11 days until Milton votes. Monday 26 October 2026. Everyone on the ballot, what each has filed, and what they say in their own words — see the ballot.
Candidate for Regional Councillor, Ward 3 · filed May 29, 2026
| Office sought | Regional Councillor, Ward 3 |
|---|---|
| Filing date | May 29, 2026 |
| Status | On the ballot |
| Campaign site | https://salmanzafar.ca/ |
| Email filed with the Clerk | [email protected] |
Source: the Town's certified candidate list. Contact details are those the candidate themselves gave the Clerk.
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 support the "We Make Milton" 2051 Official Plan’s shift away from car-centric sprawl toward urban intensification, but I would change how we sequence these developments. We cannot issue building permits for high-density areas, such as the 33-storey towers in the newly approved Agerton Secondary Plan, until the regional transit infrastructure like the Milton-Trafalgar GO Station is actually operational.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Where in your ward do you believe higher density belongs — and where doesn't it?
Higher density belongs strictly around planned major transit hubs, specifically the future Milton-Trafalgar GO Station to attract employers, shorten commutes, and diversify our commercial tax base, provided that transit delivery timelines are guaranteed before occupancy. It does not belong around the existing downtown GO station or older urban corridors, where road networks and underground utility infrastructure are already constrained. Within established single-family neighbourhoods, "gentle density" (such as duplexes) can be safely integrated, provided schools, community services and emergency response services have verified capacity to absorb that localized growth. Sprawling residential density does not belong on protected agricultural lands.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
When a development application conflicts with community opposition but complies with the Official Plan, how do you decide?
I rely on my core principle of "Evidence Over Populism" while proactively engaging residents to share the facts, trade-offs, and long-term financial implications of every scenario. If a development complies with the Official Plan on paper, but objective data shows that our roads, water and wastewater networks, or emergency services lack verified capacity to handle the demand, I will not support rubber-stamping it. True leadership means refusing to cave to political convenience or blindly approve applications; every decision must be justified by verified capacity and long-term fiscal responsibility.
On the same question, their website says: “I will prioritize hard facts and community affordability, treating you as the number one stakeholder in every decision made.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
Milton is hitting its housing targets. Is that the right target, too low, or too fast?
We are building too fast for our infrastructure to keep up. Surface-level housing is currently being approved much faster than the highly expensive transportation, water, and wastewater infrastructure required to support it. We must tie new subdivision approvals directly to our actual, verified capacity to meet demand, rather than simply reacting to growth.
On the same question, their website says: “I will enforce a policy that ties new subdivision approvals directly to our current capacity to meet demand.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
What is one concrete action council can take to improve attainability for first-time buyers and renters, not just supply volume?
I will advocate for treating housing as a basic necessity not as a tool for wealth generation. I am in favor of implementing a Vacant Home Tax to discourage market speculation and increase local supply for both first-time buyers and renters. To protect renters from losing the affordable homes we already have, Council must also enact a Rental Renovation Licensing Bylaw to stop bad-faith renovictions. We cannot simply build new units while letting existing attainable homes disappear. We must ensure the next generation isn't priced out of the community they grew up in.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Should Milton use tools like inclusionary zoning, pre-zoning around transit, or reduced parking minimums? Which, and where?
We should utilize pre-zoning and inclusionary zoning exclusively within Protected Major Transit Station Areas (like the future Milton-Trafalgar GO hub), legally requiring developers to build affordable units while ensuring building permits are strictly tied to operational transit timelines. However, I oppose blanket reductions to parking minimums before all-day transit is established. Instead, Council must mandate that high-density developments provide sufficient underground or structured parking to prevent gridlock and avoid spilling into residential neighbourhoods.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
What, specifically, can a Milton council member do to advance all-day two-way GO service beyond passing motions?
As your Regional Councillor, I will aggressively advocate directly to Metrolinx and the provincial government to deliver all-day, two-way 15-minute GO rail service on the Milton line, making it a mandatory condition for meeting provincial housing targets. The Province cannot demand rapid housing growth without delivering the required rail infrastructure to support it.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Would you support increasing Milton Transit's budget and service hours, and how would you pay for it?
Yes, I strongly support investments to annualize Sunday transit service, extend weekday service to 10:30 p.m. We must sustainably fund these enhancements through growth revenues and senior government partnerships, as I strongly disagree with improving local transit by imposing higher fares that penalize everyday commuters. I will also build a data-driven business case for free transit to our seniors to promote active living. It will have a negligible impact on operating costs as the majority of transit revenue comes from peak-hour commuters and students. Seniors predominantly travel during off-peak hours when buses run with significant empty seat capacity. Boarding seniors onto an already scheduled, half-empty off-peak bus incurs zero marginal operating cost as it requires no additional buses, driver hours, or extra fuel.
On the same question, their website says: “I will ensure we build a well-planned town that attracts top-tier commercial and industrial businesses to diversify our tax base.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
What is the single worst traffic pinch point in your ward, and what is your fix?
The single worst impending pinch point is the CN Logistics Hub, which is projected to add up to 1,600 transport trucks daily to our roads starting 2027. My fix is two-pronged: push Halton Region to build dedicated truck lanes along the Britannia and Tremaine corridors to physically separate freight from daily commuter traffic, and enforce strict Heavy Truck Route By-laws to legally prevent transport trucks from cutting through the residential neighbourhoods along the James Snow Parkway corridor.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Growth-related revenue is shrinking. Rank your preference: higher property taxes, more debt, deferred projects, or reduced service levels — and defend it.
My Ranking: (1) Strategic Debt / Internal Borrowing, (2) Deferred Non-Critical Projects, (3) Property Tax Adjustments, (4) Reduced Service Levels. Reducing core services or deferring maintenance creates a massive infrastructure deficit that acts as a hidden tax on our children. Cutting frontline services is an absolute non-starter. To bridge growth-revenue shortfalls without burdening existing taxpayers, we must strategically utilize internal borrowing from reserve funds to provide interim financing for capital costs. This ensures projects advance while holding future Development Charges accountable to repay the funds, ensuring developers ultimately pay their equitable share so that growth pays for growth. Where tough choices are required, we must apply strict project-selection criteria rooted in whole lifecycle costing, prioritizing only the most cost-effective, essential projects based on realistic inflation-adjusted budgets. Non-essential expansion projects can be deferred until revenues catch up, utilizing property taxes solely for keeping our existing infrastructure assets in a state of good repair to maintain our current service levels.
On the same question, their website says: “No hidden tax increases to fund growth or subsidize new subdivisions.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
What tax increase range do you consider acceptable for 2027, and what would justify exceeding it?
I aim to keep property tax adjustments aligned with inflation and household affordability while safeguarding essential services. Exceeding that threshold is only justified when backed by transparent, validated data to fund strategic asset lifecycle interventions that prevent costly premature infrastructure failure and protect future taxpayers. It is like paying slightly more today to avoid a major expense a few years down the road. We need political leadership willing to think holistically beyond the term of Council.
On the same question, their website says: “No hidden tax increases to fund growth or subsidize new subdivisions.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
Name one Town expenditure you would cut, or one you would add.
I would add dedicated funding to expand our local by-law enforcement team paired with proactive public education, upholding shared community standards and fostering harmony between existing and new residents. To fund this without raising taxes, we should realize savings by auditing major operational contracts and deploying corporate decision-support tools to streamline analytics, eliminate departmental data silos, and boost staff productivity.
On the same question, their website says: “I will ensure growth pays for growth through development charges and intergovernmental partnerships—so existing residents aren’t forced to subsidize new subdivisions through property tax hikes.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
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?
I will aggressively advocate to our provincial representatives for fair-share funding, pushing for legislation that synchronizes provincial capital investments in healthcare and schools with mandated housing targets. It will ensure social infrastructure is built proactively alongside new housing, rather than years later. Residents will measure success by seeing actual, data-driven alignment between new subdivision approvals and verified provincial funding commitments for school and healthcare capacity.
On the same question, their website says: “I will advocate for higher funding for Halton Paramedic Services’ Community Paramedicine Program to provide non-emergency healthcare inside a patient’s home.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
What is your position on the Milton Education Village's priorities and timeline?
The Milton Education Village must prioritize what was promised: bringing Wilfrid Laurier University, Conestoga College, and high-skill jobs to Milton, not just more residential sprawl. Its timeline must be strictly tied to real infrastructure. Growth must pay for growth: meaning road upgrades along Tremaine and Britannia, local transit links, and regional water and sewer capacity must be built before new homes are occupied.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
What recreation or community facility gap would you prioritise next, and where?
For all existing community centres, I will expand youth and senior programs to 12 hours a day, year-round to enhance quality of life for all demographics rooted in equity in service delivery. I will also prioritize installing additional play structures in growing neighbourhoods in Milton Ward 3 and Ward 4 with young families.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
How should council balance aggregate and quarry operations against groundwater and community concerns?
Protecting our municipal drinking water and the environment is non-negotiable. Council must enforce the Halton-Hamilton Source Protection Plan and firmly oppose any aggregate extraction below the water table. Council must demand independent scientific reviews on all quarry applications and strictly control haul routes to keep dust and trucks away from neighbourhoods.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
What is your commitment to rural Milton on roads, internet, and service equity?
I am committed to true service equity by establishing minimum acceptable service levels across all Milton communities, regardless of postal code. If elected, I will introduce transparent, auditable decision-making criteria ensuring rural road networks are never a lower priority in municipal budgets, while advocating to guarantee all residents have equitable and reliable access to high-speed broadband connectivity and emergency response services.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Should Milton's urban boundary expand further within this term? Under what conditions?
No, we must move away from endless residential sprawl and protect our agricultural lands. Greenfield development requires entirely new networks of infrastructure that saddle our future generations with unsustainable lifecycle costs. We must focus on smart intensification within our existing boundaries to maximize the capacity of the infrastructure we already own. Expansion should only be entertained if verified data proves our existing urban footprint cannot absorb further capacity.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Would you use, or support the use of, strong mayor powers? Under what circumstances?
I strongly oppose the use of strong mayor powers to overturn democratically achieved Council decisions. Under no circumstances should unilateral authority replace collaborative governance, as it sidelines local ward voices and undermines transparent and data-driven public consultations.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
What is one specific change you would make to how council engages residents between elections?
I will introduce regular, structured 'Pre-Council Community Briefings' ahead of major financial and planning decisions to break down complex staff reports in plain language. Residents shouldn't need a degree in municipal finance, urban planning or civil engineering to participate. This will ensure community questions and concerns are brought directly to the Council floor before decisions are made.
On the same question, their website says: “I will proactively engage, educate, and consult the community before major financial decisions are made by Council.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
What does Milton need more right now — continuity or change — and why are you the answer?
Milton urgently needs to shift away from reactive politics and populism toward proactive, evidence-based decision-making. We must stop treating local government like a popularity contest and start treating elections like job interviews to manage a multi-billion-dollar infrastructure portfolio. I am the answer because I offer proven competence over political talking points. With 13 years of verifiable municipal experience from shaping provincial infrastructure regulations to advancing infrastructure asset management programs in municipalities including Halton Region, I bring the technical rigor required to scrutinize technical staff reports against auditable decision-making criteria that align with community expectations and affordability. I have the proven expertise to maintain our critical infrastructure and deliver on my commitments without forcing unreasonable property tax increases. I am ready to advance the interests of all taxpayers by ensuring equity in service delivery and serving as a strong, authoritative voice at the Council table.
On the same question, their website says: “Milton’s rapid growth demands more than empty promises and the same old political rhetoric.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
What Halton Region decision from this past term would you have voted differently on?
I would have voted against approving capital financing strategies and development charge policies that front-end developer infrastructure and shift the financial carrying costs of rapid growth onto existing ratepayers. In 2024, Halton Region approved floating nearly $700 million in debt to build trunk water and wastewater infrastructure for new developer subdivisions, hoping to recover those funds over time. At the exact same time, everyday residents were hit with a 4.3% water and wastewater rate hike, nearly two-thirds of which (2.8%) was essentially a "catch-up tax" just to repair aging, deteriorating pipes that had been underfunded. Council has also continued to ease cash-flow pressures on the development industry by deferring development charge collections until occupancy and entertaining programs that require local taxpayers to backfill growth-related capital. Growth must pay for growth. As an infrastructure asset management practitioner, I will not support financing structures that force established homeowners to subsidize private subdivision expansions through higher utility bills and municipal debt while our own state-of-good-repair backlog compounds for the next generation.
Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →
Regional priorities — water and wastewater capacity, policing costs, waste — pick the one you would champion.
I will champion water and wastewater capacity. Housing approvals are outpacing the highly expensive underground pipes required to support them. We must resolve these critical infrastructure bottlenecks and proactively fund our state-of-good-repair programs to secure Milton's foundation before approving any further expansion. Growth cannot outrun our long-term fiscal capacity.
On the same question, their website says: “I will ensure our underground water and wastewater infrastructure has the required capacity to support growth before new developments are approved.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →
Would you support large-scale data centres being developed in our municipality, and what would make you support or oppose a specific project?
No answer to this question.
How would you weigh the economic benefits of a data centre against its use of land, electricity, water, and other municipal infrastructure?
No answer to this question.
Should the municipality actively pursue data-centre investment, or only consider proposals as they come forward?
No answer to this question.
Accounts linked from the candidate's own website or filed with the Clerk. Nothing here was found by searching for their name: guessing at an account and attaching it to a real person is a mistake worth avoiding entirely. These are links out, not content read or quoted here.
What they said in answer to the questions themselves is under Where they stand, question by question.
Captured 2026-09-05 from https://salmanzafar.ca/. These are the candidate's own words on their own site, not a summary written here. Campaign sites change; this is what it said on that date.
This is not an answer to the questionnaire. The one-line description of each theme is written by RecordAI from the candidate’s own site; the quotation beneath it is theirs, verbatim, and is checked against the page it is attributed to before it appears. It is what their own website says on each theme, with the sentence it came from. A candidate writing that they care about traffic has not thereby said whether they would raise the transit budget, so nothing here is treated as a position on a question they were not asked. Every quotation was checked against the page it is attributed to.
The candidate focuses on fiscal transparency and asset management, arguing for objective frameworks to ensure tax dollars are spent efficiently. They propose using lifecycle costing to address infrastructure wear from the CN Hub and advocate for a dedicated HST share for local infrastructure. [RecordAI]
In their words: “I will use my professional background in infrastructure asset management to ensure every tax dollar is spent transparently using an objective, auditable framework.” — their site, captured 2026-10-05
The candidate pledges to donate 100% of their compensation to local charities, framing political service as an act of community stewardship rather than a career. They emphasize transparency, community involvement in decision-making, and the importance of regulatory oversight and accountability. [RecordAI]
In their words: “I have pledged to donate 100% of my compensation as Regional Councillor to local food banks and charities.” — their site, captured 2026-10-05
The candidate emphasizes the need for competent, long-term planning to manage Milton's rapid growth. They advocate for scaling infrastructure to meet demand and proactively managing development to ensure sustainable service levels. [RecordAI]
In their words: “I want to ensure we proactively plan for its rapid growth with competence and integrity.” — their site, captured 2026-10-05
The candidate links housing affordability to broader governance issues, arguing that proactive regulation is necessary to address the crisis faced by youth. They also highlight the conflict between provincial housing mandates and local environmental concerns regarding the CN Logistics Hub. [RecordAI]
In their words: “This is the same selfish attitude that stops us from addressing the housing affordability crisis faced by our youth and young professionals.” — their site, captured 2026-10-05
The candidate pledges to expand youth and senior programs to 12 hours a day year-round. They also commit to ensuring equity in the delivery of municipal services to support diverse demographics, including Afro-Caribbean and Black residents. [RecordAI]
In their words: “Expand youth and senior programs to 12 hours a day year-round.” — their site, captured 2026-10-05
The candidate proposes specific measures to manage traffic impacts from the CN Logistics Hub, including dedicated truck lanes and strict routing by-laws. They also aim to optimize transit routes to improve connectivity to schools, hospitals, and employment hubs. [RecordAI]
In their words: “Optimize transit routes and improve connectivity to schools, hospitals, employment hubs and places of worship to reduce traffic congestion.” — their site, captured 2026-10-05
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.
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.
Everyone else on this ballot line, in alphabetical order.
16 of the 44 candidates who could be reached have answered the same 26 questions. Replies are open until Sunday 11 October 2026. 1 other candidate publishes no contact address anywhere, so they could not be asked. Read the answers, and who has answered → · the questions
One email a week with what moved on the record, Ward 3 first. No spam, one click to leave.
1 correction affects what this page shows.
Every correction made on this site, and what caused each one →