10 Parts 1 and 2 be deleted
Carried 8–5 split
8 for, 5 against8–5
AgainstM. Elliott, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, K. Principe, K. Tang
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Janz, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, J. Wright
Moved by E. Rutherford, seconded by T. Parmar
12 Administration provide a report to Committee with options to draw down the Planning and Development Business Model (PDBM) reserve, and any other recommended amendments to Council…
Carried 12–1 split
12 for, 1 against12–1
AgainstJ. Morgan
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
14 The motion be amended to add "and fees" after "fines"
Defeated 3–10 split
3 for, 10 against3–10
ForA. Knack, T. Parmar, K. Principe
AgainstR. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by K. Principe, seconded by M. Elliott
17 Revised Policy C627B - Climate Resilience Policy, as set out in Attachment 1 of the August 26, 2026, Urban Planning and Economy report UPE03141, be approved. Motion on item 7.11…
Carried 12–1 split
12 for, 1 against12–1
AgainstK. Principe
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by E. Rutherford, seconded by A. Knack
20 Bylaw 21545 be read a second time
Carried 10–2 split
10 for, 2 against10–2
AgainstM. Elliott, K. Principe
ForR. Clarke, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by E. Rutherford, seconded by T. Parmar
21 Bylaw 21545 be read a third time
Carried 10–2 split
10 for, 2 against10–2
AgainstM. Elliott, K. Principe
ForR. Clarke, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by E. Rutherford, seconded by T. Parmar
22 Bylaw 21596 be read a first time
Carried 10–2 split
10 for, 2 against10–2
AgainstM. Elliott, K. Principe
ForR. Clarke, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by E. Rutherford, seconded by T. Parmar
27 All remaining Agenda Review Committee meetings be cancelled
Carried 12–1 split
12 for, 1 against12–1
AgainstK. Tang
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, J. Wright
Moved by J. Wright, seconded by A. Knack
36 The September 8, 2026, Edmonton Police Commission report EXT03687, be referred back to the Edmonton Police Commission to work with Administration and return to the November 16…
Defeated 6–7 split, 1 vote in it
Would send the Edmonton Police Commission report back to the Edmonton Police Commission to work with city staff and return to the November 16, 2026, Community and Public Services Committee meeting with an update. Minutes
6 for, 7 against6–7
ForM. Janz, J. Morgan, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, J. Wright
AgainstA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, K. Tang
Moved by M. Janz, seconded by A. Salvador
37 The actions outlined in Attachment 1 of the September 8, 2026, Edmonton Police Commission report EXT03687, be approved. 3. That the September 8, 2026, Edmonton Police Commission…
Carried 9–4 split
Would approve the actions outlined in Attachment 1 of the Edmonton Police Commission report. Would keep the report private under sections covering disclosures harmful to individual or public safety, law enforcement and intergovernmental relations. Minutes
9 for, 4 against9–4
AgainstM. Janz, J. Morgan, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by A. Stevenson, seconded by M. Janz
38 Attachment 4 be added to the September 8, 2026, Edmonton Police Commission report EXT03687, and the actions outlined
Carried 10–3 split
Would add Attachment 4 to the Edmonton Police Commission report and approve the actions outlined there. Minutes
10 for, 3 against10–3
AgainstJ. Morgan, K. Principe, E. Rutherford
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
40 The Mayor, on behalf of City Council, write a letter to the Government of Alberta to advance the City’spriorities for the 2027 provincial budget, as outlined in Attachment 1…
Carried 12–1 split
Would have the Mayor write to the Government of Alberta, on behalf of City Council, to advance the City’s priorities for the 2027 provincial budget as set out in Attachment 1. Would keep the Office of the City Manager report private under sections covering disclosures harmful to intergovernmental relations and advice from officials. Would ask city staff to review and redact the report and release the redacted version as soon as possible. Minutes
12 for, 1 against12–1
AgainstK. Principe
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by A. Knack, seconded by A. Paquette
42 typical home — the motion be amended to read: That Administration prioritize the use of dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value rather than the ‘typical home’…
Defeated 6–7 split, 1 vote in it
Would change the property-tax reporting proposal from requiring city staff to use dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value to asking them to prioritize those amounts over the “typical home” example or percentages. The amended wording would say city staff should prioritize dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value rather than the “typical home” example or percentages. Minutes
6 for, 7 against6–7
ForM. Elliott, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, K. Tang
AgainstA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Janz, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, J. Wright
Moved by A. Paquette, seconded by K. Tang
43 The motion be amended to read: That Administration use dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value by applicable tax subclass when discussing and reporting property tax…
Carried 9–4 split
The amendment would change the proposal to have city staff use dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value by applicable tax subclass when discussing and reporting property tax spending and increases. Minutes
9 for, 4 against9–4
AgainstR. Clarke, K. Principe, K. Tang, J. Wright
ForA. Knack, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson
Moved by E. Rutherford, seconded by T. Parmar
44 typical home — the following motion be reconsidered: That the motion be amended to read: That Administration prioritize the use of dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property…
Carried 9–4 split
This motion would reconsider the proposed amendment to the property-tax reporting wording, which would have city staff prioritize dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value instead of the “typical home” example or percentages. Minutes
9 for, 4 against9–4
AgainstR. Clarke, M. Janz, E. Rutherford, A. Stevenson
ForA. Knack, M. Elliott, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, A. Salvador, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by J. Wright, seconded by A. Paquette
45 typical home — administration prioritize the use of dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value rather than the ‘typical home’ example or percentages when discussing…
Carried 9–4 split
The proposal would ask city staff to prioritize dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value instead of using the “typical home” example or percentages when discussing and reporting property tax spending and increases. Minutes
9 for, 4 against9–4
AgainstA. Knack, R. Clarke, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson
ForM. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, K. Principe, E. Rutherford, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by A. Paquette, seconded by K. Tang
46 Administration prioritize the use of dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value by applicable tax subclass when discussing and reporting property tax spending…
Carried 11–2 split
The proposal would ask city staff to prioritize dollar amounts per $100,000 of assessed property value by applicable tax subclass when discussing and reporting property tax spending and increases. Minutes
11 for, 2 against11–2
AgainstR. Clarke, K. Principe
ForA. Knack, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by M. Janz, seconded by A. Salvador
48 The Orders of the Day for the September 16, 2026, Council Services Committee meeting be changed as follows: Call to Order: 9:30 a.m. Adjournment: Noon That the Orders of the Day…
Carried 12–1 split
12 for, 1 against12–1
AgainstK. Principe
ForA. Knack, R. Clarke, M. Elliott, M. Janz, J. Morgan, A. Paquette, T. Parmar, E. Rutherford, A. Salvador, A. Stevenson, K. Tang, J. Wright
Moved by K. Tang, seconded by T. Parmar