CANDIDATE PROFILE: Lyndsay McDonald

I’m running because I believe local government should be more connected to the people it represents. I’m not a career politician, and I’m not interested in joining another political team simply because that is how politics has traditionally operated.

I’ve built my campaign around listening, asking difficult questions, transparency, accountability, and finding practical ways to connect people with the systems and resources already available in our community.

I want city hall to feel accessible again. Residents should not have to become experts in municipal government just to have their concerns heard. I’m running to bring the public voice into the room — not just during an election, but throughout the decisions that shape Kamloops.

What do you think is the biggest issue facing the City of Kamloops and how would you use your elected position to address it?

I think one of the biggest challenges facing Kamloops is the growing gap between the complexity of the problems residents are experiencing and their ability to navigate the systems designed to address them.

Housing, affordability, homelessness, public safety, transportation, infrastructure and mental health are not isolated issues. They overlap. When we treat them as separate files, we can spend significant public money without necessarily improving the experience of the person standing in front of us.

As a councillor, I would focus on connecting those pieces while remaining clear about the city’s actual jurisdiction. That means asking better questions of staff, measuring whether programs are producing the outcomes intended, pursuing partnerships with other levels of government and community organizations, and being transparent about both costs and limitations.

My approach is essentially: build the door and make it wider.

People should be able to understand where to go, why a decision was made, what it costs, and what happens next.

Following a term highlighted by infighting and tension at city hall that impacted Kamloops’ public image, how would you ensure civil discourse and good governance would take place between yourself, fellow elected officials and city staff?

Civil discourse does not mean everyone agrees. A healthy council should be able to disagree strongly while still respecting the people involved and the institution they are serving.

My approach would be to separate the person from the issue. I can challenge a proposal, question a decision, or ask for better evidence without making the disagreement personal.

I would also expect myself to do the same thing I would expect from others: come prepared, listen before responding, ask questions in good faith, respect the role of professional staff, and keep disagreements focused on policy and outcomes.

Accountability should not require hostility, and collaboration should not require abandoning your principles.

I also think transparency helps reduce conflict. When residents can see the information, rationale, costs and consequences behind a decision, political disagreement becomes much more productive.

I would bring a simple principle to council: accountability without self-erasure, and disagreement without disrespect.

Considering recent years of large municipal tax increases in Kamloops, how would you address the city’s tax rate going forward?

I believe residents deserve both responsible services and responsible taxation.

The 2026 financial plan resulted in a 5.7 per cent property-tax increase, after Council made changes intended to reduce the original tax requirement. (Kamloops⁠) That tells me the conversation cannot simply be “raise taxes” or “cut taxes.” We need to understand what we are purchasing with every dollar.

Going forward, I would want Council to examine spending through a stronger value-for-money lens: what is mandatory, what is discretionary, what is producing measurable results, what can be delivered differently, and what partnerships or alternative funding sources are available.

I would also want major new expenditures presented to residents in plain language, including their long-term operating and maintenance implications — not just the initial capital cost.

I will not promise residents that every tax increase can be avoided. I will promise to ask whether each increase is justified, sustainable and transparent.

Responsible spending means being able to explain why we are asking residents to pay more before asking them to pay more.

As major infrastructure projects are on the horizon in Kamloops, how would you prefer the city go about gaining the electorate’s approval – via referendum or the alternative approval process (AAP)? Why?

For major infrastructure projects involving significant long-term borrowing or a substantial impact on taxpayers, I would generally favour a referendum when the city has the legal ability to use one.

The AAP is a legitimate statutory process, and it can be considerably less expensive and time-consuming than a referendum. Under an AAP, however, residents who support a proposal do not have to take any action, while residents opposed to it must actively submit a response. If 10 per cent of eligible electors object, a referendum is required. (Kamloops⁠)

For smaller or clearly defined borrowing decisions, an AAP can be an appropriate and efficient tool. But when a project represents a major, long-term commitment of public money, I believe there is value in asking the broader electorate an explicit question and giving residents an equal opportunity to vote for or against it.

Whichever process is used, the most important part is that residents understand exactly what they are being asked to approve: the cost, borrowing, tax implications, alternatives, timelines and long-term operating commitments.

Public approval is meaningful only when the public has enough information to make an informed decision.

What are your thoughts on communication between the City of Kamloops and its residents? Are there areas of improvement you’d like to see?

Communication is one of the areas where I believe Kamloops has an opportunity to build significantly more trust.

The city already has tools for communication and engagement, and it has recently been working on new approaches to clarify how residents are informed, consulted and told how their input affected a decision. (Let’s Talk Kamloops⁠) I think the next step is making that communication feel more accessible and meaningful to the average resident.

People need more than announcements. They need context.

If the city asks for public input, residents should know what question is actually being asked, what can realistically change as a result, and what cannot. Once a decision is made, the city should clearly communicate what was heard, what was changed, what wasn’t changed, and why.

I would also like to see more communication in plain language and through multiple channels—not assuming everyone follows council agendas, reads municipal reports or knows how local government works.

My goal would be to help create a feedback loop:

We tell residents what is happening, residents tell us what they are experiencing, council considers that information, and the city tells residents what was decided and why.

That is how communication becomes participation rather than simply information being broadcast from city hall.

by CFJC Today

CANDIDATE PROFILE: Lyndsay McDonald

Our Community