2026 Ottawa Municipal Election

[dougvdh]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

[B]Homebuilder Alex Lawson plans to run for Ottawa mayor
He says transit, safety and affordability are getting worse and city should 'hit the undo button'

. . . .

“Let's get back to the old Ottawa. Let's take a step back. Let's hit the undo button. Let's revert to the saved file of Ottawa, where the transit got you where you needed to go,” he said.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...2026-9.7057326

The 'undo button' is going back to pre-amalgamation. Unfortunately, that's a provincial issue.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Former top McKenney advisor laying groundwork for his own mayoral run
Neil Saravanamuttoo was a key player in former city councillor’s 2022 campaign

CBC News
Posted: Jan 30, 2026 7:00 AM EST | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

The field of candidates making a run to be Ottawa’s mayor could soon have a fourth name, as another potential challenger seeks support to formally launch his campaign.

Neil Saravanamuttoo was economic advisor to Catherine McKenney’s unsuccessful 2022 campaign for mayor.

Now, he’s thinking about the next election, this October.

The economist, podcaster and organizer behind non-profit CitySHAPES and its Better Ottawa town hall events said he’s prepared to be a candidate, but with an unusual caveat: he'll only run if a “grassroots movement” signs up to back him.

“If there are 1,000 people that feel the way I do, that we can take back the City of Ottawa, return it to its rightful owners, we can win the next election,” he said in an interview with CBC.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...-run-9.7067492

Well that will make the mayoral race interesting, Niel will eat Leiper vote to the left or force him into policies most of the city doesn't want to keep them, and lawson will rest Sutcliffe voters to the right.

Hope my joins as I think it will ruin Leipers chance at being mayor

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Former top McKenney advisor laying groundwork for his own mayoral run
Neil Saravanamuttoo was a key player in former city councillor’s 2022 campaign

CBC News
Posted: Jan 30, 2026 7:00 AM EST | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

The field of candidates making a run to be Ottawa’s mayor could soon have a fourth name, as another potential challenger seeks support to formally launch his campaign.

Neil Saravanamuttoo was economic advisor to Catherine McKenney’s unsuccessful 2022 campaign for mayor.

Now, he’s thinking about the next election, this October.

The economist, podcaster and organizer behind non-profit CitySHAPES and its Better Ottawa town hall events said he’s prepared to be a candidate, but with an unusual caveat: he'll only run if a “grassroots movement” signs up to back him.

“If there are 1,000 people that feel the way I do, that we can take back the City of Ottawa, return it to its rightful owners, we can win the next election,” he said in an interview with CBC.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...-run-9.7067492

We don't want you Neil.

[Williamoforange]

And unsurprisingly to anyone that paid attention Chianello or Leiper both have outright stated they oppose the dev at 403 Richmond rd, well within the cities official plan MTSA

Nimby going to nimby, unfortunately Chianello is a comment on the article and I haven't figured it paying pictures yet

https://kitchissippiward.ca/2026/02/...DVK7RV-vr4JzFg

[Truenorth00]

Is there any YIMBY candidate?

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Is there any YIMBY candidate?

Only YIMBY choices are corporate boring Sutcliffe and mayb a more radical right wing candidate though don’t seem like any are on the horizon with any chance. I’d vote for a bold right wing candidate but we also need left wing change so Leiper might be preferable to Sutcliffe.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Is there any YIMBY candidate?

Maybe lawson, but he'll have other issues, and while he'd probably support that dev I'm willing to get her be against the new 3 story zoning bylaw for the suburbs.

As for Sutcliffe he made Leiper chair of planning committee which should say a lot.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...2026-9.7057326

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Is there any YIMBY candidate?

No municipal candidate will be for giving developers free reign to build anything anywhere. Ottawa has already significantly up zoned inside the Greenbelt. Look at the battles for anything above 12 floors in Centretown 20 years ago compared to today where we allow 30, 40+ floors in many areas.

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Maybe lawson, but he'll have other issues, and while he'd probably support that dev I'm willing to get her be against the new 3 story zoning bylaw for the suburbs.

As for Sutcliffe he made Leiper chair of planning committee which should say a lot.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...2026-9.7057326

And listening to Lawson, it almost sounds like he wants to shutter the O-Train and bring back the 95. He'd be a disaster.

There's more to running a City than allowing developers to build whatever they want, wherever they want.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

No municipal candidate will be for giving developers free reign to build anything anywhere. Ottawa has already significantly up zoned inside the Greenbelt. Look at the battles for anything above 12 floors in Centretown 20 years ago compared to today where we allow 30, 40+ floors in many areas.



And listening to Lawson, it almost sounds like he wants to shutter the O-Train and bring back the 95. He'd be a disaster.

There's more to running a City than allowing developers to build whatever they want, wherever they want.

1) housing issues effect both the growth of the city at large, affordablility & the budget viability of the city 2) no one is pushing to allow developers to build whatever they want wherever they want. (Building code & zoning for other items like parks still stand) 3) the official plan if properly implemented would have already allowed said dev.

As for Lawson like I said he'll have other issues, for me housing is #1 for both itself and budget issues, and a hypocrite that Leiper is would make this city worse off on that front for the avg Ottawa resident

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Only YIMBY choices are corporate boring Sutcliffe and mayb a more radical right wing candidate though don’t seem like any are on the horizon with any chance. I’d vote for a bold right wing candidate but we also need left wing change so Leiper might be preferable to Sutcliffe.

Leiper is a smart YIMBY, which is great. He's pro-density and wants stuff built, at the same time he's throwing bones to NIMBYs to avoid the pendulum swing in the opposite direction. Electing someone like Williamoforange will all but guarantee a decade of hardcore NIMBYism to follow.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

Leiper is a smart YIMBY, which is great. He's pro-density and wants stuff built, at the same time he's throwing bones to NIMBYs to avoid the pendulum swing in the opposite direction. Electing someone like Williamoforange will all but guarantee a decade of hardcore NIMBYism to follow.

Lmao, Leiper is nowhere near a yimby and his idiotic fights against high density in his ward only feeds nimbyism in the suburbs. Since why should stittsville accept a high rise at a location where no mass transit is even planned, when an urban ward won't accept it within walking distance of mass transit.

And you don't need to take my opinion of this, just look at the comments on his announcement on Facebook. People cheering asking him to convince there councilor to fight high density in there suburb.

[rocketphish]

NOTE: I've moved the posts relating to SoHo Westboro (403 Richmond Rd) to that thread. Let's focus this thread on the election and its candidates, and not specific development projects.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Lmao, Leiper is nowhere near a yimby and his idiotic fights against high density in his ward only feeds nimbyism in the suburbs. Since why should stittsville accept a high rise at a location where no mass transit is even planned, when an urban ward won't accept it within walking distance of mass transit.

And you don't need to take my opinion of this, just look at the comments on his announcement on Facebook. People cheering asking him to convince there councilor to fight high density in there suburb.

I think Leiper is generally regarded as pretty thoughtful in his approach to projects. He definitely isn't a mindless NIMBY. And I don't think his position on projects in his ward has anything to do with NIMBYism in the suburbs - that is pretty much all home grown.

Your comments seem to ignore the fact that he is a democratically elected councillor and is supposed to represent the interests of his constituents, the vast majority of whom don't agree with the view that highrises belong anywhere in the the central city. That's not to say he needs to go to bat for the NIMBY voices, but he can't entirely disregard community sentiment either. No politician who goes 100% all in on development and disregards the concerns of his voters entirely is going to be elected, or if he is, is going to stick around long enough to make meaningful change. There needs to be some element of balance in the positions he takes if he wants to succeed.

[skyscraperaccount]

Folks seem to forget the middle ground. It isn't black and white, right and left. The middle (a Y/N-imby candidate, for instance) works best for the majority. Lieper is your Y/N-imby.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

Folks seem to forget the middle ground. It isn't black and white, right and left. The middle (a Y/N-imby candidate, for instance) works best for the majority. Lieper is your Y/N-imby.

The guy has a laundry list of buildings that he has fought against everything from triplexes to 6 story apartment buildings to high rises. The majority of which have been in his ward or other urban areas. He opposes reduction of dev fees, he opposed allowing even mid-rise on minor corridors, he specifically requested for sherbourne to be removed as a minor corridor because it would allow commercial entities on that street.

He's not by any stretch the middle ground, nvm that his actions/votes are in direct opposition to his own rhetoric for which he was elected on.

[SkeggsEggs]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

The guy has a laundry list of buildings that he has fought against everything from triplexes to 6 story apartment buildings to high rises. The majority of which have been in his ward or other urban areas. He opposes reduction of dev fees, he opposed allowing even mid-rise on minor corridors, he specifically requested for sherbourne to be removed as a minor corridor because it would allow commercial entities on that street.

He's not by any stretch the middle ground, nvm that his actions/votes are in direct opposition to his own rhetoric for which he was elected on.

since you seemingly have a shrine to the guy, could you substantiate this with any sources of things that occurred this council term?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

NOTE: I've moved the posts relating to SoHo Westboro (403 Richmond Rd) to that thread. Let's focus this thread on the election and its candidates, and not specific development projects.

Thanks for keeping things on track and in the right threads.

Originally Posted by zzptichka

Leiper is a smart YIMBY, which is great. He's pro-density and wants stuff built, at the same time he's throwing bones to NIMBYs to avoid the pendulum swing in the opposite direction. Electing someone like Williamoforange will all but guarantee a decade of hardcore NIMBYism to follow.

Originally Posted by phil235

I think Leiper is generally regarded as pretty thoughtful in his approach to projects. He definitely isn't a mindless NIMBY. And I don't think his position on projects in his ward has anything to do with NIMBYism in the suburbs - that is pretty much all home grown.

Your comments seem to ignore the fact that he is a democratically elected councillor and is supposed to represent the interests of his constituents, the vast majority of whom don't agree with the view that highrises belong anywhere in the the central city. That's not to say he needs to go to bat for the NIMBY voices, but he can't entirely disregard community sentiment either. No politician who goes 100% all in on development and disregards the concerns of his voters entirely is going to be elected, or if he is, is going to stick around long enough to make meaningful change. There needs to be some element of balance in the positions he takes if he wants to succeed.

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

Folks seem to forget the middle ground. It isn't black and white, right and left. The middle (a Y/N-imby candidate, for instance) works best for the majority. Lieper is your Y/N-imby.

And thank you three for bringing some sanity to the debate.

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

The guy has a laundry list of buildings that he has fought against everything from triplexes to 6 story apartment buildings to high rises. The majority of which have been in his ward or other urban areas. He opposes reduction of dev fees, he opposed allowing even mid-rise on minor corridors, he specifically requested for sherbourne to be removed as a minor corridor because it would allow commercial entities on that street.

He's not by any stretch the middle ground, nvm that his actions/votes are in direct opposition to his own rhetoric for which he was elected on.

And what about all the proposals he did support?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Or did you forget Leiper also opposed the only other possible high density in the area, that being 335 roosevelt ave which was reduced to a mere 14 stories.

Couple things here. Yes, that has always been one that even I agree Leiper should not have opposed. Worth noting the OMB agreed with Leiper in 2012. Context today though is quite different and I wish Leiper would change his tune on this development.

That said, you seem to forget that Leiper has been in support of a whole bunch of towers up to 40+ floors on Scott, along with other low and mid rise projects in the area. You can't just point to the couple projects he opposed and completely ignore dozens more he approved of.

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

To put it simply the city spent billions in infrastructure and it should do all within its control to make sure full use of the infrastructure available in this area (large water mains, large sewer mains, storm mains, LRT, power grid, and etc)... The LRT being one of the major reasons.

The LRT has limited capacity. You know that right. This isn't a subway with capacity for 50k+ phpd. It's tram-trains that could be expanded to 24k phpd with further significant investment.

We have to balance the density to a certain extent to avoid blowing the capacity on any one stretch of the O-Train Line. We can't just build limitless towers at every station.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Couple things here. Yes, that has always been one that even I agree Leiper should not have opposed. Worth noting the OMB agreed with Leiper in 2012. Context today though is quite different and I wish Leiper would change his tune on this development.

That said, you seem to forget that Leiper has been in support of a whole bunch of towers up to 40+ floors on Scott, along with other low and mid rise projects in the area. You can't just point to the couple projects he opposed and completely ignore dozens more he approved of.



The LRT has limited capacity. You know that right. This isn't a subway with capacity for 50k+ phpd. It's tram-trains that could be expanded to 24k phpd with further significant investment.

We have to balance the density to a certain extent to avoid blowing the capacity on any one stretch of the O-Train Line. We can't just build limitless towers at every station.

Leipers record is quite clear and it's not good for anyone advocating for the policies that he advocates for, and it is that simple. Also if you want to argue more about his nimbyism there the mayoral thread

As for LRT capacity Leiper advocates for WFH in that scenario there is more then enough capacity headroom to support the limited numbers of high rises that are very slowly being built on the line, especially considering the few places the Leiper & council have allowed them to be built. Now even if WFH completely dies and the LRT heads for capacity far sooner then expected then that is a reason to build more higher order transit not to deny housing and make the affordablility crisis worse.

So to get back on topic do you or do you not agree with Leipers denial of this rezoning & possible increase in housing that is within 300 m of mass transit?

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

and what about all the proposals he did support?

There few & far between that got actual support especially in his ward, most it was a token support or a statement of zoning allows this so I'm voting yes, which is the bare minimum & doesn't excuse his blatant Nimbyism what other project's.

If Leiper wants to run for mayor on his record of housing he will have to answer for it and yeah most people are aware of his Nimbyism & hypocricy when it comes to housing, and if not I'm sure his opponents will let them know

https://www.reddit.com/r/ottawa/comm...r_jeff_leiper/

Also, city is reviewing is growth projection that define urban boundary & zoning, and to no one's surprise the city underestimated.... Which means the city requires even more intensification then planned