Blog

When someone opens Google Maps to plan a trip, they should see multiple realistic ways to get where they are going. Driving may make sense getting to a restaurant in Scarborough, transit to a Bay Street office, and walking to grab a coffee at a local cafe. Cycling should be a safe, practical choice as well.

Doug Ford's government has talked about bike lanes mainly as an obstacle to drivers commuting to work. That misses most of the picture. Bill 212 ordered the removal of protected bike lanes on Bloor Street, Yonge Street and University Avenue. The government later passed Bill 60, further restricting the ability of municipalities to reduce motor-vehicle lanes when building new cycling infrastructure.¹ Decisions about Toronto streets should be based on local conditions, safety data, public consultation and actual traffic information. They should not be dictated by a blanket rule from Queen's Park.

Unlike what Doug Ford thinks, cycling is about a child travelling to school, a parent picking up groceries, a teenager visiting friends, a senior going to the park, a worker connecting to transit or a family heading to the waterfront. It is not exclusively about commuting to downtown. Do we use a car only to commute to work? Cycling infrastructure should be understood in much the same way.

Many people who do not cycle are not opposed to cycling. More likely they simply do not feel safe doing it on our streets. A painted line beside fast-moving traffic may be manageable for a confident rider. It will not persuade many parents to let their children bike to school, and it will not work for many seniors, inexperienced riders or people carrying children. The quality of a bike lane matters as much as the number of kilometres built. We need physical protection where appropriate, better intersection designs, dedicated bicycle signals, clear sightlines and routes that do not suddenly disappear.

Toronto's Bloor Street pilot showed why this matters. Cycling increased by about 49 per cent, while conflicts between road users fell by 44 per cent. The collision rate involving bicycles also fell because cycling increased without a corresponding increase in bicycle and motor-vehicle collisions.² Good cycling infrastructure also makes road users more predictable. Drivers know where cyclists should be. Turning movements are clearer. Pedestrians have more organized crossings. This results in a safer street for everyone.

Building better streets involves trade-offs. Some projects may affect travel times, parking, loading or turning movements. Those effects should be measured honestly and addressed through good design. But counting car lanes does not tell us whether a street is working. Travel times are also impacted by intersections, construction, loading, and collisions.

Destination Danforth is a useful local example. After the project was installed, weekday cycling increased by 67 per cent at Jones Avenue and 133 per cent at Woodbine Avenue. End-to-end driving times changed by less than one minute, and the City recorded an overall decrease in collisions.³ Danforth still carries cars, buses, deliveries and customers. It also has protected cycling space, parking and loading in many areas, patios and a more pleasant public realm. It is not perfect, but it shows that a main street can serve more than one kind of trip.

Bike lanes can benefit drivers too. Every person who chooses to bike instead of drive is one less car competing for road space and parking. Giving people alternatives is especially important as Toronto grows. There is no realistic way for every new trip to be made by private car. Better transit, walking and cycling options leave more room for the people who genuinely need to drive, including tradespeople, caregivers, delivery workers, people with disabilities and emergency services.

Emergency response is a legitimate concern and should be considered in every street design. It should not, however, be used as a slogan to stop every cycling project. On the Yonge Street complete-street pilot, the increase in Toronto Fire response time was eight seconds greater than the citywide increase over the same period. The increase in paramedic response time was 36 seconds lower than the citywide increase.⁴ Results will vary by street. The right approach is to involve fire, paramedic and police services during design, protect emergency access, adjust signal timing where needed and monitor what happens after a project is installed.

A main street is also a destination, where cyclists are more likely to notice storefronts and can stop easily. After the original Bloor bike lane pilot, most merchants surveyed reported an increase in customers. Visitors reported spending more and visiting more often, while commercial vacancy rates remained stable. Moneris payment data also showed that total spending in the pilot area increased more than in the surrounding area and the comparison area on Danforth.⁵ That does not mean every business will benefit from every design. Businesses need deliveries, loading areas, accessible pick-up locations and customer access. Those needs should be included from the beginning.

Streets such as Danforth, Gerrard, Kingston Road and Queen Street East are community spaces as well as transportation corridors. Safe crossings, comfortable sidewalks, transit, trees, patios and cycling connections can help make them places where people want to spend time.

A city that requires people to own a car to participate fully in daily life is not an affordable city. Cars are useful, but expensive. For a household dealing with Toronto's cost of living, being able to complete some trips by bicycle can make a real difference.

Bike Share Toronto has become an important part of the transportation system. It recorded 7.8 million rides in 2025, nearly 900,000 more than the year before.⁶ The next step is making the service consistently useful. Toronto should accelerate station installations, add greater station density in Beaches-East York and improve connections to transit, parks, shopping areas and the waterfront. The City should also improve redistribution so popular stations have bicycles and open docks when people need them. An incentive program can encourage riders to return bicycles to high-demand locations, while major festivals, street events and community celebrations should receive more Bike Share valet or concierge service. A Bike Share station is only useful when it is close enough to be convenient and reliable enough that people expect it to work.

Electric assistance makes cycling possible for more people. It can help riders travel farther, carry groceries, manage hills or continue cycling as they get older. Cargo bikes can also replace some family and commercial vehicle trips. There is an obvious difference between a legal, bicycle-style e-bike and a large, heavy, fast vehicle that functions more like a motorcycle. Toronto's existing rules do not allow non-pedal e-bikes in protected bike lanes, and motorized e-bikes weighing more than 40 kilograms are not permitted on park trails or multi-use paths.⁷ Those rules need clearer public communication and consistent enforcement. Protected bike lanes should remain safe for conventional bicycles, legal e-bikes, mobility devices and appropriate cargo bikes. Vehicles that function like motorcycles should be treated like motorcycles.

I do not aim to tell people it's bad to drive or that every trip must be made by bicycle to save the environment. Cycling is simply a clean form of transportation that also provides physical activity. Active trips to school are an important source of exercise for children, and reducing unnecessary car trips can improve local air quality.⁸ A range of transportation choices also makes Toronto more resilient. Fuel prices can rise. Oil markets can become unstable as we have seen this year. Transit can be disrupted. Roads can close for construction or major events. A city with several workable ways to travel is better prepared than one that relies too heavily on a single mode.

Toronto does not just need isolated stretches of good bike lanes. It needs a connected network. A comfortable route that ends at a dangerous intersection or disappears for several blocks will deter many people from using a bike in the first place. We need to close those gaps. In Beaches-East York, that means continuing to improve east-west routes while creating practical north-south connections to Danforth Avenue, subway and GO stations, schools, parks, community facilities and the waterfront. We also need to maintain what we build. Broken barriers, potholes, faded markings, and poor lighting can make a good route unusable. Bike theft is another deterrent. I do not believe Beaches-East York needs expensive new bicycle parking on every block, but I do want the City and Toronto Police to take organized bicycle theft seriously and improve reporting, coordination and targeted enforcement.

Transportation debates are too often presented as a contest where one group must lose for another to gain. That framing may be politically useful for Doug Ford, but it does not help Toronto move. Residents are not permanently divided into drivers, cyclists, pedestrians and transit riders. The same person may drive to work on Monday, take the subway on Tuesday, walk to a restaurant on Wednesday and bike to the beach on Saturday. Our transportation system should reflect that reality. I intend to bike to City Hall and community events often if I am elected, but the goal is not to make everyone travel the way I do. The goal is to give every resident the freedom to choose the best way to get around safely, affordably and conveniently.

The TTC is probably the Toronto issue I care most about. I drive. I take transit. I cycle. I walk. Like most people in this city, I use whichever option makes the most sense for the trip I am taking. That is exactly why I care so much about improving public transit.

Better transit means less congestion for people who need to drive, more independence for people who cannot, and a city that is easier for everyone to move around.

The TTC carries approximately 1.3 million passengers on a typical weekday.¹ A single six-car subway train can carry nearly 1,000 people during rush hour.² The 504 King streetcar alone carries more than 72,000 riders on an average day.³ Try to imagine what our roads would look like if even a fraction of those passengers had to drive instead. Toronto cannot solve congestion by trying to fit an ever-growing number of cars onto streets that have a fixed amount of space. We need to move more people efficiently, and that means making transit reliable, safe, fast, and affordable enough that people genuinely want to use it.

I believe strongly in the TTC, but supporting transit does not mean pretending the system is working as well as it should. I know it because the day I registered to run for city council, Line 2 stopped and I had to get on a bike share to not miss my appointment. If we want more people to leave their cars at home, we cannot simply tell them that taking transit is the responsible choice. We have to provide service that gets them where they are going reliably and within a reasonable amount of time.

The first issue is addressing subway slow zones. Reduced-speed zones force trains to crawl over sections of track that require inspection, repair, or replacement. At one point, riders were dealing with more than 30 of these zones across Lines 1 and 2, with trains travelling at only 15 to 25 kilometres per hour in affected areas.⁴ Each delay may seem small in isolation, but they add up across a daily commute, disrupt train spacing, contribute to crowding, and make arrival times less predictable. The TTC has made progress reducing slow zones, but we should not accept them as a permanent feature of the system. Toronto faces a massive state-of-good-repair funding gap over the coming decade. If we continue delaying necessary maintenance, the system will become slower, less dependable, and more expensive to repair.

We also need to prepare the system for the weather Toronto now experiences. Major winter storms have disrupted outdoor portions of Lines 1 and 2, shut down surface routes, and exposed vulnerabilities in newer transit infrastructure. TTC employees work incredibly hard during severe weather, but they should have infrastructure, vehicles, equipment, and operating plans designed for the conditions they increasingly face. Weather preparedness cannot mean hoping that the next storm will be less severe.

Beyond the subway, Beaches-East York is served by three important streetcar routes: the 501 Queen, 503 Kingston Road, and 506 Carlton. These routes should feel like real, dependable options for reaching downtown and moving across the east end. Too often, riders instead face long waits, streetcars arriving in groups, vehicles turning back before reaching their destinations, and trips slowed by general traffic. The problem is not that streetcars are inherently slow, it is instead that Toronto frequently asks them to carry dozens or hundreds of passengers while giving priority to individual vehicles carrying one or two people.

We already know that transit priority works. The King Street Transit Priority Corridor demonstrated how much faster and more reliable streetcar service can become when the city restricts conflicting vehicle movements, manages curb space, and consistently enforces the rules. I fully support the RapidTO Surface Transit Network Plan and will advocate for its continued expansion. For Beaches-East York, that means examining where dedicated transit lanes can be added, restricting left turns where they repeatedly block service, improving signal priority so full streetcars are not forced to wait through unnecessary red lights, and reviewing stop placement where closely spaced stops significantly slow travel without impacting accessibility. Transit signal priority should be the default on major surface transit routes. These changes must also be accompanied by consistent enforcement: a transit lane is not useful if it is routinely blocked by parked vehicles, deliveries, or drivers ignoring restrictions.

Riders deserve to feel safe on every trip. The TTC has taken steps to improve safety through higher-visibility teams, crisis workers, special constables, and partnerships with social-service providers.⁵ That progress matters, but it must continue. Visible and approachable staff can discourage harmful behaviour, respond to emergencies, assist vulnerable people, and give riders confidence that help is available. At the same time, enforcement officers cannot solve every problem on the TTC. Mental-health outreach workers, shelter services, addiction supports, and other social programs must be part of the response. Transit vehicles and stations should not become the default shelter system for people who have nowhere else to go.

We also need to pursue physical safety improvements, including platform edge doors. The new Ontario Line will include platform doors, but the TTC's existing subway stations do not. Other cities have successfully added full or partial barriers to older subway systems. While Toronto is trialling platform barriers,⁶ we must continue developing a realistic phased plan, beginning with the stations where platform doors or gates would provide the greatest safety and operational benefit. Partial-height doors, platform barriers, and phased installations at high-priority stations should all be implemented.

Communication is another basic part of providing a trustworthy service. When a delay occurs, riders deserve to know what happened, which part of the line is affected, how long the disruption is expected to last, and what alternatives are available. The TTC should continue to improve on providing consistent information, particularly for streetcar and bus routes, across station announcements, vehicle displays, apps, social media, and digital signs. Reliable cellular and internet service throughout the subway network would also make it easier for riders to access updates when their trip is disrupted.

Service quality matters, but so does cost. Fare capping is an important improvement. Beginning in September 2026, riders will automatically stop paying after reaching a set number of trips within a calendar month, making the system fairer and removing the risk of paying for a pass that goes unused.⁷ I support keeping TTC fares frozen while fare capping is introduced, lowering the cap further in future years when financially possible, and continuing to improve reduced-fare programs for residents with low incomes. Affordable fares encourage more people to use a service the city is already operating, they are not just a subsidy to riders. More riders mean more fare revenue, fewer cars competing for road space, and stronger public support for better service. That said, freezing or reducing fares cannot come at the expense of reliable operations. The provincial and federal governments must contribute a fairer share toward running the country's largest public transit system rather than leaving Toronto property taxpayers and riders to carry so much of the burden.

A great TTC benefits everyone. It reduces congestion for people who need to drive. It connects residents to jobs, education, healthcare, and opportunity. It supports businesses by bringing customers and employees to their doors. It gives young people, seniors, people with disabilities, and residents who cannot afford a car the freedom to participate fully in the city. It also reduces pollution and helps Toronto meet its climate commitments. None of these benefits happen automatically. They require investment, consistent maintenance, political will, and a willingness to give transit vehicles carrying dozens of passengers priority over individual cars where it makes sense.

I am unequivocally pro-transit. Not because I believe cars are inherently bad, but because I understand what a dependable transit system does for a city. We have already seen glimpses of what is possible through the King Street corridor, RapidTO, and improvements to service priority. Now we need to apply those lessons consistently, maintain the infrastructure we already have, and build a TTC that people can confidently choose.

Talking about policies and my vision for Beaches-East York will always be an important part of this campaign. But being your city councillor means much more than voting at City Hall or advocating for good policies. A great councillor should be present, accessible, transparent, and accountable every day. The job is about listening just as much as it is about leading. It is also about understanding the concerns, ideas, and experiences of residents from every corner of our ward and making sure every voice has an opportunity to be heard.

One of the ideas I am most excited about is a weekly rotating Café with the Councillor. Each week, I will spend a few hours at a different café, restaurant, library, community centre, park, or other public space in Beaches-East York. Anyone will be able to stop by to ask a question, share an idea, raise a concern, or simply introduce themselves. I want these meetings to be informal and approachable: an opportunity to hear directly from residents while also supporting local businesses and spending meaningful time in every part of our community.

Transparency will guide everything I do as councillor. City Council votes are public information, but they are not always easy to locate or understand. I will publish a clear and accessible record of every major vote I take, along with a written explanation of why I voted the way I did. Whether you agree with my decision or not, you deserve to understand how I reached it. I will also maintain a publicly accessible calendar so residents can see who I am meeting with, which issues I am working on, and how I am advocating for our community.

Being accountable also means being responsive. If you contact my office with a question, concern, or request for help, I will respond within two business days with a meaningful update. Residents should not feel as though their councillor is impossible to reach or that their concerns have disappeared into an inbox. I will also hold quarterly online town halls to discuss the state of the ward and hear directly from residents about what matters most to them. These conversations should never be limited to election season.

Community engagement should involve more than simply asking for feedback. That is why I support participatory budgeting, which would allow residents to propose ideas for improving Beaches-East York and vote on which projects should receive funding. Other councillors have implemented this approach,¹² and I believe it can give residents a genuine voice in shaping their neighbourhoods. I will also continue expanding the use of neighbourhood polls on hyper-local matters such as speed humps, parking changes, and other community improvements.

Representation also means making a deliberate effort to hear from people who are too often overlooked. I will conduct dedicated outreach to youth and seniors so that everyone has an opportunity to participate, regardless of age or circumstance. I will continue knocking on doors throughout my term, creating videos and articles that explain what is happening in our community, and commuting to City Hall primarily by TTC and bicycle to stay connected to the realities residents experience every day.

This list is not meant to be exhaustive. I hope it grows and improves over time. Good ideas do not belong to politicians. They belong to the people who live here. My goal is not simply to be another councillor for Beaches-East York. It is to raise the standard for what residents should expect from their local representatives: someone who listens, communicates openly, remains accessible, and is accountable every day, not just every four years.

I thought I would begin this series by talking about the kind of councillor I want to be and why I decided to run.

The idea first entered my mind after a conversation with a resident here in Beaches-East York. I was unlocking a Bike Share bike to head downtown when someone who had just crossed the Danforth began talking to me about bike lanes. He told me he had jaywalked for years without worrying much about cars, but now felt more at risk from cyclists than anything else. I could have ridden away, but instead we talked.

I explained why I support bike lanes: they can help traffic move more efficiently, make our streets safer when everyone follows the rules, and make our neighbourhoods better places to live. He told me that e-bikes were too fast and that too many riders ignored the rules. I agreed with him. By the end of the conversation, we had found something we both believed: people riding responsibly were not the problem, and neither were people simply trying to cross the street. The problem was the small number of people whose behaviour makes everyone else's experience worse.

What struck me was not that I had changed his mind or that he had changed mine. It was how quickly two people who began with very different perspectives found common ground simply by listening to each other. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that these are exactly the kinds of conversations I enjoy having. I like hearing how people experience their neighbourhood. I like understanding why someone believes what they believe, even when I do not initially agree with them. More often than not, you discover that you want many of the same things. You are simply approaching them from different directions.

I also began thinking more seriously about our representation at City Hall. Over the past several years, I have often felt that too many decisions were made before residents had truly been heard. Like many of my neighbours, I have been disappointed by what I see as a lack of communication and engagement from our current councillor, and by positions that appeared to move away from the principles I believed he had been elected to represent, particularly on complete streets, transit, climate change, and other important city-building issues. That made me ask myself a simple question:

If I believe representation should look different, why not try to provide it?

I want to confess something. I do not really want to be a politician. I do not enjoy self-promotion. I do not care about being quoted in the media. I do not believe that refusing to admit mistakes is a strength, and I have very little patience for treating every issue as a partisan battle. What I do enjoy is the work itself.

I enjoy walking through every corner of Beaches-East York, often with my dog, and discovering streets, parks, businesses, and communities I had not noticed before. I enjoy knocking on doors and having conversations with people I might never have met otherwise. Campaigning has pushed me to become more comfortable speaking with strangers, and to my surprise, I have genuinely come to enjoy it. When I care about something, I throw myself into it. I built my own campaign website, do my own research, spend far too much time thinking about policy, and even built my own system to track every house I visit and every concern residents share with me. I want those conversations to lead to action rather than disappearing into a notebook.

My goal is simple. I want to know this ward as well as anyone possibly can, and I want the people who live here to know that when they have something to say, I will listen. One of my commitments during this campaign is to knock on every door in Beaches-East York. If I do not finish before election day and I am fortunate enough to earn your trust, I will keep going until I do. Then I will start over.

This will not be the last post like this. Over the coming months, I want to write about the issues facing our community and, more importantly, explain how I think. No candidate can honestly promise to already have the perfect answer to every challenge that will arise over the next four years. What I can do is show you my values, how I approach problems, and how I make decisions. My hope is that by the time election day arrives, you will have a good sense not only of what I believe, but of the kind of councillor I will be when new issues arise.