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.

Media Release: Mark Daly Files to Run for Hamilton City Council in Ward 7

Retired secondary principal and lifelong Hamiltonian enters Ward 7 race.

Hamilton, ON — Mark Daly has officially filed his nomination to run for City Council in Ward 7 in the 2026 municipal election.

A lifelong Hamiltonian and Ward 7 resident since 1995, Daly spent 34 years in education, including 14 years as a secondary school principal at St. Jean de Brébeuf Catholic Secondary and Cathedral High School. In 2021, he was named a Principal of the Year by the Catholic Principals’ Council of Ontario. Under his leadership, both schools improved academic results, modernized facilities, including the addition of new turf fields, and St. Jean de Brébeuf earned the Premier’s Award for Safe Schools. He also successfully advocated for new sidewalks on Acadia Drive and Upper Sherman Avenue — a direct infrastructure win for Ward 7 residents.

“I’ve spent my career managing budgets, leading large teams, and making difficult decisions that affected people’s lives,” said Daly. “I’ve always tried to make those decisions with both discipline and genuine care. Ward 7 deserves that same standard at City Hall.”

Daly’s campaign is focused on three priorities: Fix Our Roads. Control Taxes. Restore Accountability.

On roads, Daly was blunt: “In 2025, CAA ranked Aberdeen Avenue and Barton Street East as the number one and number two worst roads in Ontario. A Hamilton road has held that distinction six of the last eight years. That is unacceptable. Hamiltonians deserve better.”

On taxes, he was equally direct: “Hamilton property taxes have increased more than 18% since 2022. Over that same period, inflation has been under 9%. On my own home, the bill has gone up over 20%. Residents are paying significantly more and not seeing the results they expect. I will not support any tax increase above the rate of inflation. That can be achieved by prioritizing what matters most, improving oversight, and finding real efficiencies — the same approach I applied throughout my career.”

“If nothing changes at City Hall, then nothing changes,” Daly added. “I don’t accept that this is the best we can do in Hamilton. That is why I am stepping forward.”

Daly and his wife — also a retired principal — raised their four children in Ward 7. A Cathedral High School graduate, he earned a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics Education from Boston University on an NCAA Division I basketball scholarship and played professionally with the 1992 Hamilton Skyhawks. He remains active in his parish and local community organizations.

“Ward 7 is home,” said Daly. “I’m looking forward to knocking on doors and earning the trust of my neighbours — one conversation at a time.”

For more information, visit https://markdalyward7.ca/

Before the Ballot- Questions for Hamilton's Next Mayor- Update:

The following is an update, in alphabetical order by last name, as to responses to The Hamiltonian's first instalment of Before the Ballot:

Cooper, Rob- No response as of yet

Gillespie, Scarlett - Click here to see Ms. Gillespie's submission

Horwath, Andrea- Mayor’s office advised she will not be participating at this time. 

Loomis, Keanin - Click here to see Mr. Loomis' submission

While the deadline has come and gone for submissions, The Hamiltonian will remain open to late submissions- provided they are within reason. 

Before the Ballot- The Candidate's Guide

In our quest to bring you the best minds to lead our great city, The Hamiltonian announces the launch of Before the Ballot- The Candidate's Guide. In this series, we will provide practical tips and insights into positioning yourself to win an election.

This first instalment is entitled: How to Build a Winning Ground Game

Municipal campaigns are often decided less by advertising and more by presence—who shows up, who listens, and who follows through. In Hamilton, where neighbourhood identity is strong and voters expect direct engagement, a disciplined ground game is not optional. It is the foundation of a credible campaign.

Start with focus, not coverage.

A common early mistake is trying to be everywhere at once. Strong campaigns identify priority areas quickly—based on demographics, past voting patterns where available, and early conversations at the door. Not every street carries equal strategic value. Focus your time and volunteers where persuasion or turnout will matter most.

Build a simple, repeatable structure.

A ground game is not just activity—it is organized activity. Set weekly and daily targets: number of doors knocked, shifts completed, and areas covered. Create a basic schedule and stick to it. Campaigns that operate on routine outperform those that rely on bursts of effort.

Recruit early—and train properly.

Volunteers are the engine of the ground game, but enthusiasm alone is not enough. Take the time to train them. They should know how to introduce the candidate, ask effective questions, and record responses accurately. A short, consistent script is more effective than improvisation.

At the door, listen more than you speak.

Voters are not looking for a speech—they are looking to be heard. A simple approach works best: introduce yourself, ask what matters most to them, and respond briefly and clearly. The quality of the interaction matters more than the length. Respect for time and tone leaves a lasting impression.

Capture information—and use it.

Every conversation should inform the campaign. Track who supports you, who is undecided, and what issues are being raised. This does not require complex systems—just discipline. Data allows you to return to the right doors, tailor your message, and shift resources where they are needed.

Integrate presence beyond canvassing.

A winning ground game extends beyond door knocking. Community events, local meetings, and informal visibility reinforce your presence. Voters are more likely to respond positively when they have seen a candidate more than once, in different settings.

Stay consistent.

Momentum in a municipal campaign is built through repetition. Sporadic canvassing followed by long gaps weakens impact. Even a modest but steady presence—day after day, week after week—builds recognition and trust.

Manage your time carefully.

Not every interaction will be productive. Some doors will not answer; some conversations will not move. Discipline means knowing when to engage and when to move on. Time is the campaign’s most limited resource—use it deliberately.

Create a feedback loop.

Your ground game is also your best source of intelligence. What are voters talking about? Which issues are resonating? Are there misconceptions that need to be addressed? Feed this information back into your messaging and adjust as needed.

Prepare for the shift to turnout.

As the campaign progresses, the ground game evolves. Early on, the focus is identification and persuasion. Later, it becomes mobilization—ensuring that identified supporters actually vote. A campaign that does not make this shift in time often leaves support unrealized.

A final note

A strong ground game is not about scale alone. It is about discipline, clarity, and consistency. In Hamilton, where municipal politics remains personal and local, the candidates who invest in direct, structured engagement are the ones most likely to convert effort into votes.

Running for office begins with a message. Winning requires showing up—and doing so with purpose.

Enjoying The Hamiltonian? Please share thehamiltonian.net with your networks. 

Before the Ballot: Questions for Hamilton's Next Mayor - with Keanin Loomis

The Hamiltonian has launched a new feature titled Before the Ballot: Questions for Hamilton’s Next Mayor.

As the municipal election approaches, we will be putting a consistent series of focused questions to all declared and prospective mayoral candidates. Responses will be published in full, providing readers with a clear and fair basis to compare positions over time. Where a candidate chooses not to respond, that will be noted for transparency.

We believe Hamiltonians are best served when they have the opportunity to consider the views of all those seeking to lead the city.

Our second instalment features mayoral candidate Keanin Loomis. This set of questions has been circulated to all known potential candidates.

We invite you to read our conversation with Mr. Loomis.

Jackson Square was once envisioned as a “people place” at the heart of Hamilton’s downtown. Today, it reflects mounting pressures tied to safety concerns, disorder, and declining commercial activity.

Do you believe Hamilton’s downtown—beginning with areas like Jackson Square—requires fundamental transformation? If so, what specific, actionable plan would you lead to restore safety, economic viability, and public confidence? How would your plan be different from others attempts Hamiltonians have seen in the past?

If you are in support of a concerted effort to transform Hamilton’s s downtown, what do you say to those who would argue that such an effort would take away from other priority issues in other parts of the city?

We’re early in our campaign, and in the coming weeks we’ll release clear plans on public safety, downtown revitalization, and homelessness to improve our downtown core. I know Hamiltonians care deeply about the challenges facing our downtown, and those voices will directly shape our platform. We’re committed to meaningful, two-way engagement—and we’ll share more on that soon.

Jackson Square, and downtown more broadly, should be the pride of Hamilton. It is alarming to see what is happening in the core right now.

Personally, I worked in Jackson Square for a decade. I kept our office downtown on purpose because I believed in it and felt we were on the cusp of something great. I also know the team there. I’ve had many conversations with them over the years, and I know their commitment to the property and to this community.

But we have to be honest about where things stand today. We’ve seen random acts of violence, including murders, and that has shaken us all. I’m hearing directly from businesses facing unsustainable futures and struggling to retain staff. It’s unacceptable that retail workers and mall security are put in the position of managing the mental health, addictions, and homelessness crises. They shouldn’t be carrying that responsibility.

We have a serious problem, and fixing the downtown must be a top priority. Hamilton needs a mayor who will step up and champion the core.

I disagree with the current mayor’s suggestion that this is simply about changing retail trends and the evolution of malls. What Jackson Square is facing goes far beyond what other malls are dealing with. That framing misses the reality on the ground—and what businesses and workers are experiencing every single day.

We’re also seeing a new downtown revitalization plan come forward, but in my view, it risks being too little, too late. We need to be proactive as a city. We should not be waiting for challenges to reach a crisis point before acting.

A strong downtown is a win for the entire city. When the core works, everyone benefits. It should be a destination for Hamiltonians from every neighbourhood and beyond. Our downtown should command some of the city's highest property values, not the lowest. That’s how we grow our tax base and reduce our over-reliance on residential property taxes.

I will take a much more collaborative approach than we’ve seen in the past—working with council, businesses, and the community to ensure our downtown core reaches its full potential.

Thank-you Mr. Loomis for engaging with Hamiltonians in The Hamiltonian. To read a prior piece featuring Keanin Loomis, click here

Tips on Writing a Media Release and The Hamiltonian's Policy

During an election cycle, The Hamiltonian receives a steady flow of media releases, and we welcome that—it reflects a healthy, engaged local democracy. At the same time, The Hamiltonian isn’t able to publish every release. Our focus is on sharing content that helps Hamiltonians better understand the issues, the choices, and the people seeking to lead. Releases that offer clear policy positions, respond to current city matters, or add meaningful insight are far more likely to stand out and be considered for publication.

We’ve also found that more isn’t always better. Campaigns that send releases too frequently can dilute their own message, while those that communicate at a reasonable pace with strong, substantive content tend to have greater impact. Clear, concise, and relevant releases—grounded in real issues and respectful of the reader’s time—give candidates the best chance of being featured and, more importantly, of connecting with the community in a meaningful way. We offer this insight as a way of assisting Hamiltonians in receiving information that would help them decide who to support. Having said all that, if your release isn't picked up, it may have nothing to do with the nature of your release and more to do with the volume we are receiving at that particular time or other editorial priorities. Don't be dissuaded. 

The following are some tips on how to write an effective media release. 

A campaign press release is not a flyer, a speech, or a stream of talking points. It is a disciplined communications instrument designed to earn attention, convey substance, and withstand scrutiny. In a municipal environment like Hamilton’s—where readers are increasingly attuned to policy detail and authenticity—the difference between a publishable release and one that is ignored comes down to structure, clarity, and credibility.

Start with news value, not self-promotion. A strong release answers a simple question: why should Hamiltonians care today? Announcing a candidacy is not, on its own, sufficient. Tie the announcement to a concrete issue—housing approvals, downtown safety, transit reliability—and position the candidate’s action or position as a response to a real, current pressure point. Editors and readers are looking for relevance, not résumé.

The headline and opening paragraph carry disproportionate weight. The headline should be declarative and specific, avoiding vague phrases like “committed to change.” The lead paragraph should deliver the core message in one or two sentences: who is speaking, what they are announcing, and why it matters now. If a reader stops after the first paragraph, they should still understand the substance of the release.

Precision matters in the body. This is where many campaign releases fail. Replace generalities with particulars. If a candidate is “prioritizing affordable housing,” specify how: zoning reform, timelines for approvals, or targets for new units. If the issue is public safety, outline what coordination or investment is being proposed. Substance signals seriousness; vagueness reads as avoidance.

Quotations should sound like a person, not a committee. A good quote adds perspective or conviction, not repetition. It should be attributable, concise, and anchored in the issue at hand. Overloaded, multi-sentence quotes filled with clichés dilute credibility. One or two well-crafted quotes are sufficient.

Tone is a strategic choice. The most effective campaign releases strike a balance between conviction and restraint. Direct contrasts with opponents can be legitimate, but they should be grounded in policy differences, not rhetoric. In Hamilton’s civic culture, readers tend to reward clarity and fairness over aggression.

Context strengthens legitimacy. A brief reference to recent developments—council decisions, reports, or community concerns—signals that the campaign is engaged with the file. Where appropriate, include a data point or a verifiable fact. Unsupported assertions are quickly discounted.

Form and discipline still matter. Keep the release to one page where possible. Use a clean structure: headline, lead, body, quotes, and a short “about the candidate” line. Include accurate contact information. Avoid attachments when the content can be placed directly in the email body; accessibility increases the likelihood of coverage.

Finally, understand the audience. A campaign press release is written for intermediaries—editors, reporters, and informed readers—not just supporters. It must stand on its own, without explanation, and add value to the public conversation. If it reads as campaign literature, it will be treated as such. If it reads as a concise, informative contribution to a live issue in the city, it has a chance to be published—and to matter.

In the end, the discipline of a good press release mirrors the discipline of good governance: clarity of purpose, respect for the audience, and a willingness to move beyond words into specifics.

We extend our best wishes to all candidates in the upcoming election. The Hamiltonian remains committed to maintaining a neutral position and providing each candidate with a fair and equitable opportunity to be heard.

 

If you are supporting a candidate in this election, you may want to consider sharing this article with them. It may be helpful in developing their releases. Here is the link to it:  http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2026/05/tips-on-writing-media-release-and.html 

Rick Kunc Officially Launches Campaign for Ward 13 Councillor

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Rick Kunc Officially Launches Campaign for Ward 13 Councillor

Hamilton, ON — Lifelong Dundas resident and education leader Rick Kunc has announced he will run for Councillor in Ward 13 and will officially launch his campaign on Monday, May 4 at SHED brewery in Dundas.

Rick was born in Dundas and has spent his life living, working, and raising his family in the community. He and his wife Jackie raised their family in Dundas and remain active members of the community today.

“With lifelong roots in Dundas, this community has shaped who I am,” said Rick.“Running for Councillor is about stepping forward to serve the place that has given so much to my family.”

Rick brings more than three decades of leadership experience in education, working across public, private, and independent schools. Throughout his career, he has focused on building strong teams, supporting community development, and guiding organizations through change.

Over the past year, while out in the many communities that comprise Ward 13, Rick has spent time connecting with residents, listening to their perspectives and hearing from many who encouraged him to step forward and run for Council.

“I believe Ward 13 deserves leadership that listens, brings people together, and works constructively to move our community forward,” Rick has said.

Additional campaign details will be shared in the coming months.

Contact:
rickkunc2026@gmail.com

Website
https://www.rickkunc.ca/

Ward 13- Up for Grabs

Ward 13 Councillor Alex Wilson will not be seeking to be re-elected.

Ward 13 is not easily understood through a typical urban lens. It is a ward shaped as much by land as by policy—stretching across Flamborough, Dundas Greensville, and surrounding rural communities where farmland, escarpment, and village life form the backbone of daily experience. Here, municipal decisions are rarely abstract. They are felt in the soil, in traffic patterns on rural roads, in the protection—or perceived erosion—of long-standing ways of life.

For years, Ward 13 has been central to some of Hamilton’s most contentious debates. The question of urban boundary expansion has loomed large, with many residents firmly opposed to the idea of outward growth into agricultural lands. That resistance has not been theoretical—it has been organized, vocal, and persistent. In parallel, issues such as quarry and aggregate extraction have stirred deep concern, particularly around environmental impacts, water systems, and heavy truck traffic through rural corridors.

At the same time, the ward has lived with a quieter but equally important tension: the uneven distribution of municipal services. Infrastructure gaps, limited transit, and the realities of maintaining rural roads have contributed to a longstanding perception among some residents that Ward 13 exists at the edge of municipal priorities rather than at their centre.

Within that landscape, Alex Wilson carved out a role that was often independent, sometimes oppositional, and consistently rooted in a strong reading of local sentiment. His approach did not always align with the prevailing direction of council, particularly on growth and development issues, but it reflected a clear responsiveness to the communities he represented. Whether one agreed with his positions or not, his presence ensured that rural concerns were not easily sidelined.

His stepping away, changes the political calculus immediately. Without an incumbent, Ward 13 becomes one of the most open—and potentially competitive—races in the next municipal election. The advantages that typically shape local contests—name recognition, established networks, a defined voting record—are suddenly removed. What replaces them is something less predictable but more revealing: a contest built almost entirely on vision.

That shift matters. Candidates will not be running against a sitting councillor’s record, nor will they be able to rely on continuity as a default message. Instead, they will need to articulate clearly what Ward 13 should become. For some, that will mean doubling down on preservation—protecting farmland, resisting expansion, and maintaining the rural character that defines the ward. For others, it may mean acknowledging that growth pressures are inevitable and focusing instead on how to manage them in a way that respects community identity while addressing broader city needs.

What is almost certain is that the race will engage residents in a meaningful way. Ward 13 has never been passive when it comes to issues that affect its future, and an open seat—combined with ongoing debates around land use, environment, and development—will likely draw strong participation from both candidates and voters.

There is also a broader implication for City Hall. While it is only one vote, Ward 13 has historically carried influence beyond its numbers, particularly in debates tied to planning, environment, and growth strategy. A new councillor could reinforce the ward’s traditional stance as a counterweight to expansion, or signal a shift toward a more accommodating approach to development. Either outcome would subtly reshape the balance of discussion around the council table.

For Ward 13 itself, the moment presents a genuine opportunity. With no incumbent defining the conversation, the ward has space to re-express its priorities—to decide not just what it opposes, but what it supports. It can also redefine how it engages with the rest of the city, potentially moving from a posture of resistance to one of influence, where rural perspectives help shape, rather than simply respond to, Hamilton’s growth trajectory.

What comes next will depend on who steps forward and how they frame that choice. Open seats tend to attract a mix of seasoned community advocates, single-issue candidates, and newcomers who see an opening. In Ward 13, where identity and land are so closely tied, the field is unlikely to be thin.

The departure of Alex Wilson,, marks the end of a particular chapter. What follows will not simply be a replacement, but a redefinition. For voters, the decision ahead is less about continuity and more about direction—about what kind of ward they want to be, and how they want that voice to be heard at City Hall.

Will you be running for Ward 13 Councillor? If so, write to us to be featured in The Hamiltonian- Hamilton's Taste maker.

The Hamiltonian- Our Roots

For the past 16 years, The Hamiltonian has thrived under the astute leadership of our Publisher, Teresa DiFalco.

Our origins trace back to August of 2009, when founder Cal DiFalco launched The Hamiltonian and served as its inaugural Publisher. The following article, published in the Stoney Creek News on November 13, 2009, offers a glimpse into our early beginnings:

 

Click on image to enlarge

Jason Farr vs. Tammy Hwang: Ward 4 May Become a Test of Experience, Local Fit and Political Style

Former Ward 2 councillor Jason Farr’s decision to seek the Ward 4 council seat immediately changes the complexion of the 2026 race. Ward 4 is currently represented by Tammy Hwang, a first-term councillor who won the open seat in 2022 after longtime councillor Sam Merulla retired. Hwang won with 23 per cent of the vote in an 11-candidate race, meaning she entered office with a mandate, but not an overwhelming one. 

The contrast between Farr and Hwang is clear.

Farr brings name recognition, council experience, political confidence and a record shaped by downtown redevelopment, media fluency and years inside City Hall. He represented Ward 2 before losing the seat in 2022 to Cameron Kroetsch, then ran provincially for the Ontario Liberals in Hamilton East—Stoney Creek. Since leaving council, he has remained politically active and publicly visible, including through communications, government relations and his “Hammer Down” platform.

Hwang brings a different profile. She is a Ward 4-rooted councillor with a background in municipal economic development, immigrant attraction, entrepreneurship and community engagement. Her own biography emphasizes deep East Hamilton ties, including her family’s business at King and Province, her Delta Secondary School connection, and her work inside City Hall before being elected. 

Politically, Farr is the more seasoned operator. He knows council procedure, understands media, and is unlikely to be intimidated by the machinery of municipal government. His strength is experience. His vulnerability is geography and timing and he was a member of a previous council that did not do well in its re-election bids. 

Ward 4 voters may fairly ask why a former Ward 2 councillor is now seeking to represent East Hamilton, especially when Ward 4 has its own distinct identity, industrial base, neighbourhood pressures and local loyalties. Ward 4 is not downtown. It stretches from Ottawa Street to the Red Hill, with a major industrial and commercial footprint including ArcelorMittal Dofasco and the Centre on Barton.

Hwang’s strength is local fit. Her style is quieter, more community-facing and less performative than Farr’s. She has positioned herself as a listener and connector rather than a political showperson. That may appeal to residents who want steady representation rather than a return to a more old-school, high-profile style of municipal politics.

Her vulnerability is that first-term councillors are often judged less on effort than on visible results. Ward 4 residents will ask whether their streets feel safer, whether neighbourhood concerns are being acted upon, whether development is being managed well, and whether City Hall is responding quickly enough. 

On council, Hwang has generally aligned with the current progressive-to-centre governing bloc on major budget matters. For example, she supported key elements of the 2026 budget process, opposed an increase to the City Enrichment Fund, and voted with the majority on several service-level and operational questions. 

Farr’s campaign will likely argue that Ward 4 needs a more experienced hand: someone who can navigate City Hall, push files, attract attention and deliver results. Hwang’s campaign will likely argue that Ward 4 needs continuity, local understanding and a councillor whose roots are in the ward rather than in municipal ambition.

The race may therefore turn less on ideology and more on trust.

Farr will need to prove that he is not simply looking for a political re-entry point. Hwang will need to prove that her first term has produced enough momentum to deserve a second.

For Ward 4 voters, the choice may come down to this: do they want a veteran political operator with a known City Hall style, or a first-term local councillor building her record but more naturally identified with the ward itself?

Mayor Horwath on LRT Announcement

Today’s announcement marks another important step forward for Hamilton’s LRT and the future of our city. 

I’m thrilled to see this momentum and what it means for Hamilton as we continue to move this project ahead

.
Beyond faster, more reliable transit, this investment will deliver real benefits for residents - from new housing and economic growth along the corridor, to much-needed upgrades to roads, utilities, and public spaces. It’s about building stronger neighbourhoods, supporting local businesses, and making it easier for people to get where they need to go. 

Through strong partnerships with the Province of Ontario, Metrolinx, and the Government of Canada, we are delivering a project that will have lasting impact across Hamilton for years to come.

Keanin Loomis on LRT Announcement

Statement issued by Keanin Loomis concerning LRT Announcement: 

Today’s LRT announcement marks a meaningful milestone for Hamilton. After years of delays and uncertainty, it’s encouraging to see progress on a project that will shape the future of our city.

LRT has always been about more than transit. It’s about building a stronger, more connected Hamilton. It is a rare opportunity for upper levels of government to fund the replacement of outdated infrastructure, while also helping to grow the assessment base along two of our underperforming main roads.

Today’s progress reflects the persistence of many individuals and organizations across Hamilton who, for over a decade, never gave up on this vision, and I’m proud to have been part of that effort.

I was a steadfast advocate for LRT—championing it at City Council and continuing that work with both the provincial and federal governments to revive the project after its cancellation.

I appreciated the invitation to attend today’s announcement in recognition of those efforts. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend due to a prior commitment advocating on behalf of the Canadian steel industry.

As we move into the next phase, the focus must be on delivery—getting it built on time, on budget and ensuring Hamiltonians are engaged every step of the way. This will require strong coordination with our government partners, disciplined project management and a clear focus on minimizing disruption for residents and businesses.

This is an important moment for Hamilton. Now we need leadership with the experience to deliver.

After the Shock: Will Hamilton Act — or Convene Again?

A 16-year-old is dead. Another teenager stands accused. And the shooting did not happen in a back alley or at the margins—it happened inside Jackson Square, in the heart of Hamilton.

In response, Police Chief Frank Bergen has called a meeting of civic leaders, including Mayor Andrea Horwath, school boards, business leaders, and community agencies. The stated goal: “actionable, tangible next steps.”

It is the right instinct. But Hamilton has seen this instinct before.

What is unfolding now is less a coordinated response than a familiar pattern of fragmented accountability.

Councillor Cameron Kroetsch points to a lack of youth programming in the downtown core. He is not wrong. The loss of federal funding for prevention programs and the absence of a secondary school downtown represent real structural gaps.

Hamilton Centre MPP Robin Lennox, meanwhile, cites underinvestment in housing, poverty reduction, and youth opportunity.

Each of these perspectives contains truth. But taken together, they reveal the central problem: no single actor owns the outcome. 

And that is precisely why these moments so often fail to produce lasting change.

The debate itself—prevention versus enforcement—is also increasingly unhelpful. Hamilton does not face a binary choice. It faces a systems challenge.

Prevention without enforcement lacks immediacy.
Enforcement without prevention lacks durability.

A teenager does not arrive at a moment like this overnight. Nor does a firearm appear in a public mall by accident. These are the endpoints of layered failures—family, social, economic, institutional—and they demand a layered response.

Chief Bergen is right to caution that “more programs” alone will not solve the issue. At the same time, programs do matter—if they are targeted, accessible, and sustained.

Equally, enforcement matters—if it is focused, intelligence-led, and paired with intervention.

What will determine whether this latest effort succeeds is not the meeting itself, but what follows it.

Will there be clear ownership?
Will funding be attached to solutions?
Will outcomes be measured—and reported publicly?

Or will this become another well-intentioned gathering that dissipates into jurisdictional debate?

Hamilton does not need another conversation about youth violence. It needs a coordinated strategy with consequences for failure and accountability for results.

Because what happened at Jackson Square was not just an isolated act.

It was a signal.

The question now is whether the city will treat it as one.

Mayor Andrea Horwath is correct in characterizing this as a complex matter. That complexity demands a response equal in scope and seriousness. To date, such a response has not materialized—one that is coordinated, enterprise-wide, and capable of addressing the issue and others issues at their roots. Until that happens, the conditions that give rise to violence and related challenges will persist.

Before the Ballot: Questions for Hamilton's Next Mayor

The Hamiltonian is launching a new feature titled Before the Ballot: Questions for Hamilton’s Next Mayor.

As the municipal election approaches, we will be putting a consistent series of focused questions to all declared and prospective mayoral candidates. Responses will be published in full, providing readers with a clear and fair basis to compare positions over time. Where a candidate chooses not to respond, that will be noted for transparency.

We believe Hamiltonians are best served when they have the opportunity to consider the views of all those seeking to lead the city.

Our first instalment features potential mayoral candidate Scarlett Gillespie. This set of questions has been circulated to all known potential candidates.

We invite you to read our conversation with Ms. Gillespie.

Jackson Square was once envisioned as a “people place” at the heart of Hamilton’s downtown. Today, it reflects mounting pressures tied to safety concerns, disorder, and declining commercial activity.

Do you believe Hamilton’s downtown—beginning with areas like Jackson Square—requires fundamental transformation? If so, what specific, actionable plan would you lead to restore safety, economic viability, and public confidence? How would your plan be different from others attempts Hamiltonians have seen in the past? 

If you are in support of a concerted effort to transform Hamilton’s s downtown, what do you say to those who would argue that such an effort would take away from other priority issues in other parts of the city?

Ms. Gillespie's reply is as follows:

I think the premise of the question is flawed, because it treats Jackson Square as a failed space that needs to be “fixed,” rather than a complex, functioning part of our downtown that has been misunderstood and mismanaged. 

Jackson Square isn’t just a mall: it’s a civic hub. It connects office workers, small businesses, the library, the farmers’ market, transit, and people seeking shelter or services. It brings together all walks of life in one place. So the issue isn’t whether we “transform” it. The issue is whether we finally take responsibility for how it’s governed.

Right now, the conversation is being framed as if the City can simply redesign or “fix” the site. That’s not accurate. The City of Hamilton owns the land under Jackson Square, but the mall itself is privately controlled through a series of long-term 99-year leases held by Yale Properties, with approximately 56 years remaining on that term. And for years, we’ve had that leverage - and we haven’t used it well. At times, we’ve even considered selling it off entirely; in 2024, Yale Properties tried to renegotiate their lease to add an additional 50 years to their existing 99-year term. They expressed that they would consider purchasing the property (land) all together if given this extension as they represented that they needed to justify and defray the cost of any future capital expenses like renovations.  

So before we talk about transformation, we need to be honest about governance. For decades, the City has had leverage and hasn’t used it effectively.  That means any meaningful transformation requires political will, leverage, and renegotiation - not just vision statements.

Do I believe downtown needs better leadership? Yes. But not the kind of transformation that starts with blaming “disorder” or treating Jackson Square as a security problem which often responds with inadequate surface-level fixes. What people are calling “disorder” is often just visibility of poverty, mental health struggles, and addiction. Jackson Square reflects the realities of our city - it doesn't create them. Real safety comes from activity, inclusion, and design, not displacement.

The real issue is structural: Jackson Square was designed to be insulated; it cuts itself off from the city instead of contributing to it.  . The mall cuts off streets, limiting entrances and pedestrian flow, ultimately disconnecting itself from the surrounding city instead of contributing to the quality of public life in Hamilton. My plan would start there: with structure, not stigma. My plan focuses on that root problem.

First, I would use the City’s position as landowner to renegotiate the terms of that lease in the public interest. Any extension or amendment of the lease needs to be tied to enforceable requirements: opening the building to the street, increasing entrances, activating dead frontages, and restoring access, integration, and therefore walkability within the surrounding neighbourhood.

Second, we stop treating Jackson Square as an isolated problem; the mall is a part of a larger civic district and should be planned together as part of downtown: The FirstOntario Centre, the Convention Centre, the former City Centre lands, and surrounding streets. Right now, we’re redeveloping pieces in isolation, when what we need is a coordinated master plan for the largest employment and civic hub in the city.

Third, we shift the conversation on safety. Safety doesn’t come from over-policing or pushing people out: it comes from activity, visibility, and inclusion. Safety follows activity. That means:

• attracting customers at different times of day (arts, food, services, community uses)
• increased cultural programming
• supporting small, local businesses; not just large anchor tenants
• making space for the communities already there, instead of trying to displace them
• designing spaces people actually want to be in

We’ve known for decades that breaking up superblocks and restoring street-level connections would improve this site, but previous plans were never implemented. If I become Mayor, I would tie approvals and negotiations to actually delivering those changes.

What makes this different from past attempts is simple: accountability. Since the City owns the land, we need to stop negotiating passively like we are a bystander. The city has power it can leverage to improve the quality of life for every Hamiltonian, which it has failed to do thus far. 

Finally, to those who say focusing on downtown takes away from other parts of the city - I would say the opposite is true. A functioning downtown generates economic activity, jobs, and tax revenue that supports the entire city's services and programs. When it works, it supports services and investment across every ward.   Treating Jackson Square as a “special project” instead of critical infrastructure is exactly how we got here.

Hamilton doesn’t need another cosmetic revitalization plan. It needs to use the power it already has - and to stop squandering that power towards the benefit of all Hamiltonians. 

Sincerely,

Scarlett Gillespie

Thank-you Ms. Gillespie for engaging with Hamiltonians in The Hamiltonian. To read a prior piece featuring  Ms. Gillespie, click here. 

The Hamiltonian Analysis: Downtown Strategy — Vision Strong, Execution Uncertain

Assuming you may not have the time to read and consider a 17 page report on how to revitalize Hamilton's downtown, we did the reading  for you. Here are our observations: 

Hamilton’s newly proposed 10-Year Downtown Revitalization Strategy is ambitious, structured, and politically careful. It acknowledges long-standing concerns about the downtown core while attempting to chart a path forward without asking taxpayers for significant new funding upfront. 

But beneath the language of “activation,” “placemaking,” and “coordination,” key questions remain about whether this plan is transformational—or simply another iteration of past efforts.--

Where the Strategy Is Strong

1. Realistic Focus on Early Wins

The plan prioritizes “quick wins” in the first 1–3 years—cleanliness, lighting, maintenance, and visible improvements. This is a practical acknowledgment that perception drives confidence in downtowns. 

2. Cross-Department Coordination (At Least in Theory)

There is a clear recognition that fragmented governance has hindered past efforts. The commitment to a governance review and interim centralized leadership through Economic Development is a step in the right direction. 

3. Activation Strategy Built Around Existing Assets

Initiatives like:

• James Street North festival infrastructure
• King William pedestrianization
•  Farmers’ Market activation
• TD Coliseum entertainment district

…show a strategy built on leveraging what already works rather than reinventing the wheel.

4. Fiscal Restraint Messaging

By relying primarily on reallocating existing resources and a baseline $1 million annual allocation, the City avoids immediate political backlash tied to new spending. 

 Where the Strategy Is Weak

1. No New Money Is Also “No New Capacity

The report repeatedly emphasizes implementation through existing resources. This is the central vulnerability, although an argument can be made that inventing a new Downtown Office will amount to a waste of taxpayer money- as the problem is not at the staff level. 

Downtown Hamilton’s challenges—safety, cleanliness, homelessness, infrastructure decay—are not minor. Reallocating existing budgets risks spreading already thin services even thinner.

2. Governance Review Delayed Until 2027

The strategy acknowledges structural inefficiencies—but delays meaningful reform for up to a year. That raises a fundamental concern: How can a complex, multi-department strategy succeed when the governance model needed to deliver it is still undefined?

3. Heavy Reliance on Pilot Projects

Pilot programs (York Boulevard, parks, wayfinding) dominate the early action plan.

Pilots are useful—but Hamilton has piloted downtown revitalization ideas for over a decade. The concern is whether this becomes another cycle of testing without scaling.

4. Vague Accountability Metrics

While the report references “measurement frameworks” and annual updates, it lacks:

•  Specific KPIs
•  Defined targets
•  Timelines tied to outcomes (not just actions)
• Without these, Council and the public will struggle to measure success objectively.

5. Avoidance of Root Issues

The strategy focuses heavily on physical space and activation—but is notably cautious around:

•  Public safety realities
•  Mental health and addiction impacts
• *Chronic homelessness

These are acknowledged indirectly but not confronted as central drivers of downtown decline.

6. Historical Context Raises Red Flags

The report itself notes that past renewal efforts (1970s–1980s) are now aging and underperforming. This underscores a deeper concern: Hamilton has had “revitalization strategies” before—why will this one be different?

 Key Questions Councillors Should Be Asking

Governance & Accountability

•  Who is ultimately accountable for results if multiple departments are involved?
•  Why is the governance review not completed before implementation begins?
•  What happens if departments fail to align?

Financial Reality

•  Is $1 million annually sufficient for a city the size of Hamilton?
• What services are being deprioritized to fund this?
•  When will Council see the first request for additional funding?

Measurement & Transparency

What are the specific, measurable targets for:

•    Cleanliness?
•    Safety perception?
•    Business occupancy?
•    Foot traffic?

What constitutes failure—and what is the corrective mechanism?

Execution Risk

•  How many past downtown strategies relied on “pilot projects” that never scaled?
•  What guarantees exist that successful pilots will be permanently funded?

Public Safety & Social Conditions

•  How does this strategy integrate with homelessness, addiction, and mental health strategies?
•  Can “activation” succeed without first stabilizing these underlying conditions?

Economic Impact

•  What is the expected ROI of this strategy?
• How will success be measured in terms of private investment and tax base growth?

Equity Across the City

• If this becomes a model for other neighbourhoods, how will resources be distributed?
•  Will downtown continue to receive disproportionate focus?

Bottom Line

This strategy is not without merit—it is structured, grounded in consultation, and politically pragmatic.

But it is also cautious to a fault.

Hamilton is not suffering from a lack of plans. It is suffering from a lack of execution, coordination, and sustained investment. It is blind to the brand and dosage of leadership that is required to transform. 

Unless Council addresses those structural gaps head-on and understands the brand of leadership required  and dosage, this strategy risks becoming what many before it have been:

A well-written document… that doesn’t fundamentally change outcomes.

Hamilton at a Crossroads: Why Farmland Must Not Be the Price of Growth

Hamilton is once again being pulled into a familiar and consequential battle — one that will define not only how the city grows, but what kind of city it ultimately becomes.

At the center of the latest dispute is a high-stakes hearing before the Ontario Land Tribunal, where developers are pushing to expand Hamilton’s urban boundary by nearly 1,700 hectares of rural land. Their vision: tens of thousands of new homes, sprawling outward into farmland that has long been part of the region’s agricultural backbone.

The city, to its credit, is holding the line — at least for now.

Hamilton’s legal position is clear: no expansion is necessary. Instead, the city continues to advocate for a fixed boundary approach, focusing growth inward through intensification, smarter land use, and more efficient infrastructure planning. 

This is not simply a planning debate. It is a defining test of priorities.

The Illusion of “Necessary” Expansion

Developers argue that expansion is essential to meet housing demand, projecting over 50,000 units and more than 150,000 residents across proposed developments like Elfrida. On the surface, that sounds like a solution to the housing crisis.

But it isn’t.

What is being proposed is not a new model of affordability or sustainable housing — it is a continuation of the same low-density, car-dependent growth pattern that has driven costs higher and infrastructure deeper into deficit for decades. 

Even the city’s own analysis suggests that these projections rely on outdated assumptions — particularly the continued dominance of single-detached housing. That model is increasingly incompatible with modern economic realities, environmental constraints, and shifting demographic needs.

Simply put: building outward is not the same as building smart.

The True Cost of Sprawl

Every hectare of farmland lost is not just a change in land use — it is a permanent loss.

Prime agricultural land, once developed, is gone forever. In a time of growing food insecurity, climate instability, and supply chain vulnerability, that should give policymakers pause.

But the cost goes further.

Urban expansion brings with it a cascade of infrastructure demands: roads, sewers, transit, emergency services — all stretched further and funded by taxpayers. Residents in newer, low-density areas often pay less than the true cost of servicing those communities, leaving existing urban taxpayers to subsidize the gap.

And then there is the environmental toll. 

More pavement means more runoff, more strain on stormwater systems, and increased flood risk — concerns already raised by local residents near proposed expansion zones. The pattern is well known: sprawl amplifies the very infrastructure and climate challenges municipalities are struggling to manage.

A Better Path Already Exists

Hamilton has already made its choice — twice.

In 2021, and again under a subsequent council, the city embraced a fixed urban boundary, aligning itself with the widely supported “Stop Sprawl” movement. That decision was rooted in a forward-looking strategy: intensify where infrastructure already exists, revitalize underused land, and build complete communities within the current footprint.

This is not anti-growth.

It is pro-responsible growth.

Cities across North America are increasingly recognizing that density — when done well — supports affordability, vibrancy, and long-term fiscal sustainability. Hamilton has the opportunity to be part of that shift rather than reverting to outdated expansion models.

The Line That Must Hold

Even some local leaders acknowledge the risks. Councillor Mark Tadeson has pointed out that certain proposals amount to “leapfrogging” development — bypassing more appropriate, less disruptive areas closer to the existing boundary. That observation underscores a critical point: this is not a binary choice between growth and no growth.

It is a choice between disciplined, strategic development and unchecked sprawl. 

Hamilton stands at a crossroads. The decisions made through this tribunal process will reverberate for generations — shaping the city’s landscape, economy, and environmental resilience.

Growth is necessary. Housing is urgent.

But sacrificing irreplaceable farmland is neither necessary nor wise.

If Hamilton is serious about its future, the line it drew around its urban boundary must not just be defended — it must be respected. 

Hamilton’s Downtown: 15 Years of Plans, Progress—and Persistent Problems

For more than a decade, downtown Hamilton has been the subject of plans, promises, and periodic optimism. Yet for many residents and observers, the central question remains unchanged: is the core truly revitalizing, or simply evolving in uneven and incomplete ways?

Since roughly 2011, the city has laid a substantial policy and investment foundation. Updated planning frameworks, including a modernized Downtown Secondary Plan and a series of Community Improvement Plans, have aimed to attract private investment while preserving heritage and enhancing public space. Financial incentives—grants, tax rebates, and redevelopment programs—have lowered barriers for developers and encouraged adaptive reuse.

There have been tangible wins. Office vacancy dropped to just under 12 percent by 2019, retail vacancies improved, and billions in assessment value flowed into the core. Landmark projects like the Lister Block restoration, the McMaster downtown health campus, and the ongoing half-billion-dollar entertainment precinct redevelopment demonstrated what coordinated public-private investment can achieve. Thousands of new residential units, many tied to heritage buildings, have added density and helped reintroduce life to the downtown.

But the story is far from a clean success.

Major structural challenges—homelessness, affordability, and public safety—have not only persisted, they have intensified. Encampments, strained social services, and rising housing costs have reshaped the downtown experience. Businesses and residents alike continue to raise concerns about safety and vibrancy, particularly in the post-pandemic environment where office patterns and retail dynamics have shifted.

Critically, not all strategies have delivered. Large-scale, top-down redevelopment efforts have historically struggled, sometimes draining street-level vitality rather than enhancing it. Several high-profile proposals have stalled or been abandoned entirely. The lesson emerging from the past 15 years is clear: incremental, coordinated, and community-informed development works better than grand, isolated schemes; at least, where Hamilton is at.

Today, the city finds itself at another turning point.

Councillor Cameron Kroetsch’s push for a more structured downtown revitalization approach—including clearer recommendations, dedicated attention, and potentially a centralized downtown office—signals renewed political will- at least on the part of the responsible Councillor-we’ll see about the others. . But vision alone will not be enough. Without a realistic understanding of costs, sustained funding, and measurable outcomes, the risk is repeating a familiar cycle of ambition without execution.

The city’s new 10-year Downtown Revitalization Strategy (2025–2035) acknowledges this reality. Early direction points toward integrated solutions: more affordable housing, stronger social supports, improved safety, and continued economic diversification. The emphasis is no longer just on buildings and investment—but on livability.

That shift may be the most important development of all.

Downtown Hamilton has not failed—but it has not fully succeeded either. It has stabilized, grown in pockets, and attracted investment. At the same time, it continues to struggle with the very issues that define whether a downtown truly thrives: safety, inclusivity, and everyday vibrancy.

The next decade will determine whether Hamilton can move beyond incremental progress and deliver a cohesive, confident urban core—or whether revitalization remains, as it has for years, a work perpetually in progress.

The secret sauce has always been aggressive bold leadership, coupled with know-how; which remains elusive in Hamilton.