Latest Council Votes & Notices of Motion - May 27, 2026

A lot has happened at Council over the past couple of weeks. Below, I’ve shared how I voted on several key decisions.

Summary

Council did not make a final decision on the Free Fare Zone (FFZ). Instead, we voted to defer the decision so it will be considered as part of a broader review of transit fares in 2027.

What does it all mean?

This was a choice between acting quickly on Administration’s recommendation to remove the FFZ or taking more time to get a fuller picture and more buy-in to not outright eliminate it.

The option Council ultimately supported was to defer the decision and include the FFZ in a comprehensive review of fares across the entire transit system. That means we will look at how the FFZ fits into the bigger picture — alongside ridership, cost, public safety, and how people actually use transit — before making a final call.

Result

Council voted on a series of amendments related to deferring the decision and next steps:

• Amendment 1 – Defer the Free Fare Zone vote to Q1 2027 as part of the comprehensive fare review process already underway: Passed 9–6
• Amendment 2 – Explore the feasibility of moving responsibility for the FFZ from Transit to the Downtown Team for ongoing operations and budgeting as part of the Downtown Strategy: Failed 7–8
• Amendment 3 – Undertake additional engagement with stakeholders in the Downtown including businesses, organizations, and arts organizations: Passed 8–7
• Amendment 4 – Continue efforts to secure new sponsorship partners for the FFZ and report back at the September 9 Infrastructure and Planning Committee Meeting: Passed 10–5

I voted in favour of all four.

My Vote

I have been clear that I do not support eliminating the Free Fare Zone. It is something that Calgarians and many Ward 8 residents rely on and support. At the same time, I do not believe Administration’s recommendation to remove it was strong or well-supported.

It was also clear that there was a significant risk that Council was going to vote to remove it, citing public safety issues and costs. As a result, I undertook significant work with several of my colleagues to try and find a path forward. My goal throughout has been to keep transit accessible and affordable while promoting public safety with a purpose, addressing root causes rather than making reactive decisions to symptoms. The amendments before us offered a path to keep the FFZ in place for now and ensure it is considered as part of a full fare review and not just cut on a whim.

That is why I supported deferring the decision.

This was not about choosing the perfect outcome. It was about making sure we get to a better one. By taking more time, doing the work, and looking at the full picture, we give ourselves the best chance to make a decision that reflects both the value of the FFZ and the needs of our entire transit system.

Finally, I take issue with the information presented to us in Council. I do not believe eliminating the FFZ will result in better public safety outcomes, as those who want to eliminate it have stated. In fact, there is some indication getting rid of it will cause the issues seen most acutely around our C-Train stations to spread into Ward 8 neighbourhoods like the Beltline. As I said in my debate, this is completely unfair to those residents to push social disorder to their doorsteps.

Real solutions to public safety issues will result from initiatives like our new strategy Safer Together, which passed 10-4 in the same Council meeting. Safer Together gives us a concrete plan to address public safety and its root causes, which is the only way we will succeed in keeping residents and businesses safe while helping those suffering from mental health and addictions.

We will not make Calgarians safer by taking away something we value, we will make Calgarians safer by doing the hard work required to meaningfully address public safety.

Summary

Safer Together is a broad strategy outlining the City of Calgary’s plan to address public safety across our city. Calgary has had many individual strategies and initiatives related to public safety for many years, but this work has never been compiled into a single, dedicated strategy. Safer Together is the first time we have everything in one place under one plan. 

What does it all mean?

The strategy is a comprehensive approach to public safety that takes everything we are doing as a City and creates a path for better collaboration between emergency services, social services, and community partners to achieve better public safety outcomes for Calgarians.

This is visualized as a circle with four rings. On the outside is social development, followed by prevention, risk intervention, and incident response. Put more simply, our path to better public safety begins with enabling healthier communities while still prioritizing emergency response. It allows us to focus on prevention without ignoring the critical need for reaction when necessary.

Result

Passed 10-4.

I tabled an amendment, which passed 12-2, giving direction to report back to Council in July 2026. It directed Administration to do the following:

1.  Provide implementation details for Safer Together, including key performance measures and budget details no later than July 2026.
2. Report annually on the implementation and key performance measures of Safer Together starting in Q2 2027.

My Vote

I strongly supported the passing of this strategy as our first step towards creating a concrete plan to address public safety, especially in Ward 8 where we have seen social disorder continue to be a concern for businesses, residents, and visitors.

Prior to becoming a Councillor, I gained perspective on the difficulties related to public safety as a Legal Aid defence lawyer, where I served low income and youth clients who could not otherwise afford a lawyer. I saw how disparate and piecemeal our system is.

Addressing these problems are complex and inevitably tied to mental health, addictions, and poverty. They won’t be solved overnight. By having a plan, we have a chance to make progress and track the success of what we’re doing through better reporting. A plan also allows us to change things that aren’t working and integrate new ideas that may work better, all while improving transparency for Calgarians about how funding is being used.

Summary

This directs Administration to work with Calgary Police Commission, Calgary Police Service, and community partners to undertake a needs assessment for a Calgary Police Service District Station or a multi-service public safety and community hub in Downtown Calgary.

What does it all mean?

This takes the first step to assess the need for a new police station or multi-service hub in downtown Calgary in response to public safety concerns. This proposal does not direct the police or Council to do more than determine its alignment with enforcement and safety outcomes, where it would go, and what it would cost with a report back to Council in Q4 2026 about the findings of the assessment.

Result

Passed 11-3 with the addition of “multi-service public safety and community hub” as part of the needs assessment process.

My Vote

I was initially reluctant to support this proposal and agreed with Councillor Wyness that decisions like this should go through the Calgary Police Commission, which is the body responsible for bringing police funding requests to Council. I also saw this as conflicting with more urgent needs of the Calgary Police Department securing funding for operations to improve officer retention and well-being.

However, it became clear that the majority of Council was supportive of the proposal. Given this, I requested the Mayor add a multi-service public safety and community hub as part of the overall assessment. He supported this change, and it was integrated into the scope of the assessment. As a result I voted in favour, as I believe this integrated approach would achieve better long-term outcomes for public safety in our downtown while complementing our new public safety strategy Safer Together.

I still have concerns about this process and look forward to hearing from the Calgary Police Service and the Police Commission about how this will or will not help them achieve better enforcement and public safety goals. 

Summary

This rescinds the Climate Emergency Declaration from 2021 and directs Administration to cease all references to a Climate Emergency in all official City of Calgary materials and further directs them to no longer use the Climate Emergency as justification or authority for future decisions.

What does it all mean?

There is very little practical effect to this motion. Our primary tool for responding to extreme weather, environmental issues, and climate resilience is our Climate Strategy which is unaffected by the Climate Emergency declaration. There may be risks to future funding opportunities from other levels of government and reputational risks with community and government partners.

Result

I requested a division of votes so the three points in the proposal could be voted on as follows:

1. Rescind the Climate Emergency Declaration – Passed 10-5
2. Cease all references to a Climate Emergency – Failed 7-8
3. Ensure no future Council initiatives rely on the Climate Emergency – Failed 7-8

My Vote

I voted No to all three elements of what I saw as a largely performative measure that had no tangible benefit for Calgarians. It was estimated we received about $287 million in funding from other levels of government as a result of our accelerated actions following the declaration in 2021. There was no direct cost related to the declaration and no ongoing costs to Calgarians outside of the separate work in the Climate Strategy.

I did not see this as a good use of Council time and remain concerned about the risks to our reputation and future funding opportunities. As I said in my debate, over 60% of Albertans believe climate change is a very serious or serious threat, and I am one of them. By using our time in Council to go back in time and change a few words, we effectively accomplished nothing.

Summary

This will explore ways to establish a simplified way for Calgarians to donate to their local Community Association for capital repairs and maintenance.

What does it all mean?

Right now, it is difficult for Calgarians to donate to their Community Association and receive a charitable tax-receipt. The City of Calgary is a registered charity, and Community Associations are owned and supported by the City but leased to individual communities as independent entities.

This notice of motion will look at the problem created by this relationship and seek to create a framework for Calgarians to directly donate to their local Community Association and receive a tax receipt as they would for any other charity.

Result

Passed 15-0.

My Vote

Community Associations play an important role in the lives of Calgarians, especially in Ward 8. We have 17 Community Associations and are lucky to have so many volunteers dedicated to keeping them operating as a benefit for all of us. This is a great step in the right direction and will take pressure off our volunteers while helping our Community Associations thrive into the future.

Summary

This will assess the resources needed to add limited-scale policies from other Local Area Plans like Westbrook and Heritage to the Chinook Local Area Plan. It directs further scoping to assess the work needed to evaluate higher-density urban form categories and building scales in certain areas of the Chinook Local Area Plan.

What does it all mean?

Adding limited-scale policies to all LAPs will provide consistency in Local Area Plan rules specifically for lower-intensity built forms like townhouses, rowhouses, duplexes, and single-family homes.

The assessment of higher-density categories and scales in the Chinook Local Area Plan is specific to this plan only and would require more intensive resources for consultation and engagement.

Result

Passed 13-2.

My Vote

I support the limited-scale policy adjustments in this notice of motion because consistency across Local Area Plans will help provide certainty for communities and home builders. Certainty is a good thing for everyone, and this change will likely be possible using resources already available within our planning department.

I am more cautious about the evaluation of specific designations in existing Local Area Plans because of the resources and additional staffing required. We have many more Local Area Plans in the works and this may prevent that work without adding significant costs to our planning budget.

While I am supportive of improved engagement, we must also be aware of the resources we have and find a balance between enabling new Local Area Plans for communities who need them and spending the time on money on plans already in place.

Moving forward, opportunities for consistency should be taken where they exist and individual changes should be assessed based on their cost and value to Calgarians.

My team and I are still working to launch a Vote Tracker page, similar to this one, which will outline my thinking behind each vote. The goal is to provide greater transparency and help Ward 8 residents better understand how and why decisions are made at Council.

If you have any questions, please contact my office by email at ward8@calgary.ca.

Sincerely,
Nathaniel Schmidt
City of Calgary Ward 8 Councillor 
Calgary.ca/Ward8