Yes to financing, no to casinos, survey finds

City ward structure, debt financing, casino expansion, industrial lands, development charges, the Ring of Fire, municipal red tape and downtown growth — wonder where the municipal election candidates stand on these issues?

So did the Greater Sudbury Chamber of Commerce. So it surveyed all ward and mayoral candidates.

A majority (67 per cent) actually responded to the chamber's request for their views on the issues the city's business community was most curious about.

“These results give us important information about where candidates stand on issues important to both the business community and the entire city of Greater Sudbury in general,” said Geoff Jeffery, chair of the chamber board of directors. “The chamber will be using the responses from the candidates as a platform to work with those elected to advance key economic development initiatives in the city.”

When it comes to the ward structure, 59 per cent said it was time for some kind of change to the 12-ward system, with 62 per cent saying the ward boundaries should be re-drawn.

Debt financing was supported by just under half of those polled (42.55 per cent). A full 80 per cent supported the idea of making low-cost industrial land available to new industries looking to locate in the city.

As for the casino question, nearly 43 per cent of those polled didn't support the idea of a new or expanded casino for Greater Sudbury.

While the chamber indicated the majority of those polled supported the development of a multipurpose facility (for example a facility incorporating an OHL-sized arena, entertainment complex and conference centre), no percentage of support was included in a news release. The chamber said many respondents said such a project should be undertaken as a partnership between the private and public sectors.

When it comes to supporting the downtown core, candidates were asked for their ideas. Responses ranged from offering tax breaks to companies located downtown, pushing for further beautification projects, as well as addressing the issue of poverty and affordable housing in the area.

Many candidates highlighted the need to carry through with the recommendations of the Downtown Master Plan. Another set of respondents indicated that although the downtown is important, the economic development of other outlying areas should not be forgotten.

Staying with development, candidates highlighted the need to streamline bylaws, processing times and creating a customer-focused attitude at city hall.

And still with development, the contentious development charges that help pay for infrastructure projects, but which many blame for actually hampering development, received a mixed review, the chamber said.

While some candidates responded that charges are too high and need to be competitive with other northern cities, others commented that development fees are needed at their current rate to service infrastructure related development.

To see all the responses, visit the sudburychamber.ca.