Campaign Video

Https://youtu.be/zBxbnuPAazE

Saturday, 5 September 2026

#495 Pick a topic - any topic

Ward 13 Positions Ledger — Peter Karwacki

WARD 13 · RIDEAU-ROCKCLIFFE · 2026 MUNICIPAL ELECTION

Positions Ledger

A topic-indexed record of Peter Karwacki's stated positions, drawn from the campaign's ongoing accountability writing.

14topic entries
493source posts
2026standing for Ward 13
01Governing framework & methodology

Distinguishes performative political commitments from actual institutional delivery. Insists on measurable outcomes rather than outputs — "grants disbursed" is an output; "cultural impact achieved" is an outcome. Favors structural, precedent-based fixes over individual blame.

Messaging philosophy: voters can't be expected to track detailed issues, so platform communication needs simplicity, clarity, and ease of access.

Signature framing — "truth vs. comfort": incumbents tell people what they want to hear, for the incumbent's benefit; he tells people the truth, for the voter's benefit. Anchored in three recurring statistics: incumbents in Ottawa win essentially 100% of the time; only about 40% of eligible voters turn out; urban ward interests are structurally outvoted 16–9 on council.

One-term commitment: would serve only one term if elected — framed as evidence his priority is exposing structural problems, not personal political survival.

02Transit & LRT oversight
  • St-Laurent LRT tunnel — central case study: an unaddressed 2020 "urgent" engineering finding tied to a tunnel closure/bypass, paralleled with the Elliot Lake mall-collapse precedent.
  • Confederation Line bearing failures — tracked as a five-year, no-root-cause accountability gap.
  • Testing rigor — argues new infrastructure like the O-Train East extension should be trial-run with the same rigor as a major public event before opening.
  • Automated transit — skeptical of a broad automation push, but supportive of a narrow, carefully controlled pilot.
  • Council voting patterns — analysis of LRT votes as showing conformity pressure against dissenting members.
  • Funding-speed contrast — compares the city's fast response to Lansdowne funding needs against its slower response to an ongoing transit safety risk.
03Financial accountability & city liabilities
  • Critiques the Lansdowne 2.0 / OSEG financing structure as a catch-22 for the city.
  • Two-part itemization of city financial exposures, plus a ten-step structural remedy proposal.
  • Identifies an affordable-housing funding gap of roughly $419M the city could pursue.
  • Connects household spending pullback to the municipal vote.
  • Covers K1K insolvency data and federal workforce cuts as fiscal risk specific to Rideau-Rockcliffe, and traces trade-war exposure through the federal budget channel into the ward.
  • Parking policy fiscal analysis — critiques a rival candidate's free on-street parking pledge against the City's 2025 Parking Services annual report, noting it ignores the roughly $2.36M net surplus the on-street system runs and that its two-hour minimum cuts against the city's own occupancy-turnover rationale. Applies the same scrutiny to his own proposed citizen "get-out-of-a-parking-fine" card — shown reckless at full scale, then redesigned into a smaller, capped, first-offence-only version.
04Police services oversight
  • Frames unauthorized database access as a solvable technology/process problem, not just a personnel issue — the Det. Grus case is the basis for a five-point policy fix.
  • Pushes for a regular, independent audit of police data systems, citing the OPS Board chair's own admission that current auditing is "not robust."
  • Argues the people most needed to flag institutional problems are currently the least protected — a whistleblower-protection case.
  • 2025 Ward 13 crime-trend and clearance-rate analysis.
  • Contrasts King's 2022 OPS Board resignation statement against subsequent oversight failures.
05Governance, open data & municipal AI
  • Calls for a disclosure standard for the City's use of AI in operations.
  • Proposes upgrading and integrating 311 — including GPS-triggered project lookup — rather than building a parallel app; cites a finding of roughly 123,000 bulk-closed 311 tickets as an open-data integrity problem.
  • Piece on Auditor General independence and Section 6(6) reporting structure.
  • Proposes a "pie slice" ward-boundary restructuring tied to the urban/suburban council imbalance.
  • Argues uncontested (acclaimed) council seats represent a governance failure, not a neutral outcome.
  • Applies the ADKAR change-management framework to municipal service delivery, and identifies an evaluation gap in the city's Anti-Racism Strategy.
06East End Crossing (Kettle Island)

Major platform position and stated definitive difference from incumbent King: supports the proposed East End Crossing (Kettle Island / Montée Paiement–Aviation Parkway interprovincial bridge) as necessary to remove truck traffic from downtown streets like King Edward Avenue and Rideau Street. Has written on this since 2019.

Argues Ward 13 should engage now to shape design and mitigation terms rather than oppose the project outright, since council would override ward-level opposition 16–9 regardless. Contrasts this with King's firm opposition — grounded in a 2021 study finding the bridge would divert only about 15% of King Edward Ave. truck traffic — and what he calls King's "selective silence" on the file since.

Ties this to a related ask: pedestrian-activated flashing-beacon crossings at Aviation Parkway (near Cité collégiale) and at Birch/Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway, framed as an NCC/City jurisdictional gap, and links the ask directly to the live federal comment period as leverage.

07Ward 13 local infrastructure
  • Flood mitigation (sumps/pumps/valves) and an RPPP eligibility-cutoff gap.
  • Manor Park sidewalks — covers a vote where King's motion to scale back the project lost twice, framed as council overruling King rather than the community.
  • Bus shelter design and maintenance critique; proposed traffic circles at Vanier/Beechwood and St-Laurent/Hemlock.
  • McKay Pond — a near-drowning incident with no rescue equipment present, folded into a related sewage-outfall piece near the New Edinburgh Boathouse.
  • A 60-year transit-oriented-development vision for the St-Laurent Blvd corridor, including a heated station in an overpass rebuild.
  • Bathgate Park — critiques removal of a basketball court under a 2026–27 restoration project, with no replacement planned.
  • Coverage of the Taggart landfill purchase vote, Canada Day fireworks/flooding, an MFIPPA request on MURB access rights, and ByWard Market's status.
  • Blair Road (TerraCanada/TSTS hub) — raises an infrastructure-capacity question tied to a federal-lands review that bypasses the City's normal servicing sign-off, and fact-checks that neither facility is a high-containment biolab.
08Parks & cross-ward equity

Compares Riverain Park (Vanier/Ward 12 — modernized 2020–2022 with a new basketball court, splash pad, skatepark, pump track, off-leash area, and canoe/kayak launch) against Bathgate Park (Carson Grove/Ward 13 — basketball court removed, not replaced, under a smaller restoration budget). Framed as a cross-river equity comparison after confirming Riverain's location is in fact Ward 12, not Ward 13.

09Child & youth policy

Response to a Kids Come First / Ottawa Children and Youth Initiative invitation, connecting an earlier Kenora Rainy River health-region report — which recommended centering families and children in health system design — to present-day municipal levers: housing, transit, parks, libraries, safety.

Four stated commitments: apply the same accountability lens to child/youth outcomes; treat kid-safety infrastructure gaps as urgent; support real youth-voice channels tied to actual budget decisions rather than ceremonial consultation; and be a supporter of the initiative but an honest critic if it becomes communications-only.

10Arts & culture governance

Critiques the Arts Ottawa/City of Ottawa peer-assessment grant model as structurally unable to identify high-risk, high-consequence art — citing Banksy and Ai Weiwei as counter-examples. Argues the program functions as a distribution mechanism for working artists rather than a discovery mechanism, and should be reported as such, rather than conflating disbursement outputs with cultural outcomes.

11Democratic process & incumbency

Compares the 2019 by-election's 17-candidate field to 2026's 2-candidate field, framing the drop as an incumbency-deterrent effect rather than declining civic engagement — tied into the recurring 100%-incumbent-win-rate, ~40%-turnout, 16–9 council-split statistics.

Publicly discloses his own thin endorsement count (one, possibly two, unsolicited) while arguing endorsements aren't themselves a substantive position. Has endorsed mayoral candidate Neil Saravanamuttoo.

12Media & institutional accountability

Piece on perceived terminology bias in CBC's international coverage, used as evidence of a broader institutional/editorial lean at public broadcasters — tied to his own experience of receiving no CBC follow-up since registering as a candidate. Frames this structurally, as editorial-gatekeeping and incentive pressure, rather than as a complaint about any one reporter.

13Messaging & campaign meta-commentary
  • "This is not a popularity contest" — his most-viewed post, with a sequel on differing skills and approach.
  • Newsletter fact-checks contrasting stated inputs against actual outcomes.
  • "Politician Speak BINGO," in both a generic and a King-specific version.
  • Frames the nomination deadline as a once-every-four-years opportunity to push civic debate in the ward, beyond just the filing requirement.
  • A how-to-run explainer, a food-policy questionnaire, a satirical mayoral interview, and coverage of a proposed charity pickleball/tennis match against King, tied to a piece on a local court-supply gap.
14Standalone pieces

Occasional pieces with no direct Ward 13 tie-in: one on brain-cell-based computing research, and one on Canadian Armed Forces posture relative to U.S. military planning.

No entries match that search.

Compiled from the campaign's writing pipeline across peterkarwacki.blogspot.com and Unpublished.ca — a topic index, not a replacement for the source posts.

#494 CBC Questions and my Answers

Campaign video:
https://youtube.com/shorts/UL6-XJiMD5Q?feature=shared

Peter Karwacki — Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe)
Saturday, 5 September 2026

#494 CBC questionnaire — for your enjoyment

This is the form. Unedited answers. If CBC uses them, good. If they don't, residents still have the record.


How many years have you lived in the ward?

I live in Overbrook. That is home. I have run in this ward three times — 2019, 2022, and 2026 — and I have been writing about these streets for years. The campaign email is peterkarwacki.overbrook@gmail.com for a reason.

I landed in Ottawa 27 years ago. I will not invent a precise ward-year count for a form if I have not already put that number on the public record. Length of residence is not the qualification. Knowing the files is.


Why do you want to represent your ward on council?

Because Rideau-Rockcliffe does not need another councillor who is good at events. It needs one who is good at oversight.

Those are not the same skill. One gets you a warm reception at a community barbecue. The other gets you asking the right question before council signs off on a $95 million landfill purchase that was appraised at $23 million, a $419 million Lansdowne structure the Auditor General already flagged, or an LRT tunnel inside this ward that engineers called urgent in 2020 and that is still not fixed.

I am running a third time because the ward's one vote at a multi-billion-dollar table is being used more often as a newsletter than as a governing instrument. I have made a one-term commitment. My livelihood does not depend on winning re-election. That is the point.


What professional or life experiences best prepared you to make city-wide policy and spending decisions? Provide up to three.

  1. Hospital administration in Northern Ontario. Fifteen years as financial director and CEO: budgets, boards, hiring and firing, strategy, and public accountability when the money is real and the consequences land on actual people.
  2. Cognos / IBM and federal project work. Business intelligence and OLAP modelling, then independent project management for Health Canada, CBSA, Export Development Canada, and Natural Resources Canada. That is how you learn to read a large organization from the inside without swallowing the press release.
  3. Peer Metrics, since 2013, and a PMP. I measure whether a program is working. City Hall is a multi-billion-dollar organization that still treats measurement as optional. I don't.

What professional or life experiences best prepared you to listen to constituents and weigh many competing interests? Provide up to three.

  1. Living in a two-market ward. Rockcliffe Park and Overbrook are not the same housing story, the same income story, or the same infrastructure story. Anyone who represents only one of those conversations is not representing Ward 13.
  2. Boards and hospital governance. You learn quickly that every dollar given to one priority is a dollar not given to another, and that the people in the room are not the only people affected.
  3. Door-to-door work across three campaigns. Residents do not speak in talking points. They speak in basement floods, missed buses, package theft, wait-lists, and parks that got the cheaper version of the upgrade. You weigh that against the city-wide ledger, or you are just collecting applause in the neighbourhood that already has the loudest association.

What is the single biggest challenge the City of Ottawa needs to make a priority in the next council term?

Council has no consistent system for turning warnings into action.

The St-Laurent LRT tunnel had an "urgent" finding flagged in 2020 that still has not been resolved. The Ottawa Police Services Board admitted its own auditing was not robust, years after a resignation statement promised otherwise. Lansdowne 2.0 keeps adding liabilities the city will be servicing long after this term ends. In every case the information existed. What was missing was a structural requirement to act on it — and to be measured on outcomes, not press releases.

Next council needs a real audit-and-disclosure standard: independent, recurring, and public. Cover transit safety, policing oversight, and major financial commitments alike. Ottawa does not have an information problem. It has an accountability problem. Fix that, and better decisions follow on their own.


The 2026 budget raises property taxes by 3.75 per cent. What is the maximum tax increase you would support for the upcoming 2027 budget and why?

I would not set a number in isolation. I would set a ceiling tied to what residents can actually verify they are getting for it.

If pressed: I would support a cap in line with inflation — roughly 3 per cent — and not a cent more without a public accounting of where the last increase went.

Ottawa is carrying liabilities that are not fully priced into the budget conversation: Lansdowne 2.0's financing structure, federal workforce cuts hitting local spending power, trade-war exposure flowing through the federal channel, and a capital plan that still treats deferred infrastructure as a future problem. Property-tax increases get debated as if they sit in a sealed box. They do not.

Before asking for more, council owes people three columns in plain language: what we owe, when it is due, and what last year's increase actually bought.


Beyond taxes, what should the city do to make life more affordable for residents?

Stop making housing, transit, and groceries more expensive through municipal sloppiness.

  • When the city overruns capital projects, property taxes rise. When property taxes rise, operating costs rise for landlords. The renter pays that. Measure housing success by units that exist, wait-lists that move, and whether a renter in Overbrook can stay in the ward — not by signed agreements and ribbon-cuttings.
  • Stop warehousing affordable housing only in the parts of the ward that already carry it. Overbrook should not be the path of least resistance while other neighbourhoods are treated as off-limits.
  • Publish a liabilities ledger. Do not let dividends, reserves, and "flexibility" accounts quietly backfill cost overruns while council calls it infrastructure.
  • Fix the basics that eat household budgets: unreliable buses, deferred roads and sewers, basement flooding with no coordinated protocol, and hotel-based homelessness spending that buys nothing that lasts.

Would you make any significant changes to the steps OC Transpo is taking to rebuild ridership and trust, and if so what?

Yes. Stop measuring the existence of a service and start measuring whether a rider can use it.

Reliability first. Fare politics second. It does not matter how cheap a ride is if the bus does not come.

I would tie any fare relief to published, audited targets for on-time performance, cancellations, and frequency on the local routes people in this ward actually use — 6, 7, 12 — not just the headline rail line.

Hold the line on LRT testing. Do not move the goalposts to hit an opening date. The St-Laurent tunnel is inside this ward. A five-year-old urgent finding that still has not been closed is not a communications problem. It is a governance problem.

Put a councillor who will do the work on Transit Commission and the Light Rail Subcommittee. Oversight from outside the room is a newsletter.


OC Transpo keeps running deficits. Beyond requesting funding from other levels of government, how should that primarily be addressed?

Not by pretending one lever fixes a system that is failing on operations, fleet, and contract design at the same time.

Increasing fares: Not first. Charging more for a service people cannot count on is how you shrink ridership further.

Transit levy: More honest than hiding operating shortfalls inside the general tax debate — but only if the levy is tied to published service metrics and cannot be raided for debt service on projects council already blew.

Service cuts: The worst option in a city that already cancels trips and parks buses. Cutting service to close a deficit is how you lock in the deficit.

Primary address: governance and cost control. Mechanic and spare-bus capacity. Contract oversight. Stop treating consultant reports as the achievement. Then, if a dedicated levy is required, put it on the table in public with a sunset and a scoreboard.


How appropriate is the budget for the Ottawa Police Service?

Other.


Please explain how you think funding for police should be changed.

The headline number is the least useful number on that file.

The Auditor General's 2026 findings were not ambiguous. OPS reporting to the board contained inaccuracies. The word used was "vague." The independent workplace-investigations office was shut down without proper board consultation. The safe-workplace budget went from $8.2 million to $5.4 million.

That is not a "more money / less money" slogan. That is a composition and accountability problem.

I would hold the police budget to clearance, response, and board-reporting standards before adding more unrestricted growth. Scale civilian crisis response so police are not the default for calls they should not own. Require public metrics on performance, risk, and database-misuse auditing. Proper board consultation before major structural changes. Accurate, timely reporting. A board that treats "not robust" as a finding to fix, not a phrase to survive until the next news cycle.

If those conditions are met and the service still cannot meet its core mandate, then argue for more money in public, with numbers attached. Do not write the cheque first and invent the scoreboard later.


Ottawa has experienced tornadoes, wildfire smoke and flash floods. Should the City of Ottawa prioritize investments that make its infrastructure more resilient to extreme weather, even if it means spending less in other areas?

Yes — if "resilience" means sewers, stormwater, roads, trees, and power, not branding.


Feel free to expand on your answer above about infrastructure and extreme weather.

Residents in this ward experience extreme weather as flooded basements, downed trees, and streets that fail in the same places every time. That is an asset-management problem.

I will fund stormwater, sewer separation where it is still combined, road drainage, and canopy replacement before I fund another signature project that photographs well and floods later. I will not treat "climate resilience" as a blank cheque that protects Lansdowne while Overbrook waits.

Spend less on the files council already chose over the basics. The 15–9 Lansdowne vote told you the priority order. Reverse it.


How would you describe your ward to people who don't live there?

Rideau-Rockcliffe is two cities sharing one ballot.

Rockcliffe Park, New Edinburgh, Lindenlea, and Manor Park sit beside Overbrook and the east-end streets that carry more renters, more core housing need, more deferred infrastructure, and more of the city's social load. The river, the Aviation Parkway, Beechwood, St-Laurent, and the Rideau are the seams.

It is a capital ward with embassy streets and a working-class ward with basement apartments. Anyone who describes only one of those things is selling a brochure.


What is the biggest improvement you have seen in your ward since the 2022 municipal election?

I will not invent one to be polite.

There have been announcements. There have been consultations. There have been park upgrades that were not applied evenly — Riverain got the fuller version; Bathgate got the scaled-back version, basketball court removed and not replaced. The NCC has done useful work on shorelines and animation. That credit belongs there.

What I have not seen is a public trend line that says roads, buses, police clearance, housing wait-lists, or the St-Laurent tunnel are measurably better because of the last four years of ward representation. "We built a process" is not an improvement. An outcome is.


What is the top infrastructure need in your ward?

Two, and they are connected.

First: the local network we already own — St-Laurent, Beechwood/Vanier, Hemlock, sidewalk gaps, sewer and stormwater capacity, and the crossings that are unsafe for pedestrians and unpredictable for drivers.

Second: the East End Crossing. Truck traffic still cuts through King Edward and Rideau because there is no interprovincial crossing east of downtown. I support leading on Kettle Island now so Ward 13 shapes design and mitigation instead of being shaped by a decision made without leverage.

Roads and pipes first. The bridge as a planning file we enter, not a slogan we hide behind.


Agree or disagree: Intensification will be important to deal with housing issues in my ward.

4 out of 5 — agree, with conditions.

Intensification is necessary. Blanket intensification is sloppy.

Overbrook needs units that people who already live here can stay in. Rockcliffe and New Edinburgh need growth that does not pretend heritage fabric is an inconvenience. The city cannot keep putting the same housing load on the same streets because those streets complain less effectively.

Intensification without buses, sewers, schools, and parks is just a taller version of the same gap residents already name.


Residents often say city infrastructure and services aren't keeping up with new development. What specific policy or funding changes would you push for to fix this gap?

  • Publish a ward infrastructure scorecard before approvals: road condition by segment, sewer capacity, sidewalk gaps, park space per resident, transit frequency. If the numbers are not there, the application waits.
  • Stop collecting charges and then spending them as if they were general revenue. Community benefits and development charges should track to the streets that generated them, with a public ledger.
  • Require service-level commitments — bus frequency, 311 response, waste, water — as conditions of major intensification, not as hopes in a secondary plan.
  • Kill the habit of approving growth first and funding the pipe later. That is how you get new units on streets that already flood.

What would you do to improve traffic problems in your ward?

Traffic in this ward is not one problem. It is a handful of specific choke points that keep getting deferred.

  • St-Laurent Boulevard and Vanier/Beechwood need real traffic circles, not just another overlay of asphalt.
  • The Aviation Parkway and Birch / Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway crossings are pedestrian-safety issues and traffic issues at the same time. Uncontrolled crossings force unpredictable stopping.
  • Get through-trucks out of the downtown approach. That is why I support the East End Crossing rather than pretending opposition is a traffic plan.
  • Physical separation on bike routes where the data and the pavement show the current paint-and-hope model fails. I ride an e-bike. I also drive when the trip or the weather requires it. Infrastructure that only works for the fearless is not a network.

What other priorities matter to you in your run for councillor that might not have been captured above?

  • Municipal AI governance. Ottawa is adopting AI tools in city operations without a public disclosure standard for how, where, and with what oversight. That standard has to exist before the technology outruns accountability.
  • Park equity. Neighbouring communities are not receiving the same standard. Name it and fund it evenly.
  • Open data that does not require a freedom-of-information request. Road condition, sidewalk gaps, 311 closure rates, capital-plan slippage. If city hall is managing it, city hall can publish it.
  • Police-board competence, not police-board attendance.
  • One-term commitment. I can name structural problems — low turnout entrenching incumbents, urban wards being outvoted 16–9 on council, slush-fund politics dressed up as flexibility — instead of sanding them down for the next brochure.

In our coverage, how do you wish to be identified?

He/Him


What will your age be on election day?

I will provide the number directly to CBC for the form. I am not going to guess my own birthday in a blog post.


Do you identify as part of a minority group?

No — unless the question is fishing for a category I do not use in public life. I am a Polish-Canadian father of two, including a trans daughter. I do not campaign as a demographic. I campaign as a project manager who reads the books.


On October 26, one of the two names on the Ward 13 ballot will be mine.

This time around, inform yourselves.
Vote differently.
Vote wisely.

Vote Peter Karwacki for Rideau-Rockcliffe.

Peter J. Karwacki
Candidate, Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe)
peterkarwacki.overbrook@gmail.com
613-304-5844
peterkarwacki.blogspot.com
Campaign page

Paid for and authorized by the campaign to elect Peter Karwacki, Ward 13.

Peter Karwacki for Rideau Rockcliffe

The debate is happening — Ward 13

WARD 13  ·  CAMPAIGN NOTES

The debate is happening. That's the win that doesn't show up on a ballot.

4,700+ campaign page views
~7x total votes cast in Ward 13, 2022
100s readers per blog post

Over 4,700 views on the campaign page — nearly seven times the total votes cast in Ward 13 in 2022. Blog posts pull hundreds of readers each time one goes up.

Win or lose in October, that was always the real goal: create the space for public debate in a ward that usually doesn't get any.

The debate is happening. That's the win that doesn't show up on a ballot.

Peter Karwacki · Rideau-Rockcliffe · Ward 13

Peter Karwacki · Ward 13 · Rideau-Rockcliffe

Ask for the numbers.
Then use the leverage we still have.

I am running for Rideau-Rockcliffe on October 26, 2026. One term. No second-act to protect. The job is oversight, not announcements.

One-term commitment PMP · Peer Metrics Same challenger as 2019 and 2022 — different record now
01 · Crossing leverage

The bridge is a federal project. The silence is a local choice.

Opposing the East End Crossing does not stop it. It only surrenders the chance to shape ramps, truck routes, noise, and what Ward 13 gets in return.

02 · Measurement vs announcement

If City Hall will not publish it, it is not being managed for you.

Warnings sat on the St-Laurent LRT tunnel. Police-board auditing was admitted to be weak. Tax debates ignore the liability ledger. That is the pattern.

03 · Ward trade-offs

Equity is what got built — and what got removed.

Ward 13 levy money helped take a basketball court out of Bathgate Park while a neighbouring ward gained courts, a splash pad, and a skatepark.

Crossing leverage

Trucks still use King Edward and Rideau because there is no interprovincial crossing east of downtown. The Kettle Island / Montée Paiement–Aviation Parkway crossing is a federal undertaking. A councillor cannot approve it or cancel it. A councillor can decide whether the ward arrives with a list or with folded arms.

Rawlson King Peter Karwacki
Position Oppose, citing local traffic and environmental impact. Support engagement now. The crossing is the tool that gets heavy trucks off downtown streets.
What that means in practice Ward 13 argues against a project council has already shown it will not kill on ward preference alone. Ask now for design, mitigation, and local works — before the footprint is fixed.

Council math is 16–9 against treating this as a single-ward veto. Leadership is negotiating the workaround, not pretending the vote is still open.

Measurement vs announcement

Ottawa does not have an information shortage. It has no consistent rule that a warning must become an action with a public date and a public result.

  • Publish neighbourhood-level performance: road condition by segment, sidewalk gaps, park assets added or removed, police-board metrics, transit safety findings.
  • Stop sending residents to Freedom of Information to learn who to call or what the city already measures.
  • Tie the next tax debate to a liabilities ledger — Lansdowne financing, LRT commitments, deferred repairs — not to a press line about “investing.”
  • Cap 2027 at about inflation (~3%) unless residents can see where the last increase went.

Specific Ward 13 trade-offs

Bathgate Park (Ward 13)

Basketball court removed for a reforestation project. About $120,000, including $60,000 from this ward’s parkland levy. Net recreation loss on a site residents already used.

Riverain Park (next ward)

Modernization with a splash pad, skatepark, and basketball court added. That is what “equity” looks like when it is counted in amenities, not in vocabulary.

Same test on movement and money:

  • Traffic circles at St-Laurent and at Vanier / Beechwood — not another overlay of paint.
  • Pedestrian crossings at Aviation Parkway and Birch / Sir George-Étienne Cartier treated as safety files, not leftover paving.
  • City cost overruns become property-tax pressure; property-tax pressure becomes rent. Oversight is not a downtown abstraction for tenants in this ward.

What four years are for

  • Get Ward 13 into the crossing design conversation while there is still something to trade.
  • Force recurring, public audits on transit safety, police-board reporting, and major liabilities.
  • Put park and infrastructure decisions on a simple added/removed ledger by neighbourhood.
  • Say the quiet structural facts out loud: turnout near 40%, urban wards outvoted 16–9, incumbents covered first.

Who I am

Peter Jan Karwacki. Project management professional. Managing director of Peer Metrics, which I founded in 2013 to help organizations benchmark performance. B.Sc., graduate diploma in business administration, PMP. Earlier career in hospital administration and financial direction. Ottawa resident. I ran in 2019 and 2022. I am running again because the files did not close.

I have a livelihood outside City Hall. That is the point of the one-term pledge: the incentive is to name the structure, not to keep the chair.

Authorized by the campaign of Peter Karwacki, candidate for Ottawa City Council, Ward 13. Positions summarized from public posts on peterkarwacki.blogspot.com.

#493 CBC questions - $1.50 a piece

 


Why Would CBC Treat an Outsider Any Different?

Why Would CBC Treat an Outsider Any Different?

Peter Karwacki — Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe)

I registered as a candidate for Ward 13 months ago. At the registration desk, I met Arthur White-Crummey, who covers Ottawa city hall for CBC. We spoke briefly. I haven't heard from him — or from anyone else at CBC — since.

I don't think that's personal. I think it's structural, and it's worth explaining why, because the same structure shapes what you read about a lot more than one ward race.

The pattern isn't unique to municipal politics

CBC's editorial style choices on international coverage have drawn criticism for years — how it labels Israeli communities in the West Bank, how it describes the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks, and a long list of similar word-choice fights that media critics on multiple sides have picked apart in detail. I'm not going to relitigate every one of those debates here. What I want to point at is the underlying mechanism: a public broadcaster with an internal style guide, editorial layers, and institutional incentives that reward consistency with an established framing over departure from it. Once a newsroom settles on a house style, individual reporters have limited room to move, whatever their own instincts are.

What that means for a ward race nobody's watching yet

Scale that mechanism down to municipal coverage and you get something quieter but just as real. An incumbent has four years of council votes, statements, and relationships with the press gallery. A challenger has a registration date and, if they're lucky, a candidates' debate near the finish line. Editorial decisions about who gets a call, whose press release becomes a story, and whose campaign gets folded into a "race to watch" roundup aren't made maliciously — they're made by the path of least resistance, and the path of least resistance runs through whoever the newsroom already has a relationship with.

This is the same argument I've made about O-Train oversight, police board auditing, and city liabilities: don't look for a villain, look for the incentive structure. Individual people are usually acting reasonably inside a system that produces an unreasonable outcome.

So no, I'm not expecting CBC to go out of its way for a challenger in Rideau-Rockcliffe. Not because anyone there wishes me ill, but because "public broadcaster" describes a funding model, not a guarantee of evenhandedness toward whoever isn't already in the building.

What I'm doing instead

This is the same reason I write this blog and publish through Unpublished.ca rather than waiting for an assignment editor to decide Ward 13 is worth a story. Ottawa's incumbents win essentially every time, turnout sits around 40%, and urban wards get outvoted 16-9 on council. None of that changes because a reporter picks up the phone. It changes when residents go looking for information themselves instead of waiting for it to be delivered.

If CBC covers this race, I'll take the interview. If they don't, that tells you something too — just not something about me specifically.

— Peter Karwacki
Candidate, Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe)


Biggest challenges

The single biggest challenge isn't any one file — it's that council has no consistent system for turning warnings into action. We've seen this pattern too many times: the St-Laurent LRT tunnel had an "urgent" finding flagged back in 2020 that still hasn't been resolved. The Ottawa Police Services Board admitted its own auditing wasn't robust, years after a resignation statement promised otherwise. Lansdowne 2.0 keeps adding liabilities the city will be servicing long after this term ends. In every case, the information existed. What was missing was a structural requirement to act on it — and be measured on outcomes, not press releases.
Next council needs a real audit-and-disclosure standard: independent, recurring, and public, covering transit safety, policing oversight, and major financial commitments alike. Ottawa doesn't have an information problem. It has an accountability problem. Fix that, and better decisions follow on their own.

The 2026 budget raises property taxes by 3.75 per cent.

What is the maximum tax increase you would support for the upcoming 2027 budget and why?

I wouldn't set a number in isolation — I'd set a ceiling tied to what residents can actually verify they're getting for it. That said, if pressed: I'd support a cap in line with inflation, roughly 3 per cent, and not a cent more without a public accounting of where the last increase went.
Here's why I'm cautious about going higher. Ottawa is carrying liabilities that aren't fully priced into the budget conversation — Lansdowne 2.0's financing structure, federal workforce cuts hitting local spending power, trade-war exposure flowing through the federal budget channel. Property tax increases get debated in isolation from those pressures, as if they're unrelated.
Residents shouldn't be asked to absorb increases while liabilities pile up off to the side undiscussed. Before asking for more, council owes people a real liabilities ledger — what we owe, when it's due, and how growth in one column relates to restraint in another.

Traffic

Traffic in this ward isn't one problem — it's a handful of specific choke points that keep getting deferred. St-Laurent Boulevard and Vanier/Beechwood both need real traffic circles, not just repaving, to handle how those intersections actually function today. The Aviation Parkway and Birch/Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway crossings are pedestrian safety issues, but they're also traffic issues — uncontrolled crossings force unpredictable stopping patterns.
Then there's the elephant in the room: truck traffic still cutting through King Edward and Rideau because there's no interprovincial crossing east of downtown. I support the East End Crossing at Kettle Island — not because it solves everything, but because engaging now shapes design and mitigation terms, instead of leaving Ward 13 without leverage once council decides regardless.
Fix the intersections we control directly, and stop treating the crossing question as something we can simply oppose our way out of.

What other priorities matter to you in your run for councillor that might not have been captured above?

A few things haven't come up yet that matter to me. First, municipal AI governance — Ottawa is adopting AI tools in city operations without a public disclosure standard for how, where, and with what oversight. That needs to exist before the technology gets ahead of accountability, not after.

Second, park equity across the river — comparing Riverain Park's full modernization to Bathgate Park's scaled-back restoration, with its basketball court removed and not replaced, shows resourcing decisions aren't applied evenly, even between neighbouring communities.

Third, I've made a one-term commitment. My livelihood doesn't depend on winning re-election, which means I can prioritize naming structural problems — like low turnout entrenching incumbents, and urban wards being consistently outvoted 16-9 on council — over saying what's comfortable.

I'd rather residents get an honest, evidence-based voice for four years than a permanent seat built on avoiding hard truths.

#492 Child and Family Health


2027: Ottawa's Year for Children and Youth — What I'd Actually Do
Ward 13 · Rideau-Rockcliffe

2027: Ottawa's Year for Children and Youth — What I'd Actually Do

A letter of support to Kids Come First and the Ottawa Children and Youth Initiative — and a decades-old health report that made the same argument this campaign keeps making.

I was recently invited to support 2027: Ottawa's Year for Children and Youth, a joint initiative of Kids Come First and the Ottawa Children and Youth Initiative, backed by more than 180 partner organizations across the city. I could have sent back a short statement of endorsement. Instead I want to explain why this issue isn't new to me, and what I'd actually commit to doing about it.

Years ago, in an earlier career, I prepared a health promotion report for the Kenora Rainy River health region. The central recommendation was simple, and at the time uncontroversial: put families and children at the centre of the health system, because nearly every downstream outcome — literacy, mental health, chronic disease, community resilience — traces back to whether children had stable, supported early years.

Reading the invitation from Kids Come First and OCYI, I was struck by how little that core finding has changed. What has changed is that municipalities now clearly own more of the levers than a health region ever did.

Housing, transit, parks, libraries, public safety, the built environment that decides whether a child can walk to school or a family can afford to stay in the neighbourhood they grew up in — those are council decisions now, not just health-system ones. So instead of a general statement of support, here is what I told them I would actually do.

Four commitments

  1. Apply a child and youth lens where I already apply an accountability lens

    My campaign is built around measuring outcomes against announcements — auditing what the City actually delivers versus what it commits to. Children and youth outcomes get lost easily in that gap, because a ribbon-cutting reads as progress whether or not the underlying need was met. Bathgate Park in Carson Grove is one example already on record: it lost its basketball court in a 2026-27 restoration while a comparable park across the river got a full modernization, court included, a few years earlier. Nobody filed that under "youth outcomes." I intend to keep asking that question of every file — not just the ones with the word "youth" on the label.

  2. Treat infrastructure and safety gaps that affect kids as urgent, not routine

    Sidewalk completion near schools, a pedestrian-activated crossing on Aviation Parkway near a busy college corridor, flood and sewage-outfall issues near a popular family swimming spot with no rescue equipment on site — none of these are dramatic on their own. Together, they're the daily infrastructure of whether a family in Rideau-Rockcliffe can let a kid walk, bike, or swim safely. I'd rather fix ten of these quietly than announce one large initiative loudly.

  3. Support real channels for youth voice — and stay skeptical of ceremonial ones

    Low voter turnout structurally entrenches incumbents and leaves urban wards outvoted on council. That same dynamic hits residents who can't vote at all even harder. If 2027 is going to create meaningful ways for children and youth to be heard, their input needs to be tied to actual budget or planning decisions — not folded into a consultation that's already been decided. I'll support the initiative's engagement work, and push publicly, if necessary, for the City to show where that input changed anything.

  4. Be a champion, with the same conditions I hold every file to

    I'll publicly support 2027 and show up to the events, not just the launch. But I've told voters throughout this campaign that I'll tell them the truth even when it's less comfortable than what they'd prefer to hear. I'll extend that to this initiative too: a champion for the outcomes, and an honest critic if the City treats 2027 as a communications moment rather than a real change in how it spends and plans.

Why this matters for a municipal race: Children and youth well-being rarely shows up as its own line item at City Hall — it's scattered across parks budgets, transit files, planning applications, and community safety reports. That scattering is exactly how accountability gets lost, and exactly why it needs the same evidence-first scrutiny as every other file I've raised this campaign.

Thank you to Kids Come First, OCYI, and the more than 180 partner organizations already doing this work across Ottawa. My Kenora Rainy River report is decades old now, and I'm glad to see the same recommendation still being made. I'd rather see 2027 be the year it finally sticks — at the municipal level, where the levers actually are.

Peter Karwacki
Candidate, Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe), Ottawa 2026 Municipal Election
Originally published as an open letter to the Kids Come First / OCYI Steering Committees, September 5, 2026.  |  peterkarwacki.blogspot.com

i

Money Into CHEO Won't Help Most Families. Here's Why.

Vera Etches asked me a question about children's health recently.

Worth naming up front: most people in Ward 13 still picture Dr. Etches as Ottawa's Medical Officer of Health, the person who steered the city through COVID. That's not her job anymore. Since March 2025 she's been President and CEO of CHEO — a hospital in the middle of a ten-year, multi-hundred-million-dollar redevelopment plan. That's not a criticism. It's context. A question about children's health from a hospital CEO mid-capital-campaign is a different kind of question than the same one from a public health officer, and it deserves a different kind of answer.

The uncomfortable evidence

The most-cited framework in population health research — the one underlying tools like the County Health Rankings model — attributes roughly 80% of health outcomes to social and economic factors (income, education, housing, food security) and only about 20% to clinical care: hospitals, treatment, access to doctors.

That's not a fringe claim. It's the consensus starting point in public health research, and it's a big part of why the income → education → health gradient shows up at every rung of the income ladder, not just below some poverty line.

What it means in plain terms: CHEO spending buys better outcomes for kids who are already sick. Faster surgery. Better specialty care. Shorter waits. That matters enormously to those families, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

But it does almost nothing to change how many kids in Ward 13 show up sick, anxious, or behind in the first place. That's decided upstream — years before a hospital is involved — by whether a family can afford stable housing, whether a parent can get to a job without a two-hour commute, whether a kid has a safe park within walking distance. None of that is a hospital's job to fix. It isn't in CHEO's mandate, and it isn't in CHEO's budget.

What I'm not saying

I'm not saying CHEO doesn't matter or shouldn't be funded. I'm saying that if the honest goal is fewer sick kids, not just better care for the kids who are already sick, the marginal dollar does more good somewhere else — and that "somewhere else" is mostly municipal, not provincial or hospital-based.

What's actually on my desk

This is the part that matters for a Ward 13 candidate, because it's the part I can actually do something about:

  • Housing supply and stability — kids in unstable housing show worse outcomes on nearly every measure before they ever see a doctor.
  • Transit access to jobs — parental income is the biggest single lever on the gradient, and transit access to employment is a direct income lever.
  • Parks and recreation — Bathgate Park lost its basketball court in a "restoration" project and hasn't gotten one back. That's a small thing on its own. It's also exactly the kind of small thing that's supposed to add up to the 80%.
  • Safety infrastructure kids actually use — sidewalks near schools, a proper crossing at Aviation Parkway, rescue equipment at McKay Pond. None of it shows up in a hospital budget. All of it shows up in the gradient.

The honest answer

So here's my honest answer to Dr. Etches, and to anyone else who asks: I support CHEO. I'm not the person to ask about CHEO's budget, and neither is any other municipal candidate — that's a provincial and hospital-board conversation. What I am the person to ask about is the 80% that's actually within municipal reach, and that's where I'd rather spend the conversation.

 September 5, 2026


Vera Etches, President & CEO, CHEO, Co-Chair, Kids Come First Steering Committee

Christopher Vallée, Co-Chair, Kids Come First Steering Committee

Josée Blackburn, Director, Kids Come First

Mary Donaghy, CEO, Ottawa Catholic School Board, Co-Chair, OCYI Steering Committee

Michelle Crogie, Executive Director, Pleo, Co-Chair, OCYI Steering Committee

Mohamed Sofa, Executive Director, Britannia Woods Community Services, OCYI Host Organization


Re: 2027 — Ottawa's Year for Children and Youth


Dear Ms. Etches, Mr. Vallée, Ms. Blackburn, Ms. Donaghy, Ms. Crogie, and Mr. Sofa,


Thank you for the invitation to support 2027: Ottawa's Year for Children and Youth. I'm writing not just as a candidate in Rideau-Rockcliffe, but as someone who spent part of an earlier career making almost exactly the argument your letter makes — and finding out how hard it is to keep an institution honest about it once the room empties out.


Years ago I prepared a health promotion report for the Kenora Rainy River health region. The principal recommendation was simple and, at the time, uncontroversial: put families and children at the centre of the health system, because almost every downstream outcome — literacy, mental health, chronic disease, community resilience — traces back to whether children had stable, supported early years. Reading your letter, I was struck by how little that core finding has changed. What has changed is that municipalities now clearly own more of the levers than a health region ever did: housing, transit, parks, libraries, public safety, and the built environment that decides whether a child can walk to school or a family can afford to stay in the neighbourhood they grew up in.


So I want to answer your question directly, not with a general statement of support, but with what I would actually do.


1. I will apply a child and youth lens where I already apply an accountability lens.

My campaign is built around measurable outcomes over announcements — auditing what the City actually delivers against what it commits to. Children and youth outcomes are exactly the kind of thing that gets lost in that gap, because a ribbon-cutting reads as progress whether or not the underlying need was met. In Ward 13, I've already documented one example: Bathgate Park in Carson Grove lost its basketball court in a 2026-27 restoration project while a comparable park across the river received a full modernization, including a new court, a few years earlier. That's a child and youth well-being outcome, even though nobody filed it under that heading. I intend to keep asking that question of every file, not just the ones labelled "youth."


2. I will treat infrastructure and safety gaps that affect kids as urgent, not routine.

Several pieces of my ward platform are, at root, child-safety files: sidewalk completion near schools, a pedestrian-activated crossing on Aviation Parkway near a busy college corridor, flood and sewage-outfall issues near a popular family swimming spot with no rescue equipment on site. None of these are dramatic on their own. Together they're the daily infrastructure of whether a family in Rideau-Rockcliffe can let a kid walk, bike, or swim safely. I'd rather fix ten of these than announce one large initiative.


3. I will support real channels for youth voice, and be skeptical of ceremonial ones.

I've spent this campaign arguing that Ottawa's low voter turnout structurally entrenches incumbents and leaves urban wards outvoted on council. The same dynamic applies, more sharply, to residents who can't vote at all. If 2027 is going to create meaningful ways for children and youth to be heard, I'd want to see their input tied to actual budget or planning decisions, not folded into a consultation that's already been decided. I'll support the initiative's Snapshot and engagement work, and I'll push, publicly if necessary, for the City to show where that input changed anything.


4. If elected, I will be a champion — with the same conditions I hold every file to.

I'll publicly support 2027: Ottawa's Year for Children and Youth, and I'll show up to the events, not just the launch. But I've told voters throughout this campaign that I'll tell them the truth even when it's less comfortable than what they'd prefer to hear. I'll extend that to your initiative as well: I'll be a champion for the outcomes, and an honest critic if the City treats 2027 as a communications moment rather than a change in how it actually spends and plans. I think that's the kind of support that's actually useful to you.


Thank you for the work OCYI, Kids Come First, and your more than 180 combined partner organizations already do in this city. My Kenora Rainy River report is decades old now, and I'm glad to see the same recommendation still being made — I'd rather see 2027 be the year it finally sticks at the municipal level.


Sincerely,



Peter Karwacki

Candidate, Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe), Ottawa 2026 Municipal Election

peterkarwacki.blogspot.com

#491 Arts in Ottawa



my work No Panel Is Vetting Banksy

Ward 13 · Rideau-Rockcliffe Governance & Process

No Panel Is Vetting Banksy

Ottawa's arts funding runs on peer assessment committees, and the criteria they score against are legible, defensible, and consensus-built. That's not a flaw jurors could fix by trying harder. It's what a committee is.

Nobody gave Banksy a grant. Nobody gave Ai Weiwei one either — the government he's most associated with spent years surveilling him, demolishing his studio, and holding him without charge. Neither artist built a career by clearing a peer assessment committee. One built his by staying anonymous and painting on other people's property without permission. The other built his by being the kind of dissident a state cultural bureaucracy exists to screen out. If either had submitted a proposal to a municipal arts jury under their own name, in advance, describing what they planned to do, it is difficult to imagine the file surviving the room.

That's not a knock on the jurors. It's a description of what a jury is for.

What the process actually screens for

Ottawa runs arts funding through peer assessment committees — panels of working artists and cultural professionals who review applications and score them against published criteria. Arts Ottawa, which administers grant streams like the ARTiculate Project Grant out of the Shenkman Arts Centre, describes its own standard plainly: proposals are judged on artistic relevance, viability, and impact on the community. The City of Ottawa's separate Cultural Funding stream runs the same basic model — independent review, then a committee meeting, under a conflict-of-interest policy that requires jurors to declare any relationship with an applicant before the room even opens.

// what gets scored

  • Artistic relevance of the proposed project
  • Viability — can the applicant actually deliver it
  • Impact on the community
  • Completed budget, matched revenues to expenses
  • Support material demonstrating prior accomplishment

Every one of those criteria is reasonable. Every one of them is also a filter for the kind of project that can be described, budgeted, and justified before it exists. Viability rewards a track record. Community impact rewards work that can name its audience in advance. A completed, balanced budget rewards a proposal legible enough to cost out. None of that is a defect in the design — it's what you'd build if the job was to responsibly allocate a fixed public budget across a community of working artists. It is not what you'd build if the job was to find the next Banksy.

A jury selects. It doesn't discover.

The Wikipedia summary of the peer jury model, drawn from how Canadian arts councils describe their own practice, is unusually candid about this: a jury brings expertise an agency doesn't have in-house, and its function is to choose among what's submitted — not to catch what wasn't. That's a fine tool for distributing a grants budget across a discipline. It is structurally the wrong tool for identifying work that turns out, years later, to have mattered — because the work that ends up mattering most is disproportionately the work that didn't ask permission first.

Two different jobs, one label

What peer assessment is good at

Sustaining a local arts ecosystem. Getting working artists a fair, conflict-declared shot at a public budget. Producing outputs a city can report: grants disbursed, disciplines represented, projects completed.

What it was never built for

Identifying work with lasting cultural or political consequence before that consequence exists. That kind of work is defined by breaking the very criteria — permission, budget, predictable audience — a committee has to score against.

The trouble isn't that Ottawa runs a peer assessment model. Most Canadian arts funders do, for good reason — it's harder to rig than a single official's discretion, and it puts the judgment in the hands of people who actually work in the field. The trouble is when a funding program gets sold, implicitly, as a discovery mechanism — as the city's way of finding and backing its most important artists — when what it actually is, structurally, is a distribution mechanism for a fixed budget among applicants who can produce a fundable proposal. Those are different jobs. Conflating them sets an expectation the process cannot meet, and then quietly disappoints everyone when it doesn't.

On the record: Arts Ottawa's published assessment criteria for its Creation and Development grant stream are artistic relevance, viability, and community impact. City of Ottawa Cultural Funding uses independent peer assessment committees under a standing conflict-of-interest and confidentiality policy, with jurors drawn from the local cultural community and grant decisions final.

What I'd actually change

I'm not proposing Ottawa defund peer assessment, or pretend a municipal grants office can replicate what an anonymous street artist or a dissident under state surveillance does. Neither of those is a realistic municipal program. What I'd change is the framing and the reporting.

Stop measuring the arts funding program on outputs — grants disbursed, dollars allocated, applicants served — as if that were evidence of cultural outcome. It's evidence of process, not impact. If council wants to claim the program produces significant art, it should say what "significant" means and report against that, honestly, including the years it comes up short. And if a portion of the budget is meant to take on real risk — work that might fail, offend, or simply not fit a scoring rubric — build that as its own explicit, smaller stream with its own criteria, instead of asking one committee-scored process to be both a safety net for working artists and a discovery engine for genius. It currently tries to be both and is honestly evaluated as neither.

Ottawa doesn't need a jury that can spot the next Banksy. It needs to stop implying it has one.

Peter Karwacki is running for City Council in Ward 13 (Rideau‑Rockcliffe). This piece is part of an ongoing series applying an accountability and outcomes-vs-outputs lens to City of Ottawa institutions and processes.

Sources

  1. Arts Ottawa — Creation and Development grant stream, assessment criteria (artsottawa.ca/creationdevelopment)
  2. City of Ottawa — Cultural Funding, "Application process and policies" (ottawa.ca)
  3. City of Ottawa — Cultural Funding, "Information for applicants," conflict-of-interest policy (ottawa.ca)
  4. City of Ottawa — "Interested in becoming a juror?" peer assessment model description (ottawa.ca)
  5. Wikipedia — "Peer jury process"

Subject: Re: Arts Ottawa — three asks, one condition from Arts Ottawa

I'm an amateur painter. I've applied for grants purely to get wall space for my own work, and I've been turned down every time. So I don't come to this as a politician reading a sector brief — I come to it as someone who has been on the losing end of exactly the system you're describing.

I try to distinguish between commitments that sound good and commitments that actually change outcomes for someone like me. So here's my honest reaction to your three asks:

1. Cultural Infrastructure Reserve Fund — I support treating cultural space as infrastructure rather than a one-off grant line. But infrastructure funds tend to get captured by the institutions with the staff capacity to apply for them. If the City does this, I'd want a stated share reserved for low-barrier, individual-artist access — not just renovations to buildings run by organizations that already know how to write a grant application.


2. Permanent funding tied to inflation and population growth — I'm skeptical of automatic formula increases without attached outcome measures. "Funding grows every year" isn't the same as "more artists get shown." I'd want the increase tied to measurable access metrics — number of new/first-time grantees, turnaround time on applications, rejection reasons published — not just a bigger budget doing the same thing it does now.


3. Coordinating arts governance through the 2027 Governance Review and finishing the Municipal Culture Plan — this one I support without much hesitation. Fragmented governance is exactly the kind of structural problem I think Council should be fixing, and a finished, published Culture Plan is a measurable deliverable, not a promise.


So: two of three, plus a condition on the third. I'd genuinely welcome the chance to talk this through — particularly the access-for-individual-artists piece, since that's the gap I've experienced directly and don't see addressed in the paper.

Peter Karwacki

Candidate, Ward 13 (Rideau-Rockcliffe)