Differing visions for city’s future

For the past several weeks, Brandon voters have watched a rare kind of political campaign unfold. It has been a race notably devoid of the personal mudslinging that defines modern politics.

While that may not lend itself to contentious storylines between candidates as we have seen elsewhere, there is certainly some benefit to this kind of campaign when it comes to voter engagement in that we have the ability to see the steak for what it is, and not be drawn in by smoke and sizzle.

I often talk of a need for vision — particularly during election campaigns — and this one has been light on hard promises and a little too heavy on philosophical approaches.

But to be fair, a clean campaign should not be confused with an empty one. And as the dust settles on the debates hosted by The Brandon Sun, Brandon University, WCGtv — as well as the recent mayoral debate hosted by the Brandon Chamber of Commerce — it is clear that both mayoral candidates have given the electorate plenty of food for thought.

We are not choosing between two identical paths; we are choosing between two fundamentally distinct ideas for how Brandon should grow, govern, and finance its future. And while it may not be the differing visions I’d looked for, they are visions nonetheless.

Incumbent Mayor Jeff Fawcett has pitched a Brandon that actively prepares for a population of 80,000 by 2040. Considering our growth rate as a city over the last two decades, that makes logistical sense.

The substance of Fawcett’s platform is rooted in infrastructure and fiscal realism — even when that realism hurts. He has defended three terms of substantial tax hikes, including the 6.7 per cent municipal property tax increase for 2026, as the unavoidable cost of stabilizing the city’s foundational utility and hydro needs — though he has only done so after at least a decade of budgets that failed to meet those needs.

He would have our city looking outward, treating Brandon as a regional player that must aggressively find federal and provincial matching dollars to fund large scale projects that the city needs to move forward. It’s an idea we pushed for on this page toward the end of the Rick Chrest mandate, when the public debate over lift station funding and the city’s plan to take on a huge debt load forced the city to look for further grant funding.

As voters, we already have the benefit of having watched Mr. Fawcett in action — both as mayor over the last four years, and in his previous three terms as councillor for the Assiniboine Ward (now Ward 1). And that can be both good and bad for a head of council searching for a second term.

Though Fawcett has repeatedly told us that he doesn’t have an overarching vision for the city, he has already shown us what his goal is — the creation of a foundational, long-term plan required to support a bigger community.

Though the reward could be a modernized city built for the next generation, the risk that we take along this path is financial strain on the taxpayer at a time when inflation has driven the cost of living ever higher, and more and more people are requiring help from food banks and the soup kitchen in this city.

On the other hand, Len Isleifson offers a vision focused on competitive economics and municipal reform. Rather than accepting high tax increases as a given, Isleifson says council should embark upon a business-first philosophy to unlock new revenue streams without overburdening city homeowners.

His plan focuses on making the most of current city infrastructure, with a plan to expand the Brandon Municipal Airport and secure an eastern flight. It is an all-too-familiar proposal that ultimately relies on airlines like WestJet buying into the business case, if there even is one.

If realized, Isleifson says the resulting landing and parking fees would serve to subsidize the city’s operating budget.

Isleifson also told the mayoral debate audience on Oct. 16 that future economic growth could be unlocked by transforming Brandon into a major transport hub, using its ideal location on the Trans-Canada Highway, its rail networks and its airport to attract new industry.

Isleifson’s vision is one of a red tape-slashing city hall that attracts commercial and industrial developers by being the easiest place in Manitoba to do business.

By broadening the tax base through aggressive economic development, he argues that the city can fund its needs naturally.

The risk here is that this would force the city to rely heavily on the co-operation of market forces — a difficult bet in the midst of a trade war with the United States, and rising consumer costs.

But a winning gamble would produce a thriving commercial hub with a more controlled municipal budget.

Both Fawcett and Isleifson are well-known individuals to the majority of Brandonites. Both come with differing characters, and both carry the benefits and the political burdens of their years in government — with Fawcett around the council table for the last 16 years, and Isleifson as a two-term backbench MLA under Progressive Conservative premiers Brian Pallister and Heather Stefanson.

What has become clear over the last two weeks is that the two men most sharply diverge on the philosophy of governance itself.

Isleifson has targeted city hall’s transparency, specifically critiquing the high volume of closed-door committee of the whole meetings. His vision of leadership promises an open-door policy and a return to highly visible, accessible decision-making.

Fawcett, conversely, has leaned into a pragmatic defence of the existing system, emphasizing that internal administrative processes and staff-guided decisions are what keep complex city files moving forward efficiently.

Too often, municipal elections are decided on name recognition alone. Brandon is fortunate that this year, name recognition has come with at least an attempt at policy weight.

Do you want a city that continues to invest heavily in large infrastructure now in order to prepare for a much bigger population later — that “growth pays for growth” idea — even if it means tough tax choices today?

Or do you want a city focused on spending control — despite the obvious spending needs of the community and the difficult economic environment — using existing assets, and cutting red tape to drive business growth from the ground up?

Both candidates have given this community a choice on the issues at hand. On Wednesday, Oct. 28, Brandon voters must decide which vision carries us forward.

» Matt Goerzen, editor