Eight of the 12 mayoral candidates gathered in the atrium of the student centre on Oct. 22 to debate issues specifically important to the student population.
Michael Baldasaro, Ejaz Butt, Brad Clark, Fred Eisenberger, Warrand Francis, Crystal Lavigne, Brian McHattie, and Michael Pattison were all present at the debate.
The candidates provided a variety of perspectives on the topics, which have been highlighted below.
Only McHattie, Eisenberger, and Baldasaro were on board for light-rail transit, while Clark, Francis, and Lavigne opposed its implementation.
Baldasaro suggests a north and south LRT line, citing the infrastructure deficit as the reason not to build an east-west LRT line.
“Nobody cares about going to Mac and Stoney Creek that lives in Flamborough, Dundas, Ancaster [...] everybody in this room including me at some time has to go to Toronto. The best way to do that would be on a downtown LRT from GO station to GO station,” said Baldasaro.
Instead, Clark suggests executing an eight-year plan to increase B-line and A-line bus services that run north-south and east-west in the city. Baldasaro opposed this idea, stating: “The BRT, fossil fuel vehicles are dinosaurs; [...] electricity is tomorrow.”
Many candidates opposed LRT because it would take away lanes and cause more congestion for drivers. To avoid this, Butt suggested creating an underground LRT system.
A more unique approach to oppose LRT is Lavigne’s plan to bring gondola transit, or cable cars, to Hamilton. She claims cable cars are an environmentally friendly option and will act as a tourist attraction for Hamilton. Additionally, Francis claimed that a high-speed dual monorail system on both Main and Barton street will solve this issue. He proposed that McMaster engineers could design the system and it could be built from steel materials made in Hamilton, creating jobs and a new model that could be sold to other cities.
On the other hand, Pattison suggested a referendum to ask citizens what they want, as well as expanding bike lanes.
When asked to highlight how they will provide employment opportunities to students and new graduates, most candidates responded.
Clark highlighted his international business development plan to develop partnerships with CEOs and union leaders in the city. He plans to use their connections with businesses in foreign countries and entice them to move to Hamilton. In contrast, Eisenberger argued that 80 percent of growth opportunities will come from businesses that are already here in the city.
McHattie focused on advanced manufacturing in Hamilton, citing health care and the research going on at McMaster Innovation Park as an important sector for jobs.
Lavigne expressed the importance of keeping the younger generation in Hamilton by offering employment opportunities that youth want, including flexible work hours. She did not, however, provide insight into how those jobs would be created.
The candidates all agreed on finding a balance between pleasing permanent residents, land owners, and renters. Many opposed the by-law that would require rental houses to be licensed.
“The original proposal that came forward from a number of the councillors was to license student housing. And when that came forward, I opposed that because the reality is you can’t license a class of citizens,” said Clark.
Francis proposed building a new student residence close to campus, but provided no further details.
All agreed that rental conditions are sub-standard, but did not offer many concrete solutions to the problem.
Each candidates approached environmental concerns differently. McHattie described the improvements that have been made in Hamilton, including the recently improved sewage treatment system. As part of his platform, McHattie wants to found a trees and parks trust, as well as implement an air pollution by-law similar to ones in Oakville that prevent small particles, which are often the most deadly, from entering the atmosphere.
Eisenberger also emphasized the sewage treatment successes and claims that automobile emissions make up a considerable amount of pollution. He suggested a more environmentally friendly transit system to help combat this issue.
Francis stated that his monorail system would be environmentally friendly, but stressed the issue of decline of the bee population.
“My most important thing is what are we going to do in 2035 when there’s no more bees in North America? We only have four years after the bees die, after four years, we’re dead,” said Francis. “As mayor, I’m planning a massive bee re-population program where we can get the bees and sell them to all of the parts of the world where the bees are dying off.”
Clark, Eisenberger, and McHattie offered the most detailed answers, especially in the areas of transit and economic development. Butt, Francis, Baldasaro, and Lavigne offered the most unique ideas in their transit plans, but left out the details at how these projects would be funded.
McHattie and Eisenberger seemed to be the audience favourites, with the most visible support from those who attended. Baldasaro acted as the comic relief for the debate, offering strange solutions that often involved his hemp farm.
Overall, the debate addressed key issues that affect students and provided many different solutions for the problems. Now it is up to Hamilton to decide which will be the most effective for improving Hamilton’s transportation, job market, housing, and tackling environmental concerns.
The municipal election will take place Oct. 27.
