Local government experts at Western University are studying the candidates who run for municipal office to learn more about their backgrounds as well as their experiences on the campaign trail. With municipal voters in Ontario heading to the polls Oct. 26, Western researchers surveyed hundreds of candidates running in communities with populations over 2,000. It’s part of their larger Local Democracy Project, which explores who runs for municipal office in Canada, why they run and how they get their message out to voters. Political science professor Zack Taylor spoke with Western News to share insights gleaned from almost 900 candidate responses.  

Western News: Tell us about the survey – who received it, and what are you hoping to learn?

Zack Taylor (ZT): The Local Democracy Project is a SSHRC-funded collaboration between Western researchers – I’m leading it alongside political science professor Martin Horak and our colleagues at INRS-Urbanisation in Montréal and Dalhousie University. The project has several facets, including candidate surveys across Canada and in-depth case studies of local campaigns. Since 2022, we have been fielding surveys across the country to learn about what drives candidates. We wanted to know how they campaign, how they raise and spend money, and what they think about local politics – what groups have influence and what role local government should play. We also ask them about their demographic characteristics. The survey is currently active in Ontario and has just been sent out in British Columbia (which has elections set for Oct. 17).  

What does the “typical” candidate look like?

ZT: We only know about the people who have responded to our survey, and this group may not be completely representative. Among the almost 900 Ontario candidates who responded this year, the most common first name is John. About a quarter had run for municipal office before and most of those are incumbents. About 57 per cent identify as male and 37 per cent female. The average age is 56. Over half have a university degree and an annual household income of over $100,000. Over four in five are homeowners. So, the average local candidate is likely quite different from the average local resident in their district.  

According to your survey results, nearly half of respondents entirely self-finance their campaigns. Who is most likely to receive financial help for campaigns and what are the implications?

ZT: Especially in larger and more urban municipalities, candidates need to raise money to buy signs, leaflets and conventional and social media advertising. In smaller places, running for office is more about showing up for events and word-of-mouth recommendations in the community – forms of influence that don’t cost money. We won’t know how much money candidates raised or spent until months after the election, when they submit financial disclosures to the municipal clerk in their community. Almost 75 per cent of candidates told us they expect to pay for at least half of their campaign costs out of pocket. The median campaign cost, based on candidates’ estimates, is $2,600. It’s not necessarily a lot of money for the typical candidate we’ve described, but a sum of this size or larger may discourage low-income people from running for office. A commonly raised issue around self-financing election campaigns is whether it gives wealthier people an advantage. The good news is research shows that spending doesn’t guarantee a win. In past municipal elections we’ve seen candidates spend a lot and lose, and other candidates spend very little and win. A lot hinges on how efficiently they use their resources and how well-known they are in the first place. Incumbency is a huge factor – mayors and councillors running for re-election have a lot of name recognition.  

What are some of the findings related to candidates’ views on donations and campaign financing?

ZT: We found candidates overwhelmingly agree with placing restrictions on campaign spending, individual donations and self-financing, as well as prohibiting the building of “war chests” – where repeat candidates can use surplus funds raised in one election to cover expenses in future elections. Candidates also broadly agreed with the principle of disclosure – that identities of donors and the amounts they gave should be made public. Interestingly, they are divided 50/50 on whether this information should be made public before or after election day. They broadly agreed with Ontario’s current rules, which require disclosure after the campaign is over.  

How do candidates feel about political parties and those affiliations in municipal elections?

ZT: Almost half identified as ideological centrists. Very few put themselves on the far left or far right. Perhaps unsurprising given Ontario’s longstanding absence of political parties in local elections, fully 91 per cent of respondents disagreed with the statement that “municipal candidates should run as members of parties, because parties get things done better than independents” and 65 per cent disagreed with the statement that “municipal political parties would make it easier to know where candidates stand ideologically.” Most have a utilitarian back-to-basics perspective on local government, with 57 per cent agreeing “the main purpose of local government is to provide services to property owners.” Only eight per cent disagreed with the notion that “municipal policymaking is about pragmatic decisions, not ideological disagreement.” Still, 44 per cent reported having been involved in a provincial or federal political party in the past five years.  

Were any candidate answers particularly surprising or unexpected?

ZT: This year we asked candidates a series of questions on policy issues that another project, the Canadian Municipal Barometer, asks of elected officials. We were surprised to find opinion was broadly in favour of what we might call progressive policy positions: for example, roads should be made accessible to walking and cycling, even if it means fewer driving lanes or parking. What we don’t know is whether progressive candidates were more likely to respond to our survey than conservative ones, though most identified as centrists when asked to place themselves on a left-right ideology scale and strongly supported non-partisan local politics. Across all of our Local Democracy Project surveys, most candidates also believe term limits would make local government work better. This is perhaps surprising given there is no precedent for term limiting elected officials in Canada. But it may also represent a reaction to perceived incumbency advantage. We don’t have results from Ontario in 2026 yet, as this question is part of our follow-up survey to be sent just before election day, but we also ask all candidates whether they experienced harassment or intimidation while campaigning. Our surveys from other provinces indicate about half of candidates experienced at least one incidence of belittling language or insults online and some type of interference with campaign materials such as lawn signs and posters. This confirms what we hear anecdotally from public officials, which is that social media is a very unfriendly place.  

How can this data be used going forward?

ZT: Democracy only works if people decide to run for office. This research tells us about how well our current candidates represent their communities at large, what candidates think the purpose of local government is and their impressions of local politics in general. We’ve only scratched the surface. We hope to understand how these factors vary according to the type of place a candidate seeks to represent and their personal characteristics. More generally, we see opportunities for policy change. In an innovative approach, we are linking survey responses to election results and campaign finance disclosures, which is going to enable us to evaluate the effectiveness of provincial rules governing nomination, campaign fundraising and spending and advertising. Local campaigning has barely been studied in Canada up until now, so there’s lots more to explore and understand.