Answering a Voter’s Question

Recently, a resident asked me two straightforward questions:

“What’s your main reason for running?” “If cutbacks are needed and you had to make one major cutback right away, where would it be?”

He suggested my answers should be short—but for those who know me, or have seen me in council chambers, I rarely give short answers when the issues deserve depth.

Why I’m Running

I am running because our community needs a serious, fact-driven conversation about financial sustainability.

For too long, decisions have been made without the detailed data needed to properly weigh costs against the level of service our residents expect. We know the overall budget numbers—but not the specific cost of operations but not a breakdown. For example:

• How much does it truly cost to mow each park?

• What does snow clearing cost for each sidewalks, alleys, and road?

• What is the cost versus value of operating a hydrovac?

• How much does it cost, how long does it take, how often should provide a level of service?

These are the kinds of granular details that allow elected officials to make informed decisions about what services should look like and how they should be prioritized. Our town is currently working on transitioning to a true cost accounting approach to budgeting, which is the right step forward.

Why Nathan?

I believe I bring a unique perspective to this work. With 13 years of municipal experience across two communities, combined with my professional background in data analysis and efficiency optimization in the oilfield, I am well-equipped to advocate for change.

No single councillor or mayor can enact change alone—but they can bring forward ideas, present data, and advocate for smarter, more sustainable decisions. That is the role I seek to continue.

Where to Cut Costs

The second question was about cutbacks. The reality is this: there is no single “silver bullet” cut that will solve our financial challenges. Instead, meaningful savings will come from a series of smaller, thoughtful reductions that add up over time.

One example (with more to come) is how we approach community golf tournaments. I fully support local organizations and volunteers who host fundraisers at our golf course—these events bring value back to the community. Sponsoring a hole or providing support for the event makes sense. But paying for council to enter teams in the tournament, in my view, does not add value to tax payers.

After attending my first tournament as a councillor, I came to believe those costs should be covered by the councillors themselves, not the taxpayers. While the savings from ending team sponsorships may be small, small changes add up. And they set the tone for how council manages public dollars—with respect, prudence, and accountability.