Taproot Survey: Voter statistics

Based on more than 16,000 responses as of Oct. 14, here's how voters answered the survey.

Note: Respondents could skip questions, so not all questions have the same number of answers. Taproot excluded surveys with fewer than two answers. The majority of respondents answered most of the questions. It was possible for respondents to fill out the survey multiple times, but unlikely at a large scale given the structure of the survey.


  1. It should spend more (37.3%)
  2. Current support is sufficient (58.3%)
  3. It should spend less (4.4%)
  1. Yes, we have effective initiatives in place (33.9%)
  2. No, the city should put more resources behind nurturing homegrown businesses (47.7%)
  3. No, the city should put more resources behind attracting global businesses (18.4%)
  1. Yes, and we should fully fund the plan (30.7%)
  2. Yes, at the current level of investment (39.6%)
  3. No, we have already spent enough on downtown (19.1%)
  4. No, I support investment in downtown but not this plan (10.6%)


  1. It's a good start but we need to go farther to reach our goals (41.3%)
  2. It's a strong plan; we just need to follow it (42.9%)
  3. The action items are too expensive (8.7%)
  4. Climate action is not the responsibility of the city (7.1%)
  1. Yes, every decision has climate implications (49.5%)
  2. Yes for some decisions but not all (41.1%)
  3. No, most decisions don't have climate implications (9.4%)
  1. Yes (42.7%)
  2. No, I support solar power but that's the wrong location (54.7%)
  3. No, I don't support solar power anywhere (2.6%)


  1. City council hasn't been willing to raise taxes enough (8.8%)
  2. The city has limited ability to raise revenues (36.5%)
  3. The city spends too much (5.6%)
  4. The city spends its resources inefficiently (49.2%)
  1. The current mix is acceptable (59.0%)
  2. Residences should pay more (3.7%)
  3. Businesses should pay more (29.2%)
  4. Both should pay less, even if that means a reduction of services (8.1%)
  1. The city has about the right number of employees (46.3%)
  2. The city has too many employees (30.5%)
  3. The city has too few employees (23.1%)

Housing and homelessness

  1. The city should build more affordable housing, even if it can't get funding from other orders of government (46.4%)
  2. The city cannot afford to build more affordable housing without financial support from other orders of government (49.8%)
  3. The city should not build more affordable housing regardless of financial support from other orders of government (3.8%)
  1. Yes, Housing First is the right approach and we need more of it (67.5%)
  2. No, the existing programs are sufficient (8.1%)
  3. No, residents should undergo treatment for underlying issues such as substance use and mental illness before participating in housing programs (22.0%)
  4. No, this shouldn't be the city's responsibility (2.4%)
  1. The current policy towards encampments is acceptable (30.8%)
  2. Encampments should be allowed if there are no better housing options available (48.5%)
  3. Encampments should be dismantled immediately (20.7%)


  1. Council has shown the right amount of flexibility regarding zoning bylaws (28.9%)
  2. Council has been too flexible under pressure from developers (57.4%)
  3. Council has not been flexible enough to make way for development (13.7%)
  1. Yes (59.6%)
  2. No, primarily because it harms the character of mature neighbourhoods (21.1%)
  3. No, primarily because it allows too much gentrification (14.4%)
  4. No, primarily because it interferes with market forces (4.9%)
  1. Council should use every tool at its disposal, including financial penalties and incentives (45.6%)
  2. Council should rely mostly on zoning decisions to support their creation (40.4%)
  3. Council should not intentionally create 15-minute districts (14.0%)


  1. Systemic racism is apparent throughout the EPS (50.2%)
  2. The EPS is not racist on the whole, but there are some racist members (47.7%)
  3. There is no racism within the EPS (2.1%)
  1. Increase it as determined by the funding formula (23.8%)
  2. Freeze it until it is in line with comparable cities (43.1%)
  3. Decrease it somewhat (21.4%)
  4. Defund the police altogether (11.6%)
  1. Council should trust the police to know what they need and generally approve their requests (8.5%)
  2. Council should closely scrutinize all requests (80.6%)
  3. Council should not approve any further funding requests from police (10.9%)

Politics and governance

  1. Yes, before the election (89.5%)
  2. Yes, after the election (2.8%)
  3. They shouldn't have donors (5.6%)
  4. They shouldn't have to disclose donors at any point (2.1%)
  1. Yes, and the current one is working fine (26.1%)
  2. Yes, but the current one is not doing the job (71.8%)
  3. No, elections are a sufficient mechanism for governing councillors' conduct (2.1%)
  1. Yes (25.7%)
  2. No (51.2%)
  3. I accept the principle but object to some or all of these additions (23.0%)

Quality of life

  1. It should spend more (42.1%)
  2. Current support is sufficient (48.0%)
  3. It should spend less (9.8%)
  1. Yes, we need more permanent public washrooms (76.3%)
  2. No, we have enough (21.5%)
  3. No, we shouldn't have any (2.1%)
  1. Yes, I support the current approach (53.3%)
  2. No, the city should do more (36.3%)
  3. No, the city is doing more than it should (10.4%)


  1. 30 km/h (12.2%)
  2. 40 km/h (58.5%)
  3. 50 km/h (29.2%)
  1. The city should make roads more accessible to active transportation (59.9%)
  2. The city has enough infrastructure for active transportation (32.7%)
  3. The city should make roads less accessible to active transportation (7.4%)
  1. I support these expansions (65.8%)
  2. I oppose these expansions, primarily on financial grounds (12.2%)
  3. I oppose these expansions, primarily on environmental grounds (22.0%)


  1. Fares should decrease (35.7%)
  2. Fares should be frozen where they are (42.2%)
  3. Fares should go up as planned (22.1%)
  1. It struck the right balance between frequency and coverage (29.7%)
  2. It sacrificed too much coverage to provide more frequency (35.9%)
  3. The city should have taken money from something else to increase frequency and maintain coverage (26.9%)
  4. Regardless of how it is configured, the city spends too much on transit (7.5%)
  1. Divert budget from other projects to build the LRT more quickly (25.7%)
  2. Continue with the current plan (56.2%)
  3. Pause LRT construction and consider bus rapid transit instead (12.5%)
  4. Pause LRT construction and explore more future-focused technology like autonomous vehicle networks (5.7%)

Share this page: