Skip to content

🗳️ Looking ahead to the 2026 Municipal Election in Greater Sudbury

  • This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 4 months ago by .
Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • #10565

      With the next municipal election set for October 26, 2026, it’s worth starting the conversation now — about leadership, priorities, and the kind of city we want to build together.

      Some of you may remember that I put my name forward in 2018 and again in 2022, running in two different wards but grounded in the same core values:
      ➡️ Collaboration over division
      ➡️ Community-first decision-making (people before politics)
      ➡️ Strong neighbourhood advocacy
      ➡️ Transparency and engagement

      Those campaigns were about showing up, listening, and taking municipal leadership seriously — understanding both its responsibilities and its limits.

      Fast forward to today, and many of those values are needed more than ever.

      Greater Sudbury is facing multiple, overlapping challenges:
      • A housing and homelessness crisis
      • A worsening drug and mental health epidemic
      • Affordability pressures on families, seniors, and small businesses
      • Aging infrastructure and long-delayed planning decisions
      • Growing frustration and disengagement from local politics

      It’s important to be honest about what municipal leadership can — and cannot — do.

      City council alone cannot fix all of these issues. Many are tied to provincial and federal policy, funding constraints, legislation, and decisions made decades ago. These problems did not emerge overnight, and they will not be solved in a single council term.

      That honesty matters — because when candidates make sweeping promises they can’t possibly keep, trust erodes. Campaign slogans eventually collide with budgets, jurisdictional limits, and the reality that progress at the municipal level is often incremental.

      What council can do is lead.

      Council can set priorities, make responsible long-term decisions, advocate forcefully to other levels of government, and stop repeating the short-sighted planning that helped create today’s challenges. The issues we face now are not about blaming the past — what’s done is done — but about forging a better path forward, with eyes not just on the next few years, but on the next few decades.

      Residents should expect realism, not rhetoric:
      • Leaders who listen and elevate community concerns
      • Leaders who understand trade-offs and explain them honestly
      • Leaders who plan beyond election cycles
      • Leaders who follow through, even when change takes time

      As we head toward May 1, 2026, when nominations officially open, more names will emerge and more conversations will begin. This is the moment to engage — with family, neighbours, community groups, and residents — about what good municipal leadership actually looks like.

      Just as important, we need stronger voter turnout. Municipal decisions shape our daily lives in very real ways, yet too many people feel disconnected from City Hall. Rebuilding trust starts with honest conversations and early engagement.

      The next chapter for Greater Sudbury should be guided by pragmatism, empathy, and long-term thinking — leaders who understand the scope of the challenges, respect the limits of the role, and are willing to do the steady work required to move the city forward.

      The months ahead will be interesting.
      More importantly, they should be engaging.

      Let’s talk. Let’s listen. Let’s do better — together.

    • #10573

      How bout we talk lower taxes come on people were getting killed out here

      • #10609

        Can’t argue with lower taxes, how we get there is the hard part because not everyone can agree and differing points of view.

      • #10631

        I agree that we absolutely need to talk about lower taxes, but that conversation has to be grounded in how municipal finance actually works.

        Municipalities don’t have the same tools as the province or federal government. Cities can’t run deficits, can’t borrow freely to cover operating costs, and rely heavily on property taxes to fund services residents expect. Meanwhile, provincial and federal governments can run deficits, upload or download responsibilities, and adjust funding levels year to year.

        In Greater Sudbury, we’re still feeling the long-term effects of amalgamation. Responsibilities that were once provincial (like portions of what used to be Highway 69, now MR 80) became fully municipal obligations. As that infrastructure reaches the end of its life, the cost of replacement and maintenance falls entirely on local taxpayers.

        Add to that an aging infrastructure network, a massive geographic footprint, and a relatively low population density compared to southern Ontario cities. Maintaining roads, water, sewer, and services across such a large area is far more expensive per household, and decades of short-term planning only compound the problem we’re facing today.

        So yes, we should talk about lower taxes. But doing so responsibly means also talking about:

        Fair and stable provincial funding

        Realistic service levels

        Long-term infrastructure planning

        And being honest about what municipalities can and cannot control

        If we skip those parts, “lower taxes” becomes a slogan instead of a solution.

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Login to bump this post to the Top10