Angela Girard

Climate action has been an important part of my approach to local government, particularly where climate resilience intersects with housing, urban design and the everyday experience of residents.

As a member of Council, I made a motion to address excessive heat in rental housing by exploring a maximum indoor temperature of 26°C. I believe climate adaptation needs to focus not only on long-term emissions reduction, but also on protecting residents from the increasingly frequent extreme heat events we are experiencing. Ensuring that rental housing can remain safe and livable during periods of extreme heat is an important part of that work.

I supported the City’s Tree Protection Bylaw because preserving our existing urban forest is one of the most effective ways municipalities can improve climate resilience. Mature trees provide shade, help moderate temperatures, support biodiversity and contribute to the health and livability of our neighbourhoods. The City’s climate strategy recognizes increasing urban tree canopy as a key climate and environmental objective.

My work on the Advisory Design Panel gave me another opportunity to influence this issue directly. I regularly questioned development application designs where there appeared to be opportunities to retain mature, viable trees rather than remove them and rely solely on replacement planting. Once a mature tree is removed, replacement trees can take many years to provide comparable canopy and cooling benefits.

Climate action means making practical decisions today that improve resilience for residents while protecting the natural assets that make our community livable for generations to come.

I would seek a clear Council commitment that Lonsdale Energy Company complete and publicly release its carbon-neutral pathway within the next year, including measurable interim targets, timelines, costs and annual reporting.

This is consistent with the City’s Climate & Environment Strategy, which identifies decarbonizing the Community Energy System as one of its key targets and specifically calls for targets and metrics to monitor and report progress.

I would also expect the pathway to identify the specific investments and technologies required to transition away from fossil-fuel dependence while maintaining reliable and affordable energy for residents and businesses.

Transparency is essential. Council and the public should be able to see where LEC is today, what emissions reductions have been achieved, what remains to be done and whether we are on schedule.

The Strategy makes clear that the City has both an opportunity and a responsibility to lead the transition to a low-carbon economy. I would make sure that commitment translates into a concrete, publicly accountable plan.

I would support establishing a clear timeline for reducing and ultimately eliminating RNG from LEC’s energy mix, while ensuring that replacement energy sources are reliable, genuinely low-carbon and financially responsible.

The City’s Climate & Environment Strategy identifies decarbonizing the Community Energy System as a key objective. It also notes that LEC has renewable sources in its system but that the system has historically relied heavily on natural-gas boilers.

I would ask LEC to report annually on the energy mix, emissions associated with each source, costs to customers and progress toward zero-carbon energy. I would also want Council to examine opportunities for heat recovery, electrification and other renewable technologies as replacements.

My goal would be to ensure that RNG remains a transitional tool rather than becoming a substitute for completing the deeper transformation of the system.

We need to be ambitious about decarbonization while being responsible with public and ratepayer dollars.

I would support ensuring that the $235 million settlement with Acciona goes directly toward reducing the costs borne by North Shore residents, rather than simply being absorbed into the overall project budget.

I would also advocate for a truly independent, public and comprehensive review, with North Shore municipalities fully involved. That review should examine project delivery, governance, procurement, financial management, risk management, cost escalation and accountability, with its findings made public.

Finally, Metro Vancouver must provide the full financial information municipalities have requested, including household impacts, debt, operating and maintenance costs, remediation costs and the long-term financial outlook. I would continue advocating for a fairer cost-sharing formula and, where appropriate, senior-government involvement.

Residents deserve both financial relief now and accountability for how we got here.

I support stronger protection and retention of healthy mature trees through land-use planning, development approvals and other tools available to the City.

The Climate & Environment Strategy recognizes that the urban forest provides essential ecosystem services: it sequesters carbon, captures rainwater, cools our community, improves well-being and provides wildlife habitat. It also notes that the City’s canopy has remained around 20% and that tree loss from development, climate change, pests and disease is expected to increase.

At the same time, I believe we can support housing growth while protecting mature trees. The answer is better site planning—not simply stopping development.

I would support identifying significant mature trees early in the development process, designing around viable trees wherever possible, and using planning tools and incentives to make retention the preferred outcome.

Where removal is genuinely necessary, replacement should contribute to a healthy, diverse and resilient urban forest.

Our goal should be more housing and more trees—not choosing one over the other.

I support reviewing the Tree Bylaw to determine whether healthy, mature trees should receive meaningful protection even when a property is not being redeveloped.

A tree’s environmental value does not depend on whether construction is taking place. Our Climate & Environment Strategy recognizes trees as critical infrastructure for carbon sequestration, cooling, stormwater management, air quality and biodiversity.

However, any broader application needs to be carefully designed. There should be a clear distinction between healthy mature trees and trees that pose a legitimate safety risk, with a fair and transparent process for determining when removal is justified.

I would also want to consider the impact on homeowners and ensure the bylaw is practical and enforceable.

Protecting our urban forest needs to be a community-wide responsibility. We should look at the entire lifecycle of our trees—not only what happens when a property is being redeveloped—and make sure our policies are actually increasing canopy and protecting the mature trees that provide the greatest environmental benefits.