When it was approved in May 2024, Calgary’s citywide rezoning bylaw instantly became the wedge issue prospective 2025 city council candidates were looking for.

Surveys had citizens split 60/40, with the majority side against citywide rezoning, and further, that some 70 per cent of participants in a city council public hearing meeting were also opposed.

Those against it felt as though their voice was being stripped from the planning process, while those for thought it was a good step to help increase housing choice in Calgary and to eliminate bureaucracy around land use change approvals that happened at a rate of 95 per cent and higher.

As advertised, it’s become one of the most talked-about Calgary election issues.

Among the more than half of the candidates who have responded to LWC’s 2025 candidate survey, citywide rezoning ranked as the fourth most important issue they’ve heard during this campaign.

What’s more telling is that more than 80 per cent of candidates that have responded indicate that they don’t support citywide rezoning in Calgary. Unless those numbers change significantly, there’s a reasonable chance the bylaw could be repealed.

Should these candidates find themselves in city council seats come Oct. 21, how quickly could citywide rezoning be repealed?

We asked the City of Calgary a variety of questions around a potential repeal, including potential legal implications from downzoning, the process for repeal, the potential financial impact, and whether downzoning is even allowed under the Municipal Government Act (MGA).

“Council can amend the Land Use Bylaw at any time and must follow the process outlined in the Municipal Government Act to do so,” read the entire email response.

“The City of Calgary cannot comment on the other questions as that would depend on the direction received from Council.”

Typically, an approved land use bylaw amendment must go through the same process to put it in, with public advertising, a public hearing, debate and approval. The City of Calgary pointed to the Procedural bylaw, where it states, “Any reading of a proposed bylaw may be reconsidered. However, a bylaw that has received three readings and has been signed in accordance with section 213 of the MGA, may not be reconsidered.”

City council has repealed other bylaws, including the single-use bag bylaw, which was repealed in 2024.

(Editor’s note: Initially, the LWC story indicated that a reconsideration vote would be needed if the bylaw were to be overturned. That is incorrect. The story has been clarified.)

The cost of citywide rezoning change

Incumbent mayoral candidate Jyoti Gondek said that it’s important to remember that when the citywide rezoning bylaw was passed, along with it was a series of additional amendments to improve engagement and the sharing of information on thoughtful development.

That included the outreach toolkit, which informed residents, community associations and industry members on what public engagement should look like for proposed developments.

“We actually gave a voice to people at the development permit stage that traditionally didn’t exist because the 700 people who came to speak with us, most of their opposition was to the built form and not the land use itself,” Gondek told LWC.

“I think it was important to give people a greater voice in what’s going to be built next door or across the street from them.”

Gondek said that in the whole debate over a potential repeal, she hoped that candidates would inform voters of the complete decision, and not just the headline-grabbing one.

While the City of Calgary wouldn’t commit to a cost for a potential repeal, Gondek said there would be one. Until something is decided, it’s difficult to put a number on it, she said.

Whatever the cost, candidate Jeff Davison said it’s what Calgarians have asked them to take on with a repeal. He’s in favour of a full repeal of the bylaw and then working on a system that puts community needs first.

“It’s Calgarians’ money that we’re going to invest in making communities the way they want them and no more of this top-down attitude,” Davison told LWC.

“I mean, this should have never happened to begin with, and we’re going to roll that process back.”

Davison said that they’ll deal with any concerns about the reversal as they arise. He said there weren’t too many complaints about the process before the citywide rezoning change was made.

“I think it’s about creating a fair and equitable process for those people going forward to still look at things like RCG or row housing,” Davison said.

“If that’s what they’re looking at, they’ll go through the council process and have fair evaluation. Everybody’s entitled to an application, not everybody’s entitled to an approval.”

Full repeal or an amendment?

Communities First, which has been the standard bearer on the citywide rezoning repeal front, does want homeowners to have the option to remain RC-G.

Mayoral candidate Sonya Sharp told LWC that Communities First favoured a nuanced rollback that would include a grandfathering of current RCG applications, and a repeal process that would still allow a property to remain RC-G. She compared it to the secondary suite amnesty program the city put in place.

(Editor’s note: In an initial interview, Sharp described a process to keep the RC-G zoning in place, while others could revert back to prior zoning. Audio of that interview is above.)

“Putting the toothpaste back in the tube of blanket rezoning will be a little messier than squeezing it out. Today, due to blanket rezoning, all residential properties have a base zoning of RC-G,” she said.

Sharp said there would be a process for keeping a property with an RC-G zoning.

“If you want your parcel to remain RCG, because it was part of blanket rezoning, it is your prerogative to do that,” she said.

“There will be a system where you can make sure your parcel always stayed RCG before, and there’ll be a grandfathering period (for current applications).”

Sharp said that they’ve thought through how a potential change would be fair for all Calgary property owners.

“We need to give people the option in their communities, in their houses, one of their biggest single investments,” she said.

“For some people, they may be holding on to their parcel for a long time, and having the RCG up zoning may be part of the retirement plan. Who knows? But let’s give them that chance to keep it and then go back to rezoning on our R1 parcels that don’t want it.”

Later clarifying further, Sharp said that property owners wanting the zoning to return to the way it was would have to do nothing if the bylaw were repealed. Current RCG development applications would be grandfathered in.

“Those who wish to apply to keep the RC-G zoning may apply to do so, but this will not be automatic, free, nor guaranteed,” read a follow-up email.

“They will have to make an application and ask council to make that amendment at a Public Hearing. Council will decide if it is or isn’t an appropriate amendment.”

Meanwhile, the Calgary Party is set to roll out its detailed process for “respectful, community-led density” in established neighbourhoods. In an upcoming release, they say density doesn’t have to mean division.

“The City’s current approach has stripped communities of their voice, replacing engagement with top-down mandates,” they said.

“Up to eight units can now be built on a standard lot with zero input from neighbours. That’s not smart planning; that’s reckless policy.”

The Calgary Party said that it will restore local input on larger projects through a Good Neighbour Consultation Process. It would require developers to notify neighbours, host open houses, and submit community impact statements that would be reviewed by the City of Calgary.

“Calgary doesn’t need to choose between growth and community voice. We can have both,” the party said.

Jeromy Farkas’s campaign directed LWC to a previous statement on their 25-point housing plan. In his Restoring Certainty document posted online, Farkas said he’d repeal and replace the citywide rezoning bylaw.

He favours a more targeted, community approach to density that prioritizes TOD, reviews infrastructure and protects public parks from sale or loss.