“Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is difficult, and while we have made great progress, I am still unsure if that target is entirely realistic. There’s been a lot of progress that has made me hopeful and I understand how pressing emission reductions are, but as things stand now, I am unsure but optimistic about things.”

“While such assessments can make a great difference in municipal decisions to make Kingston more eco-friendly, I worry that adding an extra step may make this process take longer and cost more money. Without extra information on its implementation and how it will assist decision-making, I am not confident in knowing this will be worth voting for.”

“I am in favor of any such bylaw to improve the conditions of residents who work hard to pay for their right to live in a safe place. However, tenant protections must be fully reviewed, both to prevent potentially harmful loopholes, but also to ensure that property owners have the means to make the necessary upgrades without complications.”

“The pilot project, I believe, made a big difference for many Kingstonians. On top of improving living standards for som residents, it also helps slowly lower the costs that heat events take on the city in the long run. Wherever there is room in the budget, I would highly consider voting for it again.”

“While these centers will be extremely helpful, there are considerations of cost. Not just in terms of capital or operations, but also the opportunity cost of investing some of these initiatives. With current city efforts, how much more will all of these improve results compared to other approaches that might be less costly?”

“Before such scaling occurs, I would like to see a proper report on the performance of the Better Homes Kingston program. Just to see exactly how many residents used the program and how significant these improvements were for them. Depending on these reviews, I would consider voting in favor.”

“I am unsure how we would balance the demands such a standard may wish to lay-out and the means and needs of Kingston as a city. I am not totally against the idea, but it needs to be carefully planned out and reviewed for possible effectiveness before I consider voting for it.”

“While I don’t think rapid, unplanned expansion benefits anyone, I don’t believe that Kingston can completely maintain its current boundaries. Focusing on development within the current limits to prevent this expansion should be the priority, but if push comes to shove, I would lean towards supporting housing efforts.”

“I am aware of potential challenges, but an MSC is owned by the city. It is not a private company and must follow regulations set by the city. An MSC would allow the city to access other methods of funding and planning to more effectively manage these decisions, while still being significantly controlled by the city for the sake of residents.”

“While I would like to stand by the city’s decisions as often as possible, legal operations can quickly become costly. While it may be worthwhile in many cases, investing in a defense that is not likely to bring results is not worth it compared to investing in ways to make the best of the decision and mitigate the effects.”

“While I can’t say there are not any potential benefits, the energy costs to run a date center make them questionable. Further, it’s clear to me that many residents have not been given their say on the matter and any chance to review the plans, as well as receive public feedback, is an important thing for me to support.”

“I generally lean towards supporting the implementation and maintenance of bike lanes where feasible, but I am unsure how many areas require accelerated construction and higher levels of maintenance. For certain main roads or high-traffic areas, it would be something worth considering, but for my district I am currently unsure of its necessity.”

“Should the city budget allow for it, I am inclined to support these busses. The main challenge is that capital costs are higher than the standard bus, but in the longer term, the lower operational costs should benefit the city more.”

“Currently, discounted and free options exist for some of the listed groups, so expanding this relief seems plausible. Additionally, with proper investments, affordable transit can also make the city safer and easier to traverse. That said, a pilot to make the fares outright free requires some careful consideration before implementing.”

“While these would benefit the many who walk across the city, it really depends on the details. If they are permanent, I have to wonder about construction time and costs, if they are temporary, what is the yearly costs to roll them out, how do they improve walkability, and what challenges would they present in implementing?”