Looking for Leaders: A Challenge After Dark

 See it by clicking here

With David Boghosian- Hamilton's Integrity Commissioner

Welcome to our interview with City of Hamilton's Integrity Commissioner, David Boghosian.

Over the past two years, or as far back as your records allow during your tenure, can you  provide statistics on the number of complaints referred to your office? Of those complaints, how many were substantiated, unsubstantiated, deemed frivolous or vexatious, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, or otherwise categorized?

Attached please find my Annual IC Reports to Council for my first two years as the City’s IC, which have all of the information you have requested. 

See the 2023-2024 report by clicking here

See the 2024-2025 report by clicking here

I have not yet prepared an Annual Report for 2025/26 as it is not due until October. I unfortunately do not have the time to compile all of the statistics you have requested for the period since my last Annual Report; however, I can advise that the number of Complaints has risen dramatically. Between mid-October (the date of my last Annual Report) and December 31, 2025, my office received 12 Code of Conduct Complaints. From January 1st through July 24, 2026, my office has received 22 COC Complaints.

This next question is not intended in any way to question your integrity or that of any other individual or party; rather, it is a systemic question. How independent can an Integrity Commissioner realistically be when the municipality being scrutinized is also responsible for appointing and compensating the Commissioner?

I think that is fair comment, however, the same can be said about any municipal employee. As a member of a professional body (LSO), I am required to adhere to ethical standards which I think goes a long way to countering any conflict between my duty to as an Integrity Commissioner and the theoretical tendency for me to show loyalty to the hands that feed me.

If you do an internet search, you will see that I have not been shy about taking unpopular positions in Reports finding misconduct on the part of Members of Council and Local Boards in the municipalities where I act as IC, to the extent that I have been fired by one municipality for, in my estimation, being too hard on Members, and have my share of critics who think likewise in a couple of other of the municipalities where I am the IC. 

I think it comes down to the intestinal fortitude of each individual IC to call it like he/she sees it rather than what is most likely to enhance his/her longevity in the position.

In your view, are the sanctions available under Ontario law—principally a reprimand or the suspension of remuneration for up to 90 days—sufficient to deter serious misconduct?

The recent amendments to Part V.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001 do now provide for the potential removal of a Member from Council, but the circumstances would need to be egregious and the process for actual effecting the removal are lengthy and cumbersome, so I am skeptical that this severe penalty will ever be invoked in practice. 

My view is that unless it is a criminal matter, which I would refer to the police (as I have done on a couple of occasions in the past), the current range of penalties is adequate for the sorts of violations that I have encountered in my experience as the IC for more than a dozen Ontario municipalities over the past 5 years.

How do you assess allegations concerning councillors’ conduct on social media, particularly when they are using personal accounts but remain readily identifiable as elected officials?

I have addressed the circumstances in which posts using personal accounts will become Code of Conduct issues and the types of statements in social media that will run afoul of the Code in previous Code of Conduct reports, such as the attached report concerning former Councillor John-Paul Danko (click here to see it) (see paragraphs [16]-[28] of that decision) . There is a higher obligation on Members of Council to exercise decorum on social media compared to the general population and I expect all Members to adhere to this high standard so as to set a good example for everyone else.

If you could recommend one change to Hamilton City Council that would meaningfully strengthen public confidence in the ethical conduct and accountability of elected officials, what would it be?

I am not saying this to keep my job but I truly find Hamilton’s Council to be highly professional and dedicated to public service. There are, of course, relatively minor things that come up from time to time but nothing fundamental or institutional that I can point to.

As we approach the municipal election, what cautionary advice would you offer to those campaigning for public office? In particular, could you provide an abbreviated list of important do’s and don’ts for candidates seeking to conduct themselves ethically and responsibly?

The best I can do is provide you with the attached document (click here to see it), which combines the provisions of the Code of Conduct that deal with Election Campaigns with the City’s Guidelines for incumbent councillors running for re-election. Beyond that, I would say to make sure anything you say is factually accurate as practically everything is verifiable via an internet search these days and being caught making untrue statements can cause a lot of damage to your credibility.

Thank-you David for engaging with Hamiltonians on The Hamiltonian!  

Beattie Leaves Ward 10 Race to Pursue Provincial Seat

Hamilton Ward 10 Councillor Jeff Beattie will withdraw from the 2026 municipal election, abandoning his bid for another term on City Council after being named the Ontario Progressive Conservative candidate for the upcoming provincial by-election in Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. 

The move brings an abrupt end to a municipal campaign that was already underway. Beattie had filed his nomination to seek re-election in Ward 10 and remained on the City's published list of candidates as recently as this week. Under Ontario's municipal election rules, candidates may withdraw their nominations before the close of nominations on August 21. In a Facebook release, Beattie announced his intention to do that. 

Politics often presents candidates with unexpected opportunities, and there is nothing improper about seeking higher office. Nevertheless, voters are entitled to ask whether a municipal re-election campaign should be launched if another political opportunity is actively being pursued behind the scenes. 

For Ward 10 residents, the announcement means the race has changed significantly. Voters who had expected to decide whether to renew Beattie's mandate will instead choose among the remaining candidates or new registrants. Campaigns require time, organization, fundraising, volunteer recruitment, and engagement with residents. A late withdrawal inevitably reshapes the contest for everyone involved.

The decision also raises broader questions about commitment to municipal office. Running for city council asks residents to place their confidence in a candidate for a four-year mandate. When that campaign is abandoned in favour of another election before the municipal race has even begun in earnest, some voters may reasonably wonder whether municipal service was ever intended to be the final destination.

Others will view the decision differently, arguing that public service at Queen's Park offers an opportunity to advocate for Hamilton East–Stoney Creek on provincial issues such as housing, transportation, healthcare, and infrastructure. Voters in the provincial by-election will ultimately decide whether Beattie has made a convincing case that he can be more effective representing the community at Queen's Park than at Hamilton City Hall while voters in the municipal election may feel let down. 

Regardless of where one stands, the timing is noteworthy. Municipal campaigns are built on trust between candidates and the communities they seek to represent. When a candidate changes course after asking voters to support another municipal campaign, it is fair for residents to expect a clear explanation of why their original commitment changed.

Before the Ballot – Candidate's Edition- The Press Conference

A live press conference is one of the most effective ways for a candidate to communicate with the public. Unlike social media posts or prepared statements, it offers voters an opportunity to see how a candidate responds in real time, particularly when faced with difficult questions. It is often during the question-and-answer period—not the prepared remarks—that leadership is revealed.

A press conference should  be held when there is genuine news to share. A significant policy announcement, an important response to current events, or a matter of public interest are all appropriate reasons. If the message can be delivered just as effectively through a news release, a press conference may not be necessary.

Preparation is essential. Candidates should have one clear message and avoid trying to cover too many topics at once. Opening remarks should be concise, explaining what is happening, why it matters, and what comes next. Speaking naturally rather than reading a lengthy speech will almost always connect better with both reporters and the public.

The setting is also important. Whenever possible, choose a location that reinforces the announcement. A housing announcement, for example, is more meaningful when delivered at the proposed development than inside a boardroom. The backdrop becomes part of the story.

The greatest value of a press conference, however, lies in the exchange with the media. Candidates should spend as much time preparing for challenging questions as they do preparing their opening remarks. Anticipating criticism, knowing the facts, and understanding where legal or privacy limitations exist will help ensure confident and credible responses.

Equally important is answering the question that was asked. Voters quickly recognize when a candidate avoids an issue or relies on rehearsed talking points. If information cannot be disclosed, it is far better to explain why than to offer an evasive answer.

A live press conference is not a performance; it is an exercise in accountability. It gives candidates an opportunity to demonstrate knowledge, transparency, composure, and respect for the public's right to ask difficult questions. In the end, voters are not simply evaluating what a candidate says—they are evaluating how they lead under pressure.

The real press conference begins when the prepared remarks end.

Opinion:Beemer Park: Compassion and Public Safety Must Coexist By Adam Oldfield

Beemer Park: Compassion and Public Safety Must Coexist
By Adam Oldfield

For residents living around J.C. Beemer Park, the return of tents is not an isolated incident. It is the return of a familiar cycle. Complaints are made, enforcement and cleanups follow, the situation improves for a short time, and then the same concerns come back.

Let me be clear about where I am writing from. I am not running for Hamilton City Council. I have already tried the political game in 2022, and while political labels apparently have a longer shelf life than most campaign signs, I have no plans to put my name on a ballot again. That does not mean I intend to stop speaking up.

I am a local resident, business owner and employer. I live here, work here and employ people here. My family, my employees and my neighbours use the same parks, sidewalks and public spaces as everyone else. I have both a personal and a professional stake in making Hamilton's North End safer, stronger and more welcoming.

Beemer Park remains a community concern

The concerns surrounding Beemer Park are not new. In September 2025, residents raised serious questions about violence, threatening behaviour, reported open drug use and the loss of safe access to the park and its public washrooms.

Between September 8 and September 10, 2025, the City reported issuing 10 immediate trespass notices and coordinating several cleanups at J.C. Beemer and Tweedsmuir parks. Residents reported that people, possessions and garbage returned shortly afterward. Hamilton Police later advised that special attention had been assigned to patrol and beat officers, and that daily checks and enforcement would take place.

Roughly ten months later, the tents and the same community concerns have returned.

Residents should not have to wait for another serious assault, stabbing or death before meaningful action is taken. Families should not have to avoid a public park. Parents and grandparents should not have to wonder whether it is safe to bring children into a public space. People should be able to walk through their own neighbourhood and use a public washroom without feeling threatened.

These are not unreasonable expectations.

Compassion and public safety must coexist

This is not about pretending that homelessness, mental illness and addiction can be solved by moving people somewhere else. People living in those circumstances need housing, treatment, health care and meaningful support.

But compassion cannot mean surrendering public spaces, or expecting residents to tolerate threatening and dangerous behaviour. We should not have to choose between supporting vulnerable people and protecting families, children, businesses and neighbourhood residents.

A responsible city must be capable of doing both.

The City of Hamilton is responsible for maintaining safe, clean and accessible public spaces. The Province plays a central role in mental health care, addiction treatment, hospitals, supportive housing and social services. The federal government provides housing and homelessness funding while shaping important parts of Canada's criminal justice and drug policy framework.

That is why this can no longer be treated as someone else's responsibility.

Residents need action, not another announcement

Hamilton residents hear regularly about strategies, task forces, partnerships and funding. What we need now are answers.

What immediate action is being taken at Beemer Park? How will safe access to the park, the public washrooms, the children's areas and the surrounding pathways be maintained? What outreach, treatment, housing and mental health resources are actually available today? What happened to the daily checks and enforcement measures discussed in September 2025? What measurable results are the various task forces producing? How are the municipal, provincial and federal governments working together, and who is ultimately accountable for coordinating the response?

A task force should be measured by what it accomplishes, not by how many meetings it holds.

I will keep fighting for this neighbourhood

I am not seeking elected office, but I am not stepping away from my responsibility as a neighbour either.

I will continue to raise concerns, ask difficult questions and press elected officials at every level of government for answers. I will continue supporting responsible solutions that combine compassion, treatment, housing and public safety.

Most importantly, I will continue to live, employ and invest in Hamilton while working alongside my neighbours to make the North End and the broader Ward 3 community better.

You do not need to be a politician to care about your city. You do not need your name on a ballot to demand accountability. You certainly do not need a campaign sign to stand up for your neighbourhood.

Hamilton is our home. Beemer Park belongs to the entire community, and we should not accept losing it again.

Adam Oldfield is a Hamilton resident and president of Vacu-Man Furnace and Duct Cleaning, a family owned Hamilton business. He is a past president of the Rotary Club of Hamilton and teaches at Mohawk College. He previously ran for Hamilton City Council and is not a candidate in the 2026 municipal election, but remains committed to advocating for safer, stronger neighbourhoods.

The Hamiltonian asks Hamiltonians to Rally Around Four-Year-Old Eli

A local family is facing an unimaginable journey after four-year-old Eli was diagnosed with Grade 4 glioma, an aggressive form of brain cancer. Eli is currently undergoing intensive radiation treatments as his family continues to surround him with love, courage and hope.

Friends of the family, known as Eli’s Lion Pack, are organizing a benefit to help ease the significant financial pressures associated with Eli’s care. They are reaching out to the community for financial contributions as well as donated products, gift cards and services for raffle baskets.

Above all, Eli’s Lion Pack is asking the community to keep Eli and his parents, Amber and Cody, in their thoughts and prayers. To learn more about Eli’s story and how you can help, visit Roaring for Eli by clicking here

Hamiltonians have always shown their strength when one of their own needs support. This is one of those moments. Please share this article with your networks.

Before the Ballot with Bernard Tompkins - Councillor Candidate for Hamilton City Council – Ward 2.

Enjoy this instalment of Before the Ballot with Bernard Tompkins , Councillor Candidate for Hamilton City Council – Ward 2.

What motivated you to run for council, and why do you believe now is the right time for new leadership in your ward?

Hamilton is one of the most beautiful cities in the world. From our stunning waterfront and the Niagara Escarpment to our historic neighbourhoods, incredible parks, and vibrant local businesses, Ward 2 has so much to offer. It's a community I'm proud to have been born and raised in, and 37 years later, I'm still proud to call it home.

Despite all of those strengths, many residents, visitors, and business owners have expressed concerns about the state of our downtown with respect to our mental health and addiction support infrastructure. Instead of experiencing everything that makes Hamilton special, they're too often met with concerns about public safety, cleanliness, and disorder.

I believe our taxpayers deserve better. Residents pay significant property taxes and expect clean streets, safe parks, well-maintained public spaces, and responsible financial management. We need to ensure public dollars are being spent efficiently, transparently, and on priorities that improve the quality of life for everyone.

One of the biggest challenges we face is addiction and mental health. These are real issues that deserve compassion, treatment, and long-term support. But we also need to examine whether or not our delivery methods are creating positive outcomes for the affected individuals and our communities.

I believe every publicly funded program should have clear, measurable goals so residents know whether it's making a real difference. If a program isn't delivering meaningful results, we need to review it, improve it, or invest in approaches that do.

I also believe addiction and mental health services should be located where people can receive the care they need without placing additional pressure on our business districts, parks, schools, and neighbourhood gathering places. We can support vulnerable people while also ensuring families feel safe, businesses can succeed, and public spaces remain welcoming for everyone.

As a father of two children under 10, I want to help build a Ward 2 where families can walk our streets with confidence, children can play safely in our parks, and local

Candidates Talk A.I.

The Hamiltonian recently reached out to all candidates currently registered on the City of Hamilton’s website who have provided a public email address.

We posed simple, open-ended questions:

Hamiltonians want to know what you think about A.I. Is Hamilton handling the issue the right way? What are your thoughts on the recent vote at City Council and the broader debate surrounding A.I. in Hamilton?

Our intention is straightforward: to give candidates an opportunity to share their views, in their own words, on the role of artificial intelligence in Hamilton and how the City is approaching this rapidly evolving issue. There are no prescribed positions and no right or wrong answers. We want to hear what candidates think. Responses will be added as they are received and presented in alphabetical order by the candidates’ last names.

Abduikarim, Eisham - Councillor Candidate Ward 2

This is an important question, and I believe it deserves a balanced answer. I support attracting responsible investment and quality project that creates good jobs and strengthen Hamilton’s economy

AI infrastructure is likely to become an important part of Canada’s economic future, and I want Hamilton to benefit where it makes sense.

At the same time, projects of this scale require informed decision-making. Council should have clear, independent information about the impacts on electricity, water, infrastructure, the environment, and the number of long-term local jobs the project will create.

Residents also deserve meaningful opportunities to understand these projects and have their voices heard before major decisions are made. During my conversations with residents across Ward 2, many have told me they want to be informed and involved in the decision-making process, not learn about major projects after key decisions have already been made.

My approach is straightforward: welcome responsible investment, make decisions based on evidence, and ensure that growth benefits both Hamilton and the people who call it home.

Austin, Sasha - Mayoral Candidate

I am strongly opposed to any steps forwards on a approval of the Steel Port AI Data Centres. My opposition towards a Artificial Intelligence Data Centre will never change. There is no positive impacts that the Steelport AI Data Centre will bring to our city or citizens. It will in fact cause immeasurable destruction.

Daly, Mark - Councillor Candidate Ward 7

I’ve knocked on hundreds of doors this summer, and people raise this frequently alongside roads, taxes, and accountability.

Artificial intelligence and data centres are a new technology and a new industry, and Hamilton should be open to investment and the jobs that come with it.

At the same time, I would oppose any project that increased electricity costs, created noise problems, harmed our environment, or negatively affected Hamilton residents. People have legitimate questions about power use, water use, and the impact on our community, and those concerns deserve clear answers.

It is also clear that the legal advice provided to council yesterday changed the minds of several councillors. From the outside, it appears that municipal authority in this area may be limited.

My position is straightforward: if these projects can proceed without harming residents and with appropriate safeguards in place, Hamilton should welcome the investment and economic opportunities they bring. My priority will always be protecting the interests of the people of Hamilton.

Christopher De Melo, Councillor Candidate Ward 3

my thoughts on A.I are that it is a piece of technology that is being sold to us as the tool to potentially fix all of our current problems. It's being touted as the future and that we must embrace is. It is being communicated by government and corporations as the most important piece of technology we need to invest in. And it feel like all of this information is being sold to us by people who claim to be much smarter people than me.

Behind the buzzwords and media rhetoric the benefits of AI is not in dispute. It is good at two things: complex pattern recognition and turning huge amounts of complicated information into something easier to understand.

​When applied to physical, scientific, and operational problems, this capability translates into possible breakthroughs that save lives, reduce waste, and solve real-world logistical bottlenecks.

• Tools like AlphaFold solved a 50-year-old biological mystery by predicting the 3D shapes of over 200 million proteins. This allows scientists to design targeted molecules to block disease pathways. Such as recent breakthroughs in mapping hidden Alzheimer's triggers or targeting drug-resistant tuberculosis in weeks rather than decades. - https://www.wired.com/story/alphafold-changed-science-after-5-years-its-still-evolving/
• In India, Precision Agriculture: Rather than blanket-spraying fields with pesticides or water, smart tractors equipped with computer vision identify and target individual weeds or dry patches of soil. This reduces pesticide runoff and water usage by up to 40%. - https://frontline.thehindu.com/society/india-ai-sovereignty-compute-data-and-governance/article71103889.ece

My issue with the way Hamilton is handing A.I Data Centres in particular is how every attempt to place them in the city core is being done in a non-direct way - and it almost feels deceptive.

Whether it is the attempts to sever the land, the appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal, or the closed-door council discussions about AI data centres, the process has felt indirect and secretive. That lack of transparency makes it difficult for Hamilton residents to trust the organizations supporting these developments.

Treating Hamiltonians with transparency, respect, and honesty will build trust with residents - but at this point it feel like only bad feelings, and bad vibes.

That being said - my thoughts on the current vote in council killing the moritorium on AI Data Centres is complicated. Having a closed door session does not bode well for trust and transparency, something that in recent days - feels lacking at city hall. My thoughts go to the councillors that voted to kill the moritorium because of an apparent lawsuit the city would open itself up to if they decided to approve it. If that is the case then I hope that those specific councillors and mayor implement some checks and balances that could address the massive environmental impact of these centres. Because, at this point, I see no way of stopping the development with the moritorium defeated.

Residents can curb data center expansion by targeting the municipal planning and regulatory process. This means actively supporting the city's legal defense of zoning and land severance denials such as the fight over the massive Steelport lands when developers appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal. Simultaneously, community members can lobby council to pass protective municipal performance bylaws.

By enacting strict local limits on continuous fan noise, prohibiting the use of municipal drinking water for cooling, and requiring developers to build needed waste-heat capture systems, the city can make environmental compliance at the core of the project.

Concurrently, advocacy can also include provincial utility allocations and direct negotiation. Because these massive facilities require enormous amounts of electricity, residents can pressure the province and the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) to prioritize grid capacity for housing and traditional manufacturing over data centers. At the local level, demanding legally binding Community Benefit Agreements forces developers to provide massive financial offsets, local infrastructure funding, and environmental safeguards.

Currently - it feels as though the desire of industry and city council to put this data centre in the city limits is steamrolling any concerns for environmental or health impacts. It also feels as though for many residents - especially those living in the riding where the proposed data centre will go are being summarily ignored - or dismissed as anti-progress.

Let me make it clear - I am not anti AI - or anti Data Centre - but I do think it’s fair to ask questions about whether we are prioritizing financial gain over the well-being of residents of the city. In downtown Hamilton we already deal with environmental concerns as we spend another summer fighting black soot raining on us. Just because a data centre is better than a steel mill shouldn’t be a good enough reason to plop a new problem in the city because it’s better than the old one.

Floyd, Seth- School Board Trustee Ward 7 Public

What I think about AI is complex, because it is a broader term than many realize. It needs to be made clear that not all AI is the same, and there are some merits to AI usage in the STEM disciplines. For example, predictive AI is being used in the development of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) for medical research, intending to reduce or eliminate the need for animal models. That is an example of harm reduction that I believe everyone can get behind. However, that is not the AI that most people are referring to when it is brought up in discussion. I also believe it is not the AI usage being referred to by the corporations when they sell us the promise of some inevitable future which requires AI-dedicated data centers at massive scaling. The AI being thrust upon us is generative AI, or what I refer to as consumer AI. This AI usage is energy intensive, requiring massive centers which have the potential to cause numerous environmental harms that the public has openly denounced. The end-product are primarily fabricated imagery, text summaries, and chat bots. All things we do not need. This is not even mentioning the potential malicious uses of generative AI, such as spreading misinformation, impersonating people without their consent, and replacing jobs (especially those that require human elements of empathy and creativity).

The public has made their opinion very clear, that they are against AI-specific data centers. I have made my opinion clear as well, as evidenced by public delegations (albeit, it is hard to cover such a complex topic within a time limit). In short: regulated AI use, restricted primarily to medical research, is something I would support in most cases so long as there is justification. Consumer AI is something I am firmly against.

This brings us to the Hamilton perspective specifically, and whether it is being handled the "right way". The recent vote at council was disappointing to say the least. On June 16th, the moratorium for AI-data centers, including establishing a by-law, passed without amendments. If there was concern about the ICBL, it should have been raised and potentially amended at this point but it was not. Then a last-minute surprise special meeting, comprised of only individuals who would benefit from AI-specific data centers, including a registered lobbyist for one of the developments in Hamilton (DRAC / Steelport), was held July 15th, the day before the vote on the ICBL. This "education meeting" did not include any environmental experts, HVAC experts, nor experts on the potential malicious uses of AI. I would hardly consider that a well-rounded education on the subject. Then during the council meeting right before the vote, the closed portion was held for 3 hours right before the vote, and suddenly numerous councillors who had voted in favour of the moratorium which included the ICBL changed to opposed. Again, I believe the vote could have been deferred in light of the supposed new information, in order to amend the ICBL accordingly, but it was not. No supposed concerns were raised till it was too late; councillors simply threw their hands up and said their hands were tied.

The voices of the Hamilton residents were effectively cast aside by this vote. Which is absurd when you stop and think: the ICBL was only a temporary pause on AI data centers, not a permanent ban. I think developers and decision-makers acting in good faith do not fear reasonable questions and careful review. In fact, they advocate for it.

Stathakos, Jonathan-- Councillor candidate- Ward 9

I'm not against investment in our community. I welcome projects that create good local jobs and make life better for the people who live here. But a project has to work for residents, not against them.

I will not support this data centre, or any project, that:

• Drives up the cost of living for residents, including the strain a massive power draw puts on our electricity grid.
• Creates few lasting local jobs once the construction phase ends.
• Harms our environment through the energy and water it consumes.
• Makes daily life worse through the noise, vibration, and disturbance residents would have to live next to.

We know exactly what that looks like in Ward 9. For years, the GFL dump has denied families the ability to enjoy their own homes and backyards. It has hurt their quality of life, and they've been left to live with it.

I'm not going to support a project that repeats that same mistake.

Before I back any development of this scale, it has to prove it will deliver real jobs, protect our environment, and respect the people who live nearby. If it can't clear that bar, it doesn't belong here.

Werhun, Peter-- Councillor candidate- Ward 6

I have an MSc in chemistry and did my undergrad in chemistry at McMaster. I love science and innovation (and McMaster) and want it to flourish. I am not against progress. But I am against unregulated development - and what has been proposed in Hamilton is similar to what the state of New York made official just last week.

We have a right to have a debate in Hamilton about the costs and benefits of proposals and to have a framework in place for assessing those, without being talked down to by Laurentian elites. Somehow, when it comes to a maximum heat by-laws, we need years of study. But one year is too much to ask for when it comes to large scale AI data centers.

The federal government can't stop Canfor from shutting down mills, or defence companies from relocating overseas, but meanwhile Hamilton is the roadblock to Canada's economic future? Canada lost more good, union jobs this week than an AI data center would produce in its lifetime.

The Special Council meeting was hamfisted and counterproductive. It was not an attempt to work through issues, it was an attempt to patronize Hamiltonians into acquiescence by treating us like luddite rubes. I can certainly appreciate experts coming to give their views, but I am deeply disappointed by the way that the process has evolved.

The interim control by-law was certainly imperfect, but it represented a response to real concerns of Hamiltonians that were not assuaged, but dismissed. I believe that if we are going to build a Hamilton of the future, we should expect better, more informed decision-making that brings people to the table on these kinds of decisions rather than talking down to them.

A last-minute suggestion that members of Council (and the Mayor) actually had no idea what they were talking about and needed to be "educated", a legal opinion that from the sound of it boxed Council in with conclusions rather than providing strategies and solutions, and a sudden about face after a closed-door session were all unforced errors of governance. As a Hamiltonian sitting in the gallery of the Council Chamber, only one word describes how I felt watching my City government struggling to get through the day: humiliated. And that is a feeling that we feel far too often and have felt for far too long in one of Canada's largest and most important cities.

I cannot blame people for feeling there was a bait-and-switch, and that failure of leadership falls on Council and the Mayor.