The McMaster Students Union conducted the 2024 Your City Survey to gather student input on transportation, housing and food security, helping to shape its municipal advocacy priorities
The MSU Your City Survey, which closed on Dec. 4, 2025, collected feedback about McMaster students’ perceptions and experiences in Hamilton, covering topics such as housing, transit, food security and policing. The survey is anonymous but participants have the option to provide their email for a chance to win a gift card to the Grind.
The MSU developed the survey in 2011, running every few years, to address students’ concerns about Hamilton. It asks students about their perceptions of Hamilton’s job market, cultural scene and their likelihood of living in the city after graduation.
In 2015, the Your City Survey was updated to assess whether students’ perception of Hamilton had improved since its launch. The most recent collection of data was in 2018. The questions in the survey shifted focus to transit and neighbourhood safety, while also asking commuter students about their perspectives in Hamilton.
This past year, the survey aimed to inform the MSU’s municipal affairs priorities, including advocating to city councillors and submitting feedback on students’ experience with the housing market, transportation, food security and policing in Hamilton for the upcoming pre-budget submission to City Council.
According to Kerry Yang, the associate vice-president of MSU Municipal Affairs, a document outlining McMaster students’ priorities and concerns for the budget and the city’s plan will be created and presented to city councillors at a later date.
Yang, whose role involves lobbying city councillors and engaging with students on municipal priorities, shared her thoughts on how the survey has evolved since 2018.
“I think how it’s evolved is this survey is probably the most comprehensive one to come out. It’s not just focused on housing, transit but has sort of all topics we typically want to know from students. Because it’s been so long since we did a survey, it was important that this one would be all encompassing and give us a really good snapshot of what the student experience is like,” said Yang.
... because it’s been so long since we did a survey, it was important that this one would be all encompassing and give us a really good snapshot of what the student experience is like.
Kerry Yang, Associate Vice-President of Municipal Affairs McMaster Students Union
When developing the questions for this year’s survey, Yang mentioned they reviewed previous surveys and made an effort to not only ask about students’ housing and transit experience. This survey also inquired about what would encourage students to stay in Hamilton, such as affordable housing options and having a vibrant community with public parks and trails.
“I think the diversity of the questions this year and also just how comprehensive it is, is definitely an improvement in the survey which will hopefully serve as a basis for future surveys. The benefit of asking the same questions year after year is that it makes the survey easy to compare over time,” said Yang.
I think the diversity of the questions this year and also just how comprehensive it is, is definitely an improvement in the survey which will hopefully serve as a basis for future surveys. The benefit of asking the same questions year after year is that it makes the survey easy to compare over time
Kerry Yang, Associate Vice-President of Municipal Affairs McMaster Students Union
Yang noted that she anticipates differences in the results compared to previous surveys, as the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the rental market and other aspects of student life.
Additionally, Yang mentioned that one potential policy recommendation, based on questions in the survey, to be brought to city councillors would be to pass a cooling bylaw that aligns with the existing heating bylaw.
Yang explained that there are currently regulations requiring heating to be turned on at certain temperatures during specific times of the year, but no similar rule exists for cooling. She noted that many students both on-campus and off-campus lack air conditioning which leads to uncomfortable living conditions.
“We are going to propose directly to the city that they implement the same or similar bylaw where students are being protected from the heat,” said Yang.
The results of the Your City Survey are expected to be released later this year.
The new bylaw will require renters to prove unit vacancy necessary for renovations, aiming to stop “bad faith” renovictions
The city of Hamilton is set to become the first city to act at the municipal level to reduce the number of “renovictions”. A new bylaw set to come into action Jan. 1, 2025 will require renters to pay for an eviction licence and make it more difficult to evict tenants for the purpose of performing renovations.
A renoviction refers to when a landlord evicts tenants from a housing unit with the intention of performing repairs and/or renovation, typically with the intent of raising the rent afterwards. When a renter wishes to evict a tenant(s) for these purposes, they issue an N-13 eviction notice to the tenant.
N-13 eviction notices are considered no-fault eviction notices, as renters are not required to prove tenants have done something wrong or violated their responsibilities. Landlord’s are also not required to provide tenants with proof that they are in fact intending to perform renovations.
Already in place to dissuade landlord’s from evicting renters and performing renovations with the intent of raising rent afterwards is Bill 184, the Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act.
Bill 184 places fines on renters places fines on renters who have evicted tenants in “bad faith,” which includes when renters evict tenants to perform renovations and then later rent to other tenants and/or raises the rent. Landlord’s proven to have evicted tenants in bad faith can face fines of fifty thousand dollars under Bill 184.
Despite these penalties, the incidence of N-13 renoviction notices increased 983 per cent from 2017 to 2022. Additionally, as reported by CBC Toronto in November 2023, of the 13 fines issued for bad-faith evictions in Ontario, only four had been paid at the time of reporting. Most of these fines were also for less than five thousand dollars, far below the $50 000 maximum.
Hamilton’s new bylaw, the Renovations Licence and Relocation Bylaw, will require landlords to provide proof from a qualified engineer that renovating their unit requires the unit to be vacant. Landlords will also need to obtain a licence to issue an N-13 eviction notice at a cost of $715 dollars.
As a result, renters will no longer be able to evict tenants for minor renovations for which having the unit vacant is deemed unnecessary by an expert.
In cases where an N-13 license is approved, landlord’s will also be required to provide alternative living accommodations or compensation during the time of the renovation.
The General Issues Committee, which includes the mayor and all city councillors, voted in favour of the new bylaw on Jan 17, but still needed to be ratified at the next council meeting on Jan 24. In an email statement to the Silhouette, Antonella Giancarlo, Senior Communications Officer of the City Manager's Office, confirmed on behalf of Acting City Clerk Janet Pilon that the bylaw was approved at the meeting on Jan 24, but will not take effect until Jan 1 2025.
In an email statement to the Silhouette, Antonella Giancarlo, Senior Communications Officer of the City Manager's Office, confirmed on behalf of Acting City Clerk Janet Pilon that the bylaw was approved at the meeting on Jan 24, but will not take effect until Jan 1 2025.
ACORN Hamilton, the local chapter of the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now, had been advocating for a law such as this one to be adopted since as early as April 2023.
The bylaw was expected to be finalized in October 2023, but the decision was pushed back to this January to allow for more time to consider feedback and the cost of the new licence program. Once ratified, the bylaw will officially come into effect and be enforced beginning next January.
Following Hamilton’s decision to adopt the new bylaw, Acorn Hamilton has stated they are challenging all Ontario cities to follow suite and adopt similar bylaws as Hamilton.
Following the events of Homecoming, particularly the streetwide party on Dalewood Ave. on Sept. 30, ward 1 councillor Aidan Johnson has tabled to permanently add more bylaw officers to the Westdale and Ainslie Wood area, the two neighbourhoods surrounding McMaster University. This pilot program began in Dec. 2016.
The motion passed, with only ward 3 councillor Matthew Green and ward 15 councillor Judi Partridge opposed.
Vice president (Education) Ryan Deshpande and associate vice president (Municipal Affairs) Stephanie Bertolo spoke on behalf of the McMaster Students Union, arguing that the proposal unfairly targets students who are still learning bylaws.
Councillor Green argued that over-policing of students only worsens student retainment for the city, a sentiment echoed by Deshpande.
When the initial program was proposed last year, the MSU was consulted during its planning. During the Dec. meeting, Johnson said he had contacted all of the neighbourhood groups, which is true if one follows the list on his website, which does not list the MSU as a neighbourhood group.
Deshpande maintains that the bylaw officer program wrongfully targets students instead of addressing absentee landlords in the area that contributes to property devaluation.
The cost of fines is just offloaded to students, says Ryan Deshpande, MSU VP education. It does nothing to crack down on absentee landlords
Watch the live-feed from the SRA meeting on Sept. 29. The bulk of bylaw 5 discussion begins at 40:35. For the full video feed, click here.
After a tumultuous week in the world of student politics, the question of ancillary student fees has been put on hold.
The proposed amendments to a McMaster Students Union bylaw which would see five student groups go to triennial review by referendum did not pass at the meeting of the Student Representative Assembly on Sept. 29.
The amendments, proposed by the Finance Committee under the leadership of Commissioner Daniel D’Angela and with the support of VP Finance Jeff Doucet, sought to bring greater financial transparency and accountability to the set of non-MSU, non-university administered groups.
Each of the affected groups was given an opportunity to voice their concerns at the meeting.
“We think there are better, more effective ways to bring conversations with students, and to create more meaningful conversations,” said Kathryn Chan, co-president of Engineers Without Borders, to those present. She explained that her organization was interested in transparency, though not through what they considered time-consuming referendums.
“We think that [the referendums] come at a cost of decreased quality in the work that we do,” Chan said.
Miranda Clayton, president of the McMaster Marching Band, echoed Chan’s sentiment.
“While the changes have good intentions, they ultimately harm the groups involved,” she said.
The McMaster Marching Band was granted a student levy to the amount of $0.90 per student for the 2013-2014 academic year after winning a referendum in January 2013.
Although each of the five groups opposed proposed bylaw framework, the discussion highlighted that issues with the amendments were rooted in the drafting process.
While the groups felt a referendum was taxing, Doucet and the Finance Committee believed such a model was best for maintaining group autonomy.
“All these groups are very different, so…it’s hard to come up with a solution,” he explained. “But one thing they all had in common was going to referendum to get student money.”
Lexi Sproule, co-president of EWB, felt that the perceived lack of consultation was a miscommunication between groups.
“It’s a pretty classic misunderstanding between people making strategy decisions and people on the ground.”
After nearly two hours of discussion, the decision was made to send the proposal back to the finance committee for a more thorough consultation process.
D’Angela explained that the Finance Committee has now asked for policy suggestions from each group on “how to improve students democratic input into the fee” and a period of consultation is expected to follow.
After paying tuition, many students may not know what happens to their money. But organizers within the McMaster Students Union are working to see that changed, and show students what happens to their fees.
The finance committee of the MSU has proposed changes to a bylaw that would see student groups have their levies put up to referendum on a regular basis. The bylaw in question deals specifically with the five non-MSU, non-university organizations that currently receive a portion of student funding.
“What this bylaw essentially does is give [students] more information on where their money is going,” said Daniel D’Angela, MSU Finance Commissioner and Social Science SRA representative.
The groups that fall under this category are Ontario Public Interest Research Group, McMaster, Engineers Without Borders, Incite Magazine, the McMaster Solar Car, and the McMaster Marching Band. The money these five groups collect from the student body amounts to $10.86 for each full-time student.
And despite the enthusiasm of key players within the MSU, the groups affected have come out in vocal opposition of the motion.
“It’s an inefficient way to consult students,” said Lexi Sproule, co-president of the McMaster chapter of Engineers Without Borders of the proposed system.
Under the changes, EWB and the other four organizations would have their levy put on the presidential ballot as a referendum for students to vote on every three years.
“It’s not very in-depth feedback,” said Sproule. “Even if you get approved, you don’t know if students have any issues with how you run things. It’s so much energy for feedback that’s kind of superficial.”
Proponents of the referendums disagree.
“I don’t think that once every three years having to spend two weeks going out and telling students about what you do, I don’t think it’s that taxing,” said Jeff Doucet,
EWB currently collects 37 cents from every full-time undergraduate student. While not making up their entire budget, the approximately $7700 it receives goes directly to funding students participating in the Junior Fellowship Program, a four-month volunteer placement overseas.
While the dollar amount per student is small, the effect the potential loss is on some of the organizations is significant.
“[Without the levy] I don’t think we’d be able to operate—that’s what keeps us going,” said Yuvreet Kaur, one of eight student board members of OPIRG McMaster.
OPIRG McMaster is one of a network of organizations across the province, which promotes social justice issues through grassroots organizing and through the funding of student and community-led working groups.
Of the five affected groups, OPIRG currently collects the largest fee, at $7.57 per student. However, the fee is refundable within three weeks of the drop and adds date in September.
“We give students the opportunity to take that money if they need it or if they don’t support the work we do,” explained Kojo Damptey, also on the OPIRG Board.
”We’re the only organization on campus that does that.”
The threat of OPIRG McMaster losing its funding is not unheard of; other OPIRG chapters across Ontario, including those at the University of Toronto and at Queen’s University, have come under scrutiny through NOPIRG campaigns, which aim to abolish the system of contributing student fees to the organization.
In the case of Queen’s, NOPIRG organizer Stuart Clark told the Queen’s Journal he was opposed to the levy because of “the use of publically available funds for certain activities that don’t reflect the values of the entire community.”
Mac’s chapter, however, feels that its values align very well with the university.
“Our current president [Patrick Deane] talked about forward with integrity—we’ve been doing that for two decades here,” said Damptey. He emphasized that the working groups funded by the group, which address a range of social justice issues, are the product of student ideas.
“There are certain working groups that a lot of the McMaster population is familiar with,” echoed Board Member Sabeen Kazmi. “Other groups…like the McMaster Farmstand and MACycle started under OPIRG.”
OPIRG and the other four organizations involved are seeking not only to make students and SRA members aware of their role on campus, but also to voice their opposition to the process of the bylaw changes being made.
Sam Godfrey, co-editor-in-chief of Incite Magazine, expressed her concern with the idea of a referendum to determine fees.
“It’s hard to measure worth…by whether the majority of students read [Incite]. If you only funded things that the majority wanted, you wouldn’t have the same kind of community at Mac.”
However, D’Angela said that his impression was that the groups were in support of amendments.
“I met with them midway through the summer, the fee holders, and overwhelmingly, I’d say they agreed with increasing with transparency,” he said.
Sproule explained that while EWB is completely supportive of financial transparency, no mention of the proposed changes was made.
“All we heard was ‘great job’…what are we supposed to do with that? If we’d heard they had concerns, we’d be happy to change things,” she explained.
The bylaw changes were made within the Finance Committee but did not involve any further consultation with the groups.The process of amendment also didn’t involve notifying the groups when the motion was set to go to the SRA for voting; a system that was met with concern by OPIRG, Incite, and EWB, but to others was not problematic.
“If the finance committee decides to make a change because they feel we need more democratic input, should they notify the groups in advance that they make their change, before it goes public? I’m not sure if that will change the conversation that much,” said Doucet.
The discussion on the proposed changes will continue at the upcoming SRA meeting, scheduled for Sunday, Sept. 29.
Despite the opposition raised by the five groups, who are expected to present at the meeting, D’Angela and Doucet stand by the Finance Committee’s suggestion.
“If students want to have democratic input, referendum is the most efficient way to do so,” said Doucet.
“We think that the students are smart, they are intelligent people and they’re able to weigh the pros and cons of any single vote,” explained D’Angela upon being asked about the effectiveness of a referendum.
“We think that students are able to make decisions if you give them the right information and give them the important information.”
