Maliha K. Ahmed

For each theme: what the candidate answered, what their own website says, and what the council record shows if they have sat on Council. The three are set beside each other and left there. Nothing is scored, and no conclusion is drawn on the reader's behalf.

Where their own site speaks to one of these questions the sentence is quoted under that question. Everything else it says is set out in From their site.

Do you support the Official Plan as adopted? If not, what specifically would you seek to change?

I wouldn’t say that I fully support the Official Plan as adopted. There are elements of it that I believe move Milton in the right direction, but there are also areas where I would want to see changes and continued review as our community grows.

My biggest concern is the pace and type of growth, and whether our infrastructure is actually keeping up with it. We cannot simply approve more density and thousands of new homes and assume everything else will somehow catch up. Housing has to be planned alongside transit, roads, schools, healthcare, parks, recreation and other community infrastructure.

I also believe we need to keep asking a very important question about affordability. It is not enough to say we are building thousands of units. I want to know: who can actually afford to live in them?

I support creating more housing choices and building complete communities, and I believe transit-supported development can make sense in the right locations. But I also want to protect our natural areas, agricultural lands and established communities from poorly planned development.

So I would not give the Official Plan a blanket endorsement. I would approach it with a critical eye and continue pushing for changes where necessary.

For me, the principle is simple: growth, yes — but responsible, affordable and infrastructure-supported growth.

⸻

Where in Milton do you believe higher density belongs — and where doesn't it?

Higher density makes the most sense around major transit corridors, particularly around the Milton GO Station and other areas where people can realistically live without depending on a car for every trip.

It also makes sense in planned growth areas where infrastructure can be designed for that density from the beginning.

What I don’t support is dropping very high density into established neighbourhoods without considering traffic, schools, parking, parks and the existing character of that community.

And I would be extremely cautious about development that threatens the Niagara Escarpment, environmentally sensitive lands or productive agricultural land.

Density itself isn’t the enemy.

Poorly planned density is.

⸻

When a development application conflicts with community opposition but complies with the Official Plan, how do you decide?

I would start by listening.

Compliance with the Official Plan is obviously important, and council has legal responsibilities under the Planning Act. But meeting the minimum legal requirements doesn’t automatically mean every concern raised by residents is unreasonable.

I would ask: What exactly are residents objecting to? Is it height? Traffic? Safety? Infrastructure? Environmental impact? Lack of affordable housing?

Then I would look for changes that address legitimate concerns while staying within the law.

Residents should not discover that consultation means, “Thank you for coming, but everything has already been decided.”

At the same time, leadership also means being honest when council does not legally have the power to simply reject an application.

My commitment is that people will understand why I made the decision, even when they don’t agree with it.

Milton is hitting its housing targets. Is that the right target, too low, or too fast?

I don’t judge housing success by one number.

Milton has committed to facilitating 21,000 homes by 2031, and exceeding housing targets can certainly be positive.

But if we build 21,000 homes and teachers, young families, seniors and our own children still can’t afford them, have we really solved the housing problem?

For me there are three measurements:

How many homes are we building?

Can ordinary people afford them?

And is the infrastructure keeping pace?

We need all three.

⸻

What is one concrete action council can take to improve attainability for first-time buyers and renters, not just supply volume?

I would use municipal incentives much more strategically.

If a developer is receiving municipal incentives, faster approvals or other benefits, I want the public to receive something meaningful in return — particularly affordable and below-market housing.

My platform supports incentives for builders who create subsidized, environmentally responsible housing.

I also want Milton to encourage a wider range of housing — smaller ownership units, purpose-built rentals, secondary units, townhomes and family-sized apartments.

We cannot keep building communities where the only choices are a very expensive detached house or a small condo.

Housing policy should help people build a life, not simply increase the number of units on a spreadsheet.

⸻

Should Milton use tools like inclusionary zoning, pre-zoning around transit, or reduced parking minimums? Which, and where?

Yes, but strategically.

I support transit-oriented pre-zoning around areas such as the Milton GO Station because if we want people to use transit, housing and jobs need to be close to transit.

I also support exploring inclusionary zoning wherever provincial legislation allows Milton to use it effectively, because some of the value created by major development should translate into attainable housing.

And I support reduced parking requirements in genuinely transit-supported locations.

But I would not apply reduced parking requirements everywhere. If the transit isn’t there yet, removing parking doesn’t magically make people stop needing cars.

Build the transit and density together.

What, specifically, can a Milton council member do to advance all-day two-way GO service beyond passing motions?

This is where I think municipal leadership needs to become much more persistent.

Milton cannot order Metrolinx to provide all-day two-way GO service. So I would never pretend the Mayor has a magic button.

But the Mayor can build a coordinated advocacy campaign with Halton Region, neighbouring municipalities, our MPPs, MPs, major employers, educational institutions and residents.

I would push for regular meetings with Metrolinx and the Province, ask for clear milestones, and publicly report progress.

I would also make the economic case.

All-day GO isn’t simply a transportation issue. It affects investment, employment, housing and quality of life.

Milton has spent years asking for it.

It is time to move from asking occasionally to advocating relentlessly.

⸻

Would you support increasing Milton Transit's budget and service hours, and how would you pay for it?

Yes.

If we want people to use transit, transit has to be available when people actually need it.

Milton Transit currently operates much shorter hours on weekends than weekdays, and there is no regular statutory-holiday service. For a rapidly growing community, we need to keep improving that.

I would expand service gradually based on ridership and need, pursue provincial and federal transit funding aggressively, use growth-related revenues where legally appropriate, and make transit a higher budget priority.

My platform also looks at targeted fare relief for seniors, students and GO commuters.

I see public transit as infrastructure — not charity.

Good transit reduces congestion, improves access to employment and makes Milton more affordable.

⸻

What is the single worst traffic pinch point in Milton, and what is your fix?

Rather than pretend there is only one bad intersection, I would point to the Derry Road corridor and the connections feeding it, particularly around major north-south routes.

Milton’s own transportation planning identifies Derry Road as one of the major congested east-west corridors.

But we cannot road-widen our way out of every traffic problem.

My approach is coordinated: intersection improvements where needed, better traffic-signal timing, completing planned road connections, stronger transit and active transportation, and pushing harder for all-day GO.

The long-term solution to congestion is giving people more ways to move, not simply putting more cars onto wider roads.

Growth-related revenue is shrinking. Rank your preference: higher property taxes, more debt, deferred projects, or reduced service levels — and defend it.

My order would be:

First, carefully defer non-essential projects.

Second, use responsible long-term debt for long-lived infrastructure where appropriate.

Third, consider modest property-tax increases when necessary.

Reduced essential services would be my last choice.

I don’t believe balancing a budget by cutting the services families depend on is responsible government.

At the same time, I don’t believe residents should automatically receive the bill every time government faces pressure.

Before increasing taxes, I want to know that we have reviewed spending, pursued provincial and federal funding, examined partnerships and made sure growth is contributing its fair share.

Fiscal responsibility isn’t simply spending less.

It’s spending wisely.

⸻

What tax increase range do you consider acceptable for 2027, and what would justify exceeding it?

I would not responsibly promise an exact number before seeing the 2027 budget pressures, because that would be politics rather than budgeting.

My goal would be to keep the Town portion of the increase as close to inflation and household affordability as reasonably possible.

I would only support going significantly beyond that if there were a clear, publicly explained need — for example fire protection, critical infrastructure, transit or another essential service required by Milton’s growth.

And if I ask residents to pay more, I should be able to show them exactly what they are getting for it.

⸻

Name one Town expenditure you would cut, or one you would add.

I would add investment in public transit and community food security.

I’ve worked directly with food drives and community food initiatives, so I have seen that food insecurity isn’t an abstract statistic. It is happening to working families, seniors and children in our community.

I want the Town to become a stronger partner with community organizations through initiatives such as community gardens, food forests and better coordination of food-support programs.

And I would review discretionary consulting and administrative expenditures before cutting frontline community services.

Healthcare and schools are not municipal responsibilities, but residents feel the gaps locally. What is your advocacy plan, and how will residents measure whether it worked?

Saying “that’s not municipal jurisdiction” may technically be correct, but it doesn’t help the parent who can’t find a family doctor or the child sitting in an overcrowded classroom.

The Mayor’s job is also to advocate.

I would establish clear advocacy priorities with the Province and school boards and publish them.

Then I would report back publicly: Who did we meet? What did we ask for? What commitments were made? What changed?

Residents should be able to measure advocacy by results and progress, not photographs from meetings.

⸻

What is your position on the Milton Education Village's priorities and timeline?

I strongly support the Milton Education Village.

Having Wilfrid Laurier University and Conestoga College establish a presence here is important, but my vision for the MEV goes beyond campuses.

It should become a place where education connects directly to employment, innovation, healthcare, housing and transit.

I especially want young people who grow up in Milton to be able to study here, find meaningful employment here and afford to stay here.

The long-term plan anticipates at least 22,000 people and jobs in the area by 2051.

I want us to keep moving the permanent campuses, innovation district, housing and supporting infrastructure forward rather than allowing the project to lose momentum.

⸻

What recreation or community facility gap would you prioritise next, and where?

Indoor sports capacity is a major gap.

I’ve seen this personally through my son, who used to run a volleyball league in Milton and often had to rent facilities in Mississauga or Brampton because appropriate space wasn’t available here.

That shouldn’t be normal in a town growing as quickly as Milton.

I would prioritize additional flexible indoor recreation space — courts that can support volleyball, basketball, badminton and community programming — particularly in the growing southern part of Milton where thousands of new residents are coming.

Recreation isn’t a luxury. It is youth development, physical health, mental well-being and community building.

How should council balance aggregate and quarry operations against groundwater and community concerns?

Groundwater protection has to be non-negotiable.

Aggregate resources are important, but once an aquifer is damaged, we cannot simply replace it.

For projects such as the Reid Road Reservoir Quarry, Milton isn’t the final approval authority. That distinction matters.

But being a commenting agency doesn’t mean being silent.

I would insist on rigorous independent science, cumulative-impact analysis, groundwater monitoring and meaningful consultation with rural residents.

Where there is credible risk to drinking water or environmentally sensitive areas, I believe the burden should be on the proponent to demonstrate safety — not on residents to prove future harm after it occurs.

⸻

What is your commitment to rural Milton on roads, internet, and service equity?

A Milton postal code should mean something whether you live downtown, in Boyne or in rural Milton.

Rural residents pay taxes too, and they deserve safe roads, reliable infrastructure, connectivity and reasonable access to municipal services.

I would continue investing in rural road rehabilitation and road safety and advocate with other levels of government and telecommunications providers to close remaining broadband gaps.

Service equity doesn’t mean every neighbourhood receives the exact same service.

It means nobody is forgotten because they live farther from Town Hall.

⸻

Should Milton's urban boundary expand further within this term? Under what conditions?

I would be very cautious.

Before consuming additional farmland or environmentally sensitive land, we should demonstrate that we are making responsible use of land already designated for growth.

If expansion is eventually demonstrated to be necessary, it must be supported by infrastructure capacity, environmental studies, transportation planning and meaningful public consultation.

Growth should not automatically mean outward expansion.

Sometimes smarter growth means building better within the footprint we already have.

Would you use, or support the use of, strong mayor powers? Under what circumstances?

I believe strong powers should come with strong restraint.

The Mayor now has significant statutory powers, including proposing the municipal budget, directing staff in certain circumstances and exercising powers connected with provincial priorities.

I would not use those powers simply because I disagreed with council.

My first approach would always be collaboration and building consensus.

If an exceptional situation required me to use a strong-mayor power, I would explain publicly what power I was using, why I was using it and what outcome I was trying to achieve.

Power should never replace democracy.

⸻

What is one specific change you would make to how council engages residents between elections?

I would create regular Mayor and Council Community Forums in different parts of Milton.

Not just at Town Hall.

Go to the neighbourhoods. Go to community centres. Go to rural Milton. Hold evening and weekend sessions so working people can participate.

And most importantly, publish a follow-up:

You told us this.

Here is what we did.

Here is what we couldn’t do — and why.

Consultation without follow-up creates cynicism.

⸻

What does Milton need more right now — continuity or change — and why are you the answer?

Milton needs change — but not change for the sake of change.

We should respect what has been built here while recognizing that the Milton of today is very different from the Milton of twenty or thirty years ago.

We are younger, larger and much more diverse. Our challenges are different too — housing affordability, traffic, healthcare access, food insecurity, climate pressures and infrastructure trying to catch up with population growth.

I come from grassroots community work.

I’ve worked with families, seniors, youth, food programs, environmental initiatives and community organizations.

So when I talk about affordability or community services, I’m not speaking about numbers on a page. I’ve sat with the people behind those numbers.

I believe Milton needs leadership that is accessible, compassionate and willing to challenge the idea that growth alone equals success.

I want Milton to measure success by how well the people who live here are doing.

⸻

How would you use the mayor's budget-proposal power differently than the status quo?

I would make the Mayor’s budget much more participatory.

Before proposing it, I want residents to see the major choices and pressures facing us.

Then I would build the budget around a simple question:

Does this make everyday life better for Milton residents?

My priorities would be core infrastructure, fire and public safety, transit, parks and recreation, affordability initiatives and services that keep pace with growth.

I would also introduce stronger public reporting so residents can see not only what we budgeted, but whether programs actually delivered the promised results.

A municipal budget is not just an accounting exercise.

It is a statement of our values.

⸻

What is your working relationship plan with Halton Region, or its successor structure given the provincial regional-governance review?

The Mayor of Milton also serves on Halton Regional Council, so I would treat that relationship as fundamental to the job.

Many of the issues residents care about — water and wastewater infrastructure, major roads, public health, housing and social services — require regional cooperation.

And with the Province changing aspects of regional governance, including moving to a provincially appointed Regional Chair, Milton needs a strong voice at that table.

My approach would be collaborative but firm.

I will work with Burlington, Oakville and Halton Hills where our interests align, but my responsibility is to make sure Milton receives its fair share of infrastructure, services and investment.

Whatever governance structure the Province ultimately gives us, one principle doesn’t change:

Milton residents should never receive less of a voice because the structure of government changed.

Would you support large-scale data centres being developed in our municipality, and what would make you support or oppose a specific project?

I would not give a blanket yes to large-scale data centres in Milton.

For me, every proposal has to answer a very basic question: does this development make sense for Milton and for the people who live here?

Through my work on the board of Sustainable Milton, I have already been raising concerns about the potential impact of large data-centre development in our community. My concerns are not about technology or investment itself. They are about making sure we understand what we may be giving up in return — land, water, electricity, infrastructure capacity and environmental resources.

I have spent many years working with Milton families through Milton Muslim Moms and other community organizations, and one thing I have learned is that growth decisions made today stay with a community for generations.

I would therefore want a full and transparent assessment of a project’s water and electricity demands, environmental impact, infrastructure requirements, location, employment benefits and long-term economic value before supporting it.

If those impacts cannot be justified, or if a project puts an unreasonable burden on Milton’s resources for relatively little benefit to residents, I would not support it.

This is also consistent with my broader platform: I support responsible growth, not growth at any cost.

How would you weigh the economic benefits of a data centre against its use of land, electricity, water, and other municipal infrastructure?

Economic development is important, but we cannot look only at the dollar value of an investment announcement.

I would want to know what Milton is actually getting in return.

How many permanent local jobs will be created? What will the long-term tax benefit be? How much electricity and water will the facility require? What pressure will it put on infrastructure? Is this the best use of valuable employment land? And what are the environmental consequences twenty or thirty years from now?

My community work has always taught me to look at decisions through the eyes of the people who will actually live with the consequences.

The same principle runs through my platform. Whether we are talking about housing, transportation, development or infrastructure, growth has to improve people’s quality of life and infrastructure has to keep pace with it.

My work with Sustainable Milton has made me especially conscious that environmental resources cannot simply be treated as an afterthought once a development has already been approved.

I would expect those costs and benefits to be presented clearly to Council and to the public before a decision is made.

Should the municipality actively pursue data-centre investment, or only consider proposals as they come forward?

I don’t believe Milton should be actively chasing large-scale data centres simply because they represent a large investment on paper.

Milton should absolutely pursue good economic development and good jobs, but we should be strategic about the industries we attract.

I would rather see us actively pursue businesses and industries that create strong, long-term employment, contribute to our local economy and can operate responsibly within Milton’s infrastructure and environmental capacity.

When data-centre proposals come forward, they should be considered on their individual merits, with strong environmental and infrastructure standards and meaningful public transparency.

For me this is not about being anti-development. It is about asking the right questions before we say yes.

For years, whether through Milton Muslim Moms, Sustainable Milton, Milton Transitional Housing or my other community work, I have tried to speak up when I believe something will affect our community. I would bring that same approach to the Mayor’s office.

Milton is growing very quickly. We have an opportunity to shape that growth rather than simply react to it, and I believe we have a responsibility to get these decisions right.

Thank you again for giving candidates the opportunity to address this issue.

What they said in answer to the questions themselves is under Where they stand, question by question.

Many candidates campaign without a website. Its absence says nothing about them.

Written by other people, not by this site. Headlines and links only, with the outlet and date. Where a piece quotes them directly, that quotation is printed word for word and checked against the article it is attributed to.

None of this changes anything else on this page. A reporter’s summary is their compression of what was said, not the member’s own words, so nothing here is recorded as a position or compared against one. Where they are quoted directly, those words are theirs — and they are shown here rather than folded into a stance they did not write.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

They are named in this piece. It carries no direct quotation from them, so none is shown.

This is a record of what the Town certified and what the candidate publishes themselves. It contains no rating, ranking or endorsement, and no assessment of any candidate. Corrections are welcome and acted on within 48 hours — see the methodology page.