Calgary council approves $9-million cut to climate budget after affordability debate

Calgary city council has voted to cut $9 million from its 2026 climate and environment budget, approving a motion that supporters framed as necessary fiscal restraint during an affordability crisis.

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Calgary city council has voted to cut $9 million from its 2026 climate and environment budget, approving a motion that supporters framed as necessary fiscal restraint during an affordability crisis.

The amendment, moved on Tuesday by Ward 1 Coun. Kim Tyers passed 9–6, with Mayor Jeromy Farkas and others voting against it.

The motion reduces the business unit’s one-time operating funds from $38 million to $29 million.

Introducing the motion, Tyers said she brought the cut forward after pressing city administration to identify spending that did not affect core regulatory obligations.

“Calgarians are facing an affordability crisis. We must be diligent in how we spend taxpayer money and ensure that we do so on things that Calgarians expect their councillors to focus on,” she said. “Things such as ensuring that transit runs efficiently, or that the roads that they drive on are in good condition.”

She added that she was focused on decreasing traffic, which was a better way to reduce pollution and improve commuting for Calgarians.

Councillor Andrew Yule asked city staff what kind of initiatives would be affected by the reduction. He asked whether things like flood mitigation, stormwater programs, and habitat restoration would be affected in any way. He was told they would not.

Yule was informed that cutting this funding would mostly influence what the city staff deemed education programs for the public, but could affect up to seven limited-term staff.

Opponents of the amendment argued that the programs slated for reduction are designed to help lower-income Calgarians cut utility bills.

However, some councillors said they wished that the entire program could be cut.

For example, Councillor Landon Johnston struggled with the fact that a 30 per cent budget cut would only result in seven limited-term employees potentially having their jobs affected, while the entire department had 123 employees.

“How do we cut more? I just don’t see the need for any of this, to be honest… I’m okay with 9 million. I wish it was all of it,” he said.

Councillor Dan McLean similarly said he wished that more could be cut, but noted that it might have been a good compromise given the regulatory responsibilities.

“We can take that money and refocus on maybe some of our core services, on our needs, maybe not so much our wants,” he said.

However, McLean added that while this cut was good, he suggested that if the council explored every department in detail, they could probably find hundreds of millions of dollars that could be saved.

The debate unfolded as councillors continued working through more than 35 amendments to Calgary’s 2026 budget. Earlier in the week, council had already reduced a proposed 3.6-per-cent property-tax hike to 1.18 per cent.

Closing the debate, Tyers said the amendment balances fiscal responsibility with maintaining regulatory compliance.

“This change… will only affect small educational initiatives. It does not affect flood mitigation, stormwater, wildlife, rain barrels, trees, plants, pollinators… The best way to help low-income Calgarians is to reduce their taxes and make life more affordable.”

Council voted 9–6 to approve the amendment, with Mayor Jeromy Farkas and councillors Nathaniel Schmidt, DJ Kelly, Myke Atkinson, Harrison Clark and Andrew Yule opposed.