Sarah Marshall

Sarah Marshall currently sits as Town Councillor for Ward 4, and is seeking a different seat.

See their record on Council →

That page shows what they have moved, seconded and voted on where positions were recorded, with the coverage stated. It is a record of council business only, not an assessment of the person.

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?

Yes, I support the overall direction of Milton’s Official Plan. It provides an important framework for managing growth through 2051, while guiding where we build homes, employment, infrastructure and community services. The Official Plan’s focus on economic diversification, protecting employment lands and creating complete, connected communities is key. Milton needs to attract the right businesses, create good local jobs and strengthen our commercial and industrial tax base. We also need neighbourhoods where residents can access shops, services, recreation and transit without always relying on a car.

There are two areas I would strengthen: (1) Employment growth must keep pace with residential growth. We need to be more intentional about attracting businesses and investments that provide diverse, good-paying local jobs so more residents can live and work in Milton. (2) Transportation infrastructure must keep pace with growth. I would continue advocating for stronger regional transit connections while improving local transit service, frequency and coverage.

Overall, the Official Plan provides a strong foundation, but we must ensure growth delivers jobs, infrastructure, financial sustainability and a high quality of life for Milton residents.

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 where it can be supported by the infrastructure and services that residents need. This would include along major transportation corridors, for example Regional Road 25, near transit, and in areas where we can provide convenient access to shops, employment, recreation and other community amenities.

In Ward 4, I believe we need to be thoughtful about where that growth occurs. Density should not be added to existing neighbourhoods without considering traffic, parking, schools, parks, transit and the overall character of the community. Established low-rise residential areas should be protected from intensification that puts pressure on infrastructure or changes their character too dramatically.

Put more homes where they make sense, ensure the necessary infrastructure comes with them, and protect the established neighbourhoods and community spaces that make Ward 4 a great place to live.

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?

If after consulting with the residents of Ward 4 strong community opposition existed, I would not vote to support it.

Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →

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

Housing targets are set by the Province. The Town’s role is to determine how and where that growth occurs.

Development is a positive part of Milton’s future when it is matched with the infrastructure and services needed to support it. When new residents arrive before roads, transit, schools, parks, recreation facilities and other community infrastructure are ready, the result is more congestion, pressure on existing services and a reduced quality of life.

Growth should not be measured by how many homes are approved or built. We should also ask whether the infrastructure needed to support those homes is being delivered at the same pace.

Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →

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

Housing affordability was reviewed in February, 2026 by the current council. The review found that the Town’s residential development charges were already at the lower end of comparable municipalities, with the proposed rates moving Milton into the lower-to-mid range.

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?

Yes, Milton should make use of these tools. In fact, it already is and should continue to do so.

These tools should continue to be used on a targeted basis. For example, the use of pre-zoning and reduced parking around Milton GO and major transit corridors would be appropriate. These are areas where higher density makes sense and lower parking requirements can reduce construction costs.

The use of inclusionary zoning selectively around Milton GO and other major redevelopment sites would help ensure a defined portion of new units are genuinely affordable.

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?

Our community has already waited too long for this to become a reality. I will be a persistent and ongoing advocate of the need for this service to our local MPs, MPP, the Minister of Transportation and Metrolinx.

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 would support increasing Milton Transit’s budget and service hours, with improvements tied to measurable ridership and service goals.

As Ward 4’s local councillor, I supported Milton Transit’s Five-Year Service Plan which targets a major expansion in service, including more frequent routes, extended evening service and Sunday operations.

I would fund the expansion through a balanced, multi-year approach that prioritizes transit within the existing operating budget, using development charges and other growth-related funding for eligible capital costs, aggressive pursuit of provincial and federal grants, and growing fare revenue as ridership increases.

I would avoid relying exclusively on property tax increases. Instead, I would use the Town’s multi-year financial planning approach to phase in improvements while protecting affordability.

On the same question, their website says: “I have advocated for and supported improved transit with the introduction of Sunday service, additional bus routes, more buses on the road, and increased service frequency to better connect residents across Milton.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →

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

We see the most congestion in Ward 4 is the Regional Road 25 corridor, particularly between Derry Road and Britannia.

Britannia has already received its major widening, including six lanes through Ward 4. The remaining problem is that RR25 is becoming the bottleneck that feeds traffic into and out of that expanded east-west network.

My fix would be to make the RR25 expansion a priority. I would advocate for Halton Region to accelerate the widening of RR25, while immediately optimizing signal timing and turn phases at the major intersections. I would also require traffic from new developments to be incorporated into a corridor-wide plan rather than solving each intersection independently.

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.

I would rank these as follows: (1) higher property taxes (2) defer lower-priority projects (3) more debt and (4) reduced service levels.

I would choose modest, predictable property-tax increases before cutting core services. These are difficult decisions to make and I will always consider balancing affordability with investments in transit, infrastructure, fire protection and other services.

Second, I would defer projects that are desirable but not urgent, rather than reduce day-to-day services residents rely on.

Third, I would use debt selectively, primarily for major infrastructure with a long, useful life. The 2026 capital program is $125.8 million, with almost three quarters of that program funded externally, demonstrating that Milton can limit the tax burden by maximizing development charges, grants and other funding.

Service cuts would be my last resort*.* Milton is growing rapidly, and we need to continue to prioritize connected transit, quality facilities and planned growth.

Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →

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

The Town’s 2026 budget included a 6.94% (approximately $24.61 per $100,000 of assessment) increase in the Town’s portion of the residential tax bill. Rather than viewing that as a new normal, I would use the Town’s multi-year financial strategy to provide greater predictability and carefully manage the pace of future increases. Inflation is an important factor, but so are efficiencies, project timing, grants, development charges and other sources of revenue.

I believe Milton should aim for a responsible and predictable property-tax increase in the 5–7% range for 2027 (approximately $29 per $100,000 of assessment), while recognizing that any increase must be considered in the context of inflation (estimated to be around 3%), household affordability and the Town’s multi-year financial strategy.

Just as important, Milton needs to grow its way into a stronger financial position. Over the next four years, economic development must be the priority. I will advocate for attracting businesses, investment and good jobs that broaden Milton’s commercial and industrial assessment base. A stronger non-residential tax base can help pay for the services our growing community needs without placing the entire burden on homeowners.

I would only consider going above 7% if it can clearly demonstrate that it is necessary to protect essential services or address critical infrastructure needs, after other options have been fully explored.

My priority is to keep increases manageable and predictable while building a stronger local economy, maintaining services and putting Milton on a sustainable long-term financial path.

Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →

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

I would add targeted funding for economic development and business attraction.

Milton is growing rapidly, and we cannot continue relying primarily on residential property taxes to finance that growth. Over the next four years, we should focus on attracting businesses, investment and good-paying jobs that expand Milton’s commercial and industrial tax base.

This investment should come with clear, measurable targets for new jobs, businesses and assessment growth. By strengthening our economic base, we can help pay for the infrastructure and services our growing community needs while reducing pressure on homeowners.

On the same question, their website says: “Continue to invest in Milton Fire” — 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?

Milton’s OP plans for school sites alongside new communities and encourages coordination with school boards, parks and recreation facilities. I would advocate for those planned sites to become schools as communities are built.

For healthcare, Milton needs provincial hospital funding that keeps pace with both our current growth and the population we are planning for through 2051. I would advocate for expanded Milton District Hospital capacity, while supporting additional primary-care options such as nurse practitioners and nurse-practitioner-led clinics.

Economic development also plays an important role by attracting healthcare professionals, businesses and investments that strengthen our tax base and helps support community services. At the same time, investing in parks, recreation and active transportation gives residents practical ways to stay healthy and can help reduce pressure on healthcare.

I would measure success through schools and hospital capacity delivered, increased primary-care access, economic investment, and improved recreation and active-transportation opportunities.

Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →

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

My position on the Milton Education Village (MEV) is to keep the development moving forward, protect its original vision, and make sure infrastructure and community amenities keep pace with growth.

The MEV is much more than a university campus. The MEV is planned as a complete, mixed-use community connecting education, innovation, employment, housing, healthcare and recreation. The concept is that this area will be an innovation district supporting thousands of knowledge-based jobs.

Construction over at the MEV has already started and we can see The Village of Ridgeview Court being put to great use. The next stages of planning are underway and ongoing development should be visible soon.

My priorities for the MEV would be to maintain momentum while ensuring infrastructure keeps pace with development, particularly transit, roads, active transportation, parks and community facilities.

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?

It is important to note that the Town’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan is currently being updated. During the next term of council, council will need to reassess the number of facilities Milton has, where they are located, their capacity, and whether they adequately serve our community.

I would prioritize a new recreational facility in south Milton, serving residents south of Louis St. Laurent Avenue (Boyne survey).

I would advocate for a multi-purpose recreational facility that could include gymnasium and court space, ice pads, fitness and wellness areas, multi-purpose rooms, youth and seniors programming, outdoor space for a variety of outdoor sports and space for community organizations.

As Milton continues to grow, we need to ensure recreation infrastructure keeps pace with the communities we are building. Miltonians living south of Louis St. Laurent have already contributed development charges toward the infrastructure required to support growth. Those investments should translate into a recreational facility that is accessible to the neighbourhoods generating that growth and not require them to routinely travel across town to another existing facility.

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?

Council should put groundwater and community concerns above aggregate and quarry operations. Blasting into an aquifer that supplies water to 20,000 residents is clearly a cause for worry should the quarry operations proceed, let alone the additional environmental concerns raised from the creation of fine dust particles associated with blasting and crushing. It has been estimated that there is surplus for more than a 35-year supply of aggregate which further illustrates there is no need for quarry operations to proceed at this location.

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 would advocate for continuing to prioritize safe, well-maintained rural roads and for reliable, affordable internet access. I respect that some residents value living outside the pace and infrastructure expectations of urban Milton and would not endeavor to change that.

I have sat on Milton Public Library’s Board for the last 12 years. I have continuously supported and advocated for a mobile library or bookmobile that could bring library services directly to rural Milton, in addition to families, seniors and residents who face greater distances to Milton’s library branches. This type of service needs to become a reality within the next 4 years.

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. At this time, Milton has planned for significant growth to 2051. This growth should be fully serviced and financially sustainable before approving more growth. Until there is a clear need for housing or employment lands that cannot be reasonably accommodated through the current planning, another urban boundary expansion is not needed.

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?

No. I would not support using strong mayor powers in Milton.

I believe Milton is best served by collaboration, accountability and thoughtful decision-making, rather than concentrating additional authority in one office.

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 would create a three-to-six-month Council agenda outlook for residents.

Council agendas are generally available by 4:30pm the Monday before a meeting, giving residents a very short window to understand an issue, ask questions and engage with Council.

I would support publishing a plain-language list of topics likely to come before Council over the next 3–6 months, updated regularly as priorities change. Residents could then monitor issues that matter to them and engage with their councillor before decisions are imminent.

On the same question, their website says: “Create more opportunities for residents to discuss important issues and help shape Council decisions.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →

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

I believe Milton needs thoughtful change over the next four years. The changes needed will build on what is working while preparing for the challenges of continued growth.

Since being elected in 2022, I have focused on listening to residents, making informed decisions and working collaboratively. My experience as a lawyer offers careful analysis, practical problem-solving, strong advocacy, fairness and accountability to the council table.

As Regional Councillor, I would bring that experience to advocate for economic development, better regional transit, infrastructure, housing and community safety, while ensuring decisions are financially responsible and grounded in evidence.

On the same question, their website says: “Now, I am looking for your support to continue this work as your next Regional Councillor for Ward 4.” — their site. Everything it says, by theme →

What Halton Region decision from this past term would you have voted differently on?

A decision I would have approached differently was Halton Regional Council’s October 22, 2025 motion supporting Halton Healthcare’s request for provincial funding to add 123 acute-care beds at Milton District Hospital and Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital.

I would have supported the goal of expanding hospital capacity, but I would have pushed Regional Council to go further on Milton’s behalf. With Milton’s rapid growth, our healthcare infrastructure needs to keep pace with our population and not catch up years later.

I would have asked for a clear Regional strategy with specific timelines, measurable commitments and regular public reporting on the Province’s response. Residents should not have to wonder whether commitments made on their behalf are actually producing results.

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.

Of these priorities, I would champion water and wastewater capacity.

Milton is growing rapidly, and we cannot continue approving growth without making sure the infrastructure is there to support it. Water and wastewater capacity is the foundation for responsible growth, housing, business investment and the quality of life residents expect.

As Regional Councillor, I would make securing the infrastructure Milton needs one of my highest priorities. That means pushing for timely investment, clear construction timelines and accountability for delivering the capacity promised to our community.

Their website does not address this question. Most campaign sites do not address most specific questions. What it does say →

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.

What the record shows

No motion moved or recorded vote cast on this theme. Only substantive motions and votes recorded by name are counted, and most council votes are not recorded by name under the Municipal Act.

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.

• Facebook — https://facebook.com/profile.php?id=100084570381569
• Instagram — https://instagram.com/marshall4milton

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

Captured 2026-08-23 from http://www.marshall4milton.com. 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.

• Home | Marshall4milton
• Home | Marshall4milton
• Meet Sarah | Marshall4milton
• Moving Milton Forward | Marshall4milton
• In the News | Marshall4milton
• Support | Marshall4milton

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 emphasizes serving residents with integrity and accountability, and lists strengthening community engagement as a priority. [RecordAI]

In their words: “committed to serving Miltonians with integrity, accountability, and a focus on the future.” — their site, captured 2026-10-07

The candidate lists growing the local economy as one of the initiatives she would support if elected. [RecordAI]

In their words: “Grow Our Local Economy” — their site, captured 2026-10-07

The candidate highlights initiatives to keep kids safe around schools, invest in youth and recreation, and continue investing in Milton Fire. [RecordAI]

In their words: “Keep Our Kids Safe Around Schools” — their site, captured 2026-10-07

The candidate states she would support improving regional transit connections and expanding active transportation. [RecordAI]

In their words: “Improve Regional Transit Connections” — their site, captured 2026-10-07

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.

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.