Daniel Bourgeois
Overall Assessment
Daniel Bourgeois is the most contradictory figure on this council, and evaluating him honestly requires holding two things simultaneously: he is a genuine intellectual asset whose rigorous scrutiny and policy initiative have produced real outcomes, and he is a councillor whose conduct and collaboration failures have systematically undermined those same contributions.
On the positive ledger: the Vision Lands park is a significant, patient initiative that moved from an ambitious $25M motion in 2022 through a pragmatic federal urban parks application, and by late 2025 was moving forward with $500,000 in the 2026 budget for land acquisition. The tax rate cap he championed has contributed to multiple consecutive years of residential tax cuts. He moved the policing services review motion that launched a necessary multi-year accountability exercise. He brings a PhD in Public Policy Analysis and 27 peer-reviewed publications to a council role that benefits from exactly that kind of evidence-based scrutiny.
On the negative ledger: two code of conduct violations in a single term — one involving disparaging remarks about a volunteer committee member, one involving disrespectful behaviour toward senior staff — are not isolated incidents. They are a pattern. His decade-long refusal to engage with major media outlets creates a transparency gap that is particularly ironic given his institutional advocacy for openness. His housing grant motion failed for lack of a seconder; a motion on the Urban Growth Strategy went unsupported entirely; he was the sole vote against the Vision Lands agreement that was implementing his own park proposal. The qualities that make him an effective watchdog appear to be the same qualities that, unchecked, prevent him from being an effective colleague.
Category Scorecards
Click "Read" to expand each assessmentSources
- Moncton councillor's conduct, comments about city committee member under review— CBC News
- Moncton councillor apologizes for comments that prompted conduct review— CBC News
- Moncton councillor directed to apologize, take training course after disparaging comments— CBC News
- Moncton councillor faces sanctions following investigation— 91.9 The Bend
- Un conseiller de Moncton forcé de s'excuser pour un manquement au code de conduite (second violation, 2025)— Radio-Canada
- Park envisioned by Moncton councillors as city updates Vision Land plans— CBC News
- Moncton's Vision Lands a step closer to development— CBC News
- New plan proposes to unlock Moncton's Vision Lands for urban development— CBC News
- Moncton council votes to review who polices city— CBC News
- Moncton opts to keep RCMP in close vote— CBC News
- Moncton councillor defends nay vote on RCMP motions— 91.9 The Bend
- Moncton eyes expanding affordable housing grant program (motion failed for lack of seconder)— CBC News
- Daniel Bourgeois — ResearchGate profile— ResearchGate
- Moncton council opts to go against staff for Elmwood Drive subdivisions— CBC News
- E-mails show councillors didn't want critic on planning committee— The Times & Transcript
- Moncton woman feels singled out after council objects to her committee appointment— Global News
- Moncton crime reduction and prevention committee presents report — CBC Information Morning— CBC News
- Moncton council considers crime reduction plan— CBC News
These scorecards were developed through deep research conducted by Claude AI. Each councillor is evaluated across six equally-weighted categories built around what defines effective civic leadership — independent of political affiliation. Category scores are derived from letter grades converted to a scale out of 100 (A = 100, A− = 93, B+ = 83, B = 75, B− = 68, C+ = 58, C = 50, D = 25). An overall score of 80 or above is rated Great; 70–79 is Good; 60–69 is Okay; below 60 is Poor.
Research draws from City of Moncton official records and official news sources. This evaluation is independently produced and is not affiliated with the City of Moncton or any political party.
Scores are updated by feeding evidence-based information to the AI algorithm, which uses it to further refine its evaluation of each category. To submit evidence that may affect a score, email info@monctonvotes.ca — all submitted evidence will be provided to the algorithm.