News profile1. What are your thoughts on city ownership of Saamis Solar, and what direction would you want to see council take with ownership of renewables?
To date, our city has committed almost 8 million dollars to this project.
Estimates for the first phase (75 MW) could be as high as $120 million.
The project once completed (325 MW) is estimated to cost $600 million.
The risks are many:
1) If estimates are wrong, or costs (material, labour, etc.) taxpayers will pay any cost overruns).
2) Solar cannot fully replace gas-fired generation. Backup systems would be required, adding complexity and extra costs.
3) Even though the land is contaminated, both environmental and Land Use Impacts could negativity affect this project from being completed.
4) Recently (!!), newly announced provincial mandates, have made all RENEWABLE PROJECTS, much more onerous (extra costs to municipalities!). It should be noted that these were NOT factored in the original cost estimates.
I would be in favor of the Saamis Solar project only if the city could partner with a major investor (for example many large energy corporations are looking to diversify into renewables), and or secure a lucrative and financially beneficial lease agreement.
2. What are your thoughts on the future of the energy division, specifically the concept of turning it into a municipally controlled corporation?
As presented to city council, the motion to turn the energy division into a municipally controlled corporation, was defeated.
At present, the Status quo, remains in effect.
On September 15, 2025, six ‘Lite’ MCC options were presented by city administration for consideration.
Two of the six options should be explored, which would or should have the following elements:
As in the present MCC proposal, the city would continue to control its energy division.
The preferred ‘Lite’ MCC proposal would see council’s role as a shareholder separated from day-to-day operations and placed in the hands of knowledgeable and qualified city hall employees (not consultants). This would improve accountability and transparency.
A ‘Lite’ MCC would be able to make faster, market-driven decisions regarding investments, divestments, and partnerships without requiring full Council approval for every step.
A ‘Lite’ MCC would be in the best position to adapt to volatile energy markets.
And finally, a ‘Lite’ MCC would have the industry expertise to oversee operations.
While still maintaining the needed control, it would be ideally positioned to focus on long-term financial sustainability and risk management. And for the next turbulent decade and beyond, long term financial sustainability and risk management will be an absolute priority.
3. How would you look to balance taxation with the operation costs of running a city, as well as the services provided to residents?
Above all there should be transparent communication, so residents see value for tax dollars. That is where we start.
Budget planning is what city council is mandated to do. A line-by-line study will be essential in finding efficiency gains.
Very important. Necessary. And questions need to be asked: “Does this benefit the citizens of Medicine Hat?” And “Is the best use of their tax dollars?”
Explore regional collaboration (shared services with Cypress County, Redcliff) to cut overhead costs.
Revenue streams outside of property taxes need to be actively explored as well as new partnerships with private or non-profit organizations to share costs.
Another proven method to reduce reliance on local tax dollars is to take advantage of both provincial and federal grants.
Most importantly, the city of Medicine Hat, with considerations of ‘needs over wants’, should defer or phase lower-priority capital projects.
And lastly, and most significantly, the city of Medicine Hat needs to identify and maximize returns from city owned assets… from both land sales and or joint ventures.
4. How would you approach economic development and any need to incentivize business to come to Medicine Hat?
When there are measurable long-term benefits for residents, then the use of incentives can be appropriate.
Since The City of Grande Prairie won the Economic Development Renewal Project Award for operating an efficient and effective economic division, I would reach out to their mayor and ask what they did to achieve that award.
Specifically, I would inquire:
How did they streamline their Processes and Permitting?
How did they consolidate multiple approval types into one unified application?
How did they speed up turnaround times and reduce redundancy?
How did they implement their New Business Development Grant? I would ask “What incentives were given to newly locating or expanding businesses” and how were rebates on taxes calculated in relation to newly assessed values?
Lastly, for Medicine Hat, I would explore, encourage, and promote support for those specific types of strategic industries that would be the right for us. For example, clean energy, advanced manufacturing, logistics, and most certainly, technology.
All in all, any incentives should support, in whole or in part, Medicine Hat’s official economic development strategy. This would also include Council’s strategic priorities.
5. With the proposed north-side location for a permanent homeless shelter off the table following public concerns, what do you think are the essential priorities that a shelter location must provide? 6. A lot of focus during this election campaign has been on property taxes in Medicine Hat, though a majority of residents do not own property. What can or should the city be doing to ease cost-of-living issues for those who do not own property, such as renters? 7. What are your thoughts on proposed recreational facilities such as the Southside Outdoor Aquatics Centre and Brier Run Sports Field? How much focus would you want the city to put toward adding recreational facilities?
