2026 Oxford County Municipal Election
Woodstock — Councillor
We asked. Dave Bloxsidge answered. You decide.
Answers are published as submitted.
I. Candidate & Municipal Governance
1. Candidate Introduction
Please introduce yourself to the residents of Oxford County. Briefly tell us why you are running for municipal office, what principles or values would guide you as an elected official, and what you believe is the most important issue facing the municipality you are seeking to represent. What would you do about it?
I’m Dave Bloxsidge, running for Woodstock City Council. For nearly 20 years my wife, our kids and I have called Woodstock home. My background isn’t in government, it’s manufacturing, precision machining, and running an international logistics and fabrication business with my wife. That work taught me there’s no room for shortcuts; you need a clear plan and the discipline to follow through. In that world we have a quality system that when boiled down is “say what you do: then do what you say” that has been a mantra for many years
Every dollar council spends belongs to a resident who trusted us with it, and every decision should serve the whole city, not the loudest voice in the room.
The most important issue facing Woodstock is keeping this city on solid financial footing while it grows. Our capital plan has us heading towards some tough conversations and tough decisions. And will need honest conversations.
2. Local vs. Provincial Authority
Municipalities are increasingly affected by decisions, policies and requirements established by the provincial government. What degree of local discretion do you believe municipalities should have when provincial direction affects decisions within municipal jurisdiction? When, if ever, should a municipality challenge or oppose provincial direction? Please explain.
Municipalities should have real discretion whenever a provincial requirement lands on Woodstock’s own budget, land, or services, because council is the level residents can actually hold accountable. Housing and homelessness is a good example, Oxford County is the service manager and the province controls addiction treatment, yet residents look to the City first when they see the effects on our streets. I don’t think that’s an excuse to wait around.
A municipality should push back when provincial direction arrives without funding attached, or when it overrides a decision residents and council are better positioned to make locally, like land use or growth priorities. Where provincial goals make sense for Woodstock, I’ll work within them. Where they don’t fit our city, council has a responsibility to say so plainly and advocate hard at the County and provincial tables, not just accept it quietly.
3. Accountability & Access
Once elected, how will you maintain open communication and accountability with your constituents? What level of access should residents have to you, and what responsibility do you have to explain and defend your decisions and votes, particularly when constituents disagree with them?
Direct communication is one of my five core commitments, and I don’t want it to just be a line on a website. I’d commit to responding to every resident who reaches out, by phone, email or in person, within a few business days, even if the answer is just that I’m looking into it.
I want to be genuinely approachable, at council meetings, around town, and online, not just at election time. When I vote on something contentious, I’ll explain my reasoning in plain language, the facts and conversations that led me there, so residents see the thinking, not just the outcome.
Access has to include people who disagree with me. I’d rather hear from someone who thinks I got it wrong than only from people who already agree. We expect respect from our councillors, and residents and councillors owe each other that same respect.
4. Staff vs. Elected Council
What do you believe is the proper division of responsibility between municipal staff and elected council? What decisions should be made by staff, what decisions should be made by council, and what responsibility should elected officials retain for decisions recommended or implemented by staff?
Staff bring the expertise and the professional recommendations, that’s their job and I respect it. But council is elected to make the final call, and I don’t think that responsibility can be handed off just because staff recommended something.
My plan is to actually read the staff reports and budget lines myself, not just the summary, before I vote, the same way I wouldn’t sign off on a job in my own business without checking the blueprint. If I vote to approve a staff recommendation, I own that decision just as much as if it were my own idea, I don’t get to point at staff later if it turns out wrong.
Day-to-day operational decisions belong with staff. Policy direction, budget priorities, and anything that commits significant tax dollars or changes how the city serves residents belongs with council, where residents can actually hold someone accountable for it.
5. Candidate Social-Media History
Have you ever deleted, hidden or substantially altered past social-media posts or other publicly available online content because you believed it might affect how voters viewed you or your candidacy? If so, what did you change and why?
No. I haven’t deleted, hidden, or reworked old posts to manage how I look to voters. What you’d find is exactly who I am, a business owner, a dad, someone who’s been vocal about this community for years before I ever thought about running. I’d rather residents see the unpolished version of me than a version scrubbed clean for a campaign.
I think voters can tell the difference between someone being real and someone managing an image, and I’d rather earn trust by being consistent than lose it by getting caught cleaning up my own history. If something I posted years ago doesn’t age well, I’ll own it and explain my thinking rather than pretend it didn’t happen. That’s the same standard I’d hold myself to explaining a council vote, the reasoning matters more than a polished record.
II. Taxes, Growth & Development
6. Taxes & Services
What annual municipal property-tax increase do you consider reasonable over the next four years? If maintaining existing services would require an increase above that level, what principles would you use to determine which services or expenditures should be reduced, delayed or eliminated instead? Please explain.
I can’t promise an exact number without seeing the real cost pressures each year, but my target is holding increases as close to inflation and assessment growth as possible, not the kind of levy growth we’ve seen every year of this term. If I had to draw a line, I’d want us fighting to keep annual increases in the low single digits.
If maintaining service levels needs more than that, my first move isn’t frontline services. Police and fire already make up about 43 cents of every tax dollar, and that’s frontline service I won’t touch. I’d start with the growth in management and administrative overhead first, and I’d defer big discretionary capital commitments, like the proposed $85 million recreation facility, until there’s a real funding plan with county, provincial or private partners, instead of quietly adding it to the tax base.
7. Population Growth & Agricultural Land
Oxford County’s current planning projections anticipate substantial population growth over the coming decades, creating increasing pressure on agricultural land. Should Oxford plan to accommodate the projected level of growth, or should the County and its municipalities seek to influence the rate and/or location of future growth? When development competes with agricultural and food-production uses, should agricultural land and food production receive priority? What principles should guide these decisions? Please explain.
Woodstock is growing whether we plan for it or not, so I’d rather the County and its municipalities actively shape where and how fast that growth happens instead of just absorbing whatever projection gets handed down. Growth should serve the people who already live here first, not just hit a population target.
Agricultural land and food production should carry real weight in that decision, not just be the land that’s easiest to rezone. Once good farmland is paved over, it’s gone permanently, and Oxford County’s economy and identity are tied to agriculture in a way worth protecting deliberately, not by accident.
That doesn’t mean development never touches agricultural land, but growth should be directed first toward infill, underused, and already-serviced land before farmland, and any decision to develop agricultural land should have to justify itself, not the other way around.
III. Energy & Major Development
8. Wind & Utility-Scale Solar
What is your position on industrial wind turbine and utility-scale solar developments in Oxford County? If your municipality were asked to determine whether it should be a willing or unwilling host for a large-scale wind or solar project, how would you vote, and what factors would guide your decision? Please explain.
I’m not opposed to renewable energy, but I don’t think a willing or unwilling host decision should ever be made over residents’ heads. If Woodstock were asked that question, I’d want a real public process first, actual consultation with the people whose property, viewscape, or farmland would be affected, not a decision made purely on provincial or developer pressure.
My starting position leans toward unwilling host for large-scale projects unless residents in the affected area are genuinely on board, and I’d weigh impact on agricultural land, property values, road infrastructure for construction traffic, decommissioning responsibility, and what Woodstock actually gets in return, not just what a developer promises upfront.
I’d rather Woodstock say no to a project residents didn’t want than say yes because it was easier than pushing back, and I’d want any agreement to have real, enforceable local benefit attached to it.
9. Data Centres
What is your position on approving data centres in Oxford County? Under what circumstances, if any, would you support one? How should council weigh its potential economic benefits against demands on electricity, water, land and other municipal infrastructure? Please explain.
I’d approach data centres the same way I approach any big capital ask, on the numbers, not the pitch. They can bring investment and tax base, but they also draw heavily on electricity, water, and land, and I want to know upfront who’s actually paying for that infrastructure capacity, the company or Woodstock residents.
I’d support one where the economic benefit is real and demonstrable, where it isn’t subsidized at residents’ expense through rate increases or infrastructure upgrades the city fronts and hopes to recover later, and where there’s a clear, binding agreement on job creation, tax contribution, and infrastructure cost-sharing before council signs off.
I’d want a straight answer on capacity, our current electricity and water systems weren’t built with a data centre’s draw in mind, and I’m not willing to ask existing residents and businesses to absorb strain on those systems so one large user can move in.
IV. Property Rights, Environment & Climate
10. Property Rights & Environmental Regulation
What principles should determine the balance between private property rights and municipal environmental regulation? What limits, if any, should municipalities place on environmental restrictions affecting the use of privately owned rural land? Please explain.
Private property is exactly that, private, and I think municipal government should start from a presumption of respecting what an owner does with their own rural land, not restricting it by default. Environmental regulation has a real place, protecting water sources, wetlands that serve a genuine public function, and neighbours from real harm, but it needs to be specific and justified, not a blanket restriction applied because it’s easier to regulate broadly than to look at each situation.
Where regulation does limit what a landowner can otherwise do, I think there’s a responsibility to be upfront about that trade-off, and ideally to offer compensation or alternatives rather than just imposing a cost silently. On every environmental restriction affecting rural property, I’d want council asking whether the public benefit is real and whether there’s a way to get it that respects the owner’s rights more than the current approach does.
11. Climate Change & CO₂
What role, if any, do you believe carbon dioxide emissions play in climate change? What responsibility, if any, should municipal government have for addressing climate-related issues, and should municipal taxpayers fund those efforts? Please explain.
I’m not a scientist, and I don’t think a council chamber is where climate science gets settled, that’s above council’s pay grade. What I can speak to is Woodstock’s responsibility, and I think it’s a practical one, not a symbolic one. Resilient infrastructure, stormwater capacity, and asset planning that accounts for more severe weather are municipal responsibilities regardless of what’s driving the climate, and I’d support spending there because it protects residents and property directly.
Where I’d push back is on taxpayer-funded initiatives that are more symbolic than measurable. Before council spends on a climate program, I want to see what it actually accomplishes for Woodstock residents, not just that it lets us say we did something. Any climate-related spending should go through the same scrutiny I’d apply to any other line item, real benefit for real dollars.
V. Municipal Policy & Public Institutions
12. DEI, Hiring & Public Services
When municipal government makes decisions about hiring employees or providing services, what role, if any, should a person’s race, ethnicity, sex, disability, newcomer status or other demographic characteristics play? Do you support mandatory diversity, equity and inclusion training for municipal employees, and should municipal taxpayers fund it? Please explain.
I think municipal hiring and services should be based on qualifications and need, not demographic characteristics. The best person for the job should get the job, and a resident should get the same level of service as their neighbour regardless of their background. That’s not a lack of respect for anyone’s identity, it’s a commitment to treating people as individuals rather than sorting them into categories.
I don’t support mandatory DEI training funded by taxpayers as a blanket municipal policy. If specific training genuinely improves how staff serve residents, respectful customer service, accessibility for residents with disabilities, that’s a reasonable use of training dollars because it’s about outcomes. But training built around ideology rather than a demonstrated service improvement isn’t something I think residents should be forced to fund, and I’d want any training budget justified by what it actually delivers, the same as any other spending.
13. International Policy Frameworks
What role, if any, should international policy frameworks such as the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 and Sustainable Development Goals play in municipal decision-making? If municipal policies are influenced by such frameworks, what responsibility does council have to ensure that those decisions remain transparent and accountable to local residents? Please explain.
I don’t think international frameworks like Agenda 2030 should be driving decisions at a Woodstock council table, residents didn’t vote for the United Nations, they voted for their councillors, and every decision made in that chamber should be traceable back to what’s actually good for this city, not to an outside framework adopted somewhere else.
That doesn’t mean every policy that happens to overlap with a global goal is automatically suspect, plenty of things council already does, like sound infrastructure planning or fiscal responsibility, would tick boxes on a framework like that without ever having been the actual reason for the decision. What matters to me is the reasoning has to be Woodstock’s own, and residents deserve to know plainly if an outside framework is influencing a decision, not have it folded quietly into a staff report.
VI. Public Safety, Privacy & Emergency Powers
14. Flock Cameras & Surveillance
What is your position on the use of Flock cameras and other automated licence-plate recognition (ALPR) or camera-based surveillance systems by municipalities for public safety? What limits, if any, should apply to their use, and how should council balance public safety with residents’ privacy? Please explain.
I support giving our police the tools they need, that’s part of my commitment to community safety. Any tool to help solve crimes and find missing people faster, is worth considering and I wouldn’t want to take a useful tool off the table without a real reason. Albeit Flock style cameras would not be the priority for me.
15. Public-Health Emergency Powers
If another public-health emergency occurred, what restrictions, if any, should a municipality be able to impose on access to municipal buildings, facilities, programs or community activities? What role should elected council have in approving or overseeing such restrictions, and what limits should apply to municipal authority during an emergency? Please explain.
Council, not staff and not a single office, should have to approve any restriction on access to municipal buildings, programs, or community activities, and that approval shouldn’t be open-ended. Any emergency measure needs a clear reason, a defined end date or a mandatory return to council for renewal, and a plain explanation to residents of why it’s necessary and what would have to change for it to be lifted.
I’d want council actively overseeing that decision throughout, not just approving it once at the start and stepping back. Emergencies call for fast action sometimes, but fast shouldn’t mean unaccountable, the people making the call should still be the people residents elected and can hold responsible afterward. I’d rather council move a little slower and keep real oversight than hand that authority away and have to explain later why nobody was watching it.
Questionnaire sent: September 8, 2026
Response received: September 22, 2026
← Back to the 2026 Oxford County Municipal Election
Leave a Reply