Various organizations are holding Mayoral forums or submitting questions to candidates on issues for the upcoming election. Here is where you will find their questions. I have answered them in a comprehensive manner, in depth. If you have any comments on my vision for Saskatoon, or questions of your own, please contact me at yxemayor2024@gmail.com.
QUESTION: Beyond current plans, what specific actions would you take to promote densification, public transit, and active transport (walking, biking, etc) to ensure Saskatoon is an accessible city?
ANSWER: We need to strike a balance between promoting densification, maintaining Saskatoon’s character, and respecting residents’ preferences for housing. While increasing housing density has its merits, especially when linked to public transit, we cannot attempt to force residents into living arrangements that don’t suit their needs or desires. The market should play a key role in determining where and how people choose to live.
There is a real demand for higher-density housing, such as high-rises along Saskatoon’s main corridors. However, this must be driven by consumer choice, not imposed by the city. People invest significant amounts in their homes, often spending $300,000 or more, and they deserve the freedom to choose a living environment that works best for them, whether that’s in the suburbs or in denser urban areas. If we push too hard for densification, it risks driving residents to surrounding communities like Martensville or Warman, or to new residential developments just outside city limits. Ironically, an aggressive push for urban densification could actually lead to more urban sprawl, not less.
Regarding public transit, I am deeply concerned about the current “Bus Rapid Transit” (BRT) or Link plan. While public transportation is vital for the city’s growth and sustainability, the current design is flawed. Under this plan, it would take 5-7 minutes longer to get from downtown to the suburbs than it would by car. That may seem like not much, but a bus ride that takes 20% to 50% longer to accomplish than using a car will be a barrier to many. People value their time, and few are willing to adopt a slower commute just to support transit. The cost of this plan, which will eventually reach $1 billion, has also been significantly underplayed. No one is talking about the additional operational costs that will burden taxpayers for years to come.
Moreover, the transit routes need to make sense. The Broadway Avenue portion of the proposed route, for instance, threatens to devastate the culture and unique atmosphere of the area. It is wrong to take parking away on Broadway Ave. Instead, I propose that the BRT route from downtown should cross the Senator Sid Buckwold Bridge and continue along 8th Street to Circle Park Mall, which has already been approved for redevelopment into housing in the 2019 Transit Village Report.
Also, fewer people are working downtown and going to the office. The BRT plan hasn’t been adjusted for this phenomenon. What we need are buses that work and have air conditioning in the summer and heat in the winter. We also need Frequent Bus Service on the main thorough fares every 6 – 10 minutes. Miss one when it’s 40 below the next one is literally around the corner.
The College Drive segment is another concern, as it would require removing two lanes from the University Bridge, which is already overburdened. Attempts to increase mass transportation by restricting single passenger vehicles is a blueprint for a strong resident backlash and discord in the community. A new bridge on 33rd Street would be necessary to compensate for this loss. On 22nd Street and in the Lawson Heights area, the railway tracks present a major obstacle, and until we move the tracks out of the city, no transit system will be able to operate efficiently.
Another problematic location is the CP rail yard in Sutherland. Moving these tracks out of the city would not only improve traffic flow and allow for more efficient transit but also create a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for a premier bike and pedestrian corridor. Imagine a network that stretches from Costco on the east end of the city, crosses the freeway, intersects with the Meewasin Valley Authority (MVA) trail, and continues all the way to Highway 7 on the west side. This corridor would connect neighbourhoods like Rosewood, Briarwood, East College Park, Brighton, Sutherland, and Forest Grove on the east side with communities like Caswell Hill, Pleasant Hill, and Montgomery on the west end. It would provide safe, efficient, and vehicle-free travel for cyclists and pedestrians, and offer a tremendous recreational and commuting benefit to the city.
A livable city depends on Law and Order, and this is especially true for mass transit. Transit workers are already reporting harassment and unsafe conditions, and residents won’t choose transportation where they feel vulnerable to harassment, assault, or other unlawful activity. Without Law and Order, BRT will mean “Barely Ridden Transit.”
To change that, I support reintroducing CompStat. This system gathers real-time, accurate data, allowing police to be rapidly deployed where crimes are happening. It’s not just about reactive policing—it emphasizes effective tactics and continuous follow-up. By using CompStat, the Saskatoon Police Department can pinpoint high-risk routes, times, and locations on the transit system, and strategically deploy plainclothes officers to apprehend perpetrators and deter criminal behaviour. The mere possibility that a rider could be an officer will discourage would-be perpetrators from acting out, making the system safer for everyone. The higher the risk of getting caught, the safer transit becomes.
In terms of active transport like biking and walking, we must be smart about where we place bike lanes. The current approach has too often resulted in conflict between cyclists and vehicles, which is counterproductive. We need bike lanes that are designed with safety in mind, placed on streets where they do not create friction with vehicle traffic..
In conclusion, while I support densification, public transit, and active transportation, these initiatives must be balanced with the needs and preferences of Saskatoon’s residents. We must respect the desire for housing choice, improve the efficiency and practicality of our transit systems, and create bike and pedestrian infrastructure that truly enhances accessibility without imposing undue costs or sacrifices on the city’s character. Through thoughtful planning and community engagement, we can make Saskatoon an accessible, vibrant city that thrives without compromising the freedom of choice that its residents deserve.
QUESTION: How would you ensure that Saskatoon has access to housing that is both environmentally and economically secure/sustainable in a future marked by rising temperatures and climatic extremes? (Eg. construction of homes, energy efficiency, heat pumps, use of Housing Accelerator Fund, close to public transit, green spaces, etc).
ANSWER: Sustainability, when it comes to housing, must address both environmental factors and the economic realities that renters and homeowners face. Ensuring that housing is accessible and affordable is just as crucial as making homes energy efficient. These two goals must go hand in hand if we are to create a Saskatoon that is sustainable in every sense of the word.
The core issue we face is not just rising temperatures but also rising costs of housing, a challenge that has been exacerbated over the past several years. Fundamentally, housing is about supply and demand. A key factor behind the lack of affordable housing in Saskatoon is the failure to adequately increase supply. While it’s easy to blame the COVID-19 pandemic as a major contributor to the housing crisis, the roots of the problem go much deeper. City council, especially since 2017, has deprioritized housing compared to earlier efforts.
In my most recent term as Mayor, we made housing a priority. From 2013 to 2016, we set aggressive attainable housing targets. Our average annual goal was 470 units of affordable housing per year, and we surpassed this by achieving 564 units on average—a 35% increase over the target. This wasn’t a stroke of luck but the result of focused leadership and deliberate action.
Unfortunately, under the next city council, these efforts stalled. From 2017 to 2020, city council lowered its targets to an average of just 313 units per year—and even then, they failed to meet those reduced goals. In fact, the actual average was just 203 units per year, with some years seeing as few as 145 or 151 units. This dramatic decline is a direct result of a lack of urgency and vision.
We now find ourselves playing catch-up. That’s why I’m proposing an ambitious but attainable goal: 10,000 attainable/affordable housing units over the next 10 years. This isn’t just a number on paper; it’s a critical need. However, it’s important to note that the City of Saskatoon won’t own these homes—its role is to facilitate, not manage. We’ll work with faith-based organizations, non-profits, and the private sector to build this much-needed housing stock. By incentivizing development, we can jumpstart the process and begin closing the gap.
One reason housing hasn’t been a priority in recent years may be a flawed attempt by council to reduce urban sprawl. The thinking seems to be that by restricting outward growth, we can control development and protect the environment. However, this approach ignores a fundamental reality: people have the freedom to choose what’s best for their families. When Saskatoon restricts growth, residents move to nearby bedroom communities like Martensville and Warman, leading to even greater traffic congestion and a host of other issues.
We must recognize the interconnectedness of housing and transportation. Instead of blanket zoning changes, we need to focus on creating high-density nodes along Saskatoon’s main thoroughfares. By strategically placing these nodes every half-mile to mile, we can promote efficient public transit while still preserving the character of our established neighborhoods. This will help us reduce our city’s carbon footprint while allowing room for growth where it makes the most sense.
At the same time, we cannot afford to rush into deals that may seem good on the surface but end up being disastrous for the city. The federal Housing Accelerator Fund (HAF) is one such deal. While it promises $10.5 million annually for four years, the strings attached to that funding could fundamentally change Saskatoon for the worse. The plan would allow the construction of four-plexes and even four-story buildings next to single-family homes, completely altering the character of established neighbourhoods.
Worse still, there’s no guarantee that Saskatoon will even qualify for the federal dollars being promised. If you don’t follow what the federal government deems an appropriate time frame for housing to be created, they can withhold funding. This has occurred already occurred in some communities. To receive funding, you will need to increase the number of units produced by 76% in the 4th year, the 15% is compounded each year. We are not Toronto, Vancouver. Calgary passed it 9 – 6 and is talking of a plebiscite for the 2025 civic election. Edmonton has districts not blanket zoning, so their deal is different from Saskatoon’s.
In my experience with funding from other levels of government, negotiation to change some conditions to meet local needs prior to signing the agreement was always the preferred approach. The gas tax is a prime example where Saskatoon lead the way in having that regulation changed. We built the additional lanes on Circle Drive Bridge and the Circle and College Drive Overpass because of the changes we insisted upon. The stacking of programs for Circle Drive south Bridge is another example. With housing, we need to prioritize the quality of life in our communities, not sell out for a superficial fix.
In my experience working with other levels of government, negotiation is key. When Saskatoon was negotiating the gas tax, we successfully fought for changes that allowed us to use the funds to build additional lanes on Circle Drive Bridge and construct the Circle and College Drive Overpass. The Housing Accelerator Fund should be no different—Saskatoon should push for terms that align with our long-term needs, rather than accepting a one-size-fits-all solution.
Another critical issue is the cost of serviced land. The City’s Land Bank has, over time, appears to have been part of driving up housing costs. While the Land Bank generates revenue for the city, it could possibly be a contributed to the unaffordability of homeownership. We need to carefully review its impact on the housing market and explore ways to reduce the burden it places on new developments, especially for entry-level homes. Along with this, we need to cut through the red tape that slows down construction. By being more responsive and saying “yes” to builders and developers more quickly, we can speed up the creation of new housing.
Ultimately, economic sustainability in housing means that people can afford to live here without being squeezed by increasing demands on their income. This city council has proven time and again that it has an insatiable appetite for taxpayer dollars. Temporary levies are made permanent, as we saw when the new council, at the end of 2016, rescinded the sunset clause on the stormwater charge, leading to permanent increases on residents’ water bills.
And it’s not just water bills that are being inflated. Remember when recycling was included in property taxes? Before 2013, our recycling program cost around $300,000 annually, about $40 per tonne of recycled material, with contamination rates under 2%. This was all covered by property taxes. Then the city rolled out an expanded curbside recycling program, promising to collect 26,000 tonnes of material annually—a significant increase from the 7,500 tonnes the previous program handled. But the results didn’t come close to that figure.
In 2022, the curbside program collected just 7,000 tonnes, and even when adding multi-unit buildings and depots, the total barely exceeded 10,000 tonnes. Despite this, the cost to residents ballooned. We now spend over $7.5 million annually on recycling—an average of $750 per tonne. The additional 3,000 tonnes we hoped to collect come at a cost of $1,000 to $2,000 per tonne, far more than the $105 per tonne it costs to send material to the landfill. Worse, the cost of recycling has been turned into a separate fee on residents’ bills, while property taxes have continued to rise.
City council also chose not to use the millions of dollars received from Multi-Material Stewardship Western, a fund designed to cover recycling costs, to offset these expenses for residents. Instead, they used that money to build the Material Recovery Centre, which will turn out to primarily serve the industrial, commercial, and institutional sectors. In effect, residents paid twice for their recycling, once as a consumer of products and once as a resident of Saskatoon.
Affordability must be central to any discussion of sustainability. It’s not enough to build energy-efficient homes if residents can’t afford to live in them. While the new national building code addresses many concerns about energy efficiency, we must be cautious about implementing policies that add further costs to homeowners. The wealthy can afford these upgrades, but for those who are just getting by, the additional financial burden could be devastating.
That’s why I support the voluntary adoption of technologies like heat pumps and solar panels, rather than making them mandatory. We can incentivize these technologies in targeted ways to ensure that the benefits reach those who need them most, rather than allowing them to be concentrated among those who are already well-off.
In addition to energy-efficient homes, we need to consider the importance of green spaces. One million new trees planted over the next decade would not only beautify our city but also help mitigate the urban heat island effect, keeping Saskatoon cooler in the summer and reducing energy costs. Adding to our robust network of parks and green spaces will also increase property values and contribute to a higher quality of life for all residents.
In conclusion, sustainability in housing must be viewed holistically. It’s about balancing environmental responsibility with economic viability, ensuring that residents have access to affordable, livable homes. By setting ambitious goals, cutting red tape, and negotiating smarter deals with higher levels of government, we can ensure that Saskatoon grows in a way that preserves its unique character while securing a sustainable future for all.
QUESTION: What is your commitment to the success of the Low Emissions Community Plan? Why do you think it’s missed most of its emissions targets? What would you do to ensure it gets on track?
ANSWER: As we confront the realities of climate change, Saskatoon must adopt a visionary yet pragmatic approach. Climate change is real, and its effects are being felt globally. However, the $19 billion Low Emissions Plan proposed for our city is not the solution. While well-intentioned, its recommendations are staggeringly expensive and rely on technologies that are either unproven in our climate or unsuitable for widespread use. As Mayor, my goal is to ensure that we navigate the challenges ahead with strategies that are both environmentally and economically sustainable for our residents. Adaptation, not unrealistic carbon reduction targets, must be our focus.
The financial burden of the Low Emissions Plan could overwhelm Saskatoon’s residents and businesses. The cost is so high that if every major city in Canada were to adopt similar plans, the total would exceed $1.6 trillion. For perspective, our current national debt is $1.2 trillion. Even the plan’s projected savings of $33 billion should be taken with a grain of salt. Experience has shown that government projections rarely match reality, and these savings will likely fall short, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill. Moreover, the plan is heavily reliant on funding from federal and provincial governments, which are themselves under tremendous financial strain. The federal government is grappling with its largest debt in history, and the provincial government is already stretched thin, struggling to meet growing demands for health care, education, and infrastructure. The massive funds required for this plan will likely never materialize.
Understanding Carbon Emissions Reduction: A Practical Approach
The primary flaw in Saskatoon’s Low Emissions Plan lies in its misunderstanding of how to achieve meaningful carbon emissions reductions. Successful strategies focus on replacing fossil fuel energy with low-emission alternatives that are reliable, affordable, and abundant. The two most viable options are hydroelectric power and nuclear power.
For Saskatoon, the pathway to a low-emission future includes harnessing hydroelectric power from the South Saskatchewan River as it flows through the city. This concept has been discussed for years, and recent technological advancements have made it increasingly viable. However, the truly transformational change will come from the adoption of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), bringing nuclear power to the province. Nuclear energy is one of the cleanest and most reliable sources of power, and it’s the key to significantly reducing our carbon footprint.
Unfortunately, for decades, Saskatchewan has been held back by an ideological opposition to nuclear energy. This aversion has more to do with outdated fears and misconceptions than with science. As a result, our province has been slower to adopt cleaner energy sources, which has contributed to our current levels of carbon emissions. As Mayor, I will champion the provincial plan to bring SMRs to Saskatchewan, allowing us to generate abundant, affordable, and low-emission power. This is the most effective way to ensure Saskatoon thrives in our harsh northern climate while reducing emissions.
Problems with the Low Emissions Plan
The Low Emissions Plan also places an unfair burden on residents and businesses. Beyond government funding, it envisions significant private investment in compliance. For instance, the plan mandates that all new buildings install solar panels and requires deep energy retrofits for existing homes. While I fully support voluntary measures to promote renewable energy, these mandates are a one-size-fits-all solution that will disproportionately affect lower and middle-income households.
We’ve seen the negative consequences of similar policies in other regions. In jurisdictions with strict energy regulations, many residents have faced financial hardship, unable to afford the costly retrofits and technology upgrades required to comply with the law. The wealthy can more easily take advantage of government incentives for energy efficiency, while lower-income families struggle to meet basic needs, let alone invest in home renovations or solar panels.
One glaring irony in the plan is its mandate for solar panels on all new buildings. This comes from a city council that recently rejected a proposal for a new sustainable neighbourhood where every home would include solar panels. While the city council may be well-meaning in its intentions, its actions demonstrate a lack of cohesion and practicality when it comes to implementing sustainable development strategies.
The Carbon Debt of Electric Vehicles
Another area where the Low Emissions Plan falls short is its reliance on electric vehicles (EVs) as a solution to carbon emissions. While EVs are often touted as “zero-emission” vehicles, the reality is more complex. In fact, EVs carry what is known as a significant “carbon debt”—the high carbon emissions generated during the manufacturing of their batteries. This debt is substantial and must be repaid over time through the vehicle’s use.
For the average personal electric vehicle, this carbon debt can take up to a decade to offset when compared to an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle. Given that EV batteries have a limited lifespan, by the time this debt is repaid, the vehicle’s battery may need replacing, which adds to the environmental burden. Furthermore, in Saskatchewan, where much of our electricity still comes from fossil fuels, charging these EVs doesn’t eliminate carbon emissions; it simply shifts them from the tailpipe to the power plant.
For electric buses, the carbon debt is even greater due to the size of the batteries required. Not only are these buses expensive to produce, but their performance is often compromised in cold climates like Saskatoon’s, where low temperatures reduce battery range and efficiency. In addition, decommissioning electric vehicles presents serious environmental challenges, as the safe disposal and recycling of toxic battery materials is a costly and complex process.
Edmonton’s Experience with Electric Buses
Edmonton’s recent experience with electric buses serves as a cautionary tale. The city purchased 60 electric buses from a California-based company, expecting to revolutionize its public transit system and lower carbon emissions. However, the results were far from what was promised. More than half of these buses were regularly out of service, leading to operational disruptions and significant financial losses. The issues were so severe that the city filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer, seeking $82 million in damages.
Electric buses, especially in cold climates, face unique challenges. The colder it gets, the less efficient the batteries become. This means more buses are needed to provide the same level of service, and those buses that do operate need more frequent recharging. Not only does this undermine the environmental benefits of EVs, but it also places an enormous strain on public resources. If Saskatoon were to follow Edmonton’s example, we would likely face similar technical issues and financial losses.
The Low Emissions Plan’s push to electrify Saskatoon’s fleet, including buses, ignores these critical challenges. The effort to reduce emissions through electrification is not grounded in the realities of life-cycle emissions or the technical limitations of EVs in cold climates.
Adaptive Infrastructure and Smart Investments
Rather than focusing on unrealistic carbon reductions, Saskatoon needs to invest in adaptive infrastructure to address the specific challenges posed by climate change. For example, we are already seeing increased rainfall and more extreme weather events, and this trend is expected to continue. Our city must be prepared to manage stormwater and prevent flooding, especially in vulnerable neighborhoods.
One of the most promising strategies is the expansion of stormwater ponding. Parks like Ashley and Weaver have already been converted into temporary reservoirs, reducing the risk of flooding in nearby areas. This is a smart, adaptive measure that addresses our changing climate while preserving green spaces. We should expand this initiative to other parts of the city and take it a step further by making better use of increased rainfall.
Modular Treatment Plants (MTPs) represent another forward-thinking solution. These plants can handle wastewater from new neighbourhoods on the edges of the city, reducing the strain on our central treatment plant and improving overall water management. Even more exciting, MTPs could allow us to repurpose treated wastewater for agricultural irrigation in the surrounding areas. This would provide a sustainable water source for local farms, helping them cope with drought conditions while supporting Saskatoon’s growth.
By integrating stormwater into the MTP system, we can also ensure that excess water from storms is captured and put to good use, rather than overwhelming our infrastructure. This kind of smart adaptation is exactly what Saskatoon needs to prepare for the future.
Saskatchewan is a large ‘carbon sink’ removing untold amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. Saskatoon itself has a large canopy of trees making our community a beautiful one to live in, and, as mayor, I’ll advocate for the planting of 1 million trees in the next 10 years as a way of off-setting the city’s carbon emissions.
Conclusion: A Vision for Saskatoon’s Future
In summary, Saskatoon’s climate strategy must prioritize adaptive measures that address our unique challenges rather than unrealistic carbon reduction goals. While reducing emissions is important, it should not come at the expense of our economic stability or social harmony. We need a balanced approach that is scientifically sound, financially feasible, and socially fair.
Hydroelectric power from the South Saskatchewan River and nuclear energy from SMRs will provide the clean, reliable energy we need to thrive in our northern climate. By investing in adaptive infrastructure like stormwater ponding and modular treatment plants, we can build a city that is resilient in the face of climate change while continuing to grow and prosper.
Let’s focus on what’s possible and practical. Our goal should be to protect the environment, but also to ensure that our actions are sustainable, fair, and realistic for all residents of Saskatoon. As Mayor, I will lead our city with a forward-thinking vision that embraces innovation, adaptation, and pragmatic solutions for a better future.
QUESTION: The proposed Saskatoon Freeway would put a multi-lane freeway through Saskatoon’s Northeast and Small Swales, likely having a significant impact on what are agreed to be natural areas of outstanding biodiversity and abundance. Are you in favour of the project as proposed? Why or why not?
ANSWER: The proposed Saskatoon Freeway is still a decade or more away, which provides us with the opportunity to carefully plan for both necessary infrastructure and environmental preservation. I believe we can achieve a balance between development and the protection of natural areas like the Northeast and Small Swales, which are critical zones of biodiversity.
I support the Saskatoon Freeway project in principle because it can help move heavy trucks and traffic around the city more efficiently, reducing congestion on our streets and contributing to a lower carbon footprint. However, the current route needs to be adjusted to minimize its impact on these sensitive ecosystems.
One way to do this is by creating wildlife corridors, similar to those found on the Trans-Canada Highway in Banff National Park. In Banff, nature overpasses have been successfully integrated into the landscape to allow wildlife to safely cross major roadways, reducing accidents and maintaining animal migration routes. These overpasses blend seamlessly into the natural environment and have been proven effective in preserving wildlife populations. In Saskatoon, we can implement similar overpasses and large culverts along the freeway to provide safe passage for the many species that call the Swale home.
Additionally, we need to look at ways to enhance the biodiversity of the Swale. One exciting possibility is the reintroduction of bison to the area. Historically, these animals played a key role in maintaining the ecological balance of the prairies. Their presence can help restore native plant species and attract a variety of birds and other wildlife. By bringing back buffalo, we could potentially see the revival of a much more diverse ecosystem, as research has shown that their grazing patterns create habitats for many species.
Imagine the sight of a herd of buffalo, calves in tow, roaming through the Swale literally from Sylvia Fedoruk Drive up to Clarks Crossing on the east end of Saskatoon. This could become an iconic feature of our city, illustrating how urban development can coexist with nature in a meaningful and positive way. It would also offer an educational opportunity for residents and visitors alike to learn about the historical and ecological importance of the area.
To accomplish these goals, we need to engage with environmental experts, Indigenous groups, and the community at large. Consultation will ensure that we’re making the best choices for both our infrastructure needs and our natural heritage. In the end, this project could become a model for how cities can balance growth with environmental stewardship, showing that it is possible to build a freeway while preserving the unique and vital ecosystems that make Saskatoon special.
QUESTION: In addition to having well designed and sustainable physical spaces, a healthy city needs to be welcoming to people in a cultural and emotional sense. What do you consider important features in making Saskatoon a leading choice as a diverse, inclusive, and inviting place to live and work?
ANSWER: Saskatoon has long been a city where the arts, culture, and community thrive, and I am proud to have been part of this transformation. One of the clearest examples of this is the development of the Remai Modern Art Gallery, which became a flagship of artistic and cultural expression in Saskatoon, elevating the city’s profile on a national and international scale. Perhaps no other capital project during my time was as contentious as this one. I’ve always prioritized needs over wants and took a lot of heat for supporting the new art gallery. For some, the arts will never be a need. However, the results speak for themselves. The journey to this point exemplifies how a well-designed vision, alongside collaboration with the private sector and other levels of government, can result in remarkable outcomes.
The decision to build the Remai Modern alongside the Remai Performing Arts Centre, home to Persephone Theatre, was much more than a simple infrastructure project. It was part of a broader vision to establish a cultural corridor linking Riversdale and Broadway, bringing together diverse communities through art and culture. The city’s $39.75 million investment was only the beginning—this funding was instrumental in leveraging private donations and contributions from other government entities, securing millions more in support. Ellen Remai’s unprecedented donation of the world’s foremost collection of Picasso lino prints, for instance, came at no cost to the city but significantly boosted our global reputation. Some called the Remai Modern project a want while the art and culture community definitely called it a need. I call it a great success both culturally and economically.
A key element of Saskatoon’s success has been our ability to adapt and repurpose existing spaces. The Mendel Art Gallery’s transformation into the Children’s Discovery Museum is an example of innovative thinking. Businesses and organizations had their eyes on the Mendel’s prime riverfront location, but we chose a community-focused project, integrating the museum across from Nutrien Playland at Kinsmen Park. This adaptive reuse allowed us to retain a treasured community space while creating new, family-friendly cultural hubs.
These cultural investments have a ripple effect on Saskatoon’s development. The construction of the towers at River Landing, one of the most significant private developments in the city, was largely inspired by the flagship role of the Remai Modern. This demonstrates how supporting the arts doesn’t just enrich our cultural life—it also drives economic growth and urban development.
Cultural inclusion has always been central to my vision for Saskatoon. I have attended thousands of community events, and it has always been a tremendous thrill to be invited to all the different cultural celebrations in the city. I recognize the importance of connecting with and celebrating the diverse cultures that call Saskatoon home. When I was approached by the Saskatoon Foundation to host a Mayor’s Gala, I eagerly agreed, with the condition that we showcase the city’s vibrant cultural talent through a Mayor’s Cultural Gala. Its success was beyond comprehension, thanks to the tireless work of volunteers, the generosity of sponsors, and the leadership of the Saskatoon Foundation. Folkfest is another area we need to elevate, so more Saskatonians can experience the wonderful diversity of cultures while showcasing these communities to the broader public.
The Mayor’s Cultural Gala was an event that brought so much joy to Saskatoon. The many cultural organizations were able to show case their culture to all of Saskatoon. It not only instilled pride, The Mayor’s Cultural Gala was a tremendous financial success where the funds were turned over the Saskatoon Foundation to give others hope and opportunity that they to can succeed, a win, win for all.
Just this September, the Ethiopian Community recognized me with a certificate of appreciation, which was an incredibly humbling experience.
In my years of public service, I’ve seen how cultural integration goes hand in hand with building a sense of belonging. Someone I know teaches entry-level English to new Canadians for a local settlement organization. Her classes focus on both language and Canadian culture. Many of her students are introduced to the Riders, not to become football fans, but to feel connected to their new home and understand why so many of us are adorned in Green and White. They also learn that Ukrainian Day in the Park isn’t just for Ukrainians—these cultural events belong to everyone. Her students often describe Canada with two four-letter words: cold and safe. Cold is undeniably true, but safety has become less and less certain. Many new Canadians live in distressed circumstances. Their children don’t play in local parks because of the prevalence of discarded needles, and they feel unsafe walking at night. A healthy city is a safe city. We need to make sure Saskatoon is the safe city we all deserve. We owe it to new Canadians, and to all residents, to live up to the promise that brought them here—a promise of safety, opportunity, and cultural exchange.
Our city must continue to prioritize accessibility for all cultures. I support expanding language services at City Hall so that every resident, regardless of their native language, can easily and stress-free access city services. A city that embraces and celebrates its diversity is a city that thrives.
In this way, Saskatoon can continue to be a leading choice as a diverse, inclusive, and inviting place to live and work—a place where arts, culture, and community spirit are not just supported but celebrated.
QUESTION: The Downtown Event & Entertainment District (DEED) project has been discussed for years as a way to modernize Saskatoon as an event centre and revitalize the downtown. How would you approach the DEED? More generally, how would you prioritize municipal spending and invest in the community?
ANSWER: In addressing the Downtown Event & Entertainment District (DEED), we need to focus on priorities. As Thomas Sowell wisely observed, “There are no solutions, only trade-offs.” We must prioritize essential needs over wants, and this should guide all city decisions.
The DEED is intended to reinvigorate the downtown but the reason the core of our city is declining is because of a lack of safety. To attract residents and visitors to the area, the downtown must be safe. Safety is the foundation of a vibrant city. If women, children, and seniors don’t feel secure, no amount of investment in entertainment will draw people back. Law and order come first. Beyond that, we must identify essential services: policing, snow removal, road maintenance, housing, and addressing homelessness with compassion. These are the real needs of our residents, and they must be met before we consider large-scale projects like DEED or some call it the downtown Taj Mahal.
Take the city’s financial mismanagement as an example. Borrowing $20 million for snow removal, in a city where large snowfalls are common and the possibility of extreme snow accumulations can’t be a surprise, shows a failure in budget planning. If the city struggles with basic services, how can taxpayers trust it to manage a $1.2 billion project that’s likely to cost $2.2 billion or more?
The single biggest concern when the City is talking to the Feds and province is they continuously underestimate the costs. To say the rink will be $625M is insane. The rink in Edmonton was $625 and it was built 5 years ago. The rink in Calgary with the new environmental add-ons which Saskatoon aspires to will be $979M. If Saskatoon continues with this $625M figure and the rink come in at $1.25B which will be tough to do leaves a shortfall of $600M which neither the fed’s or province will put in additional funding so the taxpayers will be saddled with this shortfall.
Initial projections have already been exceeded, and contrary to promises, property taxes will be affected. This reflects a broader issue: priorities must shift toward fiscal responsibility, focusing on essentials rather than extravagant ventures.
I’m proud say, during my previous time as mayor, we invested in the community, not just in projects. By carefully prioritizing, successful initiatives like River Landing, which sat stagnant for 50 years, was resuscitated, built and became more than just a downtown project. It connected Riversdale, Nutana, and downtown Saskatoon, benefiting the entire city. This success came from smart investments, not unchecked spending.
Today, we need that same careful approach. Our top priorities are public safety, fiscal responsibility, attainable housing, and reliable infrastructure. A goal of 10,000 affordable homes over the next decade is essential, as is encouraging the development of 20,000–30,000 additional units to meet the projected demand of 60,000–80,000 new homes by 2030. We must also support initiatives like community gardens in partnership with the Food Bank, which help address both food security and neighbourhood development.
At the same time, we must fix Saskatoon’s transit system. Instead of investing in a costly Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, named changed to LINK to deflect, we should implement Frequent Bus Service (FBS), ensuring buses arrive every 5–8 minutes, especially in the winter when waiting is a hazard. Snow removal, road repairs, and addressing CP Rail tracks to create new corridors are also essential infrastructure needs that should come before wants like DEED.
The reality is that DEED is a “want” in the current environment. Taxpayers deserve transparency on the true costs of this project, which will likely require a 5% to 8% property tax increase, along with prepayment set aside for the down payment. Moreover, studies suggest there is no net gain from this kind of project, as benefits to one area of the city often come at the expense of another. We cannot afford to overlook the financial risk.
Investing in our community means balancing trade-offs carefully and building projects that not only serve their immediate purpose but also return value to the city and its residents. Take River Landing—this project was designed to be financially sustainable, with costs offset by revenues from land sales and programming. In contrast, DEED appears to place the bulk of the burden on taxpayers without clear mechanisms for recovering costs. High-rise developments along the Senator Sid Buckwold Bridge, for example, should be completed before moving west with any further expansions. DEED must be re-evaluated and restarted, with full citizen engagement from the beginning.
Saskatoon’s future depends on getting back to basics. Law and Order, attainable housing, transportation, balancing the budget, and fostering a business-friendly environment should be our focus. This is not about saying “no” to projects like DEED forever, but about ensuring we can afford them without bankrupting residents and businesses.
Finally, inclusion must be a priority. The city has long aimed to integrate marginalized residents into its workforce but has fallen far short of those goals. A proven model is “progress through procurement,” where city contracts are awarded to local non-profits like Cosmopolitan Industries. The City-Cosmo relationship has endured successfully for almost 5 decades. This social enterprise, which provides recycling and shredding services, has benefited hundreds of individuals with intellectual disabilities while delivering essential services to the city. Expanding this approach with enterprising non-profits will strengthen our community, creating an inclusive and sustainable economy.
In summary, we must focus on needs, not wants. Fiscal responsibility, public safety, affordable housing, and reliable infrastructure must come first. DEED, while a potential asset, must be rethought from the ground up to ensure it benefits the entire city without placing undue financial pressure on taxpayers. The future of Saskatoon depends on making careful, thoughtful investments in the community.
QUESTION: The complex issue of homelessness is increasingly acute across the country and around the world. What do you see as possible steps to address Saskatoon’s experience with this unfolding challenge?
ANSWER: Homelessness in Saskatoon has reached a critical level, and it’s clear that the current approach is not working. Over the past eight years, the number of people without homes has increased significantly, and the impact on our communities is undeniable. This is a crisis, and it’s one that demands both immediate action and long-term solutions.
As mayor, my priority will be restoring safety and security for all residents. Law and order are the most fundamental roles of government, but we cannot achieve lasting peace and safety without addressing the root causes of homelessness. Without stability for those in need, our entire community suffers.
The first step is acknowledging that homelessness is not a one-size-fits-all issue. Each individual’s needs are unique, and our response must be equally multifaceted. Some are struggling with addiction, others with mental health challenges, while some are seniors, veterans, or single parents who’ve fallen on hard times. Each group requires a different level of care and support, and it’s our responsibility to meet those needs.
We must move away from the “emergency shelter” mindset, which treats homelessness as a temporary problem. Instead, we need a “comprehensive assistance strategy,” focused on long-term recovery, dignity, and reintegration into society. This means providing not just shelters, but a full range of services:
Medical centers – for those dealing with physical and mental health issues,
Recovery centers – for addiction support,
Transitional housing – to help individuals and families move from instability to self-sufficiency,
Attainable housing – options for single parents, families, veterans, and individuals.
To meet this need, city council will work towards building 10,000 affordable homes over the next decade, with the ultimate goal of constructing 20,000–30,000 additional units. These homes will range from 200 sq. ft. modular units for individuals to larger homes for families.
However, it’s not enough to simply build more shelters. We must, avoid the mistakes of the past, such as the Westend shelter, which overwhelmed its surrounding neighborhood. Concentrating shelters and services in one area doesn’t solve the problem—it just shifts the burden to one part of the city. We must look at what was done with the Regional Psychiatric Centre on Central and the Sask. Correction in the industrial area, these were built first on green areas with no one else living or working near by. When you make your single largest purchase, your home, you should be able to buy with confidence that government is not going to change the rules later. What you are buying is what you get, peace of mind knowing you will not lose your single largest investment in your life time..
This is a complex problem that requires collaboration at every level of government. The city cannot go it alone, Saskatoon can participate on the capital side but does not have the financial resources to be a partner on the operating side. We need provincial and federal governments to be fully engaged—both financially and through human resources. We’ll also work closely with NGOs, faith-based groups, and other community organizations. Their expertise and compassion are essential to creating a comprehensive support system. I propose the $30 million that is slated for the future WANT of the downtown event district be redirected to the immediate NEED of addressing homelessness, for $2 million we can have approximately 100 units of temporary homes built for families, single parents with children, veterans, individuals and those who have come upon hard times, this can be dealt with immediately. NO COMMUNITY SHOULD HAVE TO ENDURE WHAT FAIRHAVEN AND SURROUNDING COMMIUNITIES HAVE HAD TO ENDURE. IT NEEDS TO BE REVERSED AND IT WILL BE REVERSED.
As mayor, I will ensure that Saskatoon becomes a leader in addressing homelessness, setting a model for other cities. We will develop a truly Saskatoon-focused plan, learning from what has worked elsewhere but tailoring solutions to our city’s specific needs. By collaborating across sectors and levels of government, we can ensure that those who need help receive it, and that our city remains a safe and welcoming place for all.
Leadership means making tough decisions, and it also means showing compassion and courage in the face of challenges. I am committed to doing both. Together, we will help those who need it most, while protecting the safety and quality of life for every resident of Saskatoon. Douglas McArthur once said, “A true leader has the confidence to stand alone, the courage to make tough decisions, and the compassion to listen to the needs of others. He does not set out to be a leader but becomes one by the equality of his actions and the integrity of his intent.”