I am running for Ward 13 Councilor because Ward 13 is the front door to the city ; and I want to change the way we think about improving it. I want to invest in Londoners ; focusing on growing our economy and greatly improving our services. I am running because being involved in municipal politics matters; 4 years ago the current councilor said that a lack of political will was the reason for little solutions being presented to the problems we faced ......... today ; he has said the same thing. I believe there is a lack of commitment and idea's being put forth. We can't wait another 4 years for a few good motions and directions to be taken from our councilor , we need action now ; we must invest in Londoners now ; not later.

My three priorities are safer, cleaner and healthier neighbourhoods and spaces; reliable city services and growing London’s economy. Each of them is connected to affordability and quality of life for low- and moderate-income Londoners.Safer, cleaner and healthier neighbourhoods and spaces means making sure people can use parks, sidewalks, transit stops, downtown streets and neighbourhood spaces safely and with dignity. Lower-income residents are often more dependent on public spaces and public services because they may have fewer private alternatives. Clean streets, better lighting, safer transit areas, well-maintained parks and a coordinated response to homelessness, addiction and mental-health challenges all help make daily life safer and more livable.Reliable city services means getting the basics right. Residents should not have to repeatedly call the City about garbage, snow clearing, unsafe sidewalks, bylaw problems or neighbourhood maintenance before something gets done. Reliable transit is also especially important for people who depend on it to get to work, school, appointments and groceries. When municipal services work properly, families spend less time and money trying to work around problems that the City should already be addressing.Growing London’s economy is about creating more opportunities for Londoners to earn a good living. I want the City to attract investment, support local businesses, strengthen tourism, arts, culture, sports and entertainment and help create more pathways into employment. Economic growth should not simply mean new development or bigger numbers on a spreadsheet. It should mean more jobs, stronger local businesses, more opportunities for young people and workers, and a broader tax base that helps us fund the services residents rely on.For me, these priorities come back to one principle: investing in Londoners. A stronger city is one where people feel safe in their neighbourhood, can depend on the services they pay for, and have a real opportunity to build a stable life here.

I bring experience from several different parts of London’s community that do not always overlap.Over the years, I have been involved with a number of nonprofit and community organizations, including Pride London Festival, the London Afrocentric Community Association and LUSO Community Services. I have served in roles including President, Vice President, By-law and Governance Chair, Entertainment Director, Secretary and Director at Large. Those experiences have taught me about governance, budgets, accountability, policy, volunteer management and, just as importantly, how to work with people who bring very different perspectives to the table.I am also a Teamsters Local 879 union steward and work at UPS. That has given me direct experience advocating for workers, resolving workplace concerns, interpreting agreements and finding practical solutions between people who may not initially agree.At the same time, I am a small-business owner, an accomplished DJ and a radio host. Through that work, I understand the realities facing small businesses, independent workers and the people who contribute to London's arts, culture, entertainment and tourism economy.What distinguishes my background is the combination of these experiences. I have seen issues from the perspective of workers, employers, nonprofit organizations, volunteers, artists and community leaders. I understand that decisions have to balance budgets, services, economic growth, workers' rights and the needs of residents.That is the perspective I would bring to Council: practical governance experience, community involvement, a strong understanding of working people and small business, and years of helping build London's cultural and entertainment economy.

My highest priority in my first year would be turning the commitments I made during this campaign into concrete action.If elected, I plan to introduce 25 motions in my first 100 days focused on the priorities I have consistently talked about: creating safer, cleaner and healthier neighbourhoods and public spaces, improving the reliability of city services, and strengthening London’s economy.Those motions would address practical issues such as transit reliability, downtown cleanliness and safety, homelessness and housing stability, support for nonprofits and community organizations, accountability and transparency at City Hall, economic development, arts and culture, Indigenous reconciliation, opportunities for students and young people, and improving how residents interact with City services.I do not believe residents should have to wait years to find out whether a councilor intends to act on the promises they made during an election. My first 100 days would establish a clear record of what I brought forward, what Council supported, what required further work, and where progress was being made.The goal is not simply to introduce 25 motions for the sake of reaching a number. It is to put forward practical, properly researched proposals that can begin moving through the municipal process immediately..My first-year priority would therefore be simple: move from campaigning to governing, and demonstrate early that “Listen. Respond. Deliver.” is more than a campaign slogan.

The biggest gap I see is enforcement and follow-through. London has rules requiring rental properties to be safe and properly maintained, but tenants should not have to make repeated complaints or wait unreasonable amounts of time for serious problems to be addressed.This ties directly into my priority of reliable city services. As part of my first 100 days, I would push for clearer response-time standards for property complaints, better tracking of repeat problem properties and landlords, stronger follow-up after orders are issued, and public reporting so Council can see where enforcement is succeeding or falling behind.Good landlords should not be punished with unnecessary red tape, but tenants also deserve to know that when they report unsafe or unhealthy living conditions, the City will respond and follow through.

Yes. I would support moving toward a proactive rental inspection system, particularly for larger multi-unit buildings and properties with repeated by-law complaints.Tenants should not have to wait until mold, pests, heating failures or other problems become serious before the City responds. I would push for a risk-based inspection program that identifies problems earlier, focuses resources on repeat offenders, and includes clear follow-up timelines.Any new system should also include strong tenant protections and clear appeal rights, so tenants are protected from retaliation for reporting problems and both tenants and property owners have a fair process to challenge decisions.This fits directly with my priority of reliable city services: prevention, fair enforcement and early intervention are better than waiting for residents to reach a crisis before acting.

I would want the program designed to be largely self-funded, using reasonable registration fees and enforcement-related revenues, rather than placing the full cost on property taxpayers. Any startup funding could come from existing municipal revenues or reserves, with the goal of moving toward cost recovery once the program is established.I would also explore a dedicated rental housing enforcement and tenant-support reserve, funded primarily through program revenues and penalties, so money collected through the system is reinvested into inspections, enforcement and tenant protections.The purpose should be accountability and safer housing—not simply collecting another fee.

Yes. As a Ward Councillor, I would actively champion and vote in favour of a strong Landlord Registration Program with proactive enforcement.I believe the City should know who owns and operates rental properties, be able to identify repeat problem properties, and intervene before serious issues like mould, pests, lack of heat or unsafe conditions become crises.I would support a system that includes regular inspections for higher-risk and multi-unit properties, clear enforcement timelines, tenant protections from retaliation, and fair appeal rights for both tenants and property owners.I would also want the program designed to be largely self-funded through registration fees, enforcement-related revenues and penalties, so the cost is not simply passed on to general taxpayers.For me, this is about reliable city services, safe housing and accountability. Good landlords should have a clear and fair system to work within, while tenants should be able to trust that the City will act when standards are not being met.

Large property owners should be held accountable when important downtown buildings are left vacant or in disrepair for extended periods, but there also needs to be a clear definition of when enhanced fees and enforcement apply.London already has a Vacant Buildings By-law and Inspection Registry. Currently, a building vacant for at least 30 days can be placed on the registry where there are safety or public-nuisance concerns. I would keep that early intervention tool, but bring forward a motion to examine mandatory registration for any building that remains continuously vacant for 90 days, similar to approaches used in other Ontario municipalities.I would also propose measurable enforcement standards, including an initial City inspection within 30 days of mandatory registration and a follow-up within 15 business days after a compliance deadline, with urgent safety issues continuing to receive faster enforcement.For properties that remain vacant or neglected over longer periods, I would examine escalating fees, stronger cost recovery and proactive inspections, while providing reasonable exemptions for owners who can demonstrate active renovations, redevelopment or legitimate circumstances preventing occupancy.I would also push for a Strategic Property Acquisition Framework, allowing the City to identify neglected properties of significant housing, economic, cultural or public interest and consider negotiated acquisition, land assembly or redevelopment partnerships where there is a clear public benefit.Finally, I would require regular public reporting on long-term vacant properties, enforcement timelines and outcomes.The goal is not simply to charge another fee. It is to strengthen the tools London already has, establish measurable expectations and get important properties maintained, redeveloped or back into productive use.

I would focus on stronger enforcement, earlier intervention and better use of existing housing.First, I would push for a Landlord Registration Program with proactive inspections, particularly for larger multi-unit buildings and properties with repeated complaints. That would include clear enforcement timelines, tenant protections from retaliation and fair appeal rights.Second, I would strengthen London’s response to vacant and neglected properties by reviewing the existing Vacant Buildings By-law and Inspection Registry, introducing measurable enforcement deadlines and considering stronger action where properties remain neglected for long periods.Thirdly, I would support greater investment in rent-geared-to-income, nonprofit, co-operative and supportive housing, while also looking at ways to bring vacant or underused buildings back into residential use.Finally, I would push for better public reporting so residents can see how quickly housing complaints are being addressed and whether landlords are actually complying with orders.The City should be proactive, consistent and accountable.

Yes. I support implementing a Landlord Registration Program that moves London from primarily complaint-driven enforcement toward proactive inspections and is designed to be largely self-funding.If elected, I would bring forward the motion within my first 100 days, directing staff to develop the program, consult with tenants and property owners, establish costs and enforcement standards, and report back to Council within six months.My goal would be to have the necessary by-law and funding framework approved within the first year of the Council term, followed by a phased implementation beginning within 12 to 18 months, prioritizing larger multi-unit buildings and properties with repeated maintenance or enforcement problems.I would support reasonable registration fees, enforcement-related fees and penalties being reinvested into inspections, administration and tenant protections, rather than placing the ongoing cost on general taxpayers.The program should also include measurable inspection and follow-up deadlines, protection for tenants from retaliation, transparent reporting and fair appeal rights.

Yes. I would actively champion this program at City Council.London has discussed stronger rental protections and proactive enforcement for years. The current Ward 13 Councilor is now proposing expanded rental licensing and proactive inspections as part of his 2026 platform. I believe residents deserve more than another commitment ; they deserve a clear implementation plan.That is why I would bring forward a motion within my first 100 days, require staff to report back within six months and work toward Council approval of the framework within the first year with phased implementation targeted within 12 to 18 months.We already know many of the tools available to us: cost-recovery registration fees, proactive and risk-based inspections, measurable enforcement deadlines, tenant protections, appeal rights and transparent reporting.My commitment is not simply to say I support it. It is to put a realistic framework, funding model and timeline in front of Council and do the work required to move it forward.

For me, this really comes back to why I decided to run in the first place.I believe in civic duty. If you put your name forward for public office, you should show up having done the work and ready to lead from day one. I’m not a career politician, but I do believe effective political leadership matters, and I think Ward 13 needs a stronger, more focused approach to improving the standard we accept for housing, neighbourhoods and city services.A phrase I use a lot is investing in Londoners, and I mean it. When we have public dollars available, I would rather ask how we can use them to make life better for the people who actually live here before automatically looking at another corporate incentive.That could mean helping someone get the training they need for a better-paying job, helping local talent build a career here instead of leaving London, supporting a small business trying to get off the ground, helping residents access provincial or federal programs they may not even know they qualify for, or investing in housing that people can actually afford.Housing is part of that same picture. I want stronger tenant protections and proactive enforcement, but I also want us building more rent-geared-to-income, co-operative and nonprofit housing, preventing people from losing the housing they already have, and putting vacant and neglected properties back into productive use.I also want Council to take a more serious approach to our relationship with Indigenous Londoners and neighbouring First Nations. Reconciliation cannot just be something we acknowledge at the beginning of a meeting. I want to look for practical areas where the City can work directly with Indigenous communities on employment, housing, infrastructure, economic opportunity and access to services, while respecting that those priorities need to be developed with those communities rather than decided for them.And I think that probably describes the difference in the kind of councilor I would be. I’m not running to simply maintain what we are already doing, and I’m not approaching every issue through one political ideology. I’m coming in with specific motions, measurable timelines and a willingness to work with people who may not agree with me.You can disagree with me on an issue and I will still listen to you, work with you and try to find something that actually works.For Ward 13, I want us to raise the standard. That is what investing in Londoners means to me.