Rail and bus plans, fares and mobility choices; approving a route is distinct from approving construction funding or delivering service. People are shown across their recorded careers unless dates are set.
Reviewed decisions
9
Sourced statements
1
Evidence last reviewed
Oct 30, 2026
Advancing the Green Line rail program
Explicit approvals to advance the Green Line program. Choices between two rail alignments and a wind-down after another government's funding withdrawal are explained separately and do not automatically count as opposition to rail.
Opposed the reviewed advancement proposalsSupported the reviewed advancement proposals
Only reviewed policy choices are scored. Each independent decision family counts once per measure; choices within one budget or policy package share that family’s weight. statements, promises, absences and contextual amendments do not contribute. Two decisions are the minimum for a position. The sensitivity range shows the score after removing one decision at a time; it is not a statistical confidence interval or a prediction.
Council considered studying whether ongoing Free Fare Zone operations and budgeting could move from Calgary Transit to the Downtown Strategy team.
Outcome: The final clause failed 7–8 after an earlier amendment carrying the same direction passed 8–7. Approval of the amendment did not establish final adoption. Neither vote itself abolished the Free Fare Zone.
Council deferred the Free Fare Zone decision to its updated fare strategy, due at Infrastructure and Planning Committee by the end of the first quarter of 2027.
Outcome: The final clause carried 9–6. An earlier amendment carrying the deferral passed 8–7 with a different coalition. The deferral did not itself abolish the Free Fare Zone or settle the eventual fare policy.
Council directed an increase from a 90-minute to a 120-minute valid transfer window, with a future effective date and a funding request.
Outcome: Council adopted the direction with a January 2027 effective date. As of this review the vote establishes future policy direction, not an already-operating 120-minute window.
A 2026 budget amendment provided $1 million for the Primary Transit Network and $5 million for the base/local network in ongoing operating funds, financed by property taxes.
Outcome: The amendment carried 13–2. Budget approval does not prove a specified later route-frequency increase.
The amendment reversed the 2023 fare freeze, approved additional 2026 fare increases and a user-fee table, and linked the revenue to budget funding changes.
Outcome: The amendment carried 8–7. This choice does not establish a general pro-transit or anti-transit position.
Council endorsed a joint City–Alberta vision and directed concurrent work on the southeast, downtown and future extensions of the rail program.
Outcome: Council adopted the direction, including conditional 2025 southeast construction and downtown functional planning. This is not a declaration that the full line was built.
Following Alberta's September funding communication, Council considered winding down the then-approved Green Line program while retaining assets and value.
Outcome: Council authorized the wind-down. This contingent decision is not scored as generic opposition to transit.
Council advanced a revised first phase from Eau Claire to Lynnwood/Millican and approved additional capital and municipal funding directions.
Outcome: Council approved the revised program package, subject to intergovernmental funding requirements. Later wind-down and replacement-program decisions are separate events.
Reject the feasibility direction at the final main-motion clause vote.
An earlier amendment passed 8–7 before the final clause failed 7–8. Both stages are shown; the amendment's passage is not counted twice or treated as adoption.
Reject that deferral; this vote alone does not identify whether the member preferred retaining or removing the Free Fare Zone.
The Yule/Clark amendment passed 8–7 before the final clause passed 9–6 with a changed coalition. Yule and Schmidt voted Yes at both stages; their later written reasons describe this May 26 decision, not the earlier February 24 review.
Postpone the decision and consider it through the scheduled updated fare strategy.
This is the adopted final deferral clause. It addresses decision timing and process; neither side identifies support for removing free fares or investing in the Green Line.
Approve the fare changes and fee table specified by the amendment.
The proposal combines fare revenue, operating-service costs and tax effects; it does not advance the Green Line, and those tradeoffs cannot be reduced to support for or against rail.
The proposal responds to another government's withdrawal and cannot reliably distinguish support for rail from opposition to the funding circumstances.
Reject this revised scope and financial package; a No may concern its cost or scope rather than rail in general.
This vote explicitly advances rail construction and its financial framework. Related approvals and amendments are counted within the same program decision.
Reviewed policy choice
Recorded choices remain attached to their proposals. Contextual motions are visible and unscored.
An earlier amendment passed 8–7 before the final clause failed 7–8. Both stages are shown; the amendment's passage is not counted twice or treated as adoption.
The Yule/Clark amendment passed 8–7 before the final clause passed 9–6 with a changed coalition. Yule and Schmidt voted Yes at both stages; their later written reasons describe this May 26 decision, not the earlier February 24 review.
This is the adopted final deferral clause. It addresses decision timing and process; neither side identifies support for removing free fares or investing in the Green Line.
The proposal combines fare revenue, operating-service costs and tax effects; it does not advance the Green Line, and those tradeoffs cannot be reduced to support for or against rail.
The proposal responds to another government's withdrawal and cannot reliably distinguish support for rail from opposition to the funding circumstances.
This vote explicitly advances rail construction and its financial framework. Related approvals and amendments are counted within the same program decision.
Attributed statements, recorded choices and campaign commitments retain separate labels. Month/year dates retain their precision; undated records appear last. Promises show their full lifecycle.