2026 London Municipal Election: Lawrence-Zachary Howe – Running for Mayor - London Chamber of Commerce Ontario, Canada

Name: Lawrence-Zachary Howe

What position are you running for? Mayor

What do you see as the principal opportunities and obstacles facing London’s economy over the next Council term? What should the City do to support business growth, job creation, entrepreneurship and investment, and how should it work with employers, Western University, Fanshawe College and others to attract and retain the talent London needs?

Having two universities located in London creates a consistent opportunity to leave a positive impression that keeps expertise in the region but that’s nearly impossible when London has 29.6% downtown office vacancy (CBRE Canada, 2026), 25% for the whole city (CBRE Canada, 2026), 31.3% with food insecurity (Statistics Canada, 2026), and 8.5% unemployment (Statistics Canada, 2026). Housing doesn’t attract people, opportunity does. Without a way to make money or get a decent job people don’t migrate to or stay in that community.

Ignoring the situation creates a death spiral where people don’t have disposable income – jobs leave – less disposable income – more jobs leave – on and on until a city dies or is outwardly alive in the sense people live there but the economy and institutions are broken.

London’s focus needs to be on revitalizing the business sector. My solution to this is my Trimodal Port. By building it businesses would have a fiduciary duty to set up in London and businesses currently here would be anchored.

London sits in the epicenter Southwestern Ontario, positioned as the natural trade hub for the most congested logistics corridor in North America, 200 km or less from many major municipalities: 80 km from Kitchener, 93 km from Guelph, 94 km from Sarnia, 116 km from Hamilton, 164 km from Detroit, 164 km Windsor, 168 km from Toronto, 186 km from Buffalo, surrounded by smaller municipalities, totalling over 10 million people in our region. This gives London the unique opportunity to become a regional hub and logistical powerhouse, turning the city’s geography into its greatest economic asset, as CentrePort Canada is for Manitoba – generating $7.9 Billion in provincial GDP (CentrePort Canada, 2024) and $1.18 Billion in annual tax revenue (CentrePort Canada, 2024). London’s existing manufacturing provides a higher starting density of high-value exports, meaning our “Time-to-ROI” is significantly shorter.

The Competitive advantage for manufacturers includes: Dual-access rail spurs from London to CN and CPKC mainlines for immediate transit to/from major ports, far cheaper per ton-mile than road freight on long-haul routes (ATRI, 2025), bypassing GTA highway congestion and terminal staging can recapture hours per unit in initial transit (Metrolinx, 2024; Transport Canada, 2023), volatility protection, ESG reduction by up to 75% (RAC, 2024), a critical metric for global manufacturers meeting NATO or EU procurement standards, improved throughput since 1 railcar is equivalent to 4 trucks and 1 rail-string is equal to 300 (RAC, 2024), and effortless scaling do to not needing to buy additional trucks or hire additional CDL drivers.

This passive revenue engine would revitalize the commercial sector by creating manufacturing jobs (including those requiring expertise), which in turn brings in B2B businesses which supply them (because all being equal proximity wins), which in turn creates businesses seeking to exploit the surplus in disposable income – all while providing London with a much needed alternative revenue source.

London now has a new Downtown Plan. Which elements would you prioritize and what results should Londoners expect to see during the next Council term? Please address the downtown business environment, public spaces, housing and office conversions, cultural and civic destinations, safety, transportation and implementation accountability.

This is a huge question.

I oppose downtown office conversions; permanently replacing commercial space with housing caps the maximum scalability of our business sector.

Regarding transportation delayed by construction, it stems from skewed incentives of favourable contracts: developers are paid by milestones while charging recurring fees to secure job sites, so after a certain point it’s more profitable to maintain a recurring revenue stream manning them with skeleton crews so the site isn’t classified abandoned. My solution would be to bring municipal construction in-house through a Municipal Construction Company (MCC). By building at pure cost – charging only for salaries, materials, and equipment maintenance – London eliminates private rent-seeking and halts regulatory exploitation which sucks London dry, plus we can channel savings into higher-grade materials to stop inflationary recurring maintenance which is a counterbalance to taxation.

For public spaces, park upgrades are ill-timed, given London’s crisis, but I won’t obstruct them. However, creating a new Downtown Office for permits is wasteful bureaucracy; we must force efficiency or fire people for incompetence rather than duplicating departments.

On safety, I support accessible washrooms, payphones, and fining land speculators. I vehemently reject the soft-handed enabling of open drug use. Having been a homeless youth from an abusive household who never used substances, I reject performative compassion; public drug use deserves society’s full rebuke. Furthermore, London has become a regional sponge for Southwestern Ontario’s vulnerable population because surrounding towns refuse to fund services. I will demand provincial compensation, or London will scale back to just food banks and shelters until neighboring towns pull their weight.

UNESCO City of Music – see question 12

Accountability – see question 8

London faces an urgent health and homelessness crisis. Residents, employees and businesses also have concerns about violence, property crime, public disorder and confidence in public spaces. These conditions require related but distinct responses. What actions would you support in each area, and what responsibilities should fall to the City, police, the health system, other orders of government and community partners?

Firstly, I reject the implication that the health and homelessness crisis 1-for-1 are responsible for the fear of and suffering by crimes – it’s simply a factor. This question could have easily started with “London faces an unfathomable 9 hours and 27 minute response time for urgent calls while Toronto’s are under 40 minutes despite per capita our police budget being larger.” [London Police Services Board, 2026]

To answer the question though, currently London has a broken law enforcement system. Police take forever to get to a crime scene unless it’s a life threatening call, ensuring evidence is gone when they get there, and when they finally arrive they use their broad investigative discretion to close cases instead of clearing them.

These elements, more than any others in my opinion, combine to make citizens feel unvalued and lesser, while emboldening criminals to continue to act out, lengthening the call queue for officers, overwhelming officers – all because they didn’t do their job to investigate the first time.

We don’t know the effects having a competent police force would bring, so before we try to get into the minutiae of the issues we have to fix the underlying rot at the root.

Unfortunately Josh Morgan, in an effort to subvert democracy, decided to unprecedentedly extend the police chief’s contract to 2031 in order to lame the incoming mayor – if not him. If elected, chief Truong will produce results, or I will use whatever means legal to remove him.

What changes would you support to increase housing supply and affordability and create neighbourhoods with access to employment, services, transportation and public amenities?

Once London has alternative revenue sources I would look at eliminating exploitative developer charges. The money they bring in isn’t worth the outsized power those charges enable developers to wield over weak willed politicians. This would increase housing supply by making It cheaper to build a house, thus lowering the price of entry for competent builders.

As for price, first you need to get rid of land speculators artificial price settings. Housing doesn’t seem to cleanly follow supply and demand so it’s beyond my knowledge whether you can increase the supply of housing in a meaningful way while significantly lowering cost – in cases like this, I go with what I think is right.

London’s cultural facilities, venues and public spaces are essential to the life of the city, and several face age, capacity or funding pressures. What cultural infrastructure should be prioritised during the next Council term, and how should the City decide where to invest?

Not all buildings are vital just because they get old. If they are, then the city has a duty to protect them even if the call comes at an inopportune time. The point of fiscal responsibility is to protect and uplift a city, province, nation, not an end unto itself.

I wouldn’t concern myself with regional transit, there’s no incentive for me to since my goal is to create jobs in London not ship people out. If those towns want to attract our workers it’s their job to provide that infrastructure. For local transit, the priority is having transit that moves on time. I vehemently refuse to increase funding to an institution that is not meeting expectations because it guarantees money will be wasted – you can’t outspend incompetence. Once transit is reliable we can look at expanding services but first and foremost we need leaders to be accountable to results and not pass around blame.

London’s economic success depends on reliable local, regional, national and international connections. How would you improve local transit and service to major employment areas and shift workers, intercity bus and air links, and passenger rail? What should businesses and employees be able to expect in terms of frequency, reliability and access?

I think that’s a fundamentally broken question. Regulations shouldn’t be based on what makes things easy – by their nature they are friction. Regulations should exist that are logical, protect people from real harm, prevent exploitable loop holes, and keep markets healthy/fair. When regulations exist because of ideology, or another poor reason they should be culled.

I would prefer if the question was framed as, “how can we make it so that investing and operating a business in London is an enticing prospect.” The most immediate way is reclaiming recycling routes from private hands, enabling 535 businesses, charities, and places of worship (City of London, 2026) to get service again. Beyond that, constructing my Trimodal Port would create union jobs, directly and indirectly, which creates customers with disposable income – if businesses can attract them. Good luck to all, may the best products and services win.

What changes would you make to municipal approvals, regulation, procurement and customer service to make it easier to invest, build and operate a business in London?

London City Council approved the 2025–2035 ReconciliAction Plan in May 2025, committing the City to 155 actions over ten years. What should the next Council do to translate these commitments into a clear, properly resourced implementation plan developed with Indigenous partners? How would you advance reconciliation through economic development, procurement, planning, cultural investment and municipal services?

While I respect the underlying intentions of the ReconciliAction Plan and recognize it has positive ideas, my core governing philosophy is rooted in absolute fairness and equal treatment: I vehemently oppose granting special advantages, carve-outs, or preferential benefits to any singular group.

Parts of the ReconciliAction Plan that don’t interfere with my 10 major positions or harm other groups through special benefits are fine to implement and a city councilor can spear head them – my attention would be focused elsewhere: First on bureaucratic transparency to restore effective oversight by firing bureaucrats for hiding information, then the formation of the municipal construction company to align development with city priorities, then my Trimodal Port to create an alternative revenue stream to property tax and anchor businesses to London. After that I would pursue the rest of my major and minor positions.

When we stop playing zero sum games, and start creating solutions that benefit everyone, we can pool our resources toward a common goal and collectively benefit from the results.

London’s growth depends on roads, transit, water and wastewater systems, emergency services and community facilities. How would you determine which investments proceed first, pay for growth fairly and maintain competitive property taxes?

I would prioritize making a second service core, then a third, to drastically lower the cost of services and give uniform service coverage across London.

It’s irresponsible to lower taxes when London has massive debt and a population who can’t feed itself because you need those resources to resolve those issues. Conversely, raising taxes above inflation is an admittance of incompetence – After stepping up to claim you could do the job, knowing the constraints, you don’t get to turn around and say, “I can’t do it because I need more money.”

Regardless of what London does, raising taxes above inflation would not be an option for me. Once London had viable alternative revenue streams the annual tax raise would drop below inflation.

London City Council approved the Climate Emergency Action Plan in 2022. The Plan calls for a 55 per cent reduction in community-wide greenhouse-gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. Which elements of the Plan would you prioritise, accelerate or change during the next Council term? How would you ensure that climate action strengthens resilience, affordability and economic competitiveness for residents and businesses?

This question assumes I am running without a plan or priorities of my own. If elected, my priority would be to implement my 10 major positions because they directly address the current crisis.

That said, I do support lots of the environmental plan’s goals, but my approach may be different in achieving them. I don’t like surface level solutions – I would push for solutions such as my Under-Sidewalk Joint Utility Trench, which you can read about on my website, that would allow roads and utility infrastructure to last decades longer, significantly improving city aesthetics by completely eliminating the need to cut back the urban tree canopy to protect overhead wires, essentially eliminate downtime, and eliminate the need to constantly tear up and patch the road.

Once my major positions are underway, my attention can be directed to quality of life measures such as this simultaneous infrastructure solution; which I invented.

Ontario’s strong-mayor legislation gives the Mayor of London enhanced authority in areas including the municipal budget, senior administration and matters connected to provincial priorities.
If you are a candidate for Mayor: How would you use these powers, when would you choose not to use them, and what standards of transparency and accountability would you apply?

London is in a state of crisis: If elected I will use strong mayor powers when I believe doing so will improve the prosperity of the city or prevent the city from collapsing further. Their use wouldn’t be arbitrary or petty and I would explain the logic, influences, and reservations, as applicable for every vote I cast.

What role should arts, culture and the creative industries play in London’s economic and community development? How should the City support cultural organisations, artists, venues, festivals and creative businesses while ensuring that municipal investment produces lasting public value?

London should enable artistic expression but it doesn’t have the funds or time to prioritize arts until the current crisis passes.

If an illogical city policy or city neglect is getting in the way of artistic/cultural expression then that should be promptly addressed, but otherwise the city should prioritize its duty to the prosperity of its citizens and leave the curating to others more qualified.

Contact Us