Penticton Results

Absolutely

Reduce red tape (obtained in my past term as Mayor 2008-2013)

Yes I do …with respect to current neighborhoods and prompt public input with proposed change … must fit in and be acceptable.

Utilizing hill side development out of the ALR

Yes but it is also a two way street to address all costs of development and building

A proven track record of doing the above.

Absolutely and your input and guidance is essential…. As we are going to have to work together on this to make a real difference.

But again the gap of deferrals has to be addressed by not only the Government reductions but all working together to be way more efficient in the delivery a price point that allows additional opportunity

Let’s talk about this after the election.

Yes in Penticton also!!!!!

Should tailor your questions to the area you ask response from😉

I am prepared to look at all options that allow those seeking home ownership….. but infrastructure cost reality will need to be addressed.

But as above we have to work together and share benefits together.

I’m sure it will be a priority with the other asked questions at the start of this survey. I’m asking for your increased involvement and welcome any and all ideas. Please do not hesitate to get in touch with me after a successful election. Look forward to your input and help for a better future for all.

Penticton needs to concentrate on a wide range of economic development and resilience. Construction is one of the major economic sectors that needs more resiliency as it is the first to lose jobs in a downturn.

given the explosive rise in costs of construction it is vital that we do a deep dive into how that resiliency can be built. There are cost factors of materials, labour costs and soft costs. Working to bring down costs in all areas is needed to meet the market acceptance for the finished product. Cities can be a significant partner in finding the savings.

Penticton has the challenge of limited availability of land suitable for development. Given that there is opportunity to grow, but it is more likely from infill redevelopment and higher density rather than boundary expansion. This computes to careful reviews of the highest and best use of land, especially industrial land for job creation, and making sure community services are servicing the growth.

The issue we have in Penticton is that 50 years ago a family could purchase a home on one full time salary, today it takes two full time salaries. The real estate market has grown more than the average income, by a fair amount. Andrew Ramlo of Rennie and Assoc. has made presentations on this at UDI. And whilst I can't talk for other levels of government costs I can say that Penticton Municipal costs account for a very small % of overall costs.

Having said that – it is imperative that we find ways to to reduce overall costs to enable today's families the opportunity to own a decent home. Penticton can be part of the answer.

I can say with confidence that Penticton has one of the better systems of approvals for multi family projects. To quote the CFO of Appelt Properties at a recent project opening; "I can honestly say that this has been the easiest, best process we have gone through. If we could just take the staff and the process and move it to other municipalities we would just love that".

I have also been on the BCModular Mayors Task Force that has focused on having permit ready designs for modular housing built to code requirements, which has just built a pilot project of a fourplex in-fill modular development in Burnaby.

It is one of the easiest, instant and most effective ways of cutting the cost of new housing to the buyer.

The provincial government has taken away much of a cities zoning. The larger problem is the market acceptance of prices that cannot be met with the current costs of construction. overcoming those costs and having a thriving economy will be more effective in rebooting the construction industry.

Ground-oriented homes is a major answer to attainable housing. The problem is that land designated for ground-oriented is often touted as not financially feasible. In Penticton there is a shortage of undeveloped land that is suitable for ground-oriented development and most have high servicing costs due to being high hillside. The answer may be in partnerships with neighbouring communities that have more suitable land.

The costs of high hillside development has become difficult for development to pencil. In Penticton we have such areas for expansion approved in the OCP that have not yet been developed, adding to them is unlikely to change that dynamic.

For a politician its a question of balance. To counter your point, the current residents do not want the entire cost of infrastructure to fall on them – the taxpayers. The prospect of growth is obviously important but it has to be done in a way that is acceptable to the residents, both current and future. The eyewatering increase in costs of infrastructure development and expansion does not help that balance. At some point the higher levels of government need to step in and help with a formula for the costs of infrastructure to facilitate growth.

Without jobs there is no economy to pay for anything.

Yes, absolutely. Under my leadership, enabling new home construction and restoring construction sector jobs will be a top priority for the next Council term.

The 37% drop in housing starts and rising unemployment rates across our region are a direct result of municipal red tape, slow approval processes, and a lack of innovation in our housing supply strategy. When the construction sector slows down, our entire local economy suffers—from tradespeople and suppliers to the small businesses that rely on their spending.

To reverse this troubling trend, my administration will aggressively champion diverse housing solutions that stimulate immediate construction activity while addressing Penticton's affordability crisis. A pillar of my platform is bridging the gap for lower-income homeownership through manufactured tiny homes and modular multi-family developments.

By modernizing Penticton’s zoning bylaws to allow pre-approved, streamlined tiny home communities and infill developments, we can achieve two critical goals at once:

1. Immediate Job Creation: We will unlock a entirely new, fast-moving segment of the construction sector, putting our local builders, trades, and contracting companies back to work immediately without the multi-year delays typical of large-scale concrete towers.

2. Attainable Homeownership: We will create real, dignified equity-building opportunities for young families and lower-income workers who have been completely priced out of the current market.

I am committed to cutting the bureaucratic red tape that delays permits, establishing predictable timelines, and working collaboratively with CHBA, SICA, and UDI members. We need to build our way to a stronger economy, and my council will ensure that Penticton is open for business, open to innovation, and focused on getting our local workforce back on the job.

Yes, absolutely. I am 100 per cent committed to a pro-growth agenda that prioritizes essential municipal infrastructure while keeping strict fiscal responsibility at the absolute forefront of every decision.

True economic growth is impossible without a solid foundation. Our roads, water systems, airport, and community facilities are the backbone of Penticton’s economy. When the City invests wisely in these core assets, we don't just create immediate, well-paying construction jobs—we unlock the door for private investment, empower local businesses to expand, and build a community where young families want to put down roots.

However, "pro-growth" must not mean "blank-cheque spending." My administration will approach infrastructure with a strict, business-minded framework centered on three core commitments:

1. Prioritizing Core Infrastructure Over Vanity Projects: We will redirect municipal focus back to essential services—upgrading our water systems, securing our airport's future, and improving road capacity. We will stop wasting tax dollars on divisive, non-essential cosmetic projects and focus on the structural assets that builders and residents actually rely on.

2. Cutting Red Tape to Lower Development Costs: Slow municipal approvals and unpredictable DCCs (Development Cost Charges) act as a hidden tax on housing. By streamlining the permit pipeline for infrastructure-ready land, we can fast-track private development, get tradespeople on-site faster, and generate new property tax revenue to offset infrastructure costs.

3. Aggressive Grant Procurement: To protect local taxpayers, our council will aggressively pursue provincial and federal matching grants. We will ensure that Penticton is "shovel-ready" for senior government funding, allowing us to build forward without overburdening our local citizens and business owners.

Growth and fiscal responsibility are not mutually exclusive; they are codependent. By managing our city’s budget with the same discipline required to run a business, we can build the robust infrastructure Penticton needs to thrive, create stable jobs for our local workforce, and ensure long-term prosperity for the South Okanagan.

Yes, absolutely. It is unacceptable that government taxes, fees, and bureaucratic delays account for nearly one-third of the cost of a new home. My administration will actively implement municipal measures to cut these costs, reduce red tape, and lower the financial barrier to entry for homebuyers.

To truly bridge the gap for young families and lower-income workers who want to live, work, and build equity in Penticton, we cannot rely on the same outdated housing models. My platform introduces an innovative Planning and Zoning Strategy that explicitly embraces alternative housing options—specifically, master-planned manufactured tiny home communities and attainable modular infill developments.

By diversifying our housing inventory with these lower-cost, high-efficiency options, we can bypass the high material overhead of traditional construction and provide an immediate ladder to homeownership. To support the homebuilding sector in delivering these projects, my council will champion the following specific municipal measures:

1. Fast-Track "Pre-Approved" Permitting: We will establish a library of pre-approved architectural blueprints and site designs for tiny homes and modular infill units. If a builder uses a pre-approved design, their building permit will be fast-tracked through City Hall in a matter of weeks, not months. Cutting these subsequent delays drastically reduces carrying costs for builders, savings that can be passed directly to the buyer.

2. A Comprehensive Review of Fees and DCCs: We will audit our municipal fee structure and Development Cost Charges (DCCs). Fees should incentivize innovation, not punish it. We will explore tiered DCC structures that reduce the upfront financial burden on smaller-footprint, attainable housing models that utilize existing municipal infrastructure efficiently.

3. Modernizing Zoning Bylaws: We will eliminate archaic zoning restrictions that restrict smaller dwelling sizes or limit land use efficiency. Our zoning will be rewritten to make tiny home communities a permitted use in designated areas, eliminating the costly, time-consuming rezoning process that often kills affordable projects before they even break ground.

We cannot talk about affordability while City Hall continues to inflate the cost of building. By combining a modern zoning strategy with a culture of speed and fee reduction, we will put the dream of homeownership back within reach for the next generation of Penticton residents.

Yes, completely. A slow approval process is a hidden tax on every single housing project, directly driving up costs for buyers and keeping our local tradespeople out of work. My administration will treat the streamlining of planning approvals as an urgent economic priority.

While my housing strategy focuses on innovative options like tiny home communities, those projects cannot succeed if they are choked by municipal bureaucracy. To ensure housing and related projects can begin construction sooner, my council will implement concrete operational reforms within City Hall:

1. Enact Binding Service Delivery Guarantees: We will introduce clear, predictable, and binding timelines for permit approvals. If the city fails to meet its deadline for a standard permit review, a portion of the fee will be automatically refunded to the builder. This shifts the financial accountability back onto the municipality and creates an internal culture focused on efficiency.

2. Digital Tracking and "Parallel Processing": We will modernize the city's building department by ensuring engineering, planning, and fire safety reviews occur simultaneously rather than sequentially. Builders should be able to track their permits online in real-time, just like tracking a delivery, eliminating the administrative "black box" where projects currently sit for months.

3. The "Single Point of Contact" Model for Local Builders: For complex or innovative housing projects that bring high economic value to the South Okanagan, we will assign a dedicated city staff liaison to guide the project from intake to occupancy. This eliminates conflicting information between different city departments that so often causes subsequent delays on site.

We need to replace bureaucratic gatekeeping with a culture of collaboration. By streamlining our approvals, we will lower construction financing costs, get projects out of the ground faster, and immediately stimulate job growth for our local contracting sector.

Yes, absolutely. While a mayor cannot unilaterally alter federal tax policy, I will aggressively use the full advocacy power of my office to urge the senior levels of government to eliminate the GST on all new home sales in British Columbia.

Charging a 5% federal tax on top of skyrocketing construction and land costs is a massive counter-productive barrier to housing affordability. It actively penalizes young families trying to enter the market and discourages the very private investment our construction sector needs to recover.

To turn advocacy into action, my approach will be highly collaborative and focused on collective municipal pressure:

1. Rallying Regional Municipalities: I will work directly with mayors across the Okanagan and the interior to create a unified regional coalition. When the entire Thompson-Okanagan speaks with one voice, senior levels of government cannot easily ignore us.

2. Driving Policy Through UBCM and FCM: I will actively champion and sponsor formal resolutions through the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). By aligning Penticton with hundreds of other local governments across the province and country, we can apply immense, coordinated pressure on federal and provincial finance ministries to provide this critical tax relief.

3. Aligning with Industry Leaders: My administration will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the CHBA, SICA, and UDI. We will use your data and real-world economic impacts to lobby our local Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs), ensuring they carry this fight directly to Ottawa and Victoria.

Penticton needs a mayor who doesn't just manage the city within its four walls, but one who fights for our local economy on the provincial and national stage. I am fully prepared to lead that charge.

No, absolutely not. City Hall should not be in the business of using restrictive zoning to force lifestyle choices, dictate how people live, or artificially engineering the housing market.

The current economic reality in the Okanagan proves that when municipal governments become overly interventionist, the market distorts, construction stalls, and everyday people pay the price. Forcing high-density concrete high-rises or complex multiplexes into areas where they are financially unviable does not create affordability—it creates stagnation. It ignores the actual, real-world demand of young families and seniors who overwhelmingly want attainable, ground-oriented homes with a front door and a sense of community.

My administration will replace top-down bureaucratic intervention with market-responsive flexibility. Instead of restricting what cannot be built, our zoning strategy will unlock what should be built:

1. Prioritizing Ground-Oriented, Attainable Housing: We will align our zoning bylaws with actual consumer demand. My platform explicitly champions master-planned, ground-oriented manufactured tiny home communities and modular infill options. This provides the exact type of housing people want—private, accessible, and community-focused—at a price point lower-income earners and young families can actually afford.

2. Legalizing Alternative Housing Types: We will update municipal zoning to remove archaic minimum-square-footage requirements and overly restrictive lot-use bylaws. We will make it legally and logistically simple for local builders to construct diverse, ground-oriented housing forms without needing multi-year variances or complex rezoning applications.

3. Empowering the Market to Build: Builders, tradespeople, and the families buying homes understand the market infinitely better than city planners sitting behind desks. City Hall’s role should be to establish safe, predictable infrastructure boundaries and then get out of the way so that the local construction sector can build the attainable homes Penticton desperately needs.

Voters of all ages and income levels deserve choices, not mandates. By shifting from an interventionist mindset to a collaborative, pro-innovation framework, my council will support our local builders in delivering the attainable, ground-oriented options that make sense for Penticton’s families and our local economy.

Yes, absolutely. While infill housing plays a role in our overall supply, we must recognize its structural limits. To meet the overwhelming demand for ground-oriented homes from young families and professionals looking to establish roots in Penticton, I fully support the responsible permitting of undeveloped lands, provided we strictly respect and protect our local ecosystems and environmental areas.

Penticton is geographically constrained between two lakes, which makes our available land base incredibly precious. Relying solely on infill can over-burden existing neighborhood infrastructure and drive up land costs to the point where traditional homes become unaffordable. We must expand our horizons by opening up master-planned, ground-oriented developments on undeveloped parcels that are outside sensitive ecological and agricultural zones.

My administration will use these lands to pioneer affordable, innovative housing models rather than sprawling, million-dollar single-family subdivisions:

1. Creating Dedicated Tiny Home and Modular Communities: I will champion the zoning of newly permitted lands specifically for master-planned, manufactured tiny home communities and attainable modular infill options. This bridges the gap for lower-income homeownership by drastically reducing land and construction overhead, providing young families with a private front door, a yard, and a sense of community at an attainable price point.

2. Environmental Stewardship and FireSmart Design: Growth must never come at the expense of our natural environment. Any development on newly permitted lands will be subject to strict environmental impact assessments to protect local watersheds, hillsides, and wildlife corridors. Furthermore, we will mandate modern FireSmart construction principles to ensure these new ground-oriented communities are resilient against Okanagan wildfire risks.

3. Proactive Infrastructure Planning: Instead of playing catch-up, our council will work collaboratively with builders and contractors to plan infrastructure expansion strategically. By ensuring roads, water, and emergency access are designed efficiently from day one, we can support private investment, keep DCCs predictable, and get our local construction sector back to work building the homes our workforce desperately needs.

By opening up appropriate lands for ground-oriented, innovative housing forms like tiny home communities, we can protect the character of our existing neighborhoods, preserve our natural environment, and finally give young families an affordable path to homeownership in Penticton.

Yes, absolutely. I fully support updating Penticton's Official Community Plan (OCP) to allow new, thoughtfully planned neighbourhoods beyond the current urban growth boundary, provided these developments are practical, attainable, and clearly benefit our broader community.

However, under my leadership, City Hall will approach the OCP with the correct legal and operational perspective: the OCP is a visionary guideline, not an inflexible legislative mandate. Far too often, previous councils have treated the OCP as a bureaucratic barrier, using it as an excuse to reject highly practical, attainable housing proposals simply because they didn't perfectly align with a document drafted years prior under completely different economic conditions.

When young families are being forced out of Penticton and our construction sector is struggling, we cannot let rigid paperwork dictate our economic survival. My administration will actively promote OCP modernization while exercising council's authority to adapt to immediate community needs:

1. Opening Suitable Lands for Ground-Oriented Innovation: We will review and update the OCP boundaries to identify suitable, non-environmentally sensitive lands for immediate development. These expanded areas will be specifically targeted for attainable, ground-oriented models—including my signature platform plan for master-planned, manufactured tiny home communities and modular infill developments.

2. Evaluating Projects on Real-World Merit, Not Red Tape: While a modern OCP provides a vital foundational roadmap, my council will evaluate every single housing application on its actual real-world merits. If a builder brings forward an innovative project that creates well-paying local jobs, protects the environment, and delivers genuinely attainable homeownership options for lower-income residents, we will use our legislative tools to approve it—even if it requires an amendment to the historical growth boundary.

3. Prioritizing the Broader Community Interest: True fiscal and social responsibility means reacting to the crisis in front of us. Opening up new, practical locations for development lowers artificial land scarcity, drives down the baseline cost of a home, and injects much-needed revenue back into our municipal infrastructure.

The OCP should serve the people of Penticton, not the other way around. By modernizing our planning guidelines while maintaining the flexibility to approve sensible, ground-oriented housing projects, we will get our local trades back to work and build a Penticton where the next generation can actually afford to live.

Yes, absolutely. Under my administration, Penticton will completely revisit the "growth pays for growth" framework to ensure it is transparent, balanced, and fair to all taxpayers. We must stop using new homebuyers and local builders as a blank-cheque funding mechanism for the entire city.

While new developments must responsibly contribute to the core infrastructure they directly hook into, the current extreme interpretation of this policy has backfired. When we force a young family or a lower-income worker to pay massive, upfront infrastructure subsidies embedded into the price of their home, we are actively driving up the cost of living and pricing our own workforce out of the market. This policy penalizes the very people trying to build equity in our community.

Infrastructure upgrades—like expanded water capacity, improved roads, and modernized community facilities—benefit the entire local economy, attract private investment, and create well-paying jobs for our trades. Therefore, the financial burden must be shared equitably. My council will implement three concrete reforms to fix this broken system:

1. Introduce Tiered DCC Incentives for Attainable Models: We will restructure our Development Cost Charges (DCCs) to explicitly support innovation. Projects that utilize land and existing infrastructure highly efficiently—such as my platform’s plan for master-planned, manufactured tiny home communities and modular infill developments—will qualify for heavily reduced or waived municipal fees. This ensures that the city’s fee structure actively helps lower-income residents buy a home rather than blocking them.

2. Ensure Absolute Transparency in Infrastructure Audits: We will conduct a full, independent review of the city’s infrastructure accounts. Builders and homebuyers deserve to see exactly where every dollar of their DCCs is going. We will ensure that new homebuyers are never forced to subsidize historical municipal maintenance deficits that should have been covered by general city revenues years ago.

3. Aggressively Leverage Senior Government Grants: To protect both existing taxpayers and new homeowners, our council will aggressively secure provincial and federal infrastructure grants. By making Penticton "shovel-ready" for senior government funding, we can upgrade our city’s core systems and build forward without putting the entire financial burden on the backs of local builders and families.

A healthy city requires a growing economy. By moving to a fair, transparent, and pro-incentive infrastructure policy, we will protect our local taxpayers, stimulate immediate construction activity, and finally make housing attainable for the next generation of Penticton residents.

Yes, I believe that they are the backbone to a community’s strength and resilience. If we want penticton to continue being a successful small city we have to keep attracting new employers if we want our young people to be able to stay in their hometowns. Penticton translates to “A place to stay forever” or, more accurately in the original nsyilxcən (Okanagan) language word snpintktn, "a place where people live year-round" or "the always place". This is why I am devoted to making it more affordable for our kids and grandkids to stay and continue the next chapter. By amending our zoning bylaws we can introduce master plan tiny home communities that will be the missing bridge to homeownership. Along with a municipality operated medical clinic offering move in ready practice space to attract new family practitioners. An offering such as this would be a major enticement for young doctors to put down roots in our beautiful city, allowing them to focus on keeping our resident healthy as opposed to trying to run a brick and mortar business as well as being a physician. Let’s work together and make this the most inviting and accommodating city for business.

No explanation provided.

Yes we need to update and add new infrastructure to Penticton.

Our municipal government needs to stop delaying projects but at the same time make sure things are completed safely and properly.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

We can't ruin our community in the hopes for more people to live here, whats the point ?

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

Without home availability there is no growth

We need to keep up with all these things to make our city attractive to others and working for the population that is already here and growing

Its not fair to our younger generation to not have the same opportunities and security that all generations before did

The faster we can get things buikg the faster we get people off the streets

There’s enough taxes and GST was NOT supposed to be permanent… Mulroney said 5yrs….30 years ago .. so no more!!

You should listen to the public..if they want houses give them houses… smaller more economical and affordable

If houses are what people want then yes use the land for houses as opposed to putting giant condos in the middle of a neighbourhood

As ling as its in the best interest of all involved

We need to discuss how much in costs and weigh the benefits snd negatives and go from there

We need housing

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_UxNjKDtc-VUAstSvA2OeDOsR0Aa3tjb/edit?usp=drivesdk&ouid=105698079407730778351&rtpof=true&sd=true

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_UxNjKDtc-VUAstSvA2OeDOsR0Aa3tjb/edit?usp=drivesdk&ouid=105698079407730778351&rtpof=true&sd=true

Lower fees on on 1st house, lower rates for first time/young new homeowners and elderly. 2 or more homes no exemption. Sliding fee scale to benefit the people

Dam straight

Absolutely, then some!

City hall should not be making all the decisions. We need a balance, I believe. Not a blanket effect solution.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_UxNjKDtc-VUAstSvA2OeDOsR0Aa3tjb/edit?usp=drivesdk&ouid=105698079407730778351&rtpof=true&sd=true

No explanation provided.

Yes we need more housing and related job growth which has been lacking with an unfortunate lack of industry here. More effort needs to take place to entice private businesses to want to relocate to Penticton.

Yes of course I will as per my previous answer, but strong efforts have to be made to want to entice private business and industry to want to relocate here so that there will be jos afforded to those who either reside here now or who want to relocate here.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

Removing the GST would definitely make housing more affordable for many , especially the younger generation just entering the work force.

The big difference between Kelowna and Penticton though is the topography. Penticton, unlike Kelowna is very limited to building ground oriented homes due to two lakes, and mountains to the east and west whereas Kelowna has much more room for that.

Yes but if the consumer demand is actually there.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

Yes as per my previous answers, the city in conjunction with the city council should make every effort to entice private businesses and industries to relocate too Penticton. If their was industry here, such industries would be a huge tax base for the city which would help lower property taxes for its residents.

Construction is a major employer in the South Okanagan, and the drop in housing starts is hurting workers, families, and our local economy. I will support practical steps that help get homes built again and keep people working.I also believe we need both market housing and social/supportive housing, because people in treatment, recovery, or facing mental‑health challenges need safe places too. Housing and construction jobs — along with social housing options — will be a priority for me on Council.

I support growth that gets people back to work and brings investment into the Okanagan. We also need community facilities and services that support people in treatment, recovery, and mental‑health challenges. Good jobs, strong infrastructure, and solid social supports all need to grow together so our communities stay healthy and stable.

Yes. Housing costs are too high, especially for young families trying to stay in the Okanagan. Reducing fees and building costs will help get more homes built and make housing more reachable. Lower, fair fees support steady construction and help keep people working

Faster rezoning, quicker permit processing, and reducing unnecessary delays will help us get homes built for the people who need them.

Removing this tax would ease the pressure on both builders and buyers. It would help bring down the cost of new homes, make it easier for families to put down roots in our communities, and support people who are trying to get a stable start in the housing market.

No. I don’t think the City should restrict people’s housing choices. Everyone’s needs are different — families, seniors, young people starting out. We should support a mix of housing so people can choose what works for them, not be forced into a lifestyle because of zoning. Flexibility lets our community grow in a way that actually reflects how people live in the Okanagan.

No. I’m not supportive of opening up undeveloped land for more housing. Once we build on those areas, we can’t get them back. I believe we should focus on smarter use of the land we already have, protect our natural spaces, and find solutions that don’t come at the cost of the environment or future generations

No. I don’t support expanding the Growth Boundary. Once we push development outward, we lose natural areas and create long-term costs for the community. I believe we should focus on smarter, more efficient use of the land we already have, protect our environment, and build neighborhoods that keep Penticton sustainable for future generations.

Yes. It’s not right that people trying to put down roots here end up paying for infrastructure that serves all of us. This policy makes homes less affordable and shuts families out. We need a fair, transparent system where new residents aren’t subsidizing the whole community.

Yes. I care deeply about the people who live here. When construction stops, parents lose income, young people lose opportunities, and families lose the chance to find a home they can afford. Putting housing and job creation first is about standing up for the dignity and stability of our neighbours.

When I first was on council (2008-2018) we also were in tough economic times…one strategy was to introduce Economic Incentive Zones; which I would be in favor of but perhaps more of a narrower/targeted focus. I am also running to bring tax increases down and use CPI as the benchmark for those increases…adding new properties to the city tax roll is a good way of introducing new revenues.

Our infrastructure is aging so we need steady investment to replace it.

I would also support the slow down or pause for adopting more step code principles / levels. Not only are many of the energy efficiencies more expensive…they all come with the requirement of an engineer or specialist being involved which also adds to costs.

I would freeze DCC and other building fees.

I think smaller projects still approve at a reasonable pace, but larger projects definitely need improvement

No explanation provided.

I think the OCP should reflect and respect neighborhood character to ensure we have adequate amount of ground level housing…many of those lots are big enough to have a carriage house or in-law suite to help keep families together, add some density, and/or be a mortgage helper.

I assume the question was also meant for Penticton…

No explanation provided.

I think new development should pay the lions share but the City should also contribute as current residents around that area will benefit plus the City will be getting new tax revenues from the new development for life.

Working to ensure we have a strong economy will help us weather the economic downturn. It is expensive to live here so having good paying jobs and reasonable housing costs/options is vital for a safe and vibrant community.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

This is a poorly worded question. In Penticton, where I am, City Hall refused to intervene in housing projects that would place multiplexes in established single family and small townhouse neighborhoods (near a school, too), despite petitions going to City Hall, signed by 42 nearby neighbors (100% wanted protections – City Hall refused). I cannot think of an example in Penticton in recent memory, where someone wanted to merely build single family housing, but the City insisted on high density, multiplexes. Maybe true in Kelowna, not here.

Yes, but I do not live in Kelowna. If this related to Penticton, YES.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

New home construction is one of the biggest sources of local jobs. I will treat getting homes built as economic development, not just development

Growth needs roads, water, and sewer to happen. I support investing in the infrastructure that lets housing and businesses get built, because that is what creates jobs.

Every dollar of city fees lands on the price of a new home. I support a full review of what the city charges on new housing and cutting what we cannot justify.

Slow permits cost builders and buyers money. I support a builder and stakeholder committee to fix permitting and engineering delays and set clear timelines.

The GST on a new home is a federal tax that makes housing less affordable. Council should add its voice to the call to remove it.

Zoning should not force people into housing or lifestyle choices they do not want. I support housing choice.

Yes, where it makes sense

Undeveloped land should be on the table for ground oriented homes, but fire risk, wildlife impacts, and servicing costs have to carry real weight in every decision.

Yes, where practical and in the broader community interest. Where expansion makes sense for the community as a whole, the boundary should not be a wall. But it has to be practical: servicing, fire risk, and real community benefit come first.

The principle is right but the math has to be honest. If charges are set so high that nothing gets built, existing residents still pay through higher housing costs. I support reviewing development cost charges so growth pays its fair share without killing the homes we need.

You cannot have a healthy community without both. Housing attainability and jobs and economic development are my top two priorities for the next term.

Yes. I believe housing and construction need to be a priority, not only because people need homes, but because new construction supports good local jobs and keeps money moving through our local economy.

As a lifelong Penticton resident and small business owner, I’ve seen how many local trades and businesses are connected to construction. When housing slows down, the impact reaches far beyond the builder.

I would support making it easier and more predictable to get good projects from application to construction. That means reducing unnecessary delays and red tape, improving communication between the City and applicants, and working with local builders, contractors and developers to understand what is actually getting in the way.

At the same time, growth has to be responsible. We need to make sure our water, roads, sewer and other infrastructure can support the homes we approve, and that taxpayers aren’t left carrying the cost of poor planning.

I want to see Penticton build the homes our community needs while creating opportunities for the local tradespeople, businesses and workers who help build them.

Yes. I want to see Penticton grow, but I want us to grow smart.

As someone who has owned and operated local businesses for years, I understand how important good jobs and a strong local economy are to our community. Infrastructure is a big part of that. When we invest in roads, water, sewer, transportation and community facilities, we are creating the foundation for businesses to invest, build and hire locally.

The right investments can create jobs today and opportunities for tomorrow.

But growth has to come with accountability. I will ask questions about the cost, the priorities and whether we are getting good value for taxpayers. I want to see Penticton move forward, attract investment and create good-paying local jobs — while making sure we can actually afford and support the growth we approve.

To me, being pro-growth means being willing to build, invest and move forward — but doing it thoughtfully and responsibly.

Yes. I believe we need to take a hard look at the fees, charges and processes that add to the cost of building a home.

As someone who was born and raised in Penticton, it’s difficult to watch housing become so expensive that young people who grew up here, work here and want to raise their families here are being priced out of their own community.

I would support reviewing municipal fees and processes to see where we can reduce unnecessary costs and delays without compromising the infrastructure our community needs.

I also think we need to be honest about the bigger picture. If we want more housing, we need to make it possible for people to actually build it. That means working with builders and the development community, questioning costs that can be reduced, and making the process more predictable.

We need homes people can afford, and we need to make sure the cost of government isn’t unnecessarily adding to the cost of getting those homes built.

No explanation provided.

As a City Councillor, I may not control federal taxation, but I can use the position to advocate for Penticton residents and work with other communities to make sure our concerns are heard.

I believe every level of government has a role to play in making housing more attainable, and I would be prepared to do my part.

No. I don’t think City Hall should be deciding what type of home people should want or be able to afford.

Penticton needs a variety of housing, but I think we need to pay attention to what people are actually looking for and what can realistically be built. A young family, a senior downsizing, a first-time buyer and someone wanting to live closer to downtown may all have very different needs.

I would support zoning that allows for more choice rather than unnecessarily limiting it. We also need to look at whether our current rules are actually producing housing that people can afford, or simply adding cost and complexity to the process.

I’m not interested in telling people how they should live. I want to see more options, more attainable homes and a housing market where builders can respond to what people in our community actually need.

For Penticton~

Yes, where it makes sense. We need more housing choices, including ground-oriented homes for families and working people. I would support opening suitable undeveloped land while protecting important environmental areas and making sure water, sewer, roads and other infrastructure can support the growth.

To me, responsible growth means building where it makes sense, without creating unnecessary costs for taxpayers.

Yes, where it makes sense. I’m open to looking beyond the current Growth Boundary if a location is suitable, housing is attainable, and the infrastructure can support it.

We need to be willing to question whether our current boundaries still reflect the needs of Penticton today, while protecting agricultural and environmentally sensitive areas and being responsible with taxpayer dollars.

Yes. I think we should take a hard look at how these costs are allocated and make sure the system is fair and transparent.

New development shouldn’t automatically be expected to carry the full cost of infrastructure that also benefits the broader community. At the same time, taxpayers shouldn’t be left with costs that are directly created by new development.

I would support reviewing the policy, looking at the actual costs and benefits, and finding a fairer balance that helps keep housing attainable while protecting existing taxpayers.

Yes. I believe job creation and housing construction should be a top priority for the next Council.

Penticton needs good local jobs and housing that people who work here can actually afford. As a lifelong resident and local business owner, I’ve seen how connected our local economy is. When businesses can grow and people can afford to live here, the whole community benefits.

I want Council to focus on making it easier to build, invest and create jobs, while making sure growth is responsible and supported by the infrastructure we need.

I have supported this during my short term on council

And will continue to do so

We have met 70 % of our 2030 targets for both housing and daycare / critical to supporting new families wanting to relocate here. Job creation with sustainable salaries and security is the next step.

We created and will

Continue to support a development task force to help inform council as

To the best ways to support these efforts moving forward.

See above.

Of note, a recent large project just completed and the developers were very complimentary about their relationship and experience with the city staff and development team.

I don’t know enough about this to comment but am happy to learn more.

I have just become aware of changes in our city bylaws that impact recent Downtown builds and the long term implications. This is an area I need to explore more fully as I have concerns about how it is changing the culture of our city overall.

Penticton faces different challenges to Kelowna, given that we are basically an island with little opportunity for growth and expansion. Our needs are similar but our solutions will

Look different I think.

I will always support reasonable

Growth but am also mindful of the need to protect our ALR lands as well. It is all a question of balance and long term

Goals.

We have been engaged on this review process and I will

continue to be if I am re-elected

As stated, we have met targets to support new families moving here ( ie daycare spaces) but this is the logical next step.

Penticton has its own specific constraints (and opportunities) with regards to new home developments. In the past the City has worked hand-in-hand with developers large and small to meet the needs of our growing community. I would commit to doing the same, ensuring that the housing needs of residents are met.

I will commit to supporting a smart-growth agenda. Growth at all costs creates too many future risks for residents. In my capacity as a City Councillor I would ensure that any new growth is sustainable from an environmental and economic perspective.

Penticton is already reviewing its development services department with the goal of streamlining operations and identifying ways to enhance its relationship with local developers. If elected to Council I would support the findings of this report, paving the way for reductions in development costs in the city.

See answer 3.

The City of Penticton's main focus is, and will continue to be, the delivery and maintenance of programs, services, and infrastructure for the residents of Penticton. External lobbying efforts by your or any other organizations are welcome, but will not be initiated by me if elected to Council.

Many of the housing/density policy changes experienced in BC municipalities over the last 5 years have been the result of provincial directives and mandates. In the future I will work towards a better balance between the needs of individual communities and identified needs of residents across BC.

No explanation provided.

Penticton's OCP has been crafted through years-long consultations with elected officials, City Staff, residents and local stakeholders. We experienced challenges in recent years when external proponents sought changes to our long-established plans for our community. I invite all groups and individuals to the table whenever there is interest in a proposed change. But I will work as hard as I can in my capacity as a City Councillor to ensure that the material needs of our community and natural environment are the priority.

All development results in material and residual costs within the community that it occurs. It is my hope that the City, local developers, and residents will continue to collaborate on future changes in our city and that the shared costs of this growth are not passed on to residents seeking affordable housing in our community.

After the summer we experienced in Penticton/Summerland I feel that the top two priorities for Penticton's next Mayor and Council should be ensuring the safety of residents through affordable housing and mitigating the risks from the increasingly devastating climate crisis.

Because building more homes helps increase housing supply, supports local construction and trades jobs, and can help ease pressure on housing costs. I support making housing construction a priority because Penticton needs more attainable housing and the economic benefits that come with getting projects built.

I support investing in the infrastructure Penticton actually needs to grow and function well. That means maintaining and improving roads, water systems, community facilities and other core services in a way that supports local jobs, attracts investment and keeps the city moving forward without losing sight of affordability for taxpayers.

Housing is already out of reach for too many people, and municipal fees and development costs can add to the price of new homes. I would support reviewing those costs and reducing unnecessary fees or barriers where possible, while still making sure growth pays its fair share and essential infrastructure is properly funded.

No explanation provided.

I would support bringing forward and supporting council advocacy to the federal government, including letters, resolutions and working through organizations like UBCM, asking for the GST on new home sales to be reduced or removed.

I believe zoning still has an important role in making sure development is appropriate for the area. I support a variety of housing options, but I do not believe high-rises or high-density development should be pushed into every part of the community. Growth should be balanced and respect existing neighbourhoods, infrastructure and the character of Penticton.

I support responsibly opening suitable undeveloped land for more ground-oriented housing, while protecting environmentally sensitive areas. This would give families more housing choices without relying solely on high-density or high-rise development

No explanation provided.

I support reviewing this policy to make sure infrastructure costs are shared fairly and transparently. New development should contribute to the infrastructure it requires, but new homebuyers should not be expected to carry costs for improvements that benefit the entire community.

Creating good local jobs and increasing housing supply are both major priorities for me. Penticton needs more opportunities for people to build careers, raise families and actually afford to live here. I want Council to support responsible development, reduce unnecessary barriers, and make it easier to get housing and job-creating projects moving.

Absolutely, my platform is built around attainable housing, and economic development. I have several plans whether its; targeted EIZ's (Economic investment zones), private public partnerships with industry to spur job growth, or reduction in red tape/bureaucracy. Penticton is an unaccommodating place for young people and working families to live. I want to change that and make Penticton more accessible to those demographics who currently cant afford to stay or move here.

No explanation provided.

I support lowering the cost of building, but the 30% figure doesn't describe Penticton. Our development cost charges are about $10,000 per apartment and $25,000 per residential lot. Even the City of Kelowna estimates its DCCs at 3–5% of a home's cost, so most of that 30% isn't development charges. Federal and provincial taxes like GST are the driving force behind those costs. Cutting DCCs further would shift growth costs onto existing taxpayers, whose city tax levy has risen 32% in four years. I don't want to see DCC's expanded and there is perhaps a limited opportunity to reduce them, but I would rather spend my energy making it easier and faster to build.

Yes I will. I've spoken to several Penticton based developers to identify bureaucratic in-efficiencies that could be alleviated to support streamlined development. Through these conversations I've learned that there isn't one big specific fix at city hall, rather its a broader cultural change that is required. City hall can at times be somewhat combative to developers and contractors attempting to build in Penticton. They spend time finding reasons to not do something, rather then finding ways to make something work. I would instruct the CAO to have conversations with the various department heads to start finding solutions, instead of finding problems.

I believe Penticton has much bigger problems that we need senior government to deal with. As a relatively small municipality we have a limited amount of "political capital" and I would choose to spend it elsewhere. We need provincial support on mental healthcare and addiction support, and economic development would greatly benefit from federal support in designating our area as a target for industry.

I am running for Penticton which has different constraints then Kelowna does. We are sandwiched between two lakes, a mountain and a reservation. There is no room for suburban sprawl and a "ground oriented" home for everyone. Penticton needs density and in-fill housing to attract and retain the young working families that work in the services our city needs.

I am running for Penticton so this question doesn't meaningfully apply. Penticton is much more limited geographically and there isn't room for the vast suburban sprawl that Kelowna has. Penticton needs density through multiplex/in-fill housing, and larger scale apartment complexes to accommodate the future needs of our town.

Again these questions are not relevant to Penticton as we are limited in development opportunities by our geography and we do not have a designated "growth boundary". The areas for possible development in Penticton and its boundaries are the PIB reservation, and the land on the Naramta bench which is currently zoned for rural density. I will not rezone the lower Naramata bench, I believe it should stay as agriculture and low density land. Smart urban density is the path forward for Penticton, and our city is already zoned with that in mind.

I will revisit this policy to make it transparent and fair, but I support the idea of "Growth pays for Growth." There are situations where the new infrastructure benefits existing residents but this is not always the case. New housing developments on the outskirts of town like the Sendaro hills project do not benefit Penticton residents, those infrastructure projects almost exclusively benefit the new development. In situations like that it makes complete sense for the development/developers to foot the cost of the infrastructure work. Inside the town itself there is certainly a case to be made for infrastructure work to be spread out among existing tax payers when there is a clear and defined benefit to them. I do not support a blanket rejection of "Growth pays for growth" because when executed properly it protects tax payers from subsidizing private for profit developments.

Absolutely, and it is a primary priority for me. Penticton has watched over the previous decades as our industrial land and our industrial employers slowly errode. Our industrial lands support employers and businesses who provide jobs that offer livable wages and help combat the affordability crisis. Likewise, housing construction can drive housing prices down via supply and demand which helps support young and working class families find a place to live within their means.

While housing development is important, it is not my top priority. Given the significant property tax increases over the last four years, my main focus is on conducting a value-for-money audit to reduce financial waste and address budget inefficiencies. Maintaining stable tax and utility rates remains my top priority.

Maintaining local infrastructure and proactively developing new infrastructure is critical for our council. We have seen other communities fail to maintain their existing infrastructure, resulting in costly disasters and significant financial burdens—an outcome we must actively avoid.

Given that Penticton is already more densely populated than neighboring communities in the Okanagan, I believe our capacity for growth is limited and I do not anticipate the level of expansion currently being predicted.

Regarding economic growth, our focus must be on supporting existing local industries, attracting new businesses, and fostering year-round employment opportunities for residents beyond the tourist season.

I fully support reducing fees and cutting the red tape involved in building new homes. We need to streamline development permits and fees through a clear, transparent schedule so developers know costs upfront before submitting an application.

To make development fees clear and predictable, I would advocate for the following measures:

– Fee-Locking Policies: Lock development charges at the rate in effect upon application submission for a set period.

– Inflation Capping & Single Schedule: Cap fee increases at the rate of inflation and consolidate charges into a single schedule, eliminating separate fees from multiple departments.

– Online Fee Calculators: Provide online calculators so builders can receive total fee estimates before committing funds to formal applications.

– Deferred & Installment Payment Timelines: Allow builders to defer fee payments until the time of occupancy or pay in installments to reduce initial financial strain.

– Targeted Fee Reductions: Offer fee reductions to incentivize high-priority projects, such as affordable housing.

I am eager to hear directly from local developers to better understand the specific hurdles they face in our community.

I think I touch a bit on that in my previous answer. I am definitely supportive of cutting red tape and making things easier and more affordable for builders. There's way to much bureaucracy in Canada at every level of government. I will do whatever I can to stream line that from a municipal level.

Canadian's are under a tax assault here in Canada. We are being taxed way to much by every level of government. I will fight to have taxes and fees removed and reduced where ever I can so we can make life affordable again.

We need to ensure we offer affordable housing options for everyone while taking a thoughtful, sensible approach. Maintaining clear zoning rules is essential so that our neighborhoods make sense—for instance, avoiding high-rises in industrial zones, which can lead to noise complaints against nearby businesses.

Not everyone wants to live in a high-rise or a multiplex, yet mobile home and RV parks are continually being removed. I would like to see dedicated areas set aside within the city, or a partnership with the PIB, to allow for a tiny home park. This would offer accessible entry into homeownership, provide affordable housing, and allow residents to maintain their own personal space.

City hall needs to remember that they work for the people of Penticton and need to be mindful of the ever changing needs of the community and be open minded to make changes when necessary.

As I said in a previous answer, not everyone wants to live in a high rise or condo so we need to make sure there's an adequate supply of ground oriented homes of all different price points allowing everyone an opportunity to own their own home.

I always keep an open mind. Just because someone says you can't do it, doesn't mean it can't be done. I don't take no for an answer easily and if it's something that is in the best interest of the community and something the majority of the community wants, then I would help them achieve it.

My main priority is to hold the city fiscally responsible. It's unreasonable to expect new developments to fund all associated infrastructure especially if these costs come as a result of changes made by the municipality. For instance, Penticton wants to have all their power lines underground. When an existing development wants to upgrade, they have been burdened with tearing up the roads and sidewalks to have those services installed underground costing 10's of thousands of dollars. I don't agree with that. It's an unnecessary burden put onto home owners and developers.

As I've said before, Penticton only has so much room for growth and has a higher density than other Okanagan communities so I don't think housing construction should be the priority. Cutting financial waste, reducing red tape, and transparency are on the top of my list.