All candidates were scored out of 50 points total based on a rubric of:

• reconciliation 

• harm reduction

• sustainability

• housing/homelessness

• accessibility

​

The members of PG CHIC believe the actions of candidates are a stronger indicator of a candidate's values than campaign promises.

​

Our goal to was to separate performative reconciliation from good-faith reconciliatory action and intent, and likewise for each subject on our rubric. Because of this, voting records of incumbents weighed heavily in candidate scores, particularly regarding the "Safe Streets" bylaw, which puts people in Prince George accessing the illicit drug supply at greater risk of drug poisoning death. Because of the nature and context of this bylaw, it impacts scores on both reconciliation and harm reduction.

 

When assessing candidates who do not have a previous voting record, PG CHIC was careful to rate them on concrete, definitive statements or indicators that showed strong understanding of the issues and evidence-based solutions.

 

We were tough, but fair, in our assessments. PG CHIC members collectively researched and discussed the candidates, before submitting independent assessments into an anonymous form. Our final scores were decided based on an average of the members' independent assessments, rounded to the nearest whole number.

 

PG CHIC hopes that, regardless of who is elected, the new mayor and council will continue to learn about the complexities of the issues affecting the community and become better advocates for those who need it most.