Believe it or not, Mayor Jeromy Farkas is a member of the More Neighbours Calgary community.
During the campaign, he regularly engaged with members on housing and city issues. One phrase came up again and again: “repeal and replace.” The promise was to repeal the current contextual at-grade default zoning and replace it with something better; something that reduced red tape while addressing concerns from Calgarians uneasy with rezoning.
That framing mattered. “Repeal and replace” implies not just opposition, but an alternative. An adjustment, not a blanket downzone back to 2007 land use policy.
Members of our community repeatedly asked for details. What would replace the current framework? The answer was usually vague, but the clearest version came from Mayor Farkas himself in an interview with CBC days after the election: “I’ll be working with this council to repeal the blanket rezoning bylaw. But it’s really important to talk about what’s next. My plan calls for a targeted community-informed approach, transit-oriented development, where the infrastructure and services can support it through the local area plan process.”
Since taking office, that promise has not been kept.
Transit-oriented density has been weakened. Local area plans have been ignored. Each individual decision is framed as prudence or consultation, but the cumulative effect is simple: Fewer places where housing can be built, and fewer paths forward for addressing Calgary’s housing shortage.
The contradiction was made stark in council’s vote on a small apartment building in North Glenmore Park, considered the day after councillors voted to start the process of repealing blanket upzoning.
The proposed six-storey apartment was next to two schools, fully aligned with the recently approved West Elbow Local Area Plan, supported by existing infrastructure, and within walking distance of a BRT station, meeting the city’s own criteria for transit-oriented development. Not a single person showed up to speak against it.
It should have been an obvious yes.
‘Should‘ have been an obvious yes
Instead, Mayor Farkas voted against it. The project failed 7–8. Even Coun. Andre Chabot (who introduced the motion to repeal blanket upzoning) voted in favour. While acknowledging he is generally skeptical of infill apartments, Chabot pointed out that the developer followed the rules, consulted the community, respected the local area plan, and should therefore be allowed to build.
For many in the More Neighbours Calgary community, this vote was deeply disappointing. If this becomes a pattern, it will be impossible for the mayor to deliver on his promise to “build homes faster, at more affordable prices, in greater amounts, and with community involvement.”
To be clear, the choice was never between keeping the current rules exactly as they are and scrapping them entirely. In the 2025 election, a clear majority voted for mayoral candidates who supported fixing (Gondek and Thiessen) or replacing (Farkas) the current zoning.
Just under 40 per cent voted for candidates advocating blanket repeal (Sharp and Davison), and even these candidates claimed to support transit-oriented density with local support.
There are practical, proven ways forward. Cities can allow modest housing forms by default while setting clear limits on height, size, and design. They can prioritize predictable rules over discretionary approvals. Calgary’s own local area planning process is built on these principles.
Repealing a policy without replacing it does not restore balance. It creates a vacuum, one filled by higher prices, longer commutes, and fewer options for families trying to stay in the communities they already live in. Saying “not yet” or “somewhere else,” again and again, is functionally the same as saying no.
“Repeal and replace” was a campaign commitment. Making housing more affordable was the goal. It’s time for Mayor Farkas to stand by that commitment, or admit it was never the plan at all.
- Willem Klumpenhouwer is a Co-Founder of More Neighbours Calgary
