What an Ontario Planning Commissioner Actually Does

Warehouses will undoubtedly be one of the issues discussed during Ontario's 2026 election. They should be.

Residents have legitimate questions about truck traffic, air quality, road safety, proximity to homes and schools, and how continued development will affect their quality of life.

But there is something else residents deserve to understand: what does a Planning Commissioner actually do?

The answer is considerably more complicated than counting how many development projects someone voted for or against.

Ontario already has a General Plan, Development Code, zoning regulations, Specific Plans and decades of land-use decisions governing how property throughout the city may develop.

The City describes the Planning Commission as performing three major functions: advising the City Council on planning issues, implementing the General Plan by reviewing development proposals case by case, and acting as the decision-making body for many entitlement applications.

That means commissioners aren't simply asked: “Do you personally like this project?”

We have to examine what the law and existing plans require.

Ontario's Development Code requires specified findings for discretionary permits. Those findings can include consistency with the General Plan, consistency with applicable Specific Plans and development standards, compatibility with surrounding uses, and protection of public health, safety and general welfare.

When the required findings cannot be established, the Code provides for denial.

That is a substantially different responsibility from campaigning on a blanket promise to say yes—or no—to an entire category of development.

My position is: evaluate every project on its merits.

Where is it located? Where will the trucks travel? How close is it to homes and schools? What are the traffic and environmental impacts? What infrastructure improvements are required?

Does it comply with the General Plan and applicable Specific Plan? Are adequate protections being provided to surrounding neighborhoods? And is the applicant asking to develop according to existing plans—or asking Ontario to change those plans?

Those distinctions matter.

Ontario's Development Code exists specifically to implement state and federal planning requirements and The Ontario Plan while protecting public health, safety and welfare.

It is easy during an election to reduce difficult subjects to: for or against?

But governing doesn't usually work that way. When you're responsible for an actual decision, you have to understand the authority of your office, the law, the evidence, competing interests and the consequences of the decision.

Sometimes leadership means saying no. Sometimes it means saying yes with conditions. Sometimes it means demanding better mitigation.

Sometimes it means recognizing that the real policy question belongs at the General Plan or City Council level rather than pretending one individual project created a decades-old land-use strategy.

That is why experience matters. Being elected isn't simply an opportunity to express opinions. It means accepting responsibility for decisions affecting residents, businesses, employees, property owners, taxpayers and future generations.

I don't expect every resident to agree with every Planning Commission decision I have made. I do believe residents deserve to know that those decisions involve considerably more than whether somebody personally likes warehouses.

This election should include robust debate about Ontario Ranch, warehouses, public safety, homelessness, infrastructure, economic development and the future of our city.

But it should also include another question: who is prepared to make those decisions?

Being on the ballot makes someone a candidate. Understanding the responsibility, demonstrating judgment and building a record of leadership are what make someone qualified.