Chantelle Dur

Elected Catholic (CCSD) school trustee in the January 2025 by-election and the 2025 general election.

Elections contested

Won

Votes received

338

all races combined

Raised for 2025

$700

spent $2,268

Record

Separate school trustee

View chart data

Chart values

2 rows

Office	Record
Separate school trustee	January 2025 by-election CCSD trustee, Wards 11 & 12: 31.1%, won
Separate school trustee	2025 CCSD trustee, Wards 11 & 12: –, won

Bars are terms on council; diamonds are elections (filled = won). Records start with the 2010 election.

Elections

Year	Race	Votes	Share	Affiliation	Result
2025	CCSD trustee, Wards 11 & 12	0	–	Independent	Elected
January 2025 by-election	CCSD trustee, Wards 11 & 12	338	31.1%	–	Elected

Official results, City of Calgary Open Data (sources). Share is of all votes cast in the race; affiliations appear from 2025, the first election with municipal parties.

Name as recorded

Source	Spelling
Ballot	CHANTELLE DUR
Disclosure	Chantelle Dur
Disclosure	DUR, Chantelle

Spellings matched to this person across sources. See About for how names are resolved.

Issue positions

Explore the issues and policy measures or compare this person.

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

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Broader residential permissions

Reviewed land-use decisions where the direction of residential building permissions is explicit. Broader permission does not establish that a home was built. Contextual amendments do not each become another independent score.

Favoured narrower permissionsFavoured broader permissions

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Capital borrowing authorizations

Final readings of specified capital borrowing bylaws. This is a record of support for these particular debt-financed projects, not a general tax, spending or fiscal-conservatism score; utility-supported and tax-supported debt may differ.

Opposed the reviewed borrowing authoritiesSupported the reviewed borrowing authorities

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Climate and Environment operating allocations

Explicit amendments to Climate and Environment operating allocations. This is separate from formal targets and declarations; multiple amendments within one annual budget share one scoring weight.

Favoured the reviewed funding reductionsFavoured retaining the reviewed allocations

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Community-based safety responses

Explicit funding or plan approvals for community-based prevention and wellbeing responses. This measure makes no claim about a member's position on every police budget or the effectiveness of an adopted plan.

Opposed the reviewed community-safety proposalsSupported the reviewed community-safety proposals

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Formal municipal climate commitments

Reviewed decisions establishing or rescinding municipal climate targets, strategies and declarations. A declaration vote is not evidence of a particular dollar amount or emissions outcome.

Favoured fewer formal commitmentsFavoured more formal commitments

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Public funding for the Event Centre

Specific public financial commitments to the Event Centre project, including the original project and the replacement agreement. These are different proposals across time; a vote is not a generic position on all major projects.

Opposed the reviewed public commitmentsSupported the reviewed public commitments

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

Public support for non-market housing

Reviewed decisions that provide a specific financial or tax benefit for non-market housing. A vote records a choice on that proposal, not an estimate of affordability outcomes or an overall housing ideology.

Opposed the reviewed support proposalsSupported the reviewed support proposals

Chantelle Dur

Insufficient voting evidence

0 reviewed decisions

View chart data

Policy positions

1 row

Person	Score (0–100)	Independent decisions	Remove-one low	Remove-one high	Evidence status	First vote	Last vote
Chantelle Dur	Not available	0	Not available	Not available	Insufficient voting evidence	Not available	Not available

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.

Policy choices over time

No policy history collected for this selection

Missing votes and statements remain unknown.

Votes, statements, promises and action milestones retain distinct labels. Dates preserve source precision; undated records appear last. Different proposals can explain different choices; a changed vote is not automatically a changed belief.

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.

Published statements are attributed to their author and kept separate from recorded votes.

Promises and actions

No sourced commitments collected

A missing commitment is not a finding that someone made no promises.

Milestones describe the evidence collected. Adoption, an individual vote and implementation are different events; a missing milestone is not proof that a promise was broken.

Policy leadership

No documented leadership entries collected

Sponsorship and committee appointments require an explicit source; a Yes vote alone does not establish either.

Appointment records do not establish continued service beyond their sourced term. Authorship and sponsorship require explicit documentation.

Campaign funding

All campaign finance

Election	Contributions	Own money	Fundraising	Spending	Totals	Statements (PDF)
2025	$700	$1,449	$0	$2,268	Checked	2025
January 2025 by-election	$8,540	$0	$0	$8,421	Checked	Campaign

Largest contributors (from itemized listings)

Contributor	Type	Elections	Total read
Kasper Jarosz	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$2,500.00
Michelle Jarosz	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$2,500.00
Randall Jarosz	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$1,000.00
Gerald Barr	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$500.00
Matthew Gelinas	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$500.00
Paul Hamnett	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$500.00
Ken Dick	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$300.00
Matthew Dirk	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$250.00
Germaine Maxwell	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$200.00
Jason Kenney	Individual	January 2025 by-election	$200.00

From the candidate's disclosure statements (scanned; read by OCR or transcribed). Checked = the totals satisfy the form's own arithmetic. Contributor names and amounts were transcribed from the attached listings.

Funding context

All recorded candidate elections

Itemized gifts read

$8,450.00

All recorded candidate elections

Largest five donors

82.8%

Share of readable itemized gifts

Verified organization coverage

–

Share of readable itemized gifts

Unreadable gift amounts

No verified business mappings for this selection

Business activities are curated from primary sources; personal employers are not inferred.

Candidate filings only; party and third-party advertiser gifts are excluded. Concentration uses readable itemized amounts, not all fundraising. Incomplete listings can change the result. Business sources verify the named organization’s activities; donation identities retain the name-matching limits of the listings. Shared funding and similar votes do not establish influence.