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
2
Sourced statements
0
Evidence last reviewed
Oct 29, 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.
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.
Authorize the wind-down in the stated funding circumstances.
The proposal responds to another government's withdrawal and cannot reliably distinguish support for rail from opposition to the funding circumstances.
Approve the revised core scope and funding package.
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.
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.
Statements and reasons for votes
No sourced statements collected
This is a gap in the collected evidence; it does not establish a person’s views.
These are attributed statements, separate from voting scores. Date filters exclude undated sources.
Promises and actions
No sourced commitments collected
A missing commitment is not a finding that someone made no promises.
Commitments and their sourced milestones are shown across their full lifecycle, independently of the vote-date filter.
This view could not be loaded. Check your connection and try again.