Isabelle Skalski plans for city council after winning the Osgoode by-election

Osgoode Ward has a new city councillor. During a by-election on Monday, Isabelle Skalski won the seat with 34 per cent of the vote. She replaces former representative George Darouze, who was elected as the new PC MPP for Carleton in April. 

In second place was Doug Thompson who many saw as a frontrunner given his name recognition. Thompson, who was city councillor for the rural ward from 2001 until 2014, took 22.6 per cent of the votes. It wasn’t a less impressive result than when he ran against the incumbent Darouze in 2022 and lost by a little over 200 votes, or 38.5 per cent of the vote. On Monday, Colette Lacroix-Velthuis came in third at 22.5 per cent and Dan O'Brien in fourth at 13.2 per cent.

• In total 11 names were on the ballot. 

Voter turnout was low — about half of what was recorded in the 2022 municipal election — at 24.1 per cent. In total, 6,223 votes were cast. That could be due to voter fatigue with Osgoode residents also voting in this year's provincial and federal elections. Residents will then get to do it all over again in 16 months when the next city-wide municipal election is held. 

The Ottawa Lookout sat down with Skalski the afternoon after her election win to discuss the biggest issues Osgoode is facing and how her leadership will be different than her predecessor. Answers have been edited for length and clarity.

Lookout: Tell me about what drove you to run?

Skalski: It was sort of a two-part decision: I think that part of it was the opportunity presented itself, where I felt like I really did have knowledge and the relationships in the community to know what their needs are. But the other was a bit of frustration about the way government works and a bit of sadness about the way people feel about it. I’m someone who knows that we can do better.

Lookout: So how do you start creating that trust in Osgoode specifically?

Skalski: When we talk about things like consultation in these concepts of transparency, I don't think we quite get it right at this moment. I think we've seen consultation as putting a lot of information on the Internet or having a meeting, but it's not really the opportunity to listen and to change things. 

I see it as an opportunity to make decisions locally, which means you engage people in the whole process. We need to present ‘This is the information we have. This is where we're headed. How do you feel? What are your first thoughts?’ You can adjust things as you go and not be so rigid about it.

Lookout: Tell our readers about what you think some of the biggest issues currently are in Osgoode Ward?

Skalski: Everything I care about centres around the concept of safe streets. One of the biggest issues we're seeing is a lot more traffic in Osgoode, and the types of traffic we are seeing are also changing, including lots of trucks. It's faster. There's a lot more speeding. People don't feel like their streets are safe. 

It means something different in each community. In some areas, people don’t feel comfortable walking to school. For others, it’s about paving shoulders, and actually sharing the roads with trucks and farming equipment.  

Lookout: A big file at city hall right now is Tewin which is planned to be built in Osgoode. Some councillors are calling for the plans to be scrapped, but city staff have said that would cause complications and perhaps legal issues. Do you think Tewin should happen or be cancelled?

• In case you missed it: You can read the Lookout’s latest coverage on Tewin here.

Skalski: It’s a really controversial file and in the ward, it's four years into the planning process. Everything online is really vague, and it’s a tough story to piece together. There are a lot of opinions, and trying to put facts together and understand why sections have been made and where to go from here is challenging to piece together. 

I stand in a place where I said I've been very pragmatic about this for four years and I don't believe that this ship is turning around. I think this is about making the right choices every step along the way. And that means having the good information and accurate facts about what exactly is happening, where we are in the process and what are the impacts on the environment? What are the costs associated with this? These kinds of very practical questions have not necessarily been at the centre of this discussion. 

At this moment, I look forward to engaging the community and talking to them, and making sure I'm representing their interest appropriately.

Lookout: Tewin is a file that was voted on by the last term of council. But if you were at the table then, do you think you would have supported the project?

Skalski: I don't know. It’s a very hypothetical scenario because it's unclear what information they had exactly at the moment to make a decision. I can't go back in time, but I would have handled it differently. I think I would've asked different questions and I don't know that we'd be in the same place today. 

It’s difficult because people are being misled in my mind and that's not helpful. I think this is people's home. This is their neighbourhood. They were hoping to live in a rural community and now there's potentially going to be a massive suburb near their homes. This has real implications for the way they live and the way they farm. It could be positive and they could benefit from new utilities.

But that information is really unclear and that uncertainty is not a good thing, and throwing in misinformation about costs that have not been landed yet is not helpful.

Lookout: Lastly, I want to ask about Lansdowne 2.0 which council will make final decisions about this fall. It’s a very controversial project with fewer area seats than currently with a big price tag. Do you plan to support it?

• In case you missed it: You can read the Lookout’s latest Lansdowne 2.0 coverage here. 

Skalski: The CBC had done a questionnaire on that, and I had said that I would not at this point support it. I look forward to getting a more wholesome briefing on Lansdowne, but on the surface, let’s just say I can think of other ways to spend $413 million.