Where Brian stands

Residents are rights-holders, not an audience to be informed after decisions are effectively complete.

I want to transform the current trickle of information between the Town administration and residents into an accessible, reliable and continuous flow. Since the decline of the local newspaper, administrations must be more determined and more creative in their effort to connect with the public.

What Brian would do

• Establish permanent, welcoming two‑way communication channels among residents, Council and senior staff.
• Provide timely access to studies, reports, decisions, conditions of approval and supporting information.
• Create meaningful opportunities for residents to be heard before decisions are made.
• Use clear public reporting to show what was promised, what was completed, what changed and why.
• Make the Town’s website genuinely user‑friendly, so important documents, studies and RFPs are easy to find and understand.
• Explore citizen standing groups and other ongoing forums that connect neighbourhoods and community expertise with municipal decision‑making.
• Support accessible, approachable and accountable leadership.

Planning should be consensus-building supported by good information, accepted rules and genuine dialogue, not speed at the expense of Council accountability or public trust.

I am neither pro‑development nor anti‑development. As a former urban and land‑use planner, I am in favour of a balanced approach: one that puts public safety first, prioritizes previously developed and underused sites for redevelopment before sacrificing more green space, and applies true due diligence before granting approvals.

I do not support adopting a Community Planning Permit System. That is what our Official Plan is for; no additional by‑law is required. Our Official Plan was developed with much thought, careful deliberation and at great expense. Why set it aside when assessing future applications?

I ask: what is the rush? We need to get future development decisions right at the planning stage, not push approvals through before the necessary due diligence has been completed.

What Brian would do

• Use the existing Official Plan and Zoning By‑law, both developed with public input, as the starting point for responsible decisions.
• Do not adopt a planning system that removes meaningful Council autonomy and authority merely for expediency.
• Prioritize brownfield redevelopment and underused land before sacrificing green space and wildlife habitat.
• Require clear, enforceable heritage, design, accessibility, parking, tree‑canopy, environmental and public‑notice protections.
• Study the experience of other municipalities and define measurable outcomes before committing to any new system.
• Define incentives precisely, and ensure they produce housing that remains affordable over time.

Saugeen Shores has an affordability and housing-diversity problem, not simply a housing-numbers problem.

Health‑care workers, personal support workers, young families, seniors and people on fixed incomes all need suitable homes. It is the lack of housing diversity and affordability that makes it difficult for local employers (health care, veterinary care, restaurants and retail) to find staff. Workers cannot afford to live where the jobs are, and that causes quality‑of‑life problems for all of us.

During my 20 years as a professional planner I learned that co‑operative housing, community land trusts and other proven programs can create affordable homes and keep them affordable. Major projects are already under way at Westlinks, Southampton Landing and Chantry Crossing. Growth may be inevitable, but that does not mean we must accept overdevelopment, or more homes that do not meet the needs of local people.

What Brian would do

• Support co‑operative housing and community land trusts.
• Use shared‑equity and down‑payment assistance models where appropriate.
• Encourage additional Habitat for Humanity partnerships and builds.
• Apply long‑term affordability protections, including resale restrictions or other mechanisms where public support helped create the housing.
• Use municipal tools for short‑term vacation rentals, including licensing and zoning where legally available, to protect long‑term housing supply and neighbourhood quality of life.
• Work with employers, senior governments, non‑profit providers and developers to create essential‑worker housing.
• Avoid treating unrestricted greenfield construction as the only answer to affordability.

Existing public-health and safety needs should take priority over infrastructure expansion that principally serves new development.

Our taxes and water rates are among the highest in Ontario. Residents are entitled to know what they are paying for, what condition our infrastructure is in, and who is responsible for which costs.

What Brian would do

• Review water‑rate formulae, forecast assumptions and methodologies with the aim of identifying avoidable costs.
• Address H₂S and related odour or health concerns through root‑cause investigation and a durable solution, not a short‑term bandage.
• Clarify the condition, capacity and funding of water and wastewater infrastructure, including servicing north of the Saugeen River.
• Make developer‑versus‑taxpayer cost responsibilities transparent.
• Report the evidence, options, risks, costs and timelines in language residents can understand.

Every tax dollar should be tied to a clear purpose, a defensible assumption and a measurable result.

I will respect your tax dollars. Every expense should have a clear purpose, every major project should be carefully reviewed, and residents should be able to see what they are paying for and what results they should expect to receive.

What Brian would do

• Apply zero‑based budgeting principles, so spending is justified rather than automatically carried forward.
• Establish clear performance targets and public reporting.
• Improve public communication and consultation on the Town’s ten‑year capital plan.
• Explain major cost changes, delays, scope reductions and funding sources.
• Track conditions, securities and developer commitments, so unfinished obligations do not quietly become public burdens.

Public purchasing should be prudent, competitive, transparent and designed to produce value for residents.

What Brian would do

• Review procurement policy, processes and practices.
• Ensure RFPs and tenders are financially prudent and clearly scoped.
• Strengthen reporting on change orders, consultant performance, project risk and total cost.
• Use the lessons of completed and troubled projects to improve future procurement.

The decision should rest on a complete record, not on pressure to declare support or opposition before the evidence is assembled.

I will undertake a comprehensive review of the information presented by all parties, including Neoen and concerned members of the community, to support evidence‑based decision‑making. I will also examine the methodologies and formulae used to determine projected energy demand.

What Brian would do

• Review information from Neoen, residents, technical experts and other communities.
• Examine fire and emergency response, environmental effects, setbacks, insurance, decommissioning, financial benefits, municipal liability and long‑term monitoring.
• Make the evidence and the reasoning public before a final decision.
• Reach an evidence‑based conclusion that puts public safety and the community interest first.

Growth should strengthen Saugeen Shores without making Southampton, Port Elgin and the Saugeen Ward indistinguishable from every other place.

Our historic character, heritage buildings and unique marine culture are a key part of our future prosperity. They contribute to strong property values, lively tourism and long‑term economic resilience. I will respect, protect and celebrate them.

What Brian would do

• Protect heritage buildings, streetscapes, culture, tree canopy, wildlife habitat and valued public spaces.
• Use enforceable design standards rather than optional guidelines, where the law allows.
• Promote human‑scale development, thoughtful landscaping, and parking located away from prominent street frontages where feasible.
• Treat complete environmental review and aftercare obligations as essential parts of approval.
• Respect the distinct identities and needs of Southampton, Port Elgin and the Saugeen Ward within one municipality.

The waterfront should be restored and improved as an accessible, welcoming public place for residents and visitors alike.

What Brian would do

• Work to restore and improve Port Elgin Beach for all.
• Engage residents and waterfront users before major changes.
• Balance tourism, accessibility, recreation, environmental protection and local quality of life.
• Set clear priorities, timelines and measures for waterfront work.

Every unhoused person is an individual with a personal history. Each deserves safety, dignity and a realistic path toward stability.

What Brian would do

• Work with Bruce County Social Services and community partners on an emergency homelessness task force.
• Explore emergency funds and a suitable serviced location with access to clean water, sanitation and electricity.
• Investigate temporary shelter options, including gently used trailers, as a bridge to longer‑term housing.
• Develop basic, fully accessible transportation so people can reach groceries, services, employment and community life.
• Integrate emergency shelter with outreach, health, mental‑health, addiction and social supports rather than relocating people without support.

Approvals should pause until essential due diligence, environmental work and public questions are resolved.

What Brian would do

• Clarify ownership and title history of the former CN rail lands and any transfer to the developer.
• Identify which rail‑trail sections would be conveyed to the Town, when conveyance would occur, and how continuous public access would be protected.
• Confirm the status and adequacy of environmental studies and peer review for all phases.
• Examine traffic and safety effects, including possible commercial uses and drive‑through traffic.
• Specify required tree species, sizes, planting locations, aftercare, monitoring and remedies if commitments are not fulfilled.
• Make conditions of approval, securities and enforcement mechanisms accessible to the public.

A prominent public sign should reflect Southampton's name, character, heritage and visitor experience.

In my view the current sign does not appropriately represent a town called Southampton, and it was installed without the level of public involvement such a prominent identity project deserved. I consider the location unsuitable and the branding disconnected from how residents identify their town.

What Brian would do

• Review the placement, safety, lost parking, visual backdrop, purpose and branding value.
• Consult residents and local businesses before deciding whether the sign should be relocated, redesigned, repurposed or removed.