Every question, answered in public

Questions from Ed Vander Vegte

The email below was sent to me by Wainfleet resident Ed Vander Vegte, who has given his permission to post it here in full along with my answers. His contact information has been removed for privacy.

What are your views on making Wainfleet an attractive place for tourism, and Airbnb?

My answer: Tourism is one of the few economic engines a township like ours actually has, and the last council came close to switching it off. Over the past months I've sat down with the people who live off our visitor season: the chocolate shop, the ice cream shops, realtors, cleaners, landscapers, farm stands, handymen, restaurant owners and more. Business after business told me the same thing: when the Township went after short-term rentals the way it did, the visitors stopped coming, and their livelihoods were decimated along with them. Nobody I spoke with wants party houses. Neither do I. But there is a way to stop a handful of problem properties without devastating an entire community's economy: enforce against behaviour, not against tourism itself.

Now, the part I owe you before my opinion goes any further, because you may have already seen it in the news: I own lakeshore property here. When the Township brought in its STR rules, I voluntarily disclosed four weekend bookings, every one of them booked a year before the by-law took effect. The Township treated my honest disclosure as an admission of guilt and fined me amounts so far out of proportion that the story made national news, with millions of views online. I'm the leader of a group of approximately 30 people who are suing Wainfleet for illegalities with their bylaws and their enforcement tactics. I'm not telling you that for sympathy; I'm telling you because you deserve to hear it from me, not from a headline. Because of that history, I am seeking a formal independent opinion on exactly where a conflict of interest begins and ends for me as a councillor, and I will follow it to the letter: declaring my interest and stepping aside from any STR vote the law requires. I will not use a council seat to fight my own case.

My rationale: A township that fines honest disclosure teaches every resident to stop being honest, and a township that treats every visitor as a nuisance teaches every visitor to spend their money in Port Colborne instead. The costs aren't only borne by the businesses: the Township's own budget shows roughly $458,000 in by-law legal fees over three years, and $277,155 in fines collected in 2024 against a $30,000 budget. When enforcement becomes a revenue line, something has gone wrong with the purpose of it. Whatever your view of Airbnb, that program deserves a line-by-line review in the open, and Wainfleet deserves a council that sees its beaches, it's farms and its small businesses as things to grow, not things to police.

What are your views on allowing decent supplementary homes or additions to allow a comfortable place for parents to live in if the property size decently allows it?

My answer: I support small, responsible growth: about 300 buildings over four years, and a comfortable secondary home or addition for your parents or to create rental income, where the property can support it, is exactly the kind of growth I mean. I grew up in Waterdown in the 70s and early 80s, when it was peaceful and spacious and we fished the creeks for trout. I moved to Burlington at 14, met my wife in high school there, and watched Burlington grow as busy and congested as Toronto over the years. I moved to Wainfleet five years ago to get away from exactly that, so believe me when I say I will never vote to turn this township into what I left. But look at the map: Wainfleet is 21,753 hectares. Port Colborne next door is 12,199 hectares and houses 20,000 people; we are nearly twice the land with about a third of the people. Provincial law is already on your side for additional units; the practical limits in rural Wainfleet are septic, well and floodplain, not council's mood. The Township's job should be to help you get to yes: a plain-English guide to what your lot allows, a published permit timeline, and staff whose first instinct is to help.

My rationale: The reason for 300 is the tax pool. Wainfleet spreads a $10.25 million levy across only about 3,100 dwellings, which is why every household's share is so high. Three hundred new buildings would add roughly a million dollars a year to the tax base, money we badly need, because my goal is to stop the annual increases and start bringing the burden down, not by cutting services but by having more families share the load. I know 300 in four years is a challenge; I'd rather set an honest target and chase it than pretend the problem solves itself. Spread across our massive land base, that's roughly one new building per kilometre of road. It won't change traffic or congestion in any way you'd notice, but it will bring more families to support the school, the arena, the fair and the small businesses that make this a town at all.

What are your views on working with the Niagara Region?

My answer: Work with the Region where it saves Wainfleet money, and push back hard where it costs us. But I want to give you a straight answer about how that actually works now, because the rules just changed and I'm not sure every candidate has noticed. Starting with this election, the Province has cut the regional council down to the twelve mayors plus a provincially appointed chair. Wainfleet's four councillors will hold no seat at the Region at all; our township of 6,900 gets one voice in that room, our mayor, sitting beside the mayors of St. Catharines and Niagara Falls. So a councillor who tells you they'll "fight for you at the Region" is describing a room they won't be in. What a councillor can actually do, and what I will do, is make sure our one voice walks in prepared: council resolutions that give the mayor a clear, evidence-backed mandate on every regional file that touches us, from policing costs to waste to regional roads; formal Township advocacy positions on the record, so Wainfleet's position is public and can't be quietly traded away; and doing the homework, because the councillor who reads the regional budget line by line is the one who arms our mayor with something better than talking points. The second track is our neighbours: I want a formal shared-services review, starting with Port Colborne ten minutes away, because a township our size doesn't need to own and staff everything itself, and those deals are made township to township, no Region required.

My rationale: Roughly 40 percent of your residential tax rate is the Region's, more than the Township's own share, so a councillor who only watches Wainfleet's portion of your bill is watching less than half the problem. Under the new structure, small municipalities like ours keep the same one seat while representing a fraction of the population of the cities, which means Wainfleet wins regional arguments on preparation and evidence or not at all. That happens to be the thing I do for a living. And the shared-services file matters more than ever: the fixed costs of fire, roads, planning and the library are spread across too few people here, and sharing them with a neighbour is the one structural fix that doesn't depend on winning a vote in a room we're barely in.

Do you consider the current town management to be doing a good job of spending our money and providing reliable services?

My answer: No. The mayor and council are doing a horrible job of managing this township, and people are fed up. You said you're constantly disgusted with the current council; you are far from alone. I've spoken with well over a hundred residents so far and I'm still talking with 15 to 20 more every day, on porches, at fence lines and in driveways across Wainfleet, and the common theme is unmistakable: people want a full change. That means a new mayor and four new councillors. The record backs the frustration up. Wainfleet has raised its levy faster than every neighbouring municipality for five straight years (5.35, 5.97, 5.93, 5.66 and 4.98 percent) while Pelham, West Lincoln, Port Colborne, Welland and Fort Erie all held between 3.5 and 4 percent this year. We collect almost the same total levy as West Lincoln with less than half their population. And despite all those increases, our roads are reinvested at about a third of what the Township's own engineers say they need. That is not good stewardship, and I'm running to change it: a line-by-line review, published publicly, starting with cemetery operations, in-house drainage, by-law legal spending, and the gap between what we budget for wages and what we actually pay.

My rationale: My criticism is aimed where the decisions are made: the council table, not the front counter. I run a business; when the numbers drift year after year, you change the decision-makers, not the payroll clerk. Every figure above comes from the Township's own budget documents and West Lincoln's, and all of it is cited on my website, because if I'm asking for your vote on the numbers, you should be able to check the numbers yourself.

The quality of our roads, or lack thereof.

My answer: You're right about the roads, and the Township's own Asset Management Plan agrees with you: 34 percent of our road network's value is in poor or very poor condition, our asphalt roads average nearly 80 years old, and the reinvestment rate has run at about a third of what the Township's own engineers call for. Here is my approach. I want a tax cut, and I want a measured, professional approach to where every tax dollar goes. Those two goals are not in conflict; they are the same discipline. There is waste everywhere in this budget, and waste that gets found and fixed becomes money for the services people are actually asking for. Roads will be a big part of that. On the roads themselves, I don't believe in spreading money like peanut butter: I want an engineering-based review of the whole network to decide which roads need servicing first, published so you can see where your road sits on the list and why. Fix the worst first, fix them properly, and report progress every year.

My rationale: This is how I've run a business for 25 years: you don't fix a cost problem by writing bigger cheques, you fix it by finding out where the money is going. The Township's own budget shows where to look: roughly half a million a year in legal and professional fees, cemetery operations staffed and equipped in-house while our neighbour contracts theirs for a fifth of the cost, by-law enforcement running six times West Lincoln's cost per resident, and wages budgeted 23 percent above what was actually paid the year before. Fix waste like that and you can service the roads that need it and give taxpayers relief, because the goal of finding money was never to grow the budget; it was to stop taking more of yours every year.

Have a question of your own for Scott Wilson? Ask it, and I will answer it here in public, whether I like the question or not.

Ask a question

Questions from Conrad

The email below was sent to me by Wainfleet resident Conrad, who has given his permission to post it here in full along with my answers. His contact information has been removed for privacy.

Good morning Conrad,

Thank you for these questions. They're specific, they're about money, and they're exactly the questions this council should have been answering in public for years. Here are my answers, each with my reasoning, because I think a candidate owes you the "why," not just the position.

1. Fire Department: 2 Fire Chiefs? Capital budgets, firehalls, trucks and equipment. Should the level of service be more, less, or the same?

My answer: Let me clear up the two chiefs first, because there's a story there most residents never heard the end of. Wainfleet has one Fire Chief and one Deputy Chief leading 51 volunteer firefighters, 3 captains and 9 lieutenants across three stations. A volunteer department needs two people in command because emergencies don't wait for one person's vacation. But here's the part worth knowing: in 2024, our chief and deputy also ran Port Colborne's fire department under a shared-management deal that saved Wainfleet about $54,000 a year and Port Colborne about $47,000. Both councils approved making it permanent. Then Port Colborne walked away from it in December 2024 and hired its own chief. Shared services worked, saved both towns money, and died at their table, not ours. As a councillor I'd go back to that table, and to others.

On the level of service: keep it where it is. Our volunteer model is one of the best bargains in the budget, and I will not touch the people who run into burning buildings for their neighbours. But I will dig into this deeper, because I believe that when people are motivated, they find ways to reduce expenditures while maintaining a high level of service. Fire is important, and I still think we can save a percentage of the cost without degrading our residents' safety. Where I want that scrutiny is the capital and management side: fire wages and benefits run about $100 per resident here against $56 in West Lincoln, the new Central Station carries about $438,000 a year in debenture payments until it's paid off, and we operate 10 apparatus out of three stations for 6,900 people. Ten trucks means ten replacement cycles, and fire trucks now cost over a million dollars each. I want a community risk assessment and fire master plan to tell us, with evidence, what stations and fleet this township actually needs over the next 20 years, so those decisions are made by data instead of by habit.

My rationale: Protect the service, question the overhead. That's the same discipline I'd apply to every department, and fire is the one where getting it backwards is unforgivable. The debenture is a fixed cost no council can cut, so pretending otherwise would be dishonest. What council can control is the size of the future capital plan, and the only honest way to right-size a fire fleet is a professional risk assessment, done in public.

2. Public works, and staffing at town hall. Every time I walk into town hall it seems like we have a new employee.

My answer: I hear this everywhere, so I went and did the comparison nobody at town hall has published. Wainfleet spends about $172 per resident on town hall administration wages and benefits. West Lincoln spends $162. My target is $140. We can beat West Lincoln, and here's the path. There's a pattern in the budget that explains the revolving-door feeling you're describing: positions sit vacant for part of the year, the money doesn't get spent, and the next budget asks for the full position again plus a raise. Administration wages actually paid in 2025 were $690,893; the 2026 budget asked for $851,140. That's a 23 percent jump over what was actually spent, and closing that one gap gets us most of the way to $140. The rest comes from the service-delivery choices next door to town hall: we staff and equip a cemetery operation at $265,000 a year that West Lincoln contracts for $54,000; we run in-house drainage at $129,000 that they contract entirely; and our by-law enforcement runs six times their cost per resident. If the work got done last year with the desk empty, why are we funding it at full freight plus an increase this year? That's the question I'll ask at every budget table, on every line.

My rationale: I'll be straight with you about what the numbers do and don't show: our admin cost per resident today is close to West Lincoln's, so the opportunity isn't in slashing town hall, it's in running it like a professional business. Budget what you actually spend, contract what a contractor does cheaper, and measure everything. A $32-per-resident improvement sounds small until you multiply it: that's roughly $220,000 a year, more than two percent of the entire levy, found without cutting a single service anyone uses. Public works I'll deal with under roads, because that one has a geography answer.

3. Road maintenance and safety: a lot of our roads are deteriorating pretty fast.

My answer: You're right, and the Township's own Asset Management Plan proves it: 34 percent of our road network's value is in poor or very poor condition, our asphalt roads average nearly 80 years old, and reinvestment has run at about a third of what the Township's own engineers call for. Here's my approach. I want a tax cut, and I want a measured, professional approach to where every tax dollar goes. Those two goals are not in conflict; they are the same discipline. There is waste everywhere in this budget, and waste that gets found and fixed becomes money for the services people are actually asking for. Roads will be a big part of that. I don't believe in spreading money like peanut butter: I want an engineering-based review of the whole network to decide which roads need servicing first, published so you can see where your road sits on the list and why. Fix the worst first, fix them properly, report progress every year. On safety, residents across the township tell me about vehicles doing 100 in a 50. Enforcement is Niagara Regional Police, and I'll push council to formally request it where residents name the roads. Traffic calming is ours: I want a policy with a resident petition process and a published list of candidate streets, so it's decided by process, not by who shouts loudest.

My rationale: One honest number so you know I'm not selling you something: Wainfleet maintains about 39.5 kilometres of road per 1,000 residents; West Lincoln maintains 25. Our roads will always cost more per person. What council controls is whether the money reaches the roads at all, and for years it mostly hasn't.

4. Do you have any ways to reduce taxes or increase the township's income sources? Bringing more businesses in or development?

My answer: Yes, three. First, find the waste: cemetery operations, in-house drainage equipment, by-law legal spending that's run about $458,000 over three years, and wages budgeted far above what's actually paid. Every $96,752 found is one percent of the levy. Second, grow the base: I support small, responsible growth of about 300 buildings over four years. Wainfleet is 21,753 hectares; Port Colborne next door is 12,199 hectares with 20,000 people. Our huge land base and small population factor into why each household's share is high, but I don't accept that as an excuse, because the answer is to be frugal, run town hall like a professional business, and find savings by working harder instead of taking the easy road (pun intended) of cutting the maintenance and repair our roads need. Three hundred buildings adds roughly a million dollars a year to the tax base, about one new building per kilometre of road, invisible to traffic but transformative to the levy. Third, stop strangling the businesses we have: the tourism economy that our beaches, farm stands and small businesses depend on took a beating from the STR enforcement campaign, and welcoming visitors back costs the taxpayer nothing.

My rationale: There is no fourth way. A township can spend less, collect from more payers, or grow its economy, and I'm proposing all three at once because no single one is big enough alone. What I will not do is promise a tax cut funded by cutting the services people actually use; the cut comes from waste and from growth, and I'll publish the arithmetic every year so you can hold me to it.

5. What are your thoughts on the transit system? I'm currently paying about $750 a year for a service that very rarely gets used within the township.

My answer: You've put your finger on exactly how the new Region works, and why preparation matters. Transit is not a Township service: it's the Niagara Transit Commission, funded by a special levy the Region sets and divides among all twelve municipalities, and it lands on your bill whether the OnDemand van ever stops on your road or not. Wainfleet gets OnDemand-only service, no fixed routes, while our levy share helps carry a region-wide system built mostly for the cities. Here's the accountability piece: our mayor sits on the Niagara Transit board. That seat is Wainfleet's only lever, and it should arrive at every meeting with our ridership numbers, our cost per ride, and a mandate from council to demand rural municipalities pay for the service level they actually receive. If elected, I'll move that council receive the OnDemand usage data for Wainfleet every year and publish it, because you cannot argue about value for money without the numbers, and right now nobody in the township can tell you what our rides actually cost per trip.

My rationale: I won't promise to pull Wainfleet out of regional transit, because a councillor can't; the special levy is set at the regional table. What a councillor can do is arm our one voice at that table with evidence. A service that very rarely gets used is either underused because it doesn't fit rural life, in which case our share should shrink, or underused because nobody knows it exists, in which case the Commission should fix that before billing us more. Either way, the data settles it, and I'll make sure we have it.

6. The amount we pay for NRP and what we get in return.

My answer: Policing is the single largest line in the regional levy, and roughly 40 percent of your total tax bill is the Region's, so this question is bigger than most people realize. Wainfleet pays through the regional rate like everyone else, but rural response times, visibility on our roads, and enforcement of the speeding residents complain about every day are not what a township of concession roads experiences the way a city does. Council's tools here are limited but real: formal requests for enforcement blitzes on named roads, an annual request for Wainfleet-specific service data from the NRP on calls, response times and patrol hours in the township, and a mandate to our mayor at the Region to push on rural service levels every budget cycle. I'll use all three, and I'll publish what comes back.

My rationale: The pattern in my whole platform is the same: you can't manage what nobody measures, and Wainfleet has been paying regional bills for years without ever putting the service data on a public table. A councillor who reads the police budget and shows up with Wainfleet's numbers will get more for this township than one who just complains about the bill.

7. What do you bring to the table for Wainfleet?

My answer: Twenty-five years of finding out where the money actually goes. I've built and run businesses since 1999, I teach AI and executive reporting at McMaster University's DeGroote School of Business, and my job in both places is the same: take a pile of numbers, find the three that matter, and say them plainly enough that decisions get made. I've already done it for Wainfleet before holding any office: every figure in these answers comes from the Township's own published budgets and Asset Management Plan, compared line by line against West Lincoln's, and it's all cited on my website so you can check my work. I've also knocked on a lot of doors: well over a hundred conversations so far and 15 to 20 more every day. And I'll bring the habit this council has lacked most: doing it in public. Every review published, every question answered on the record, every year.

My rationale: Wainfleet doesn't need another councillor with opinions. It needs one who reads the documents, and I'm the only candidate who has published the receipts before asking for your vote.

Now let me turn it around, because you've asked me seven good questions and I'd like to ask you one: what matters most to your family in Wainfleet over the next four years? That answer tells me more than any budget line.

I'd also like to meet in person, on your porch or over a coffee, whichever suits you. Two more asks while I have you: I'd be proud to put a sign on your lawn if you'll have one, and I'd like your permission to publish your questions with my answers on the Questions page at swwilson.ca, because if you're asking, other residents are wondering too.

Have a question of your own for Scott Wilson? Ask it, and I will answer it here in public, whether I like the question or not.

Ask a question

A Message from Andrew Watts

The email below was sent to me by Wainfleet resident Andrew Watts, who has given his permission to post it here in full along with my answers. His contact information has been removed for privacy.

Hi Andrew,

Thank you for taking the time to write, and for backing your points with Official Plan references. You clearly know this file better than most people who have sat at the council table, and this is exactly the sort of exchange I hoped the website would start. You raised five things worth answering properly, so let me take them one at a time, the same way I answer every resident.

1. On the growth target, and where my information comes from

My answer: I have no knowledge of any mandated growth target for Wainfleet, and I've never claimed one exists. The 300 dwellings I talk about is my own mandate, a target I set myself for one purpose: tackling taxes. Nobody in Thorold or Toronto handed it to me. So help me out: what page and paragraph on my website are you referring to? I've re-read the site and I can't find anything that says Wainfleet has to meet a growth target, but if some wording gave you that impression, it could give someone else the same one, and I'd want to sharpen it. As for where my information comes from: the documents themselves, the Township's published budgets, the Asset Management Plan, and the neighbouring municipalities' budgets, all cited at swwilson.ca/sources. Not from planning staff, and not from incumbents.

2. "The Regional Official Plan defined Wainfleet as rural, with no urban areas, and zero population growth, the sole municipality with no mandated target."

My answer: If that's what the annex tables show, it strengthens my argument rather than weakening it. It means whatever growth happens here is a local choice made at our council table, not an obligation handed down, and that's exactly how I want it. I'm going to do what I always do with a claim that matters: pull the current Regional Official Plan and read the annex tables myself before I repeat anything about them.

And since we're on growth, let me give you my honest position, because I suspect you and I are closer than you might think. I don't want to see Wainfleet built up. I left Burlington five years ago because I watched it become as busy and congested as Toronto, and I have no interest in voting for that here. The 300 dwellings spread across our 21,753 hectares is not a number I crave. It's the amount of growth I would accept because of the tax arithmetic: we spread a $10.25 million levy across about 3,100 dwellings, our township rate is roughly double West Lincoln's, and the people already here cannot keep carrying that alone. The point was never the buildings. The point is who pays.

Candidly, I doubt we get anywhere near 300 anyway, because our taxes have made Wainfleet a place builders and buyers avoid. Property taxes sit inside the ratios lenders use for the mortgage stress test. On comparable homes, our tax bill eats roughly $150 a month more of a buyer's qualifying room than West Lincoln's does, which means the same family with the same income qualifies for tens of thousands of dollars less house here than ten minutes up the road. High taxes shrink every seller's buyer pool and keep modest growth away. So the real work, and the first work, is the cost side: cut the waste out of this budget, run town hall like a professional business, and stop the compounding increases. If that gets fixed, some modest growth may follow on our terms and at our pace. If it doesn't, no growth policy matters anyway.

3. "Wainfleet's urban expansion request was approved... at least one condominium development on formerly agricultural land... a long and sad story."

My answer: This is the kind of documented local history I want to see, and if you have material on the hamlet boundary adjustments and the urban expansion request, I would sincerely like to read it. Decisions of that size made without public debate are exactly what my transparency planks are aimed at: a council that publishes what it's deciding before it decides, and a councillor who reads the planning documents himself instead of taking staff summaries on faith. Documented local memory like yours is worth more to me than any consultant's report.

4. "If you can find like minded new candidates to agree to campaign for a new Council and succeed... it would be more than a start."

My answer: You and I read the record the same way. Five straight years of levy increases higher than every neighbour, roads reinvested at a third of what the Township's own engineers call for, and an enforcement culture residents tell me they're afraid of. That record belongs to the four councillors who voted for it, and I've been clear with every resident who asks: all four council seats need new people in them, and I'm running to be one of the four. As for which other candidates deserve the other three, I'm meeting them all before I say anything about anyone, but I can tell you the appetite for change at the doors matches everything in your email.

5. "From day 1 you will be fighting a battle against a town hall staff... who will tell you what you can do as a Council, and even worse try to tell you what you can't do!"

My answer: Thank you for the warning, and I don't take it lightly. I've spent 25 years running a business where the answer to "you can't do that" is "show me where it says so." A council that reads its own documents is very hard to lead around, and I intend to be the councillor who reads the documents.

And I'll add this, because it goes straight to your point. I've been researching exactly what a council has the authority to do, and the short version is that three councillor votes are a majority of Wainfleet's five-members (4 council and 1 mayor for the tie breaker vote). With the right people in three of the four councillor seats, more can change, and change faster, than most residents realize. I won't lay out every move in an email, but if the right four win on October 26, you will see the changes you're seeking, and quickly. I'm ready for that fight, and from what I'm hearing, I won't be fighting it alone. Someone has to fight for the people of Wainfleet.

I'll be at the Meet and Greet at the hall on Sunday, October 4, from 1 to 3 and 5 to 7, and I'd genuinely enjoy continuing this in person. If that doesn't suit, I'm happy to come to you; a porch conversation is how most of this campaign has happened. And with your permission, I'd like to publish this exchange on my Questions page, because if you're raising these points, other residents are wondering about them too.

Have a question of your own for Scott Wilson? Ask it, and I will answer it here in public, whether I like the question or not.

Ask a question

A question from Adam Koziol

The email below was sent to me by Wainfleet resident Adam Koziol, who has given his permission to post it here in full along with my answer. His contact information has been removed for privacy.

Hi Adam,

Thanks for reaching out. I'm glad you like my platform.

I strongly believe Wainfleet needs four new councillors. In my opinion, the current council has failed residents terribly with relentless tax increases, irresponsible spending and decisions that have damaged local businesses and our economy.

There are several candidates I really like.

Paul Wainwright: Paul is highly intelligent and tough as nails. He's not afraid to shake things up, and he's fed up with the unrelenting tax increases that are making Wainfleet increasingly unaffordable and making it harder for people to sell their homes. I believe he'll stand up for residents and challenge the status quo.

You can learn more about Paul here:
https://www.facebook.com/p/Paul-Wainwright-for-Wainfleet-Council-61592658307544/

Lee Bott: Lee might be even tougher than Paul. She's furious that her property taxes and those of her neighbours have doubled, and she's ready to go to battle for her community. She's passionate, determined and won't be easily intimidated. https://leebott.ca/

I strongly support both Paul and Lee and I will be voting for them.

Joe Gonzalez: You can't go wrong with Joe. He's a genuinely nice person who volunteers at Wainfleet community events and cares about his neighbours. I believe he'll make decisions based on what's right for residents.

Dan Bath: Dan holds a PhD in neuroscience, and I genuinely believe he's one of the smartest people in our country. He cares about Wainfleet residents, strongly supports our farming community and wants municipal disputes resolved amicably whenever possible. I think he'd make an outstanding councillor.

Rebecca Anderson: Rebecca is a wonderful person who genuinely wants to do right by her neighbours. I believe her intentions are sincere and that she'd bring compassion and common sense to council. To avoid any confusion, Rebecca is not related to outgoing Councillor Joan Anderson.

Jeannette Pieterse: I don't know enough about Jeannette yet to offer an informed opinion.

Regarding the current council:

I'm particularly disappointed with John MacLellan, Sherri Van Vliet and Terry Gilmore.

During their term, council approved repeated municipal tax increases, including 5.45% in 2023 and 4.98% for 2026. Council also passed the 2023 short-term rental bylaw, which I believe has caused substantial economic harm to local businesses and property owners.

The Township's financial records, as summarized in my campaign's budget analysis, show approximately $458,000 in bylaw-related legal expenses from 2023 through 2025. In my opinion, these decisions raise serious questions about spending priorities, financial accountability and the treatment of Wainfleet residents.

I would not support their re-election.

The damage caused by the short-term rental bylaw goes far beyond rental property owners. In my view, it has devastated Wainfleet's tourism economy. Farm stands, ice cream shops, mini-golf, chocolate shops and other local businesses have lost customers. Cleaners, landscapers, handymen and handywomen have lost work. The economic consequences have spread throughout the community.

Meanwhile, residents continue to face property tax increases of nearly 5% annually, compounded year after year. That's putting tremendous financial pressure on homeowners, particularly seniors, retirees and families living on fixed incomes.

Wainfleet is a wonderful community, but we need a council that respects taxpayers, supports local businesses, protects our farming community and remembers that municipal government exists to serve residents.

Thanks again for reaching out, Adam. I appreciate your interest in the election and your concern for Wainfleet's future.

Have a question of your own for Scott Wilson? Ask it, and I will answer it here in public, whether I like the question or not.

Ask a question

Questions from The Welland Tribune

The email below was sent to all candidates by Dave Johnson of The Welland Tribune for the paper's online candidate profiles. My responses follow in full.

Hi Dave,

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in The Welland Tribune's candidate profiles. Please find my responses below.

Full name:

Scott William Wilson

Occupation:

Entrepreneur, business owner and university lecturer. Founder and CEO of Geek Certified, a digital marketing agency. I also teach business, marketing and artificial intelligence at McMaster University.

Previous political experience:

First-time candidate for municipal office. I have been involved in advocating for fair municipal policies, property rights and greater accountability at Wainfleet Town Hall.

Community work:

Youth hockey coach, community advocate and spokesperson for the Wainfleet Association of Responsible Short-Term Rentals. I have advocated for property rights, fair municipal policies and accountability in local government.

Why are you running:

Wainfleet residents deserve responsible spending, lower taxes and a council that listens. I want to bring my business experience, financial discipline and problem-solving skills to municipal government.

What is your top issue or issues in the township:

High property taxes, municipal spending, deteriorating roads and excessive bureaucracy. We need better financial management, fairer bylaw enforcement and sensible rural development that protects Wainfleet's character.

Why should voters choose you:

I've spent decades building businesses, managing budgets and solving difficult problems. I'll question unnecessary spending, challenge decisions that don't make sense and put residents' interests ahead of municipal bureaucracy.

Was there a decision council made this term you think they got right and a decision that missed the mark, in your opinion:

Council's short-term rental bylaw was a serious mistake. In my view, it eliminated much of Wainfleet's tourism accommodation, damaging local businesses, including farm stands, ice cream shops, mini-golf and chocolate shops. Cleaners, landscapers and tradespeople also lost work. The economic consequences spread throughout the community. Council also approved budgets containing wasteful and irresponsible spending, contributing to annual property tax increases of nearly 5%, compounded year after year. Residents and local businesses have paid the price.

Where can people find out more information about you:

Website: https://swwilson.ca

Have a question of your own for Scott Wilson? Ask it, and I will answer it here in public, whether I like the question or not.

Ask a question

Ask a question