1. Municipal infrastructure
2. Leadership, accountability & transparency
3. Responsible development
4. Emergency management
5. Transportation & highway safety

• Squamish is growing too fast. Council should slow the pace of new development approvals.In the middle

  “Development is an important source of revenue for the District, and it helps fund the services and amenities our community relies on. However, residents must always come first. This means making sure our infrastructure keeps pace with growth. As we welcome new development, we need to ensure that roads, water distribution systems, sewer infrastructure, parks, recreation facilities, and community services are planned and funded appropriately. My goal is simple: support responsible growth that benefits the entire community, ensure development contributes its fair share, and maintain the quality of life that makes Squamish such a great place to live.”

• Taller buildings (above 6 storeys) should be allowed downtown and near transit and services.Somewhat disagrees

  “Our views are one of Squamish's greatest assets. They define our community, contribute to our quality of life, and are a big part of why people choose to live here. I support responsible growth, but not at the expense of the character and natural beauty that make Squamish special.”

• Squamish should open new land and new neighbourhoods for housing, rather than adding density to existing ones.Somewhat agrees

  “To be honest, I'm not convinced the answer is simply more density everywhere, and I'm not convinced the answer is opening new land everywhere either. I think it's a conversation worth having as a community. If we're going to consider new neighbourhoods, it needs to be done responsibly, with meaningful community engagement and more opportunities for Council to be involved in those discussions. These decisions will shape Squamish for generations, and residents deserve to have a real voice in them. I'm open to exploring new areas for housing if there's a clear benefit to the community. That could mean creating more housing options, improving affordability, or delivering new amenities and infrastructure that make life better for residents. But growth for the sake of growth isn't enough. I want to know how it will benefit the people who already live here, how we'll pay for the infrastructure, and whether it helps us build a stronger community. At the end of the day, my focus is making sure growth works for residents first. If opening new land helps us achieve that, then it's a discussion I'm willing to have.”

• The District should put more public money and land into non-market and below-market housing.In the middle

  “I'll be honest, creating non-market housing is not an area where I have deep expertise. I tend to look at this issue through the eyes of the average taxpayer. I want to help people, and I recognize that many residents are struggling with housing affordability. I also believe that local government has an obligation to support vulnerable residents and help where it can. At the same time, I think municipalities have been asked to carry more responsibility for housing without always receiving the support and funding we need from senior levels of government. That's a challenge we must acknowledge. For me, it's about finding balance. We need a community that is affordable and inclusive, but we also need to invest in the infrastructure, parks, recreation facilities, and services that make Squamish a great place to live. I don't know exactly where that balance lies, and I think it's different for every project. What I do know is that the District needs a strong foundation if we're going to help others effectively. The stronger we are as a municipality, the more we can do to support residents who need a helping hand. I'm open to supporting non-market housing initiatives when there is a clear community benefit, strong partnerships, and a responsible plan that makes sense for both current residents and future generations.”

• Squamish needs more shelter and supportive-housing spaces, even if they are located near residential areas.Somewhat disagrees

  “I think we need to find a balance. Supporting the most vulnerable members of our community should always be part of the conversation. Everyone deserves dignity, safety, and access to the services they need to get back on their feet. At the same time, we have a responsibility to residents, families, and businesses who want safe and welcoming neighbourhoods. That's why I believe supportive housing needs to be paired with the right services, support staff, and community safety resources. I support expanding supportive housing, but I also believe location matters and each proposal should be evaluated carefully. I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all solution. We need honest conversations with residents, service providers, and the people who will be living in these homes. My goal would be to find solutions that help our most vulnerable residents while maintaining the quality of life that people expect in their neighbourhoods. I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do believe we need to keep working together to find solutions that are compassionate, practical, and work for the entire community.”

• Squamish should fund more RCMP officers and policing.Somewhat agrees

  “The District already spends millions of taxpayer dollars each year on RCMP services, so the question isn't always whether we need more officers. Sometimes it's about how those officers are deployed and how connected they are to our community. We need to make sure our RCMP members have the tools, training, and resources they need to succeed. Policing today is far more complex than it used to be. Officers are increasingly dealing with mental health challenges, addiction, homelessness, and social issues that weren't traditionally part of policing. To me, community policing is about relationships. Residents should know their local officers. Businesses should feel heard when they raise concerns. People should feel comfortable reporting issues before they become bigger problems. I also think we need to be realistic. The RCMP cannot solve every social issue on its own. Strong community safety comes from partnerships between police, outreach workers, health services, businesses, and residents all working together. If elected, I would advocate for a stronger community policing presence in Squamish. I want to see officers out in the community, building relationships, understanding local concerns, and focusing on prevention whenever possible. At the same time, I want to make sure taxpayers are receiving good value for the significant investment they're already making in public safety. At the end of the day, people want to feel safe in their neighbourhoods, safe in our parks and trails, and safe walking through our downtown. That's what I will focus on.”

• Keeping property tax increases at or below inflation should be a top priority, even if it means cutting services or delaying projects.Strongly disagrees

  “Core infrastructure is my passion, and I know firsthand how expensive it is when a community falls behind on maintaining it. For me, the priority is clear. Without reliable drinking water, sewer and storm systems, roads, and flood protection, nothing else works. We can build homes, attract businesses, and plan for growth, but if the infrastructure underneath it can't support that growth, we're setting ourselves up for failure. Our infrastructure is aging, and we need to be honest about that. I will push to maintain and replace these critical assets in the most cost-effective way possible. These systems don't generate revenue. They cost money to build, operate, and maintain, but they are essential to public safety and quality of life. I believe Council has a responsibility to stretch every taxpayer dollar as far as possible. That means better asset management, long-term planning, prioritizing maintenance before emergency repairs, and constantly looking for grants, partnerships, and efficiencies before turning to taxpayers for more money. Keeping tax increases affordable is important, but I don't believe an arbitrary commitment to keeping taxes below inflation should come at the expense of critical infrastructure or public safety. Delaying necessary investments often costs more in the long run. My approach will be to look for savings first, improve efficiency wherever possible, and make sure every dollar is spent wisely. If additional funding is truly necessary to protect essential infrastructure or public safety, then I believe we need to have an honest conversation with residents about why it's needed and what benefits it will deliver. At the end of the day, my goal is simple: protect the infrastructure that keeps our community safe, spend taxpayer money responsibly, and leave Squamish in better condition than we found it.”

• The District should sign the proposed 10-year tax agreement with Woodfibre LNG.Strongly agrees

  “Based on the information available, I would have supported the agreement. For me, this is less about whether someone supports or opposes the project and more about responsible financial management on behalf of taxpayers. The District has the authority to set its industrial tax rate, but the fact remains that we are currently involved in litigation. At some point, the courts will provide direction on what is reasonable, and future tax rates will likely need to reflect that outcome. If the District is successful, that's great. If not, we could face significant costs, uncertainty, and the challenge of establishing a new tax rate framework moving forward. I also recognize that litigation is expensive. The longer disputes continue, the more uncertainty exists for both the District and Woodfibre LNG. As someone who believes in long-term planning, I see value in reducing uncertainty whenever possible. One of the things that appealed to me about the agreement was the predictability. A guaranteed revenue stream over ten years would have provided certainty for financial planning, infrastructure investment, and asset management. When you're managing major infrastructure projects, predictable funding allows you to plan better, prioritize work, and often save money over the long term. I also understand that tax agreements between governments and large industrial projects are not uncommon. They can provide stability for both parties and help establish a workable long-term relationship. That doesn't mean we leave money on the table without asking questions. The District has a responsibility to negotiate in the best interests of residents. But given the certainty of the proposed revenue, the cost and uncertainty of ongoing litigation, and the importance of maintaining a productive relationship with one of the largest taxpayers in the community, I would have supported the agreement. At the end of the day, my responsibility is to look at long-term financial sustainability. Pre”

• The District should use its permit powers to press Woodfibre LNG on local impacts, even if that means delays or legal fights.Strongly disagrees

  “I would have supported the agreement because I want the District to have a strong, workable relationship with Woodfibre LNG. That relationship should be respectful, accountable, and built on clear expectations from both sides. Whether people support the project or not, the reality is that if the facility operates successfully, it will be part of our community for decades. I believe we can often achieve more through constructive engagement and partnership than through constant conflict and litigation. A stable relationship creates opportunities for ongoing dialogue about community benefits, infrastructure investments, local employment, environmental accountability, and other issues that matter to residents. That doesn't mean giving anyone a free pass. It means holding partners accountable while working together toward outcomes that benefit Squamish. My preference is to build relationships that are firm but respectful, because I believe that approach is more likely to deliver long-term benefits for our community than continued uncertainty and legal disputes.”

• Climate action should be a top council priority, even when it adds cost.Somewhat disagrees

  “For me, taking care of basic needs comes first. People need safe drinking water, reliable roads, effective sewer and storm systems, flood protection, and affordable services. That's the foundation of a healthy community. I believe climate change is real, and we are already seeing its impacts through extreme weather, wildfire risk, and flooding. We need to do our part, but we also need to be realistic about costs and priorities. My approach is to focus on climate actions that deliver practical benefits to residents and strengthen our community. Investments in flood protection, wildfire preparedness, resilient infrastructure, and energy efficiency help protect people and property while preparing us for the future. At the same time, I don't believe every climate initiative should take priority over core infrastructure or essential services. Council has a responsibility to manage taxpayer dollars carefully and make sure we're getting value for our investments. I would support setting clear priorities, establishing realistic budgets, and focusing on projects that provide measurable benefits to residents. If we can't provide reliable water, sewer, roads, and public safety, then we've missed the mark. My priority will always be protecting the infrastructure and services that keep our community safe. Climate action is important, but it needs to be balanced with affordability and the basic needs of the residents who call Squamish home.”

• The District should cut red tape and speed up permits for builders and businesses.Strongly agrees

  “Absolutely, This is one of the areas where I would like to focus my energy as a councillor because the benefits are felt across the entire community. Faster and more predictable approvals help businesses invest, create jobs, build housing, and reduce costs. I also think we need to recognize that many delays are not caused by bad intentions. Sometimes applications are complex. Sometimes applicants don't fully understand what information is required. Sometimes staff are working with limited resources and competing priorities. That's why I believe the solution is not simply removing rules. The solution is creating a process that is clear, efficient, and easy to follow. We need to give Municipal Hall the tools, staffing, and resources necessary to succeed. We need a process that is easy for staff to administer, easy for applicants to understand, and designed to lead to successful outcomes. A good process should clearly explain requirements upfront, identify issues early, reduce unnecessary back-and-forth, and provide applicants with realistic timelines and expectations. When everyone understands the process, projects move forward faster and with fewer surprises. We still need rules that protect residents, neighbourhoods, and the environment. But there is no reason those protections can't exist alongside a streamlined and efficient approval system. At the end of the day, I want a District that is known for being professional, responsive, and easy to work with. When you have a well-designed process, residents are happier, businesses are happier, applicants are happier, and staff are happier. That's a win for everyone.”

• Regional transit to Vancouver and Whistler is worth spending local tax dollars on.Somewhat agrees

  “I support investing local tax dollars in regional transit because it has a direct benefit for Squamish residents. Better transit connections to Vancouver and Whistler could help workers, students, businesses, and visitors while reducing traffic on the Sea-to-Sky Highway. That said, regional transit is expensive and comes with challenges. Ridership is often heavier in one direction than the other, which can impact efficiency and operating costs. There are also practical considerations around comfort, luggage storage, bike capacity, and the type of service being offered. My approach would be to look for the most cost-effective solution possible. Before asking local taxpayers to shoulder the full burden, I would want to explore partnerships with the Province, BC Transit, neighbouring communities, major employers, and tourism organizations. If we can share costs and responsibilities, we have a much better chance of delivering a service that is affordable, sustainable, and available sooner rather than later. I believe regional transit is worth pursuing, but it needs to be done responsibly. We need a service that works for residents, makes financial sense, and provides long-term value to the community. As with any major investment, I would want to see a solid business case, realistic ridership projections, and a clear funding strategy before moving forward.”

• New buildings should have to provide enough parking for the people who live there, instead of being approved with less.Strongly agrees

  “I do not support parking variances that reduce the minimum parking requirements for new developments. In my view, the current parking requirements are already close to the minimum. They were designed with the expectation that more people will use active transportation and transit in the future. While I support those goals, the reality is that many residents still rely on their vehicles every day. We are already seeing the impacts of parking shortages in parts of downtown Squamish. When developments don't provide enough parking, the problem doesn't disappear. It gets pushed onto neighbouring streets and existing residents. I believe developers should provide adequate parking for the people who will live in their buildings. If a development brings new residents, it should also help accommodate their parking needs. That doesn't mean we stop investing in transit, cycling, or walkability. We should continue supporting those options, but we also need to be realistic about how people live and travel today. My position is simple: future development should help solve our parking challenges, not add to them. As a councillor, I would support clear and consistent parking requirements that protect existing neighbourhoods while ensuring growth remains responsible and sustainable.”

• Major recreation investments, like renewing Brennan Park, should go ahead even if the District has to borrow.In the middle

  “We absolutely need a new recreation centre. We need another pool, more ice time, and additional recreation space to support a growing community. Recreation is important on many levels. It keeps people active, teaches our kids essential skills like swimming, supports physical and mental health, and provides the quality of life that residents expect. The challenge is how we pay for it. I know the community has been waiting a long time for improvements to Brennan Park, but I am cautious about taking on significant new debt given the financial pressures the District is already facing. Before borrowing tens of millions of dollars, I want to make sure we have explored every available option. I would like to see the District get creative and investigate partnerships with private industry, senior levels of government, community organizations, and potentially neighbouring communities. Other municipalities have successfully used partnership models to help deliver recreation facilities, and I think those examples are worth exploring. My goal would be to deliver these amenities sooner rather than later while minimizing the financial burden on taxpayers. If we can find a way to share costs, reduce risk, and accelerate delivery, that's a conversation worth having. I support investing in recreation, but I also believe we need to be responsible with public finances. We all want these facilities, but we need a plan that the community can afford. At the end of the day, doing nothing isn't an option. Squamish has outgrown its existing recreation facilities. The question isn't whether we need more recreation infrastructure. The question is how we deliver it in a way that is financially responsible and sustainable for future generations.”

• The Under One Roof shelter and its services should be moved out of downtown.Somewhat agrees

  “I believe we need to take a serious look at how supportive housing and related services are distributed throughout the community. I fully support helping vulnerable people and ensuring they have access to shelter, housing, and the services they need. At the same time, I think we need to be honest about the challenges that residents, businesses, and visitors have raised regarding the concentration of services in the downtown core. Downtown is where a lot of the community comes together. It's home to Municipal Hall, the library, local businesses, restaurants, community events, and many of the places we encourage visitors to explore. It's also an area where residents should feel comfortable living, working, and spending time. My concern is not with the people who need help. My concern is whether we have the right balance and the right support systems in place. I think it's reasonable to review whether our current approach is working for everyone and whether services could be delivered more effectively. I would support a community discussion that includes residents, businesses, service providers, and the people using these services. The goal should be finding solutions that support vulnerable individuals while also maintaining a safe, welcoming, and vibrant downtown. I also believe supportive housing needs to be paired with appropriate supports, community safety measures, and enforcement when necessary. Housing alone is not enough. At the end of the day, I want a compassionate community that helps those in need, but I also want a downtown that residents can be proud of, businesses can thrive in, and visitors want to return to. I believe we can achieve both if we're willing to have honest conversations and work together on practical solutions.”

• The District should clear tent encampments from public spaces, even when there is nowhere else for those people to go.Somewhat disagrees

  “This is one of the toughest challenges facing our community. I understand why people want encampments cleared. They can create safety concerns for the people living there, nearby residents, businesses, and the environment. But simply clearing an encampment without another option usually just moves the problem somewhere else. I believe we need an immediate solution that balances compassion with accountability, while working toward a long-term solution that improves safety and helps restore prosperity in our downtown. We need to support people who are struggling, but we also need to make sure residents, businesses, and visitors feel safe in our community. I want to see stronger community policing and more support for the RCMP in dealing with repeat offenders who are creating safety concerns. We need to help people who want help, but there also need to be consequences for those who continue to harm the community. If there were an easy solution, we would have found it already. My focus will be on improving public safety, increasing accountability, supporting local businesses, and working toward long-term housing and support solutions that treat people with dignity and respect.”

• Spending on inclusion and community symbols (such as rainbow crosswalks, flags and proclamations) is a good use of District money.In the middle

  “I think it's important that everyone feels welcome and that they belong in Squamish. Community symbols, proclamations, and other forms of recognition can help with that, but right now the District is facing significant financial pressures and major infrastructure needs. I believe our spending should be proportional to the challenges we're facing. We should focus on practical and affordable ways to build inclusion today, and those ideas should come directly from the people and groups looking for that support. They know best what would make a meaningful difference in their lives. As our financial position improves, we can invest more in initiatives that strengthen community connection and belonging. My goal is to find the right balance: making sure everyone feels welcome while being responsible with taxpayer dollars.”

• Large new developments should be required to include a fixed share of below-market homes, even if that means fewer homes get built.In the middle
• Height and density should follow clear rules set in advance, rather than being negotiated project by project.Strongly agrees
• The District should hold on to the land it owns and use it for housing, rather than selling it to fund other things.Strongly agrees
• Short-term rentals like Airbnb should be restricted further in Squamish.In the middle
• The District should provide a sanctioned place on public land for people living in vehicles.Strongly agrees
• The District should put more bylaw enforcement officers downtown.Strongly agrees
• The District should fund mental-health and outreach crisis response teams alongside the RCMP.Somewhat agrees
• Capital projects above a set cost should go to a public referendum before council approves them.In the middle
• The District should borrow to renew Brennan Park now rather than wait until it can be paid for from savings.In the middle
• New buildings should have to meet higher energy standards, even if that raises the cost of building.In the middle
• Paid parking downtown is a fair way to manage demand for spaces.Somewhat disagrees
• Downtown Squamish needs more public parking, and the District should get it built.Somewhat agrees
• If Squamish brings in paid parking, residents should park free and only visitors should pay.Somewhat agrees
• The District should spend local money on protected bike lanes and sidewalks.Somewhat agrees
• Land set aside for industry and jobs should be protected from being rezoned for housing.Strongly agrees
• The District should increase spending on dikes and flood protection, even if it means higher taxes.Somewhat agrees
• The District should formalize shared decision-making with the Squamish Nation on land use.Somewhat disagrees
• The District should actively work to expand subsidized childcare spaces.Somewhat agrees
• When public safety downtown and services for homeless people pull in different directions, safety should come first.Somewhat agrees
• The District should use bylaws to stop open drug use in parks, sidewalks and other public spaces.Strongly agrees

Answered by Luc Perreault on September 28, 2026. Where these differ from our earlier reading of the public record, the candidate’s own answer is what counts in the quiz and compare pages.

Civil Engineering Technologist and Public Works Inspector, and a former firefighter. Has lived and worked in the Sea-to-Sky corridor for 15 years and moved to Squamish with his family four years ago. Says he decided to run after an 'unpleasant' first experience engaging with the District on a development issue as an impacted resident.

Worked out from Luc’s public statements and votes, not a label they chose. See everyone side by side · Who on council thinks like you? Take the quiz.

• Luc Perreault campaign website (PERREAULT 2026)
• District of Squamish: 2026 Municipal Election Candidates
• Nomination papers - Luc Perreault (redacted)
• Squamish Chief: Central hub for 2026 election coverage (no Perreault profile as of Sept 22, 2026)