Within our Country of Canada, Province of Alberta, and City of Calgary – I have seen discontent and anger building within our political spectrum. It seems some leaders have replaced consideration for positive impact with expressions of blame, chastisement, and negative rhetoric; whether it’s about: Covid-19, economics, taxes, or the direction of our future.

My last posting as a principal at a newly formed school, we were tasked with defining a mission statement and vision. The school chose 3 power words and I still hold them close to this day: Accept, Achieve, and Aspire.

• Accept all as they are
• Achieve to be the best of their ability
• Aspire to be better than we are individually and as a group

During this 2021 Municipal Election, I witnessed the best and worst in campaigns. Despite the negativity and manufactured bitterness, there was one campaign that also used 3 power words deserving Calgary’s support: Positivity, Possibility, and Policy. These words ring true in an environment that is sometimes overflowing with misinformation and selfishness.

My interpretation of these 3 words are:

• Positivity – While we might not agree on a given issue, we endeavor to always be respectful and compassionate when having these discussions
• Possibility – Always trying to aspire to enable possible course-of-actions to move forward on a given issue with the focus of improving Calgarian’s quality of life
• Policy – Utilizing solid governance and adjusting policy in a responsible way that respects all parties and political processes

My sincere desire is for political environments, not only within our city – but across our entire country, adopt the intent of incorporating these 6 power words. While we must continue to be open-minded, evaluate different views and political aspects; as political leaders we must embody decency, ethics, and honesty.

Looking back to when I was first elected in 2010, I can’t help but get nostalgic about the well-maintained atmosphere of mutual respect of City Council at the time. Serving constituents meant conducting ourselves in a way that was collaborative, communicative, that demonstrated honest integrity. We solved many problems by being respectful when thinking critically, and strategic in our decision-making. Politics used to create meaningful and positive change, however much has eroded since then. It is up to this new generation of leaders to help rebuild political higher standards.

I wish to congratulate the following individuals on their achievement, and ask them to think of these 6 power words on behalf of all residents of Calgary. Thank you.

Ward 1: Sonya Sharp

Ward 2: Jennifer Wyness

Ward 3: Jasmine Mian

Ward 5: Raj Dhaliwal

Ward 6: Richard Pootmans

Ward 7: Terry Wong

Ward 8: Courtney Walcott

Ward 9: Gian-Carlo Carra 

Ward 10: Andre Chabot

Ward 11: Kourtney Branagan

Ward 12: Evan Spence

Ward 13: Dan McLean

Ward 14: Peter Demong

I would like to start this blog the same way I started in 2010, by stating I am here to learn. I can honestly say in whatever I am doing, if I left it better than when I came, it’s a great day. Today is a very great day, and I hope that everyone who holds my position gives it their all. To make life better, every day, for everyone.

I truly believe I’ve gained more than I gave. Which after 11 years includes numerous amounts of experience, knowledge, insights, an above all, many many friends. Not just acquaintances. I want to thank all members of Council, past and present. Their staff and especially the staff of Ward 12.

I can go back to Jason Letourneau, Meghan, Jordan Pinkster, Shannon, Vincent, Kevin and many others. Which the City usually ends up robbing from my office because I hire nothing but great individuals.

I want to thank the business units, Administration teams, Civic Partners, Calgary businesses, the Community Associations, and above all, the residents of Calgary.

I want to thank everyone for the time spent together, for the exchange of ideas that have created paths forward, and for sometimes, just having a simple visit and conversation.

I will remember many discussions, debates, disagreements, and most of all the times we came together on many topics. To create a better community. There are so many cherished moments I will take with me and so many stories I will retell over the coming years.

While the rest of Council is great, however one never forgets their first cohort. In 2010 I joined City Council, with Councillors Carra, Demong, Mayor Nenshi, Pootmans, and Mcleod. Next term there will only be two of us, and I ask Council to lead onward and continue the great work has been started, and the great work that continues now.

It was great sitting beside Cleopatra Gondek, both in Planning Commission and Council, we have had a great relationship going back and forth. It was great being office neighbours with Councillor Davison. It was great having fantastic discussions and mentorship in both directions with Councillor Chahal. It’s great still having discussions with Councillor Sutherland while he tries to get me to see things his way, and let’s not forget Councillor Jones. He’s still here with us now, as he was in the past.

Also, as we are a team, I’d like to thank Councillor Farkas, Chu, and Magliocca. Because that’s the way we should be. A team. It was also great to tag team many aspects of the Green Line with Councillor Wooley, and to learn so much from the long time colleagues Councillor Farrell and Colley-Urquhart, who are here to teach us and will continue to do so. (and if I missed anyone, sorry- I think I got everybody)

As with all the great joys of my time here, one must also mention great disappointments. When members criticize me, and criticize my time away from Calgary during family illness. The sayings of social media and some public mentalities, and then to be questioned by Administration over it.

However it was the members of council and members of the media (that we have to make sure are here, because they are the ones who actually tell our story in an appropriate way,) who came to my aid, and helped shine a light on the disrespectful nature and unethical trolls that we as elected officials sometimes have to put up with.

 It was the silence of certain Council Members connected to those individuals that was especially telling as well.

I say this, as there needs to be a change in the discourse and interactions of the public and Council members. It is time I made up for it with my wife, children and grandchildren for the time I have missed, and I hope that that will be many, many years to come.

I think it’s fitting to finish using someone else’s words because I truly believe through our interactions with others, we learn to be better. I also believe, it’s with others is how we can evaluate our own growth, as well as our own journey through every stage of our lives.

What I’m about to read. Is part of a three page handwritten letter from a developer, which in my view, really hits the mark.

“Thank you for all your support on this project. It’s been a long road to get to where we did, and it will be nice to move to the next stage. As with all things that challenge us, they provide us with the opportunities to learn, and get better at what we do. This plan was no exception. We knew we had to put our best foot forward on the quality of the plan, and I am very happy with what we were able to present to Council. We learned the importance of balancing individual and stakeholder’s wishes, as we moved through the complex levels of approvals. We became much more understanding about how the costs of new developments impact the city. We learned never to take anything for granted. We likely also learned lessons we don’t know yet. And hopefully we can put these into work for us in the future years. As we continue to build a city in a positive and cooperative manner. I also think the City gained from the process we all went through. Evidence by some of the positive changes and productive conciliations, coming out of administration recently. Aside from sleepless nights, long delays, high planning bills, and way too many meetings, I feel we are all better off because of this plan and associated conversations about growth that accompanied it.”

And this is what I think Council is all about. Thank you.

Calgary is lucky to have so many individuals that believe in the worth and positive impact of the green line. See? I it doesn’t matter where or what topic, I can still sneak in the Green Line.

This project is one of the many examples of how Calgarians are working together. That’s because we believe in making Calgary better for everyone, and that’s no science fiction. You don’t need lightspeed space crafts and roaring Wookies to usher in the future.

You just need to trust in the power of people, provide opportunities for everyone, and let city initiatives be motivated by a force of good. I am proud to be part of the many Calgarians doing just that.

Here at the City of Calgary, our colleagues have and will continue to serve with pride. These past 11 years have been quite the ride. While our city has seen many changes, the desire of City staff, to work hard for their fellow citizens has not changed one bit.

Each year we refine, we optimize and we endeavor to live up to Calgary’s world-class reputation. We have a lot to live up to. To think we started in 1875 as just a small community. It is thanks to the diversity of our communities that we are able to capitalize on industry and development alike.

Indigenous Peoples, farmers, cattle ranchers, innovators, and many more. All linked by our desire to share our vision of Calgary with the rest of the world with City-shaping infrastructure that united our hearts and minds.

Proud doesn’t begin to describe the feelings I have in my heart for the many thousands and thousands of individuals focused on creating a better Calgary.

That’s why we are presenting small token of our appreciation, a ribbon, that’s just an inkling of appreciation we have for the collective drive we share, and for those focusing on building a better city.

I have sat on this council for over a decade, a fleeting snapshot in the history of our city. While my story is wrapping up, Calgary embarks on a new chapter. One that will kick off with this demonstration of appreciation to all City employees, and will hopefully sow the seeds for our brighter future as all our city of Calgary colleagues are proudly serving our great city, while making life better, everyday for everyone.

So, with the presentation of 20,000 ribbons, 5000 for all the vehicles in the City’s fleet, and 1 for each city employee. I hope that council will join me in saying thank you.

This is thanks to the donations from…

Ward 12 Councillor Shane Keating
Ward 1 Councillor Ward Sutherland
Ward 3 Councillor Jyoti Gondek
Ward 5 Councillor George Chahal
Ward 6 Councillor Jeff Davison
Ward 7 Councillor Druh Farrell
Ward 8 Councillor Evan Woolley
Ward 9 Councillor Gian-Carlo Carra
Ward 10 Councillor Ray Jones
Ward 13 Councillor Diane Colley-Urquhart
Ward 14 Councillor Peter Demong
Can West Legacy Inc
Tuxedo Mills and Molding Inc
Laird’s Spindle and Railing Inc
Easy Trim Fence Guard Inc
Calculated Structured Designs
DP Energy
Rick Balbi Architect Ltd.
Kumlin Sullivan
Section 23
Melcor
McManes Automotive Group
Quantum Place
Situated Consulting
West Creek Developments

How much progress have we really made in bringing the Green Line for Calgarians?

Let’s quickly review: July, 2020, Council voted 14-1 to give approval for Green Line Plan. Two Request for Proposals (RFP’s) were sent out for consideration. One for Light Rail Vehicles (LRV’s) and the one for Green Line’s Stage 1 of Phase 1.

Many of Calgarians, thousands in fact have the same questions that I do. They want to know 1) the current status of the approval process, 2) what’s the delay with approving the RFP’s for LRV’s and Phase 1 Stage 1 construction to begin, and 3) why the Province’s acceptance of anything Green Line related is met with caveat after caveat.

Many concerned Calgarians, including myself would like to know…

Will Green Line construction see shovels in the ground in 2021?

Or, are we still going to be stalled into the year 2022?

It took four months for the Provincial review to be completed, then two months for the Green Line team and the Alberta Government to start talking about it in earnest.

Overall, nine months have passed since Council’s approval. We’ve missed nine months of opportunity for jobs creation and Albertan’s getting back to work after weathering historically low oil prices, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the global economic recession.

So I have to ask: where do we currently stand? What progress have we gained?

It’s as LRT on the Green Foundation stated in their March 2, 2021 press release, “The Clock is Ticking.”

(You can read it here: https://www.lrtonthegreen.ca/march-2-2021-times-ticking-on-green-line-review/)

Last week’s Provincial Budget talks about accelerating infrastructure investment and driving Alberta’s post Covid-19 economic recovery. I think it’s fitting to note that the last time Alberta faced a major recession, we built the Saddledome and LRT.

Government of Alberta’s 2021-22 budget focuses on three themes:

1. Protecting Lives – through with investments in healthcare
2. Protecting Livelihoods – by preparing for economic recovery and
3. Fiscal Accountability – by “maintaining responsible spending”

Yet Provincial changes to funding will invariably impact The City of Calgary shovel ready transit and transportation priorities including:

• Project specific funding at $485M for the Green Line LRT which remains contingent on the Government of Canada, $460M federal contribution.

Green Line LRT is the largest infrastructure project in Calgary’s history. With $4.9 billion in commitments from the Government of Canada, Government of Alberta and City of Calgary, Green Line will play a key role in providing 20,000 jobs and with expected opening day ridership of 65,000 people.

How is the Green Line LRT not a kick-start project for Alberta’s economic recover?

But many people know already, the Green Line is an economic stimulus that will play a momentous role in Alberta’s recovery.

What many people might not realize is that the Green Line is already in the RFP process, it’s shovel ready, and all that is needed is for bodies to get behind it.   

This should be a slam dunk.

As we have stated many times in the past, Stage 1 of Phase 1 is the simplest section of the Green Line to begin construction.

It’s easy and ready to start.

Ready as in right-this-instant ready.

To start construction on Stage 1 of Phase 1 should be an easy decision, considering it requires a budget far less than half the total Green Line cost, taking us from South Shepard Maintenance Facility all the way to East of Elbow River/ Inglewood.

I understand concerns will arise, but thinking the City is incapable of getting to 7^th Ave/ Eau Claire Station, let alone 16^th Ave Station with two-thirds of the budget for Phase 1, Stage 2a and 2b is completely ludicrous.

City Administration are perfectly capable of moving forward with such low risk construction.

We have hundreds of consultants and experts in the field that share our well-deserved confidence.    

Not only is this a mis-placed concern on the Alberta Government’s part, it’s now 2021, and to think that 4 years ago we had approval from the Province on the present plan.

Sure, there have been minor changes in decisions to reduce costs and risks, slight adjustments to alignment, but with that said, the plan has barely changed over 4 years.

Four years, and we haven’t moved an inch.

The last time I spoke to the Alberta Government I was told that if I had a solution to “put it in writing and submit it.”

I’m sure you’ve heard that one before. It means, “we’re not interested in what you have to say.”

However, I’m putting it in writing here and now.  

The Alberta Government’s comment of a “train to nowhere,” should be of no concern. This can be easily remedied with the present RFP for Stage 1 of Phase1 by adding an addendum extending it from Elbow River/ Inglewood Station to 4^th Street SE Station adjoining with current Stage 1 from Elbow River/ Inglewood Station to the Shepard Maintenance Facility.  

This will place the Green Line within steppingstones of the existing Red Line.

Now what we can do is take this increased section from 4^th street SE Station to Shepard Maintenance Facility and divide it into manageable portions of approximately $500 million to $600 million contracts.

We divide the remaining Phase 1 into three parcels. The Shepard Maintenance Facility would be one contract, and we could divide the remaining length of line into 2 separate contracts.

This would further allow for “Shovels in the ground 2021,” with a greater amount of flexibility to facilitate local companies who bid on these portions. This means people are working. Let the planners plan, let the builders build.

More jobs, and more Albertans getting back to work.

By allowing the first RFP to commence, we would effectively be providing the much needed kickstart to the economic recovery without jeopardizing the rest of the project, but also simultaneously allow for further review and adjustments to Stage 2a and 2b to be made if needed.

Let’s do what’s right and approve this first RFP while we work on Stage 2a and 2b.

Our Green Line Plan is credible. It always has been. This is evident by all the great work the Green Line Team, City Council and the numerous governing boards such as the Technical Risk Committee and Green Line Board have done

Not having shovels in the ground in 2021 would mean a failure to Alberta’s economic recovery

• Part of Calgary’s global competitive advantage to attract new businesses and a young talented workforce in our city would be lost
• 20,000 job critically needed opportunities would be lost
• Transit service between central and south east community hubs, schools and businesses would be lost
• Community beautification and connectivity around LRT Stations would be lost
• The opportunity to care for our most vulnerable populations of children, seniors and people with disabilities who already experience accessibility issues with independent living and transportation to schools, work, medical appointments and social activities would be lost.

It’s now 2021, and to think that four years ago we had approval from the Province on the current plan.

Four years and we haven’t moved an inch.

If shovels aren’t in the ground in 2021, how could we possibly peg this as success?

Could we consider this is a failure to the thousands and thousands of Calgarians that desperately need the Green Line on part of the Provincial Government, the Mayor’s Office, City Council, the Green Line Team, and yes, even a failure on my part?

There is a need for accountability.

There is a need to seize the initiative and build from this economic momentum that the Green Line will create.

So, that begs the question, when exactly can Calgarians expect Green Line LRT construction to begin?

Rather than take the time to properly represent the facts, certain columnists and even councillors just want to hijack the conversation, shout thin rhetoric into an echo chamber, and punch another hole in their fan club appreciation card.

That’s not loyalty, that’s the sort of behaviour that disrespects Calgarians’ intelligence.

So, it’s time to pull out my teacher’s red pen again.

Time for the real facts.

Based on previous Council Direction, the Safer Mobility Plan 2019-2023 aimed to improve road safety for Calgarians and bring us closer towards a transportation network free of fatalities and major injuries.

See the Vision Zero approach here: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=120352

The most important part of the Vision Zero approach is achieving operating speeds that reduce the likelihood of a fatality or serious injury for all users by reducing impact energy.

Collisions involving injury or fatalities is an important issue for Calgarians, and rightly so.

According to Item 8.2.2 Neighbourhood Speed Limit Review (TT2020-1036) Attachment 2: Technical Analysis Report of the November 2^nd, 2020 Combined Meeting of Council, there was an average of 9,100 collisions per year on Calgary neighbourhood streets with an average of 550 of them resulting in serious injury or death.

Here’s the link to the Nov 2 Combined Meeting of Council: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=e949d625-ada3-4950-8571-7175c76bd5cf&Agenda=Merged&lang=English&Item=39

You can review the report in its entirety by clicking here

Many residents have expressed to council that they are tired of vehicles speeding on their streets. The first step to ensuring safer residential travelling and reducing the frequency and severity of collisions is to adjust the unposted speed limit on residential roads.

The recommendations put forward would only apply to residential roads. There are no proposed changes to playground zones or higher classification roads (e.g. Deerfoot Trail, Bow Trail, Anderson Road, Memorial Drive, etc.)

To clarify, residential roads are the roads in front of most houses that typically have no center line, and have less traffic.  

The data speaks for itself. Sure, there are many facets to the conversations and issues we as councillors discuss with our constituents, but this one is easy.

Slower speeds = safer streets.

Keep in mind, a number of studies have demonstrated that driving at 50km/h in neighbourhoods is risky for everyone and leaves little margin for error. A small reduction in speed can drastically reduce the chance of collision. You have more time to react, a more broad field of view, and less severity of injury if a crash were to occur. This also means cyclists and pedestrians have more time to react.

Other cities across Canada, North America, and globally, have found that reducing driving speeds in neighbourhoods has reduced the frequency and severity of collisions.

This conversation isn’t a tool to earn easy favour. It’s about doing the hard work of informing Calgarians of the benefits, and the facts.

People are being harmed as a result of traffic collisions in neighbourhoods on residential roads across all of Calgary. Yes, there are some specific neighbourhoods that have more collisions than others, but it would be inefficient to address these locations with specifically targeted street-by-street, intersection-by-intersection traffic calming measures.

The benefit of a speed limit reduction is that it is a measure that targets residential roads in all neighbourhoods, and can reduce the frequency of collisions more effectively in all neighbourhoods.

You can’t say that the entire city will become a playground zone.

Let’s look at a map of proposed adjustments in Ward 12.

You can view these maps for all the Wards here: https://www.calgary.ca/transportation/roads/traffic/traffic-safety-programs/residential-speed-limits.html

As you can see, roads in grey, playground zones, and existing reduced speed zones will remain unchanged. All of the red lines are staying at 50km/h.

The yellow lines are the residential roads that will have their speed reduced to 40 km/h.

This is just on the street you live on, not the collector roads. We’re not turning the city into a playground zone.

Let’s use Riverbend as an example.

When you’re coming off Glenmore Trail going southbound into Riverbend, the speed limit of 18^th Street is 50km/h. That hasn’t changed. Turning on 21^st street SE? That’s still 50 km/h. Are you turning onto a residential road, like River Rock Way SE? That’s when you slow down from 50km/h to 40km/h.

Here’s the thing, responsible drivers are already doing that.

But not all drivers.

This chart is taken from chapter 3 of the same Attachment 2: Technical Analysis Report I mentioned earlier.

• Average Speed: The numerical average, or mean, of a sample of vehicle speed measured.
• 85th Percentile Speed: The speed at which 85% of drivers are travelling at or below This measure is commonly used in engineering processes to indicate an upper boundary of ‘normal’ behaviour.
• Design Speed: This refers to a vehicle speed that a given roadway has been designed to accommodate, such that a driver travelling down the road at that speed should be able to maintain control of their vehicle, remain in their designated lane, and stop in time to avoid hazards or yield the right-of-way as required.
• Speeding: Any driver driving in excess of the posted or unposted speed limit is speeding. While speeding is sometimes considered a factor in collisions from a liability perspective, for the purposes of this study, whether or not someone is speeding is less relevant than the physics at play relative to the speed of vehicles and the design environment.

So based on this sampling on speed data it’s suggested that most people drive near or below the current speed limits when driving in neighbourhoods.

But there’s still a lot of room for improvement. Recording an 85th percentile speed that is slightly higher than the posted speed limit means that more than 15% of motorists are still not compliant with the speed limit.   

Similarly, observed behaviours on Residential roads demonstrate that the vast majority of drivers complying with the existing speed limit. As a result, it is essential to note that the current collision rates observed in Calgary neighbourhoods are the result of the challenges all drivers face safely operating in these environments at the current speed limits. It is also worth noting that this is a new glimpse into behaviour in Neighbourhoods. Speed information for higher-order streets typically shows average speeds at or slightly above the posted limit, with 85th percentile speeds 6-10 km/h above the limit

For those who are saying this is just a city-wide cash grab, I’ve got a simple solution.

Don’t speed.

The vast majority of those who get hit with the photo radar or electronic enforcement are those who speed all the time. And we have to understand, if you’re going to speed all the time, I will gladly take your money.

You might be wondering about the costs of resigning roads. Yes, there will be some costs, but many of them will come from the budget already set aside for traffic improvement. Also, the speed reduction is expected to save the city annually by reducing the number of yearly collisions.

Are you worried bout an increase to your travel time? Worry not. The impact to your travel time is about the same time it takes to brush the snow off your car after a light snow. 1-2 minutes.

The amount of time spent on residential and collector roads are relatively small for most typical commutes. The City conducted a study of travel times and travel time reliability and found to vary by more than 2 minutes a day with a standard deviation in each trip ranging between 3.1 and 5.5 minutes per trip.

What does that mean?

It means the Neighbourhood Speed Limit Review will have less impact on your travelling times than the normal day-to-day fluctuating variations experienced daily. Things such as traffic volume.   

This isn’t a decision that requires a plebiscite. It’s a non-issue. The proposed changes are small but will have a positive and large impact on the safety of Calgarians. The entire city is not being made into a playground zone, the costs are coming from existing budget for traffic improvements, has minimal impact to travel times, and provides the city with greater authority to enforce responsible driving.

Slam dunk.

Easy Decision.

At least it should be.

This is a safety issue, not a political debate. We’re dealing with the facts. There isn’t a need to go for a plebiscite when the benefits outweigh the perceived negative impacts by such a large margin.

This has nothing to do with the intelligence of Calgarians, in fact, Calgarians are smart when given the correct and truthful information.

For those of you who love listening to opinion columnists or councillors who deal in soundbites, not reality, take a moment to read into the facts. City administration has done their due diligence in representing the different components and reasoning of the Neighbourhood Speed Limit Review. 

All of this information is readily available here: https://www.calgary.ca/transportation/roads/traffic/traffic-safety-programs/residential-speed-limits.html

Calgarians are more than capable to make decisions when the correct information is given, not purposeful misrepresentations that only muddy the efforts of those who want to do well by making Calgary a safer city.

I’ve always had great respect for Transportation Minister, Ric McIver. As an individual and as an elected official, and I still do.

However, the statement the Alberta Government and Minister McIver’s office provided on Dec 17^th, regarding the current hold-up of Calgarian’s Green Line is just an inaccurate statement.

An inaccurate statement that I will happily and respectfully address. As my constituents have come to expect.

Here’s the statement in question (twitter post). You can read Madeline Smith’s full Calgary Herald article here

Here’s the short form, 

1. Did The City put out a credible plan?

2. Is this actually a “train to nowhere?”

3. Should the report be made public?

Time to pull out the teacher’s red pen. I’ll show my work and you can follow along.

Let’s talk about did The City of Calgary put forward a credible plan?

Absolutely. It’s hardly a shot in the dark. 

What we’re seeing is Phase 1 from 16^th Avenue North to Shepard in the South. This is being broken into 3 segments.

The first segment, from Elbow River to Shepard is the least complicated and we happen to have decades of experience in building quality LRT projects.

So we started there, and nailed down the costs. We know the risks are low, and we are ready for construction.

Seriously, give me a shovel- I’ll start the digging.

Moving forward with this segment is paramount.  This is laying the foundation for the other segments.

Why am I so confident? This is in part due to The City’s progressive procurement style.

The City’s progressive procurement style is well planned out and means that we are dividing the whole project into manageable portions and install segments. We have learned that we can build from one segment to the next easier, and that this approach allows for smaller companies to bid on the project.

The fact is, the larger the contract the fewer corporations can actually bid on it. It’s a multi-billion dollar job. By splitting things up, we make bidding more accessible and each segment is like steps of a ladder, building on each other while creating a solid footing to move on to the next segments.  

I’d like to reiterate, that we heard over and over again through our engagement with the community, the Green Line Team, and many external experts, to not build too big of contracts. Why? Because you’re short-changing all of the possible builders who would like to bid a section of the project that they are best suited to construct–empowering them to do what they do best.

Too large of contracts are not good for local companies, and it would mean only a select few bidders could handle the contract.

That’s just plain good business. That is the type of decision that puts food on someone’s table.

Segment 2a is from Elbow River to Eau Claire. This is the most complicated part. The difficulty with this segment stems from the unknown unknowns. You can plan, adjust, and think of all the things that could go wrong, but if you don’t know what’s under the ground as you’re going through the core, it’s possible you might hit something unexpected.

This is where the tunnelling and the style of tunnelling will be decided on–once we begin the previous segment. Here is where we will decide if it’s bored, cut and cover, or a number of other construction styles. We have consistently heard that the unknown unknowns or these aspects of underground construction present the most variables. But we actually have to take the cover off and get into the ground to see what is underneath.

It’s hard to say exactly what’s wrong with an engine when we haven’t even popped the hood.

So, what we’re saying is that Segment 1 is something the City has decades of experience building. We’re good to go. Start here, and let’s get some jobs created in this economy and get things rolling.

We are not rushing blindly into action, but we have to start somewhere.

This whole plan is based on a design-build-finance model. A DBF. Many large contracts are done this way, and we aren’t doing anything uncommon.

All city-shaping projects like this start with a functional plan, which for the LRT, included a rigorous selection of the best alignment, (where stations would go, etc.) Then cost estimates and finally a request for proposal (RFP). This is a solid year of study and discussion before we can start to pin down the fine details.

Why? Because it is up to the potential builders, three or four different large companies, to iron out many of the details and facets of the project in collaboration with The City. This is an important part of the RFP process.

Then, when the contract is awarded, the contractor is responsible for the final detailed plan, down to every nut and bolt.

These companies spend millions of dollars going through this process.  

Now that we’re into a DBF, so the successful builder actually builds, designs, and finances it. They are getting paid in intervals. So the DBF means the proponent bidder actually has to design it as laid out through the request for proposal (RFP) process. This can take a year and you do not get into the very fine detailed designs until the process is complete.

For up to a year of the RFP process, the Green Line Team, (the ones who work for The City,) and all of the experts they have hired, work together to ensure the project is done correctly. It goes back and forth with each of those companies until they have a design nailed down.

This often produces the best quality of work. People tend to stick to what they are good at.

The type of overpasses, tunnels, construction styles, time-frames, all of these details are worked out with the company long before the contract is awarded. Once the contract is awarded, it’s up to the company to do the finely detailed engineering. We’re talking about the full definition of every aspect of the project development.

One of the proposed fixes to the “train to nowhere” issue that the Province has flagged is creating a larger contract that includes the downtown core (7^th Ave to Shephard). While this would indeed ensure that, from the beginning, the line would serve the core–it would also implode efficiencies that are wisely baked into The City’s plan.

This contract would be half of the tunnelling necessary and a long conventional build. The downtown segment (2a) was specifically made as a separate segment to enable the very best partnership for this all-important portion of the Green Lines construction.

Another efficiency this would implode is some extremely important risk mitigation. There are contingencies for the unknown unknowns that are being factored in. Keeping the Segments distinct from each other allows for far more flexibility in worst-case scenario outcomes.

Even if you were to accept this and stop at 7^th Avenue you are going to have to go well past 7^th Avenue to allow the cars to change directions, which would create a whole new set of issues to unravel. I see no sense in doing half a tunnel, we should tackle the core as one integrated strategy. That is just common sense.

Even if we started with the connection into downtown being the major focus we should be starting Segment 1 now and immediately launch a full investigation for the best downtown treatment and create new stage gates based on the evidence.

There cannot be a one-size-fits-all contract for many reasons.

So has the plan been credible? Absolutely.

Has it been done correctly? Absolutely.

Anyone who says we don’t have a clear and detailed plan isn’t paying attention.

Our plans for the Green Line are a demonstration of our credibility. They cover the functional and detailed parameters of Phase 1. At a surface glance they could be misconstrued as missing seemingly key features because not all of the completed fine details of let’s say, an overpass are present. That’s done once the contract is awarded

Timing is key, and we have the process and steps all worked out.

Let’s touch on the order of things. If you look at the recommendations on June 15^th, 2020, Combined Meeting of Council, there were 17 of them. The first being, start with Segment 1. Right away. Because it’s ready to go, it’s easy to build, and we can move forward from there. Then work on Segment 2a over the next number of months, let’s nail down the exact alignment, for example the difference between 9thAvenue, and 11th Avenue, integration statements into future developments, and things like that. Then we can look at Segment 2b, Eau Claire to 16th Avenue.

But it’s not changing the project.

Like I said earlier, we can come back in 2021 and look at going out for an RFQ, then a RFP (where a lot of the fine details are done,) and move through the process as planned.

We make sure Segment 2a is completed from Elbow River to Eau Claire. Then we go forward and look at Segment 2b. (Eau Claire to 16^th Avenue.) The recommendations clearly state not to start Segment 2b until construction of Segment 1 is well underway, all of its risks are identified, the price is known, and then we move on. We don’t start 2b until 2a is also well on its way.

Not only are we breaking the complete phase 1 into 3 segments, we are a employing a progressive procurement style, with an extremely healthy contingency fund.

Our robust contingency fund is for the unknown unknowns. To guarantee we’re not going over the budget.

Credibility, accountability, foresight.

Sounds like we know what we are doing.

Segment 2b, Eau Claire to 16^th Avenue is very similar to Segment 1. We build a bridge over the river, we go at-grade down Centre Street, make improvements to the street scape as we go, and we make our way to 16^th.  Again, this is something we have done for decades. If we are capable enough to construct Segment 1, then it’s proof that we are credible in the design, construction, and implementation of Segment 2b.

This shows the credibility of the plan. We are on track and ready to execute on a well-developed and formulated Phase 1.

The first step of this is to move forward on Segment 1. The least complicated Segment.

This progressive procurement style is an embodiment of our strong approach to the Green Line. Start with something less complicated, knock it out of the park, and move on to the most complicated, look at the unknown unknowns, mitigate the risks, ensure it’s going well, and tackle the rest of Phase 1.

2. Train to nowhere?

Alright, a train to nowhere. Catchy little tune, of political trash talk. But really, is it a train to nowhere?

It’s the largest component of Phase 1, running from Shepard in the deep South, close to 130^th Avenue, and all the way to the Elbow River. It goes through the industrial park, densely populated areas in the South, and stops at the Elbow River.

For one reason only!

It sets the stage for the next segment.

The most complicated segment where we start with tunneling.  This builds on the momentum of the project, and that’s why we should end it at Elbow River in the first contract, and then go forward.

You are not compounding complicated issues, like tunnelling in 2a and conventional build above ground in Segment 1.  Tunnelling and conventional builds require different experts and construction styles, so why combine them in one contract? Isn’t there a smart saying about not putting all your eggs in one basket?

If we look at the plan and divide it into thirds, this is one-third of the plan. Segment 2a from Elbow River to Eau Claire, is one third, and Segment 2b Eau Claire to 16^th Avenue.

So, if this is a train to nowhere, and if people are actually saying that we will start this and stop at Elbow and run out of money, is absolutely ludicrous.

That would mean that not just the Green Line Team (who are city hall employees,) but all of the external expert companies they hired, and every consultant would be hundreds and hundreds of percent off their estimates.

That’s just not a credible line of thought.  

What is credible, is that this plan, in its conception and execution, is a demonstration of the City’s capabilities.

This is not a train to nowhere, it’s the first phase in a three-phase progressive procurement style, an approach that many mega infrastructure projects utilize to great success.

3. Should the report be made public?

Should the Alberta Governments’ consultant’s report be public? No, it should never. This is commercially sensitive information that should not be in the public’s hand, or either an elected official’s. The report was never asked to be made public.

This is a deflection of the real ask. This is answering a question that was never asked. Political distraction 101.

The Green Line Team has asked many times, to have the report shared with them in order to address the detailed difficulties this program has.

The answer has always been no. So the problem stands,

How can you address concerns without knowing the specifics of that concern?

It’s easy to say we have a cost estimate concern, a procurement concern, but unless you get into the actual fine details of these things, how can they actually be addressed?

Thankfully, it sounds like discussions are now going well. Although it’s unfortunate it took this long to start, so I hope it continues.

I’ll repeat though, the report was never asked to be made public, it should not be made public, it was asked to be shared on a confidential agreement with the Green Line Team, and only them so that they can provide all of the data and answers for your concerns.

That’s all it was, and that’s how it should have stayed. 

It’s time for the AB Government to listen to the experts, because it sounds like a problem is being created when there isn’t one.

The capable professionals on the Green Line Team are not the only ones who developed a solid and credible plan.

This is an outright refusal by the Province to acknowledge the tremendous body of work conducted by the Green Line Team, and the many external companies and consultants that have participated in the review process.

You may think I sound biased, because the Green Line Team is composed of members who work for The City. These individuals are skilled in procurement, engineering, financing, costs, and construction. And these are not the only ones saying our plan is solid and credible.

They have worked alongside a plethora of international consultant companies, have conducted many external reviews, and have operated constantly with the needs of Calgarians at the forefront of their minds during this entire process.

Simply put, we have many greatly skilled and knowledgeable individuals working on the Green Line Team, and they are working with many greatly skilled and knowledgeable individuals in the execution of this transit mega project. 

At this point I’ve gotten quite used to explaining things over and over again. Especially for those who choose not to listen.  As I explained in my letter to the Premier, which I’ll post below, it’s time to listen to the experts. Especially when they number in the hundred’s and are all giving the green light to the Green Line.

These internationally recognized companies represent a vast wealth of knowledge and experience in developing and delivering city-changing mega-projects. Financial experts, engineers, assessment analysts, risk management professionals, procurement strategists, all these individuals, in the eyes of the Alberta Government, do not measure up to just one of their consultants.   

Here is a sample of the expert consultants and international companies that the Green Line Team have collaborated with over the course of the last 5 years, ensuring that everything brought before Council is credible.

• Hatch –international transit and rail solutions advisor, currently acting as the owners engineer for the Green Line Program
• KPMG –international infrastructure mega project experience, acting as Financial and Commercial advisors within Canada and abroad
• Blakes –broad P3 legal expertise working with many jurisdictions and within many programs across Canada
• SMA Consulting – expertise in Risk management and project controls with significant experience assisting the City of Edmonton with various LRT projects
• Hanscomb Limited –expertise in cost estimating – used to assess reasonability of the approaches used on the Green Line Program
• Steer Group –expertise in LRT business case development and assessment having prepared business cases for a number of LRT programs across Canada
• Stantec – expertise in LRT and enabling works construction throughout Canada

These companies have provided even further due diligence on costing and enhanced risk management around the project.

So if the Government of Alberta believes that this distinguished list of Canadian and international companies is not credible, then who is?

On June 15, 2020, City Council voted 14-1 to move forward with Segment 1 of Phase 1,  and made 17 recommendations. A number of these recommendations, guarantee that the project is financially viable and the alignment is sound.

The decision was made not to alter the current Green Line plans, but to look for any improvements. Just small tweaks.

We have absolute faith in our process, the road we paved to get to this point was made possible because we engaged with the community, industry professionals, and a tirelessly working Green Line Team, all of whom are dedicated to providing Calgarians with their long-awaited, world-class transit solution. Their Green Line.

Here are some great examples of the recommendations Council approved.

You can view all of these recommendations in the June 15^th Combined Meeting of Council Confirmed Minutes, here  

What we did was break Phase 1 into 3 segments.

• Segment 1: Elbow to Shepard
• Segment 2: Elbow to Eau Claire
• Segment 3: Eau Claire to 16^th Ave

Once again, here’s the pertinent info from that June 15^th, 2020 Combined Meeting of Council. We start with the construction of Segment 1, we review Segment 2 for slight changes, and don’t start Segment 3 until 1 and 2 are in the ground and risks are approved.

So, looking at this documentation, if these aren’t credible, then what is?

The Province’s perceived complications are just a case of putting the horse before the cart.

As it stands, Segment 1 is ironclad and ready to proceed.

Council directed Administration to undertake a review of the Stage 1 alignment and to complete a series of due diligence activities to confirm that Stage 1 has the right alignment, that Stage 1 is the right project for Calgary and that it will be delivered using the right approach. The report presented recommended updates to the Green Line Stage 1 alignment and confirms:

1. That the updated Stage 1 alignment is the right alignment that can be delivered within budget, manage risk, achieve the Green Line vision and deliver the best value for Calgarians.

2. That the updated Stage 1 alignment is the right project for Calgary and meets the objectives set by Council, and the investment in Stage 1 will have significant mobility and urban development benefits for the City and provide long-term benefits to downtown real estate values and City assessed value.

3. That Administration has set up the right approach to enhance Council and Calgarians trust and confidence in The City’s ability to deliver the Green Line Program on time and on budget.

Taken from, https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=133229 2020 June 1 Green Line Committee Report

Segment 1 of the Green Line needs to get started as soon as possible.

In the best interest of transparency, here’s the letter I wrote to the Premier.

While it might not be filled with colourful rhetoric, it contains the facts. The truth of the matter is that we were not given a credible explanation for the Alberta Government’s perceived issues on Calgary’s Green Line.

Council listened and wanted third party oversight to review our plans, so the Technical Risk Committee was formed.

• Donald C. Fairbairn,
• Erich Neugebauer,
• Albert Sweetnam,
• Eric Tromposch,

The shear amount of experience these individuals carry, working on mega projects is astounding. If you look at their exhaustive credentials, the years of experience and expertise they carry, and believe them to not be credible, then who is?

Here is the link to their 18 page Curricula Vitarum, so you can see for yourself the expertise they possess. View the escribe here

Council even went a step beyond that. We decided to create an additional management board of directors to oversee the construction of the Green Line. This committee will be formally recognized in January 2021, and as you can see in the image below, the skills being sought for this management board is nothing less than extraordinary.  

If this additional management board of directors is not credible, then who is?

Minister McIver, I know that you value providing our city with a functional transit system, and I respect you for it, but with that said, public discourse spurned by inaccurate statements are a disservice to those who elected us.

I will continue to correct these statements, especially when it disregards all the hard work and mindful preparation that has gone into the Green Line.

Here’s an example of exactly that. Someone purposely misinforming you

I would laugh if this weren’t so serious.  Here are the real facts,

Even the word defund is misleading.

It does not mean disbanding. It does not mean abolishing, as those who try to “spin” the conversation into something it is not, as Councilor Farkas included his statements.

It means finding a better method of dealing with addiction, mental health, and a plethora of other issues that the Calgary Police Service has to shoulder.

Now let’s talk about Councillor Woolley’s Notice of Motion, Reallocating Policing Resources to Support Community Safety.

You can watch the entire conversation we had about this Notice of Motion on my YouTube page by clicking here

The point of issue I had with this Notice of Motion was the last therefore be it resolved, that said to reallocate $10M in 2021, and $10M in 2022. I raised the issue with the fact in the Notice that says to take money from the existing police budget.  

It should be noted, The Calgary Police Service talked about wanting to be a partner in the process of finding a better method, and a willingness to re-allocate some of their budget into supporting this Community Safety Investment framework.  

As you can see in the previous clip, I raised the issue of this Notice of Motion for being a little too forward in affecting the police budget. I suggested there has to be a better way to do this, especially if CPS has a desire and a willingness to be an active partner in this process.

Don’t believe me? How about the Chief of Police?

Or how about Police Commission Chair Bonita Croft?

These quotes are from a well done Calgary Herald Article. No spin, just facts.

You can read the full article by clicking here

Calgary Police Service is prepared to make a $40 million adjustment to the 2020 and 2021 budgets

Here’s the breakdown

• The reduction totals $40 million, (that amount isn’t a direct cut to the current budget)

• It includes removing $10 million from previously budgeted growth

• a $20-million “absorption” of COVID-related impacts
• ($11.75 million of COVID-related losses in 2020, with another approximate $8 million in 2021, this is the same as all city departments, are reducing costs due to the corona virus pandemic)

• $10-million crisis response reallocation.
• This will go towards exploring alternative call response models of system integration involving health, social services, justice and police in 2021
• Net reduction comes to $18M (4% of next year’s police budget) in 2021

This sure doesn’t sound like a move to “appease extremists,” as Councillor Farkas has stated. (Sounds more like mayoral candidate rhetoric)

I wasn’t the only person, or Councillor to catch on, either

Click here for the link

And another link here

 What this sounds like, is a step in the right direction.

The intent with this Notice of Motion, is that if there is another organization that can deal with many of these calls (not all of them, because there is still a need for CPS assistance), then it would reduce the number of calls to CPS and further optimize their ability to prioritize and handle other situations.  

We should honor that desire to do better, but not demand a specific amount. I raised the issue of accepting the voluntary reallocation from CPS, whatever amount it is, and then proposed having The City find the remaining, up to $20M, from other sources like the Fiscal Sustainability Reserve.

I stated to the Mayor during council discussion that he recognize me at a later time for an amendment. Allowing Councilors to have a discussion on, and address their point of views and questions.

Low and behold, Councillor Farkas comes out and mimics my exact amendment, however taking all the money from the Fiscal Sustainability Reserve before even allowing me to place my own amendment.

I’ll be frank, he sidelines the CPS’ desire to be a willing partner.

Farkas’ amendment was defeated.

I was then able to place my amendment, which had an emphasis on the fact CPS has a desire to be a willing partner in supporting a process that would enable them to better deal with addictions, mental health, and other social issues.

My amendment was carried.  

The intent here is that if there is another organization that can deal with many of these calls (not all of them, because there is still a need for CPS assistance), then it would reduce the number of calls to CPS and further optimize their ability to prioritize and handle other situations.  

At no point in time has Council, the Police Commission, or the general public supported the idea of defunding or abolishing the Calgary Police Services.

Defund is a completely inaccurate and purposeful misstatement of the good work we are trying to accomplish here. What we are doing is reallocating funds, in order to invest in a framework of support that will better enable Calgary Police Services to deal with the many social issues that are thrust upon them.

Ultimately, this will be determined at a November budget hearing, and the amount will be determined by Calgary Police Service and by the Police Commissions, not by City Council. So tune in to Monday’s Nov 9, Special Meeting of Council. You can watch it live here (https://www.calgary.ca/ca/city-clerks/council-and-committee-webcasts.html)

Hungry for more truth?

If we abolish something, how about misinformation?

Let’s get into how a Councillor is appointed to a committee. All Councillors are provided a preference sheet that include all committees a Councillor can serve on. Committees such as Transportation and Transit, Planning and Urban Development, and yes, the Police Commission.  

All 14 Councillors fill out these sheets with the choices of committees we would like to serve on, which are then returned to City Clerks, who tabulates the preferences and creates a wish list of all the choices by all the councilors.

In the case of the Police Commission, Farkas was appointed for a 1-year term, which came to an end.

Councillor Gondek resigned, leaving 2 open positions.

According to the wish list, and nominations from the floor, more Coucnillors were interested in serving in this board than spots available.

In a case like this, as in all committee appointments, Councillors give a 2-minute speech, and then a ballot is placed to choose who will be selected.

At no time was there discussion about Farkas not serving because he refused to “defund the police.”

I implore all individuals once again, quit taking to heart many of the sound bites, false information and in some cases, the absolute untruths that are so prevalent in Calgary’s civic political world of today.

Please, during this time leading up to the next civic election, take a moment to dig into the facts. A small amount of research can go a long ways, especially when there are those who are so quick to attack others because they were given false claims and misinformation.

One of the most common concerns my office receives from constituents are about traffic safety.

I consider the right for residents, (which include pedestrians and motorists) to feel safe on their streets priority number one.

Always has been, always will be.

You might remember when I worked to introduce the implementation of Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons.

This isn’t a new issue, the 2016 Pedestrian Strategy’s What We Heard Engagement Report (found here) mentioned the public’s desire to decrease speed limits in residential areas and increase speed limit enforcement.

Residential Safety Strategies enable us to move forward in high-risk residential areas, utilize citizen feedback and place emphasis on better public awareness. It’s clear that residents have expressed feelings of fear and discomfort of the speed of vehicles traveling along their street.

On average there are…

• 36,600 motor vehicle collisions occur on Calgary streets
• 9,100 collisions per year on streets inside Calgary neighbourhoods
• 550 of them resulting in serious injury or death. (25% of all collisions)
• Over $120 Million societal and personal costs of pedestrian-involved collisions in Calgary per year

We really need to zero in on why this makes such a difference to pedestrians, and it also makes a positive impact on motorists as well.

More than half of these serious injuries are experienced by drivers and passengers inside vehicles.

Administration has concluded that changing the unposted speed limit to 40 km/h while posting (for the time being) most Collector roadways at 50 km/h, represents an important first step towards reducing the frequency and severity of collisions and enhancing the livability of our neighbourhoods.

Under the City Charter, Council can make this change through bylaw.

The recommendations that will be presented to SPC on Transportation and Transit include:

• Changing the unposted speed limit in Calgary from 50 km/h to 40 km/h
• To post a 50 km/h speed limit on most Collector roadways
• To update City of Calgary design standards so that new communities and road retrofit projects lead to roadways where it will make sense to post residential roads at 30 km/h and collector roads at 40 km/h

In principle, I am supportive of lowering speed limits. The data I have seen makes a compelling argument for why this is the right thing to do:

•Pedestrians are 90% more likely to survive when struck by automobiles travelling at 30km/h, 60% at 40km/h, and less than 20% at 50km/h.

•The time it takes to stop on dry pavement doubles between 30km/h (13M) and 40km/h (27M).

•83% of casualty collisions involving pedestrians aged 12 and under occur on local (26%) and collector (57%) roadways.

As the saying goes, and we’ve all heard this. Speed kills.

At lower speeds we not only reduce the chance of a collision happening, we mitigate the impacts when a collision does occur.

There is a threat in remaining complacent, and as Calgarians we owe it to our city to always strive to do better. Especially when it comes to safety. We shouldn’t say “to heck with it” just because something is acceptable. We need to continue to ask “How can we do better?”

If you’re worried about the potential impact this may have on time, worry not.

The time added to your commute would be absolutely minimal. Especially seeing how the average trip includes less than 1 km of travel through residential roads. By moving from 50km/h to 40km/h, the impact would be under two minutes. That’s less time than it takes for my coffee maker to heat up.

You can even calculate your eta here:  https://www.etatool.com/

One important factor that was somewhat glossed over, was the effect of this speed reduction on Calgary Transit. I was told every bus goes the speed limits, or under. Meaning most buses drive under 50 km/h today. In fact most routes are on collector roads. That being said, the impact on Calgary Transit would be minimal. 

In order for this to be a success, we need to have proper enforcement. How can we expect folks to go slower if we are not consistently enforcing the speed limits as they currently stand?

While we often hear about the photo radar being nothing but a cash cow, there’s an easy solution. Don’t speed.

I’m also quite sure that those who complain about photo radar on a regular basis, are the ones speeding on a regular basis.

Another easy solution to the difficulty of having manned personal conducting increased enforcement. Technology.

I think the best way to circumvent potential enforcement costs is to lean heavily on electronic enforcement. We have a number of avenues available to us, permanent mounted cameras for one. My belief is that they would do the same as physical barriers. If people know a camera is there, they slow down.

And for those saying this is a simple cash-grab, let me be clear. If you are caught speeding in a residential zone, you are going to be fined.

Seeing as the City of Calgary receives no funds from fines, I am still quite sure that Calgary police service and the Provincial Government would rather you make your financial contributions in a less potentially dangerous way.

I think we have made some positive progress with traffic safety, there’s still more we could be doing; and this Neighbourhood Speed Limit Review is a good step forward in making our residential streets safe for pedestrians, and motorists.

At this time, what The City can do is limited, so information is the first and most important step we can take in this situation.

For more information about Foxtail Barley click here

It should be noted that Foxtail barley is a perennial weed, which is not legislated in Alberta. Which means our Integrated Pest Management group does not control Foxtail Barley because…

1. it isn’t a legislated weed and
2. there aren’t any herbicides that have proven to be very effective for controlling it.

While it’s not poisonous, it can, and unfortunately, has caused injury to some dogs. This can be caused by blisters that form once the brown seeds/awns are stuck to the body. Although this is not common. It is still cause for concern.

• It’s important that you do not walk your dog on private property that may contain a large volume of Foxtail Barley.
• If a large amount of Foxtail Barely has blown into your yard, it would be in your best interest to rake it, and bag it. (if not for your own pets, for your neighbours)

Our office is currently reaching out to developers to ask them to keep foxtail barley under control.

We are involved with escalating 311 calls and reports of large areas of Foxtail Barley.

You can also contact your local MLA. You can find them by clicking here

The intent is for these masks to be available for Transit riders and other Calgarians who may not have the means or ability to access masks being provided at drive-thru locations.

My office has received 4,000 of these masks, and as of now have distributed 2000 of them.

During the July 21/22 Combined Meeting of Council, Calgary City Council voted to pass the temporary Face Coverings Bylaw (BYLAW NUMBER 26M2020

This bylaw will require individuals to wear a face covering in public premises and public vehicles. Unless the person is separated from others by a barrier or exempt.

Combined Meeting of Council. Item 12. Item 12.2.1 Mandatory Face Coverings, C2020-0845 begins at 3:45. You can watch it here

This is considered a necessary, recognized and effective method to limit the spread of COVID-19, thereby helping protect the health, safety and well-being of Calgarians

There is additional information available at www.calgary.ca/covid19

With that said, here is some helpful information that can help you stay safe, and protect others by wearing a mask. This information is available at https://www.alberta.ca/masks.aspx