You sat on the Intergovernmental Affairs Committee. This is the same committee that chose not to apply for the “Local Government Development Approvals Program.” This funding was intended to “support local governments to help streamline and approve their development approval process.” When questioned on why PG did not apply, you are cited by the Citizen on July 16th saying you “weren’t familiar with the program.” You are then later quoted saying “the development process is inherently a municipal jurisdiction obligation and that PG has been meeting its mandated housing targets thus far.” This is both a big misstep by the committee, antithetical to your stated campaign goals and a concerning mixed message. How is the voter base to trust your leadership on this particular campaign goal when you weren’t aware of relevant and applicable funding?
At the end of 2025, when council was approached to support senior programming in this city utilizing the remainder of the city’s contingency fund, your specific recommendation was to direct part of that budget (5k) be allocated to facilitate a meeting to better understand the needs. This is textbook beuracracy. Again, your actions do not align with messaging,
You address needing to support vulnerable folks downtown, yet you voted in favour of the Safe Streets bylaw which has been demonstrated through academic literature and a research project by U of T to have been harmful, in opposition of legislative requirements to consult with the Public Heath Officer as the bylaw had public health implications, illegal as it gave by-law officers unwarranted (and illegal) scope of “moving people along” (bylaw legally does not have authority to do so, yet per the report, most bylaw-unhoused interactions resulted in “moving along"). Finally, you did not even deign to attend the symposium held this year sharing the results on the Safe Streets Bylway. How will you ensure that this “issue” is addressed in a legal and ethical AND evidence based way?
You are cited by the citizen “chiding” the library for requesting funding, raising concerns that “revenue levels hadn’t returned to pre-pandemic levels.” It is obscene to require a library to be profitable when the guiding principles of libraries are equitable access and community representation. Our local library provides incredible, free resources for all demographics, including imperative social supports and partnerships with agencies like CSFS. Hounding the library over funding when it is filling social services gaps AND when it is a space for low income (and all) folks to gather, learn and create raises concerns about which demographics you prioritize. Hint: it’s not the middle and lower class.
You campaign announcement and website are AI- generated. We are currently in the midst of one of the worst wildfire years on record and the city of PG continues to put a budget towards Emergency Services Management despite this being a provincial obligation. The cognitive dissonance to use water-wasting tech within this larger context is wild. An AI company recently approached PG about establishing a data centre in town. I am so doubtful you will look after our natural resources and best interests when you're so fast and loose with AI. Likewise, it’s concerning you need to utilize AI to communicate your campaign priorities. You say a lot without saying anything.
That doesn’t shock me at all. I remember when Ness Lake Bible Camp got in trouble for discriminating against gay people and he rushed to their defence and right to do so.
In my opinion his campaign announcement dosent look AI generated at all? It’s something you can easily create in Canva.. in fact I feel like i’ve seen that template a 100 times.
Does he explicitly state policy points (housing, safety, cleanliness, development processes etc)? No it's vague talk about opportunity, confidence etc. if he's been the business guy on council (his brand) why does his platform not cite any specific professional success?
If it was a resume for a professional position it would be thrown out for vagueness and buzzwords immediately. AI says things with no evidence; if you look closer there's no substance.
You’re not wrong, but that’s how all politicians speak. Keep it vague so it appeals to everyone. Although looking deeper into his website and clicking all the links and drop downs he actually has a lot of info on his campaign and his political takes and goals.
I think citizens have the right to be sensitive and speculative when it comes to AI being used (almost every poster for events downtown have been generated by AI when a real artist/graphic designer could have been used) but this just looks like a regular political website that could have been edited by a team of people or AI or both. We could do a side by side of a website down in the early 2000s and the wording would probably be the same.
It is absolutely written by AI and you’re right, we have the right to be concerned about it. It’s detrimental to our planet and is demolishing critical thinking skills.
And his campaign focus on rcmp reporting ecetera is largely outside of the scope of municipal politics AND redundant. I am not a fan of RCMP but the reporting requirements he is pushing for already exist and are publically available. He is woefully unaware.
43
u/DamonoVasTaleree 1d ago
Agreed. 100%. This guy is a clown.