Methodology and sources

1. Tier 1

   Official primary record

   Legislation, regulation, City agenda, minutes, motion, amendment, vote, staff report, filing, government dataset, decision, procurement record, candidate filing, or official transcript.

2. Tier 2

   Direct candidate or party source

   Policy page, release, speech, interview recording, verified public statement, questionnaire answer, or official campaign publication.

3. Tier 3

   Authoritative professional record

   A public employer, board, regulator, professional association, published paper, or organization record that establishes role and action.

4. Tier 4

   Reputable reporting

   A named outlet and author using identifiable evidence or direct interviews.

5. Tier 5

   Commentary and public discussion

   Useful for leads, framing, and disputed viewpoints. Not sufficient for a material factual claim that a stronger source can support.

●Yes

Direct evidence supports the proposition.

○No

Direct evidence rejects the proposition.

◑Conditional

The position depends on stated conditions.

□Unclear

Relevant evidence exists but does not resolve the proposition.

···No public position located

Reasonable documented searches found no attributable position as of the check date.

There are 5 states and no sixth. A state is never converted into a point total or aggregate verdict.

Current rule

Now

Listed alphabetically by surname.

Final rule

Later

Listed in the official ballot order after the City completes the random draw.

Roster gates

2

Official checks

Order everywhere

One

No route-specific sorting

• R01

  Every candidate's record is read against the same seven questions.

• R02

  Each question breaks down into propositions, and each proposition is answered with one of five factual states.

• R03

  A state that asks for a position is answered Yes, No, or Conditional only where an attributable public statement supports it.

• R04

  Where a documented search finds nothing attributable, the answer is No public position located, which is a fact about the record and not about the candidate.

• R05

  A party position is recorded as the party's and marked as such; it is never filed as the candidate speaking.

• R06

  Every answer carries its evidence, its date, and its source.

1. Q1 / Vancouver's civic AI direction

   Open the complete question

   +

   Where should the City of Vancouver use artificial intelligence during the next four years, and where should it not be used?

   Please identify:

   • one high-value municipal use you would advance;
   • one unacceptable or prohibited use; and
   • the principle that separates the two.

   Please also state who remains accountable when a City employee or contractor uses an AI system to produce advice, content, analysis, or a decision.

2. Q2 / Public register and resident rights

   Open the complete question

   +

   Will you support a public register of AI and automated decision systems used by the City and its agencies?

   Please state whether the register should include the responsible department, vendor, purpose, data sources, risk assessment, human oversight, performance evidence, reported incidents, and current status. When an AI or automated system materially affects a resident, what rights should that person have to notice, a plain-language explanation, access to a real human, correction, review, appeal, and redress?

3. Q3 / Procurement, privacy, workers, and accountability

   Open the complete question

   +

   What requirements should apply when Vancouver buys, builds, pilots, or renews an AI system?

   Please address:

   • privacy and data minimization;
   • security and data residency;
   • independent testing and City audit access;
   • open standards, intellectual property, portability, and vendor lock-in;
   • accuracy, bias, accessibility, incident reporting, and responsibility for harm;
   • worker consultation, training, job redesign, collective bargaining, and workplace surveillance; and
   • conditions that would require the City to suspend or terminate a system.

4. Q4 / Data-centre development

   Open the complete question

   +

   Which position best reflects yours?

   • A. Continue considering proposals under current rules.
   • B. Allow proposals only under a new data-centre framework.
   • C. Pause or prohibit new approvals for a defined period.
   • D. Another approach.

   Please explain how your approach would address electricity, water withdrawal and consumption, cooling, heat reuse, land use, noise, operational and embodied emissions, grid and infrastructure costs, emergency planning, and decommissioning. Please identify which decisions belong to the City and which require provincial, utility, federal, regulatory, or First Nations action.

5. Q5 / The public bargain

   Open the complete question

   +

   What measurable public benefits should Vancouver require from a large AI or data-centre project?

   Please address local procurement, apprenticeships and career pathways, taxes and infrastructure costs, heat reuse, community-benefit agreements, research partnerships, accessible compute for public-interest organizations and local firms, transparency, and consequences when promised benefits are not delivered. Which benefits are non-negotiable, and which should be evaluated project by project?

6. Q6 / First Nations governments, rights, and data governance

   Open the complete question

   +

   How would your administration work government-to-government with the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations on municipal AI, digital infrastructure, land use, and data governance?

   Please address:

   • decisions that require government-to-government engagement;
   • rights, title, Nation laws, protocols, and decision authority;
   • ownership, equity, revenue, procurement, employment, or capacity-building opportunities; and
   • control, access, retention, use, and disclosure of Nation-controlled information.

   Please distinguish negotiated benefits from rights-based obligations.

7. Q7 / First 100 days

   Open the complete question

   +

   What single civic-AI action would you complete or formally initiate during your first 100 days as mayor?

   Please identify:

   • the concrete deliverable;
   • the responsible City body or external partner;
   • any required Council motion, budget, procurement, policy, consultation, or intergovernmental action;
   • the expected completion or public-report date; and
   • the evidence residents should use to determine whether it happened.

1. 01

   A candidate or a member of the public can identify a factual error and supply a public source.

2. 02

   A correction to a factual error is made and recorded with its date.

3. 03

   A disagreement with a BC + AI interpretation is published alongside the interpretation rather than replacing it.

4. 04

   Superseded versions stay in the version history. A correction never means deleting the record of what was there before.

Paid or boosted promotion is prohibited under the current owner decision. Elections BC's published guide identifies potential exclusions for qualifying no-cost websites, free internet posts, private communications, free media coverage, and direct communications to an organization's members. Whether this purpose-built guide and each actual distribution channel satisfy those exclusions depends on the production, audience, cost, independence, and format facts. Issue 2402 must record the activity-by-activity determination before public launch or outreach.