horwath emphasized that Hamilton already has “incredible organizations, advocates, youth workers and community leaders” doing important work, and said the goal is to build upon existing community efforts rather than duplicate them.

The initiative will ultimately require provincial participation and funding to move beyond the motion stage into implementation.

The proposal is likely to receive broad support from many social service advocates and community organizations. However, questions may remain regarding timelines, funding commitments, measurable outcomes, and how such a hub would integrate with existing services already operating across the city.

For many Hamiltonians, the conversation increasingly centers not on whether supports are needed, but whether governments at all levels can move quickly enough to respond to escalating concerns involving youth vulnerability, violence, and community safety.

The mayor’s motion represents another indication that Hamilton’s response to youth violence is evolving beyond policing alone and toward a more integrated social and public health approach.

Whether the Youth Wellness Hub becomes a transformative long-term investment or another well-intentioned proposal awaiting provincial action may depend on what happens next.

Before the Ballot- The Candidate's Guide- The Essential Components of a Campaign Team

Many first-time municipal candidates begin with a message, a few supporters, and a sense of momentum. What they often discover quickly is that campaigns are not sustained by enthusiasm alone. They are sustained by structure.

Even smaller municipal races require organization, coordination, and clear roles. The strongest campaigns are not always the biggest or best funded—they are the ones where responsibilities are understood, communication is disciplined, and execution is consistent.

A campaign team does not need to be large. It does need to function.

The campaign manager: the operational centre

Every serious campaign benefits from having one person responsible for keeping the operation moving. The campaign manager coordinates scheduling, priorities, volunteers, timelines, and decision-making. They help ensure the candidate is spending time where it matters most. Without this role, campaigns often become reactive—pulled in too many directions at once.

The communications lead: controlling the message

Municipal campaigns live and die on message discipline. Whether it is a press release, social media post, interview response, or printed literature, the campaign should sound consistent. The communications lead helps shape that consistency. They manage messaging, media relations, digital tone, and often prepare the candidate for interviews or debates. In today’s environment, where one poorly worded post can become a distraction, this role carries significant value.

The field organizer: building the ground game

Someone needs to organize canvassing, volunteer shifts, literature drops, and voter contact. That responsibility usually falls to a field organizer or volunteer coordinator.

This role is about execution:

– Which neighbourhoods are being covered?
– How many volunteers are scheduled?
– Are supporter lists being updated?
– Are follow-ups happening?

Campaigns that neglect this function often mistake activity for organization.

The fundraising lead: sustaining momentum

Campaigns require resources—signs, literature, websites, advertising, and event costs all add up quickly. A fundraising lead helps coordinate donor outreach, fundraising events, and contribution tracking. Just as importantly, they help ensure fundraising remains compliant with municipal election rules. Strong fundraising is not simply about money. It signals support, seriousness, and organizational stability.

The compliance and finance role: protecting the campaign

This may not be the most visible role, but it may be one of the most important. Ontario’s municipal election rules include requirements around contributions, spending limits, and financial reporting.

A campaign that ignores compliance creates unnecessary risk. Someone must be responsible for:

– tracking donations,
– monitoring expenses,
– maintaining records,
– and ensuring deadlines are met.

Administrative discipline is part of campaign credibility.

The volunteer team: the campaign’s public face

Volunteers are often the people voters meet first. Their professionalism matters. Campaigns should take the time to train volunteers on messaging, conduct, and voter interaction. A respectful, organized volunteer operation reflects positively on the candidate. A disorganized one does the opposite.

The policy and research support role

Candidates do not need a large policy operation, but they do need someone helping verify facts, develop proposals, and prepare briefing materials.

This support becomes especially important during:

– debates,
– media interviews,
– and responses to emerging issues.

Preparation reduces the likelihood of preventable mistakes.

The candidate: leader, communicator, and stabilizer

The candidate is not separate from the team—they are part of it. Their tone often becomes the tone of the campaign. Candidates who remain calm, organized, respectful, and disciplined tend to create stronger campaign cultures around them. Those who become reactive or inconsistent often create instability throughout the operation.

The importance of role clarity

One of the most common municipal campaign problems is overlap without accountability. Everyone assumes someone else is handling something important.

Clear roles prevent confusion:

– Who handles media calls?
– Who tracks lawn signs?
– Who schedules canvassing?
– Who responds to volunteer questions?

Campaigns that answer these questions early operate more effectively under pressure.

A final note

Municipal campaigns are often portrayed as highly personal efforts—and they are. But they are also operational exercises requiring structure and coordination. Candidates who build even a modest but disciplined team give themselves a major advantage. In Hamilton’s increasingly competitive municipal environment, organization is no longer optional. It is part of what voters interpret as readiness to lead.

 

Enjoying The Hamiltonian? Spread the word to your networks. Right next to the comments section. below, you will see an email icon. Clicking on that will enable you to easily forward this article to your networks. Thank-you!

Who Can Beat Andrea Horwath?- The Candidates, The Calculus, The Stakes

The image to the right includes mayoral candidate Keanin Loomis walking in front of Hamilton City Hall. That image may be more symbolic than is apparent.

Should Horwath enter the race for Mayor , and should she prove to be the frontrunner, it won't be enough to ensure a win.

At this stage, the strongest potential threat is Keanin Loomis. Not because he is the loudest candidate. Not because he is the most ideological. And not because he necessarily has the deepest political machinery. Rather, Loomis may pose the greatest challenge precisely because he occupies the space that often proves most dangerous to incumbents: the “pragmatic alternative"

Hamilton is a city wrestling with fatigue. Fatigue over encampments. Fatigue over public safety debates. Fatigue over stalled development fights, tax pressures, downtown uncertainty, and increasingly polarized political discourse. Whether fairly or unfairly, incumbents absorb that frustration.

Horwath’s challenge is that she governs during a period where many Hamiltonians feel the city is struggling to regain momentum. Her supporters see compassion, stability, and principled leadership. Critics see drift, caution, and a council often unable to move decisively.

That environment creates an opening for a candidate who can credibly argue: “We can do better without becoming divisive.”

That is where Loomis becomes politically interesting. His background in economic development and the business community allows him to position himself as managerial rather than ideological. He is unlikely to outflank Horwath on progressive politics, nor would he likely try. Instead, his path would involve attracting centrist voters, frustrated moderates, fiscally anxious homeowners, and portions of the business community who believe Hamilton requires a stronger focus on execution, investment confidence, and operational competence.

Importantly, Loomis also lacks some of the political baggage long-time elected officials often carry. In municipal politics, outsider status can become a powerful asset — particularly when voters are seeking change but are wary of anger-driven populism.

That does not mean the road would be easy.

Horwath still retains significant advantages:
• High name recognition
• Deep labour and progressive support
• Established campaign infrastructure
• Strong personal resilience as a veteran political campaigner
• A loyal base that remains substantial within Hamilton

And in municipal elections, fragmented opposition often helps incumbents enormously.

That reality may ultimately become Horwath’s greatest ally.

Candidates such as Scarlett Gillespie and Rob Cooper may attract issues- driven voters, but unless one challenger emerges clearly and early as the consensus alternative, anti-incumbent votes risk splintering across multiple campaigns.Municipal elections are rarely won solely through ideology. They are won through coalition-building.

The candidate who poses the greatest threat to Andrea Horwath will ultimately be the one who can unite voters seeking change without alienating voters seeking stability.

As demonstrated in the last municipal election, Keanin Loomis came within striking distance of becoming Hamilton’s next mayor. In elections decided by narrow margins, attention to detail matters enormously. Small missteps in one area can produce disproportionate and unexpected consequences elsewhere in a campaign.

A recent example illustrates the point.

In The Hamiltonian’s first instalment of the “Before the Ballot: Questions for Hamilton’s Next Mayor” series, both Keanin Loomis and Scarlett Gillespie provided timely, thoughtful, and on-topic responses to our questions, demonstrating an understanding of the value and influence of engaged local media platforms such as The Hamiltonian.

Mayor Andrea Horwath declined participation in the first round of the series, but did so respectfully and professionally through a courteous reply.

By contrast, Rob Cooper disengaged from the conversation altogether, providing neither a response to the questions posed nor an acknowledgement of our outreach.

In modern campaigns, these seemingly minor moments matter. Municipal elections are often shaped not only by major policy positions, but also by consistency, responsiveness, attentiveness, and a candidate’s willingness to engage with the broader civic conversation. Little mistakes can quickly become larger political issues.

Right now, Keanin Loomis appears best positioned to pose a serious threat to Horwath's bid - if she runs. Whether he succeeds is another question entirely.

The Hamiltonian does not endorse any particular candidate and remains committed to fair, balanced, and neutral coverage throughout the municipal election campaign. Along the way, we will call it the way we see it. We extend our best wishes to all individuals who have chosen to put their names forward in service to the people of Hamilton.

The Hamiltonian

Promises, Pledges, and Practicality: The Limits of “Guaranteeing” Municipal Politics

In an era where public trust in politics is fragile, it is not surprising that candidates are searching for new ways to demonstrate credibility. As reported in today's Hamilton Spectator, Ward 13, candidate Loren Lieberman proposes to to sign a legal-style guarantee promising to uphold his campaign commitments — or resign if he breaks the. The pledge appears to be rooted in a sincere frustration many voters share: too often, campaign promises feel temporary.

At first glance, the idea carries intuitive appeal. Accountability matters. Voters understandably want elected officials to mean what they say. In a climate where cynicism toward politics has grown, any attempt to rebuild trust is likely to resonate with at least some residents.

But while the gesture may be well intentioned, municipal governance is rarely as simple or predictable as campaign season language can suggest.

The challenge is not necessarily sincerity. The challenge is practicality.

City councils operate in an environment where circumstances can change dramatically over four years. Economic conditions shift. Provincial legislation changes. Emergencies emerge. Budgets tighten. Unexpected infrastructure failures occur. Public opinion evolves. Sometimes councillors are required to balance competing priorities that were not even visible during an election campaign.

The reality is that effective municipal leadership often requires adaptability rather than rigid adherence to pre-written commitments. In that light, at worst Lieberman's promise can be seen as both sincere and naive.

A candidate may campaign strongly against a development proposal, for example, only to later receive legal advice indicating the city faces significant financial exposure if it proceeds differently. A promise made before seeing confidential reports, budget pressures, or staff recommendations may become far more complicated once governing begins.

That is not always betrayal. Sometimes it is governance.

There is also a broader philosophical concern. If politicians bind themselves too tightly to fixed campaign pledges, there is a risk they become less responsive to evolving realities and public input once elected. Democracy is not only about promises made in October; it is also about judgment exercised responsibly over the years that follow.

To his credit, Lieberman appears to be attempting to elevate standards around political accountability rather than diminish them. That objective deserves respect. Voters should absolutely scrutinize whether candidates follow through on their priorities and principles.

But there is an important distinction between accountability and contractual politics.

Campaigns are ultimately about presenting values, priorities, direction, and leadership style — not drafting legally enforceable operating manuals for unpredictable four-year mandates. Municipal government is simply too fluid and too complex to reduce to a binding checklist.

Ironically, a rigid “guarantee” could create the opposite problem from the one it is trying to solve. Rather than encouraging honesty, it may incentivize candidates to make fewer meaningful commitments at all, sticking only to vague or ultra-safe promises that can survive changing conditions.

There are already mechanisms available to voters to hold politicians accountable: public scrutiny, media oversight, council transparency, elections, and ultimately the ballot box itself. A councillor who repeatedly abandons their principles or misleads voters usually faces consequences eventually — politically, reputationally, or both.

The desire for stronger accountability is understandable and perhaps even overdue. But municipal leadership is not a fixed script. It is an exercise in judgment, flexibility, negotiation, and adaptation under changing circumstances.

That may not fit neatly into a signed pledge.

But it is probably closer to the reality of governing a city.

Before the Ballot: The Candidate’s Guide- Building a Platform That Is Credible and Deliverable

Welcome to our second instalment in the series: Before the Ballot: The Candidate’s Guide. In this edition, we bring to you -Building a Platform That Is Credible and Deliverable

One of the earliest and most important decisions in a municipal campaign is determining what you actually stand for. A platform is more than a collection of promises—it is a statement of priorities, judgment, and readiness to govern. In Hamilton’s increasingly policy-aware political environment, voters are looking not just for ideas, but for ideas that make sense.

The strongest municipal platforms are clear, focused, and grounded in reality.

Start with priorities, not volume. A common mistake among first-time candidates is trying to address every issue in the city. The result is often a platform that feels unfocused and difficult to remember. Strong campaigns identify a small number of priorities—typically three to five—that align with the candidate’s message and the concerns they are hearing from voters.

Whether the focus is housing, infrastructure, downtown revitalization, safety, or fiscal accountability, the key is discipline. Voters are more likely to remember a few well-developed ideas than dozens of vague commitments.

Understand municipal authority. Not every issue falls within municipal jurisdiction. Candidates sometimes make promises that belong primarily to the provincial or federal governments, creating unrealistic expectations and weakening credibility.

Before announcing a proposal, ask:
Can the city actually do this?
Does council have the authority?
Would it require provincial approval or funding?
Understanding these boundaries demonstrates seriousness and preparation.

Be realistic about costs. Hamilton voters are increasingly attentive to taxes, budgets, and financial pressures. A platform that proposes major spending without explaining how it would be funded invites skepticism.

This does not mean avoiding ambitious ideas. It means showing awareness of trade-offs, timelines, and implementation realities. Fiscal credibility strengthens policy credibility.

Explain the “how,” not just the “what.” Saying you support affordable housing or safer streets is not enough. Voters want to know how you intend to move those goals forward.

A credible platform outlines:
– the proposed action,
– why it matters,
– how it would work,
– and what outcome it is intended to achieve.

Specificity helps voters distinguish between serious proposals and generic messaging.

Ground the platform in what voters are actually saying. The most effective platforms are not built in isolation. They emerge from conversations at the door, community meetings, and local engagement.

If the same concerns continue surfacing in different neighbourhoods, pay attention. A platform that reflects real conversations feels connected to the city. One built entirely from assumptions often feels disconnected.

Keep the language accessible. Municipal policy can become technical quickly. Avoid unnecessary jargon or overly bureaucratic language. A strong platform translates complex issues into clear, understandable proposals without oversimplifying them.

If voters cannot easily explain your platform back to someone else, it may be too complicated.

Ensure consistency with your campaign message. Your platform should reinforce the broader identity of your campaign. A candidate positioning themselves as fiscally disciplined should not release a platform filled with unfunded commitments. A candidate focused on neighbourhood engagement should demonstrate that philosophy throughout the document. Consistency builds trust.

Prepare for scrutiny. Opponents, media, and voters will test your proposals. They may ask about costs, timelines, feasibility, or unintended consequences. Know your platform well enough to defend it clearly and calmly.

A platform is not simply a campaign document—it becomes part of your public credibility.

Avoid the temptation to overpromise. Municipal government moves through process, negotiation, and council dynamics. Promising immediate transformation can create expectations that are difficult to meet. Voters generally respond better to realism delivered with confidence than to exaggerated certainty.

A final note. The best municipal platforms are not necessarily the longest or the boldest. They are the ones that demonstrate understanding—of the city, of governance, and of what can realistically be achieved.

In Hamilton, where voters are increasingly looking for seriousness and substance, a credible and deliverable platform is not just a campaign asset. It is evidence that a candidate is prepared for the responsibilities of office.

Know someone who is running or considering a run for municipal office? Share this article with them. 

The House of Horwath- The $8,500.00 Cart Before the Horse

Update: Property Standards Appeal Delays Enforcement Action on West Avenue Home

Mayor Andrea Horwath has formally appealed a city property standards order related to a West Avenue North home she owns, adding another development to an ongoing dispute surrounding the property.

According to the city, the appeal was filed with the clerk’s office following a Jan. 9 property standards order requiring building and roof repairs at the home. The original compliance deadline expired May 1.

Under the city’s process, the filing of an appeal delays further enforcement action until the matter is heard before Hamilton’s property standards committee. A hearing date has not yet been scheduled.

The property has been the subject of ongoing public attention since late last year. Horwath’s former partner, Ben Leonetti, currently occupies the home and has claimed an ownership interest in the property as part of an ongoing family court matter. That issue has not yet been resolved by the courts.

News of the appeal follows a recent Superior Court decision denying an application seeking Leonetti’s removal from the property.

In his decision, Justice Michael Valente stated he was “not satisfied” that Leonetti needed to vacate the home for repairs to proceed and said he could not determine whether Horwath had the unilateral authority to demolish the property.

Court documents filed by Horwath argued that repairs required under the order would cost at least $131,000, while demolition was estimated at approximately $25,000. The documents also stated the property had been appraised at $300,000.

The city has previously completed emergency work at the property under an emergency order issued last December. Earlier this year, the municipality was permitted to register a lien exceeding $58,000 against the property to recover those costs.

Prior to the appeal being filed, the city had indicated a bylaw officer would reinspect the property following the May 1 deadline to assess compliance and determine whether further enforcement action was required. Possible enforcement measures could include fines or additional city-ordered work added to the property tax bill.

In a statement to The Spectator, Horwath described the matter as “a long and protracted personal issue” that she continues to work to resolve.

The matter will now proceed through the city’s property standards appeal process while related family court proceedings continue separately.