Summary#

Calgary City Council approved the Council Policy Program Update on July 28, 2026, on the consent agenda. It rescinds seven Council policies that City staff say have been replaced by other City rules or documents, and records that two other policies had already been rescinded because of a 2025 change to Alberta’s Municipal Government Act. City staff say the goal is to keep Council’s policy library current and reduce overlap.

• The seven rescinded policies cover fuel management, cultural landscapes, oil, gas and aggregate extraction, plain language, posting councillor ward budgets and expenses, circulation of some professional-services contracts, and councillors’ reporting after FCM and AUMA conferences.
• Council also received into the Corporate Record the rescission of the public-member code of conduct and the COVID-19 vaccination policy for public members appointed to boards, commissions and committees. The report says these were rescinded by the 2025 law change; Council did not newly rescind them.
• Council’s vote was 14 to 0. The decision was approved on the consent agenda, without debate.

What it means for you#

• City staff and Council: The seven policies no longer provide City direction. Staff are expected to rely on other governance documents or procedures instead.
• Residents and public appointees: The decision does not describe a direct change to residents’ services or rights. The two policies for public appointees were already rescinded under the law change, according to the report.
• People looking for City rules: The seven policy documents are rescinded, but the report says other documents now provide current direction. The materials supplied here do not identify those replacement documents by name.

Money#

City staff report no anticipated financial impact.

• The supplied material gives no estimate of staff time or other costs from carrying out the decision.

What is unclear#

• The report refers to replacement governance documents in an attachment, but that attachment’s details are not included in the supplied material.
• It is therefore unclear where people can now find the specific direction previously set out in each of the seven policies.
• The materials do not describe any public notice or transition steps; staff said public communication or engagement was not required.

Case for#

• City staff say the seven policies no longer provide the current direction for staff, and that other documents or procedures now do.
• Staff say removing overlapping or outdated direction can make it clearer which rules and documents apply, supporting more consistent administration.
• Staff also say keeping the policy library aligned with current legislation and City practice supports effective decision-making.

Case against#

• The replacement documents are not identified in the supplied material. Without that information, it is hard to check how the former policies’ detailed direction is preserved or where users should look for it.
• Removing seven stand-alone policies may make some guidance less easy to find if it is spread across other documents. This is a possible trade-off, not an outcome established by the report.
• City staff identify a risk in keeping outdated policies, but the supplied material gives no examples of specific confusion or harm caused by these policies.