Lauren Anderson

I would not responsibly identify a service to cut or promise a dollar amount before going through the budget with administration, council and the public. Leadership is not picking a number for a campaign promise and figuring out the consequences afterward. I want every department challenged to identify efficiencies, duplication and opportunities to deliver services differently. Before council makes a significant change, residents should understand the expected savings, the impact on service and the long-term consequence. My priority is protecting frontline services while ensuring taxpayers can clearly see where their money is going.

I won’t manufacture a job number without the economic-development data and employers at the table. My goal is measurable growth in actual filled, sustainable jobs, not announcements.

Agriculture is one of Chatham-Kent’s greatest economic opportunities. Expanding agriculture, agri-business, food processing and the industries that support them creates opportunities far beyond the farm—for skilled trades, engineering, technology, transportation, healthcare, professional services and small businesses. The economic spinoff can reach across our entire municipality. I want economic development working directly with existing businesses and prospective investors, establishing a baseline and publicly measuring job creation and investment against it.

I wouldn’t personally assign percentages to engineering criteria. That is exactly where professional expertise matters. Administration and our infrastructure professionals should develop an evidence-based ranking that considers road condition, safety, traffic and agricultural use, emergency access, rural and urban needs, lifecycle costs and what happens financially when work continues to be deferred.

Council’s responsibility is to establish priorities and funding; administration’s responsibility is to provide the technical evidence. The public should then be able to understand why one road is being reconstructed before another.

My first step would be getting the people who actually understand the barriers around the same table—administration, council, the Home Builders Association, developers, housing providers and senior levels of government.

I want builders telling us what municipal processes are slowing housing down, administration identifying what can legally be changed, and council determining what can responsibly be funded. From that work, we establish specific actions, responsible parties, timelines and measurable outcomes. I don’t believe a mayor should predetermine the solution before consulting the people expected to build and deliver it.

Residents should be able to easily understand what major projects were approved to cost, what they currently cost, where they stand, what has changed and why.

I would work with administration and council on a consistent public reporting system for major capital projects—including approved budget, actual or forecast cost, funding sources, project stage, major timeline changes and explanations for significant variances. The exact reporting frequency should be designed with administration so we’re providing meaningful, reliable information rather than creating another administrative exercise that doesn’t help residents.

I voted ‘No’ to strong mayor powers.

Being mayor doesn’t mean being the expert in every room. It means knowing how to bring the experts into the room. Whether we’re talking about housing, infrastructure, economic development, healthcare, homelessness or public safety, I want administration, council, residents and the people doing the work involved in developing solutions. For health, homelessness and public safety, that means meaningful collaboration with CKHA and frontline first responders as well.

My job as mayor would be to bring those voices together, establish clear direction, make decisions when decisions need to be made, and ensure the public can measure whether we’re actually delivering results.