Scorecard
What the mayor and councillors said during the 2026 campaign, and whether their own votes match.
At a glance
Sean Easton11 promises · 39 positions tracked
Eric Andersen7 promises · 26 positions tracked (6 checked against votes)
Janice DesJardins10 promises · 44 positions tracked (40 checked against votes)
Sarah Ellis10 promises · 36 positions tracked
Luc Perreault10 promises · 39 positions tracked
Laura Prosko10 promises · 45 positions tracked
Shaun Veltkamp9 promises · 31 positions trackedPromises
Specific things they said they would do. Each one says in advance what their part is: what they move, second or vote for. Only that part gets a label.
Sean Easton Mayor · 11 promises
Not tested yetPut air and water monitoring stations around town to track possible effects from Woodfibre LNG.Who decides: Council and the Province
What Sean said:
“Install extensive air and water monitoring stations throughout the community to track potential impacts in real time”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to fund or secure community air and water monitoring stations that report to the public. Not kept if he votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether monitoring stations are set up and report results. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council and the Province
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPause approval of new developments unless they clearly make life better and more affordable.Who decides: Council, within provincial housing law
What Sean said:
“Pausing approval of new development unless it meaningfully improves quality of life and affordability”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Counts only rezonings, which council votes on. Kept if he votes against a rezoning whose staff report shows no affordable homes and no community benefits beyond what the rules require. Not kept if he votes for one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how many rezonings council approves. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council, within provincial housing law
Since Bill 44 (2023), council cannot pause housing that fits existing zoning: those projects need only staff permits. So this can only be tested on rezonings.
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetSpeed up the Pioneer Way supportive housing project.Who decides: BC Housing and council
What Sean said:
“Expedite the Pioneer Way supportive housing project to create more permanent deeply affordable housing for those facing homelessness”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for steps that move the Pioneer Way supportive housing forward, such as approvals, land or permits. Not kept if he votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether it gets built, and when. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: BC Housing and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetRaise the share of affordable homes developers must hand over to the District.
What Sean said:
“Increase the proportion of affordable units that developers must provide to the DOS.”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for a policy or bylaw that requires a bigger share of affordable homes in new developments. Not kept if he votes against one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council adopts one. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPick a location for a downtown parkade.
What Sean said:
“Identifying a location for a parkade.”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to choose or reserve a site for a downtown parkade. Not kept if he votes against choosing one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council picks a site this term. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetStop letting new buildings get approved with less parking than the rules require.
What Sean said:
“Placing a moratorium on parking variances, so developers provide enough parking for their buildings.”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves or votes for a pause on parking variances, or votes against each request to cut required parking. Not kept if he votes for one. We show the count, for example 4 of 5.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how many parking variances council approves. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetNegotiate with Woodfibre LNG for a new recreation centre with a pool and ice rink.Who decides: Woodfibre LNG and council
What Sean said:
“Negotiate with Woodfibre LNG for a new recreation centre with an ice rink and pool”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to make a new recreation centre with a pool and ice rink part of talks with Woodfibre LNG. Not kept if he votes against asking for it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether a new agreement with Woodfibre LNG includes money for a recreation centre. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Woodfibre LNG and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetHold property taxes flat in 2027, with no increase.
What Sean said:
“Freeze property taxes for 2027”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves or votes for a 0% increase in the 2027 budget, and votes against a 2027 budget that raises the District's property tax. Not kept if he votes for a 2027 budget with an increase.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching the 2027 property tax increase council adopts, as the District reports it. If he votes no and loses, his promise is still kept. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPause new bike lane and sidewalk upgrades until residents have been properly consulted.
What Sean said:
“Placing a moratorium on active transportation upgrades until more effective community engagement has taken place.”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to pause new bike lane and sidewalk projects until residents are consulted. Not kept if he votes to start a new one before that.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council pauses them. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetWork with BC Transit and the province for an express highway bus every 15 minutes.Who decides: BC Transit and the Province
What Sean said:
“Partnering with BC Transit and the provincial government to establish an express bus down the highway every 15 minutes, making transit a more practical option”[source]
Sean’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for a formal District request to BC Transit and the Province for express highway buses every 15 minutes. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether express buses run every 15 minutes. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sean: council decides as a group.
Who decides: BC Transit and the Province
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Eric Andersen Councillor · 7 promises
Not tested yetLet the Cheema lands (Lots 509 and 510) housing proposal be reviewed and negotiated.
What Eric said:
“I support allowing a development proposal for Lots 509/ 510 for evaluation and negotiation.”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he votes to let a Cheema lands proposal go forward for review, starting with the growth boundary step. Not kept if he votes to stop it being reviewed.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council lets a Cheema lands proposal be reviewed. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetKeep judging parking shortfalls for new buildings case by case, rather than banning them.
What Eric said:
“Parking variances for new developments will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Not kept if he votes for a blanket ban on parking variances. Kept if he votes against a blanket ban. His votes on single requests do not count either way.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council keeps deciding parking variance requests one at a time. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetConsider spending developer parking payments on parking, not only on bike and walking projects.
What Eric said:
“The fees-in-lieu of parking stalls not provided should be considered for allocation to parking facilities in every case – and not necessarily directed to Active Transportation facilities.”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he votes to put cash in lieu of parking into the parking fund rather than the walking and biking fund. Not kept if he votes the other way.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching where council decides developer parking payments go. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetProtect the few possible parkade sites, including north of Pemberton Avenue.
What Eric said:
“The scarce potential locations for parkade facilities should be protected – including on the north side of Pemberton Avenue.”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he votes against selling or rezoning a possible parkade site, such as land north of Pemberton Avenue, for other uses. Not kept if he votes for it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether possible parkade sites stay available. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetHelp bring back a downtown RCMP office.Who decides: RCMP and council
What Eric said:
“The District should help to facilitate the (re-)establishment of a Downtown RCMP office.”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for steps toward a downtown RCMP office, such as funding it or asking the RCMP for it. Not kept if he votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether a downtown RCMP office opens. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: RCMP and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush to restart Crime Stoppers and Block Watch programs in Squamish.Who decides: RCMP and volunteer groups
What Eric said:
“In addition, the District should examine the need for and facilitate the (re-)establishment of a Squamish CrimeStoppers organization and program, as well as Block Watch and similar neighbourhood-level programs.”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for District help to restart Crime Stoppers or Block Watch. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether Crime Stoppers or Block Watch restart in Squamish this term. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: RCMP and volunteer groups
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for a full update of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan alongside the Brennan Park work.
What Eric said:
“The Brennan Park facilities planning task force currently at work and should be complimented by a comprehensive Parks & Recreation Master Plan update”[source]
Eric’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to order and fund an updated Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council orders and funds the updated plan. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Eric: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Janice DesJardins Councillor · 10 promises
Not tested yetSeek a negotiated settlement and a reset with Woodfibre LNG on taxes, worker housing and amenities.Who decides: Woodfibre LNG and council
What Janice said:
“I would go after a negotiated settlement and a real reset: a fair, predictable tax arrangement, a workable approach to worker accommodation, and community amenity contributions back on the table”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes for a negotiated agreement with Woodfibre LNG covering taxes and amenities when one comes to council. Not kept if she votes against one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District and Woodfibre LNG reach a new agreement. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Woodfibre LNG and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetStart considering the Cheema lands and Fast properties for housing on higher ground.
What Janice said:
“We should start considering Fast Properties and Cheema Lands to avoid overbuilding on the floodplain.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes to let proposals for the Cheema lands or Fast properties be reviewed. Not kept if she votes to stop them being reviewed.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council reviews proposals for those lands. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetKeep the six homes with no parking zoning switched off until frequent buses actually run.Who decides: Council, within provincial housing law
What Janice said:
“Keep the six-homes-no-parking zoning dormant until frequent buses are actually running.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes against turning on the six homes, no parking zoning before frequent buses run. Not kept if she votes for it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether that zoning stays switched off. Provincial housing law sets some of these rules. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council, within provincial housing law
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetBring a permit for local people living in vehicles to a decision, with a date.
What Janice said:
“I would bring it back with an actual decision and a date attached.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves or seconds a motion to bring a residents only vehicle permit to council for a vote with a start date. Not kept if she votes against bringing it forward.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council votes on such a permit. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetStart a land bank now for worker housing and housing society projects.
What Janice said:
“I also am for creating a land bank starting now for future employee housing, and housing society projects.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes for a land bank, or for buying or reserving land, for worker and non profit housing. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council sets up a land bank or reserves land. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetVote against any more parking variances, and rewrite the parking bylaw for Squamish.
What Janice said:
“No more parking variances. Review the bylaw and amend it to Squamish's needs.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes against each request to cut required parking. Not kept if she votes for one. We show the count, for example 4 of 5.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how many parking variances council approves. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetMove restaurant patios off street parking and stop food trucks parking on Cleveland and 2nd.
What Janice said:
“Right away, I would move restaurant seating off the street onto the sidewalk and stop food trucks from parking on Cleveland and 2nd between Victoria and Pemberton.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves or seconds a motion to take patios off parking stalls and bar food trucks from Cleveland and 2nd, and votes for it. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council makes these changes. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush council to set up a community parking committee right away.
What Janice said:
“I will push Council to immediately strike a community Parking Committee made up of three downtown business owners, three homeowners from affected neighbourhoods, two Councillors, and the department head responsible for roads.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves or seconds a motion early in the term to create a community parking committee, or votes for one. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council sets up the committee. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetDirect staff to bring a budget with no property tax increase over last year.
What Janice said:
“Direct Staff to bring a budget to Council that reflects zero increase over last year.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves or votes for a budget with no property tax increase, and votes against budgets that raise it. Not kept if she votes for a budget with an increase.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching the property tax increase in each budget council adopts, as the District reports it. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetSend any big Brennan Park expansion to a referendum, not an alternate approval process.
What Janice said:
“And if a big expansion is on the table, it goes to a referendum, not an alternate approval process.”[source]
Janice’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes for a referendum, and against an alternative approval process, when council borrows for a big recreation expansion. Not kept if she votes the other way.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how council asks voters before borrowing for Brennan Park. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Janice: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Sarah Ellis Councillor · 10 promises
Not tested yetKeep voting to carry out the town's Community Climate Action Plan.
What Sarah said:
“I support the 6 big moves of the town’s existing Community Climate Action Plan and would continue to vote in support of its implementation.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes for budget items and bylaws that the staff report says carry out the Community Climate Action Plan. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how much of the plan gets done. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetVote against widening the growth boundary without a plan to pay for services and land for affordable housing.
What Sarah said:
“My current view for an OCP discussion is I would only support further expansion of the growth boundary if there is clear, feasible plan for financing and maintaining infrastructure and strong requirements for good planning and design and community benefits such as land for affordable housing.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Counts only votes to widen the growth boundary. Kept if she votes against one that comes without a plan to pay for services and land for affordable housing. Not kept if she votes for it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council widens the boundary, and on what terms. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetSupport the Province's HEART and HEARTH program and the Government Road supportive housing.Who decides: BC Housing and council
What Sarah said:
“I support Squamish’s participation in the Province’s Heart and Hearth program and the supportive housing development on Government Road.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes for the HEART and HEARTH project and the Government Road supportive housing when they come to council. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether both projects go ahead. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: BC Housing and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetSupport exploring pilot programs for people living in vehicles.
What Sarah said:
“I would support exploring pilot programs that allow us to test what works, learn from the results, and determine whether a broader program is feasible.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to look at or start a pilot permit or parking program for people who live in vehicles. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether a pilot starts. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetGrow the District's housing fund and get land or homes from developers for non-profit housing.
What Sarah said:
“This includes negotiating with developers to provide land or units, building up our housing reserve fund, and supporting zoning relaxations and tax and fee waivers.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes to add money to the housing reserve fund, for fee waivers for non profit housing, and for deals where developers give land or homes. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how much the housing fund grows. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetUpdate the parking rules for new downtown buildings to match how many cars people really have.
What Sarah said:
“I think it’s time to re-evaluate parking requirements for new Downtown development to make sure they reflect actual vehicle demand.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to review and update the downtown parking requirements in the zoning bylaw. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council updates them this term. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetLook at resident parking permits, time limits and paid parking downtown.
What Sarah said:
“We should also look at approaches that have worked in other communities, including resident permits, time limits and paid parking.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to study or bring in resident permits, time limits or paid parking downtown. Not kept if she votes against studying them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council studies or brings them in. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetNot put a downtown parkade ahead of more pressing building needs.
What Sarah said:
“I’ve heard interest in a Downtown parking structure, but I would not prioritize that over more pressing capital needs.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Counts only votes to fund a downtown parkade. Not kept if she votes for one while the staff report lists higher priority projects still without money. Kept if she votes against it then.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council funds a downtown parkade, and when. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetSpeed up the Brennan Park task force so a replacement is designed and priced.
What Sarah said:
“Then, we need to expedite the work of the existing Brennan Park Task Force to design and begin costing out a replacement project.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes for steps that get a Brennan Park replacement designed and priced sooner, such as funding the design. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council gets a design and cost estimate this term. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetWork to grow the network of safe bike routes for kids, families and seniors.
What Sarah said:
“I strongly support continued advocacy to build up our transit network, and work to expand Squamish’s safe cycling network for kids, families and seniors.”[source]
Sarah’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes to fund new protected bike routes. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how many new protected bike routes get built. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Sarah: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Luc Perreault Councillor · 10 promises
Not tested yetVote against rezoning business or industrial land for housing.
What Luc said:
“Because of that, and despite the difficult choices involved, I would not support rezoning commercial or industrial lands for residential use.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Counts only rezonings where the staff report says land now zoned for business or industry would allow homes. Kept if he votes against one. Not kept if he votes for one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how much business and industrial land council rezones for housing. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for regular testing and updating of Squamish's emergency plans.Who decides: District staff, with direction from council
What Luc said:
“I will advocate for continual improvements of our emergency plans, regular testing and public communication, stronger coordination with regional and provincial partners, and investments that improve community safety and resilience.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for regular testing and public reports on the District's wildfire and flood plans. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District tests, updates and reports on its plans. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: District staff, with direction from council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for developers to pay bigger community amenity contributions.
What Luc said:
“I will advocate for responsible development, stronger Community Amenity Contributions, better infrastructure coordination, and public spaces and services that support residents of all ages”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he votes to raise the community amenity contributions the District asks of developers. Not kept if he votes against raising them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council raises them. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for a District run campground for people living in vehicles and for visitors.
What Luc said:
“A better solution is to create a municipally operated campground that can serve both vehicle residents and visitors.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for the District to plan and open a campground with basic services for vehicle residents and visitors. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether a District campground opens. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetVote against letting new buildings have less parking than the rules require.
What Luc said:
“I do not support parking variances that reduce the minimum parking requirements for new developments.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he votes against each request to cut required parking. Not kept if he votes for one. We show the count, for example 4 of 5.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how many parking variances council approves. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetMake new developments provide public parking, held for public use forever.
What Luc said:
“We need to leverage development to secure dedicated public parking, whether through municipal parkades or public stalls integrated within private developments, guaranteed in perpetuity via title covenants.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for a rule or deal that makes a development provide public parking held by a covenant. Not kept if he votes against one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council approves projects with public parking held for public use. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetKeep short stay shopping parking downtown free, with time limits enforced.
What Luc said:
“At the same time, commercial short-term parking should remain free to support downtown businesses, backed by consistent time-limit enforcement to ensure steady turnover for shoppers.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Not kept if he votes to bring in paid parking for short stay shopping spots downtown. Kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether short stay downtown parking stays free. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for a stronger community policing presence in Squamish.Who decides: RCMP and council
What Luc said:
“If elected, I would advocate for a stronger community policing presence in Squamish.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for more RCMP community policing, such as officers on foot or a local office. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether more community policing happens. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: RCMP and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetHold off on a big Brennan Park expansion until there is a clear plan to pay for it.
What Luc said:
“My approach would be to maintain essential services, improve efficiency, phase upgrades responsibly, and avoid committing to major expansions until we have a clear funding strategy.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Not kept if he votes to commit to a major Brennan Park expansion before council has adopted a funding plan for it. Kept if he votes against committing first.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council adopts a funding plan before committing. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for a full review of the 10 year budget plan to find savings.
What Luc said:
“If elected, I would push for a full review of the 10-year plan to identify savings, delay non-essential spending, improve efficiency, and make sure service increases are clearly tied to real community benefit.”[source]
Luc’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for a full review of the 10 year financial plan that lists savings and delayed spending. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council orders the review. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Luc: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Laura Prosko Councillor · 10 promises
Not tested yetGet simple permit applications decided in under 8 weeks, with published timelines.Who decides: District staff, with targets set by council
What Laura said:
“Streamline red tape so straightforward permit applications get a decision in under 8 weeks, with clear, published timelines businesses can count on.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes for published permit timelines or an 8 week target for simple permits. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District publishes timelines and decides simple permits within 8 weeks. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: District staff, with targets set by council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetFinish a Tourism Master Plan in council's first year.
What Laura said:
“Deliver a comprehensive Tourism Master Plan in year one of the next Council term to support a sustainable tourism economy under our "Hardwired for Adventure" brand.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to fund and adopt a Tourism Master Plan in council's first year. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council adopts a Tourism Master Plan by about November 2027. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetGet a stronger 10 year money deal and a 40 year agreement with Woodfibre LNG.Who decides: Woodfibre LNG and council
What Laura said:
“I would like to see a more robust 10-year agreement. I would also pursue a thoughtful long-term MOU covering the 40-year operations period”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to reopen talks for a 10 year tax agreement and a longer agreement with Woodfibre LNG. Not kept if she votes against reopening talks.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District and Woodfibre LNG sign new agreements. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Woodfibre LNG and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetCreate a District job, held by a Squamish Nation member, to link the District and the Nation on Woodfibre LNG.Who decides: Council and the Squamish Nation
What Laura said:
“Create a new District of Squamish liaison role, held by a Squamish Nation member, to serve as a conduit between the District and the Squamish Nation on Woodfibre LNG matters including regulation, local content and procurement.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to create and fund this liaison job. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District creates and fills the job. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council and the Squamish Nation
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetCreate and carry out a Squamish poverty reduction and affordability plan.
What Laura said:
“Develop and implement a Squamish Poverty Reduction and Affordability Strategy.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to adopt and fund a Poverty Reduction and Affordability Strategy. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council adopts and funds one. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetVote no on letting new buildings have less parking than the rules require.
What Laura said:
“I would vote no to parking variances.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes against each request to cut required parking. Not kept if she votes for one. We show the count, for example 4 of 5.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching how many parking variances council approves. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetWork to start building a second ice rink at Brennan Park in 2027.
What Laura said:
“On Council, I would work toward shovels in the ground in 2027 for a second rink.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she votes for the funding and approvals for a second ice rink at Brennan Park. Not kept if she votes against them.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether construction on a second rink starts in 2027. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetHold property taxes flat in 2027 and 2028, and win council votes to do it.
What Laura said:
“Deliver a property tax freeze for 2027 and 2028, and build the council support needed to get it done.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves or votes for 0% budgets in 2027 and 2028, and votes against budgets that raise the District's property tax. Not kept if she votes for a budget with an increase.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching the property tax increase in the 2027 and 2028 budgets council adopts, as the District reports it. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPublish an easy online dashboard of big project budgets and timelines.Who decides: Council and District staff
What Laura said:
“Publish a public, plain-language dashboard tracking capital project budgets and timelines, keeping residents informed and Council accountable.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes for a public dashboard of capital project budgets and timelines. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District publishes one. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council and District staff
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetHold a yearly budget town hall, in person and online, before budget decisions.
What Laura said:
“Host an annual Budget Town Hall, both in person and online, where the Mayor and Council present and explain the District's budget, increase transparency, answer residents' questions, and provide an opportunity for meaningful public input before budget decisions are made.”[source]
Laura’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if she moves, seconds or votes to hold a yearly budget town hall, in person and online, before budget decisions. Not kept if she votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council holds one each year. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Laura: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Shaun Veltkamp Councillor · 9 promises
Not tested yetRebuild the District's economic development department.
What Shaun said:
“Rebuild and strengthen the Economic Development Department.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to add staff or money for economic development in the budget. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the budget adds them. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetCreate a full Tourism Master Plan.
What Shaun said:
“Develop a comprehensive Tourism Master Plan (TMP) to strategically manage and grow Squamish's visitor economy.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to fund and adopt a Tourism Master Plan. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council adopts one this term. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetKeep the growth boundary where it is until the neighbourhoods already planned are built.
What Shaun said:
“In my opinion, as a community we should be honouring the current boundary until the existing neighbourhoods are built out.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Not kept if he votes to expand the growth boundary for housing while planned areas like Oceanfront are still mostly unbuilt. Kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council expands the boundary. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetSpeed up an updated Official Community Plan.
What Shaun said:
“Fast-track an updated Official Community Plan (OCP) — Squamish needs a clear VISION.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to start the Official Community Plan update early in the term on a short timeline. Not kept if he votes to delay it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching when council starts and adopts the update. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetRun a wide search for a new Chief Administrative Officer.
What Shaun said:
“Conduct a broad search for a new Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), Council's only employee.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes for an open, wide search when council hires a Chief Administrative Officer. Not kept if he votes to hire without one.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether council runs a wide search. Hiring is often decided in closed meetings, so his vote may not be public. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetBring in real performance reviews for the District's top managers.
What Shaun said:
“Introduce meaningful performance reviews for senior management and District leadership.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to set up regular performance reviews for the Chief Administrative Officer. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether reviews happen each year. The Chief Administrative Officer reviews other senior staff. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetWork with the RCMP on a new downtown safety plan.Who decides: RCMP and council
What Shaun said:
“Work alongside the RCMP to develop and implement a new downtown safety strategy.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to work with the RCMP on a new downtown safety plan, or to fund one. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District and the RCMP adopt and carry out a plan. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: RCMP and council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetPush for a new community centre that meets Squamish's growing needs.
What Shaun said:
“Advocate for a new community centre that meets Squamish's growing needs.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to plan a new community centre or to apply for grants for it. Not kept if he votes against planning it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the District plans it and wins grant money. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Not tested yetBring back a grant writer to win provincial and federal money.
What Shaun said:
“Re-establish a grant writer to work on funding from provincial and federal sources.”[source]
Shaun’s part (the only thing we mark): Kept if he moves, seconds or votes to fund a District grant writer position. Not kept if he votes against it.
Did it happen? Not yet. We’re watching whether the budget funds the position. This is a plain fact, never a mark against Shaun: council decides as a group.
Who decides: Council
Council hasn’t voted on anything that tests this yet.
Positions: do they vote the way they said?
During the campaign we asked every candidate to agree or disagree with the same 38 statements. Six of the seven winners answered. Eric Andersen did not answer, and Janice DesJardins and Laura Prosko skipped some. Where someone did not answer, a dashed box shows our reading of the public record. Dashed boxes are never checked against votes.
The box is what they said during the campaign. Once a council vote tests it, a mark appears under it: ✓ voted that way, … early sign or ✕ voted against.
Growth & development
“Squamish is growing too fast. Council should slow the pace of new development approvals.”
“Taller buildings (above 6 storeys) should be allowed downtown and near transit and services.”
“Squamish should open new land and new neighbourhoods for housing, rather than adding density to existing ones.”
“Height and density should follow clear rules set in advance, rather than being negotiated project by project.”
Housing affordability
“The District should put more public money and land into non-market and housing.”
“Large new developments should be required to include a fixed share of homes, even if that means fewer homes get built.”
“The District should hold on to the land it owns and use it for housing, rather than selling it to fund other things.”
“Short-term rentals like Airbnb should be restricted further in Squamish.”
Homelessness & supportive housing
“Squamish needs more shelter and supportive-housing spaces, even if they are located near residential areas.”
“The shelter and its services should be moved out of downtown.”
“The District should clear tent from public spaces, even when there is nowhere else for those people to go.”
“The District should provide a sanctioned place on public land for people living in vehicles.”
“When public safety downtown and services for homeless people pull in different directions, safety should come first.”
“Supportive and low-income housing should be spread across all neighbourhoods rather than concentrated downtown.”
Policing & community safety
“Squamish should fund more RCMP officers and policing.”
“The District should put more bylaw enforcement officers downtown.”
“The District should fund mental-health and outreach crisis response teams alongside the RCMP.”
“The District should use bylaws to stop open drug use in parks, sidewalks and other public spaces.”
Taxes & spending
“Keeping property tax increases at or below inflation should be a top priority, even if it means cutting services or delaying projects.”
“The District should sign the proposed 10-year tax agreement with Woodfibre LNG.”
“Major recreation investments, like renewing Brennan Park, should go ahead even if the District has to borrow.”
“Capital projects above a set cost should go to a public referendum before council approves them.”
“The District should borrow to renew Brennan Park now rather than wait until it can be paid for from savings.”
Woodfibre LNG plant
“The District should use its permit powers to press Woodfibre LNG on local impacts, even if that means delays or legal fights.”
Climate & environment
“Climate action should be a top council priority, even when it adds cost.”
“New buildings should have to meet higher energy standards, even if that raises the cost of building.”
Jobs & local economy
“The District should cut red tape and speed up permits for builders and businesses.”
“Land set aside for industry and jobs should be protected from being rezoned for housing.”
Transportation & transit
“Regional transit to Vancouver and Whistler is worth spending local tax dollars on.”
“The District should spend local money on protected bike lanes and sidewalks.”
Parking
“New buildings should have to provide enough parking for the people who live there, instead of being approved with less.”
“Paid parking downtown is a fair way to manage demand for spaces.”
“Downtown Squamish needs more public parking, and the District should get it built.”
“If Squamish brings in paid parking, residents should park free and only visitors should pay.”
Childcare, short-term rentals and vanlife
“Spending on inclusion and community symbols (such as rainbow crosswalks, flags and proclamations) is a good use of District money.”
“The District should formalize shared decision-making with the Squamish Nation on land use.”
“The District should actively work to expand subsidized childcare spaces.”
Flood protection
“The District should increase spending on dikes and flood protection, even if it means higher taxes.”
On the map
The map on the compare page places each member from their campaign answers. Once at least 3 votes test each line of a map, a second diamond shaped marker shows where their votes put them, joined to the first by a dotted line. A long line means they vote differently from how they campaigned.
How we judge
- We only count clear promises. Something they said they would do or vote for, in their own words, with a link to where they said it. General values like “I care about Squamish” aren’t tracked.
- We only mark what they did themselves. Each promise says, in advance, what their part is: how they vote, or what they move or second. That is the only thing that gets a label.
- “Did it happen?” is a plain fact, never a mark. Council decides as a group, and some promises also need the Province, BC Transit, the RCMP, Woodfibre or the Squamish Nation. If a member votes the way they promised and loses, their promise is still kept.
- An AI reads the votes. Every mark links the vote it came from, so you can check it yourself. Fixes are listed on the corrections page.
- Only the official minutes can make a label red. A vote heard on the meeting video shows as an early sign until the minutes confirm it, usually a few weeks later. When the minutes change a vote, every label is worked out again from all the votes. A position is only marked “voted against” after at least 2 confirmed votes against it.
- Each label shows its count, like “Not kept (1 vote)”, or “Mixed” when their votes went both ways.
- “In progress” means council has taken a step but not finished. “Not tested yet” means council hasn’t voted on it.
- Positions are checked the same way. When a vote directly tests something a member said, like “move the Under One Roof shelter out of downtown”, we note whether their vote went the same way as what they said.
Think we got one wrong? Tell us and we’ll fix it and note it on the corrections page. · How meeting summaries are made
Get it by email, once a week
Every Friday morning: what council decided that week and what’s coming up. Plain words, nothing else. Unsubscribe any time.
Sent by Squamish Voters (Jeff Kirdeikis, Squamish, B.C.). We never share your address. See this week’s email.