Oh, I make no bones about it. Personal beliefs inform everything we do, and the sense I get from your online presence is that many of yours are fundamentally incompatible with the kind of Hamilton I believe we can have.

*seem to want

The data show that policing is a flawed institution in Hamilton. We’ve got white nationalists training in parks and on the force, and despite year-on-year increases in budget they can’t seem to clean up themselves or the city. I think a new approach is warranted; you seem want the status quo.

Fair enough I suppose. I do think you might be using your personal beliefs to frame the ways you are willing to engage about HPS and criticism of them, though, which you identified as being no way to have a discussion.

You openly ask for people to email you about wasteful spending in your bio. I’m suggesting that the HPS budget as it currently stands isn’t providing value for money.

I appreciate that. I think it’s worth pointing out that anecdotes are not anec-data. I think Hamilton can and will get better; I have a lot of time for reasoned, data driven and practical ideas. Less so for vague “anti-woke” sentiments that I think you sometimes lean towards.

Certainly the HPS, who recently suspended an officer (with pay) after their white supremacist beliefs became public knowledge, and have been damningly implicated in findings about racial discrimination in use-of-force, and yet plead for MORE budget each year deserve much harsher critique?

Do you think that despite the HPS being the largest percentage of the budget, their inability to provide passable services to the city indicates that money is being spent unwisely?

That would have been much better, agreed! Why is it, then, that the councillors who are most aggressive in pushing for affordable housing solutions seem to be the most frequent targets of your criticism while those who repeatedly vote against solutions receive none?

I appreciate that you care about the Ward, and that you’re willing to throw ideas at the wall to see what sticks. MV.

What happens next? Some combination of the above?
I think you may be overestimating the levers available to an individual councillor. I agree that it would be great if something was done, but I wonder if you’re laying the blame in the wrong place here.

So, if I’m understanding correctly, the solution here is to amend the bylaws to allow for these buildings to be demolished by their owners with no plans in place for the lots? Levy fines that absentee landlords might never pay? Should the city expropriate the properties and assume responsibility for

Intend to address and if so, how? Apologies if I’m asking you to spoil the platform before it’s fully ready, but my impression so far is that it’s been boiling down to “Nann bad” and that’s simply “not good enough” for someone who wants to represent my ward.

“Not good enough.”
I guess the follow up question is what does “good enough” actually look like and what is a councillor’s role in satisfying that requirement?
Would tackling the underlying issues of lack of housing leading to squatting and lack of sufficient social supports be something you’d

Thanks Andrew. I wonder a little bit about your video’s rhetoric then. To me, it seems like you’re trying to insinuate that these issues can only be addressed by unseating the councillor during the 26 election, (presumably by voting for you) or that cllr Nann is to blame for what you claim is

Hi Andrew. I’m wondering what specifically the councillor is supposed to be doing about private properties? Obviously by-law can get involved, but you can (and probably have) notify them yourself. I agree that burned out buildings are not ideal, but what specifically is the councillors remit here?

😩I’m sorry buddy

NOT THE BEST