Hi everyone! I’ll be driving to Canada for an impromptu weekend trip tomorrow. It’s my first time visiting and I have a few inquiries if you don’t mind:

1. The weather report says it’s sunny high of 62°F.
   Does that feel accurate??
   
2. Any insights on entering/leaving the border?
   
3. Recommendations? Must-sees?

So I was trying to figure out who the heck to vote for for the School Trustee seats and there's not a lot of information for these candidates. I did the best I could with publicly available information and I wanted to summarize it for all of you. Maybe it'll help y'all out.

Firstly, my biases. I think conservatives are nuts so I rank them poorly. Honestly, I don't want to get mugged by bored uneducated children and I don't think most of you want that either so can we please not vote in any of these conservatives?

If you have the misfortune of being conservative, just reverse my rankings and this guide should still be useful. If you have trouble doing that, which I assume you probably will, DM me and I'll reverse the list for you. Or better yet, don't vote. Watch some WWE instead.

Election Oct 17. Six seats. Full candidate list and profiles on surrey.ca. DPAC questionnaire responses available (PDF on surreydpac.ca). Slates: Surrey First Education (mostly long-term incumbents), Surrey Now (tied to Troy Van Vliet, who founded a Catholic independent school), Our Surrey (parent/advocate slate, CUPE 728 endorsed), plus independents.

My lens: education-first, pro-science, anti-religion-in-schools, prepare kids for a global competitive economy. Conservative ideas, SOGI panic, “parental rights” as a dogwhistle, or any religious/ideological inkling is disqualifying. Long-term failure to fix portables and chronic underfunding is also a problem.

The Good

(Progressive, inclusion-focused, evidence-based public education advocates who prioritize supports, capacity, and preparing students without culture-war nonsense.)

Anne Whitmore (Our Surrey)

Archetype: Battle-tested parent advocate

+ DPAC president with a track record of fighting cuts, launching Room Clear Tracker for inclusion, and working with STA/CUPE.

+ Explicitly supports SOGI 123 as anti-bullying/respect resources (not sex ed). Focuses on “Enough Space, Support, Trust,” IEPs, and accountability.

+Collaborative, transparent, and actually engages families instead of stonewalling.

– Still unproven in the actual trustee seat.

– System is so broken that even good advocates face uphill battles on funding.

Kyle Jones, Vick Karan, Dean McGee (Our Surrey)

Archetype: Coordinated parent-educator slate

+ Shared platform on permanent schools over portables, staffing for inclusion, and restoring trust/engagement. CUPE endorsed.

+ Strong on special needs supports, anti-discrimination (including SOGI), and holding the superintendent accountable.

+ Fresh voices focused on equity rather than status quo.

– Limited individual public track records outside the slate.

– Risk of being outnumbered by entrenched interests.

Bob Holmes (Surrey First Education)

Archetype: Experienced inclusive advocate

+ Supports SOGI, proud parent of queer children, strong provincial advocacy via BCSTA. Focuses on outcomes, funding, and safe environments for all students.

+ Long DPAC/PAC background before becoming trustee.

+ Prioritizes classroom spending and graduation rates.

– Still part of the long-running board that hasn’t solved capacity.

– Institutional inertia.

Rohit D’Silva (Surrey Now)

Archetype: STEM/global-economy pragmatist

+ Explicitly pushes AI literacy, coding/robotics, cybersecurity, data science, dual credits with SFU/KPU, and makerspaces — actual preparation for the modern economy.

+ Engineering background, focuses on phasing out portables and enrichment.

+ Pro-science orientation without culture-war baggage.

– Runs with a slate whose leader founded a Catholic school.

– Non-response to some parent questionnaires.

Noor Cheema & Gurleen K. Chahal (Independents)

Archetype: Frontline/youth practical reformers

+ Cheema (EA background) prioritizes safety, capacity, special needs staffing, and age-appropriate inclusion while supporting Indigenous history. Chahal (recent grad, nursing student) brings science-based stress/mental health angle and youth perspective.

+ Both emphasize counselors, EAs, permanent schools, and reducing portables.

+ No strong conservative signals.

– Independents lack slate power.

– Limited broader visibility.

(Other solid-ish mentions: Shawn Wilson, Laurie Larsen, Gary Tymoschuk — experienced, support SOGI and equity language, but long incumbency.)

The Bad

(Status quo, mild conservative undertones, or uninspiring. Sarcastic +s where needed.)

Terry Allen (Surrey First Education)

Archetype: Eternal incumbent

+ Has been on the board since 2002 — truly experienced at watching portables proliferate.

+ Understands the $1B+ budget and special education shortfalls.

– Decades of advocacy haven’t fixed chronic underfunding or classroom space.

– Entrenched leadership that parents (including DPAC) say doesn’t listen.

– Classic “we’ve always done it this way” energy.

Surrey Now slate overall (Banovich, Ceniza, Gilera, Tighe, Wang + D’Silva)

Archetype: Safety-and-core-courses reformers with baggage

+ Some focus on capacity, mental health (Ceniza is a physician), and practical planning.

+ D’Silva’s tech enrichment is a genuine bright spot. – Mayoral candidate founded a Catholic independent school — religious inkling disqualifying for secular public education.

– Emphasis on “fundamental core courses,” police liaisons, and safety can drift into culture-war territory. Several non-responses to DPAC.

– Risk of importing private-school/religious priorities into the public board.

Gary B. Hee & Ghulam Mujtaba (Independents)

Archetype: Oddball technocrats

+ Hee has ideas about revenue generation and asset optimization. Mujtaba claims a progressive social outlook and global education exposure.

– Hee’s priorities (endowment funds, parking lot revenue, patio-style portables) feel like a side quest.

– Limited coherent public education philosophy or track record.

– Easy to get lost in the noise.

The Ugly

(Explicit conservatives, SOGI crusaders, or clear ideological red flags. Sarcastic +s.)

Amrit Birring (Independent)

Archetype: Single-issue SOGI warrior

+ Dedicated website (saveusfromsogi123.ca) and Freedom Party ties show real commitment to one topic.

+ Computer science background and interest in academic standards.

– Explicitly wants to purge SOGI 123 and “ideologies” from schools. Frames inclusion as government overreach.

– Classic culture-war candidate who treats evidence-based anti-bullying resources as indoctrination. Disqualifying.

– Zero tolerance for drugs/vaping is fine; the rest is not.

Garry Thind (Surrey First Education)

Archetype: Dual-running Conservative

+ Long board experience and fundraising record.

+ Focuses on Indigenous graduation rates.

– Now the BC Conservative candidate for Surrey-Guildford (provincial). Overt conservative affiliation.

– Advised voters to skip him to avoid a byelection. Dual candidacy is messy and signals priorities elsewhere.

– Conservative inkling = disqualifying.

Afzalur Rahman (Independent)

Archetype: “Let children be children” parental-rights guy

+ Teaching experience and autism parent perspective on special needs supports.

+ Wants more EAs and early intervention.

– Opposes the current SOGI approach, prioritizes “parents’ voice” on sensitive topics, and uses “let children be children” framing.

– Classic dogwhistle territory that undermines inclusive, evidence-based education.

– Disqualifying for anyone who wants schools free of culture-war panic.

Summary for voting:

Prioritize the Our Surrey slate (especially Whitmore) and any non-conservative independents or STEM-focused candidates like D’Silva who avoid religious/ideological baggage. Avoid SOGI panic candidates and pure status-quo long-timers if you want actual movement on capacity, inclusion, and global-economy readiness. Full DPAC responses and individual surrey.ca profiles are worth reading before Oct 17.

I was just reviewing differnet candidates platforms and came across this, seems like a cool idea.

None of the other major local parties have a detailed plan as this one.

brings them down to 91 candidates now.