Throughout weeks of public hearings on blanket rezoning, Calgary city councillors were obligated to approach each of the 411 speakers and nearly 3,300 written submissions with an open mind.

Being “amenable to persuasion” is an expectation of councillors in every public hearing, even on long-debated subjects that become major campaign issues like blanket rezoning. It was also the expectation for councillors during the largest public hearing in council’s history two years ago, which was also about blanket rezoning.

But more than half of the council members who participated in public hearings on blanket rezoning, including Mayor Jeromy Farkas, had already publicly committed to repealing the policy.

Just one vote shifted on council between the 13-2 decision in December that began the process to repeal the controversial housing policy to the 12-3 vote to repeal that followed public hearings, which began March 23 and concluded April 8.

While some politicians praise the hearings as a true form of direct democracy, others see it as a less effective way to reach the public.

‘Direct democracy in action’

After the final speaker, Farkas proclaimed the eight-day public hearing had been “direct democracy in action.”

Farkas promised to repeal the policy months ago, a stance he maintained in the vote. But he told CBC Radio’s Calgary Eyeopener on Thursday that he’s still always willing to keep an open mind to new evidence, even citing criticism he faced during last fall’s election for flip-flopping on views he previously held as a city councillor.

“I’m willing to take a look at the evidence, I’m willing to take a look at good arguments, and I’m willing to change my mind,” said Farkas.

During the marathon public hearing session on blanket rezoning two years ago, Calgary’s city solicitor reminded councillors they can’t arrive at the meetings with a decision firmly made, but instead must be open to persuasion.

The expectation was raised again in a failed court challenge to blanket rezoning’s introduction from some Calgary residents, who claimed then-councillor Gian-Carlo Carra was not open to persuasion, which a judge ruled against.

While a binary vote on blanket rezoning doesn’t reflect the nuances of what council heard about how to manage the city’s growth, Farkas argued the hearings will guide their work.

“Everyone was taking notes, and for many of my council colleagues, it’s going to inform motions that they’re bringing back to council in the coming weeks or months,” said Farkas.

While the majority of council members ran on repealing blanket rezoning, Ward 3 Coun. Andrew Yule was one of the few exceptions. He was elected without a stance on the subject.

He was also the lone councillor to change his vote, after supporting beginning the process to repeal in December. He then opposed the decision this week.

He said he couldn’t support a repeal without a replacement in place, adding the move will push the city’s tax burden to its outskirts.

He also pointed to speakers who provided insight that helped shape his opinion.

“As someone who didn’t campaign any which way on rezoning, the public hearing was extremely important for informing my vote,” said Yule during Wednesday’s council meeting.

“One day I would come into the office after a day of speakers and say I was persuaded one way, and the next day I was persuaded another way.”

‘Outdated model’

Former city councillor Courtney Walcott said it was rare for a public hearing to sway members’ votes during his tenure from 2021 to 2025. But he noted being open to persuasion can sometimes just mean being open to amendments.

During 2024’s marathon hearing, Walcott said an ultimately unsuccessful amendment he proposed about how to incentivize developers to offer more affordable units or green space, came from a speaker’s suggestion.

“You don’t see that very often. A lot of the reason why is because most people have already made their decision in advance, and they’re just looking for that one thing that could change their mind,” said Walcott.

Most of the time, councillors enter public hearings with their minds made up from months of discussions with constituents, said Walcott. And if they’ve done that homework, he said they’ll rarely hear something new in a public hearing.

“If you’ve done your job well, nothing surprises you at council,” he said.

Those conversations, including seeking out people who would never enter city hall or contact a councillor, are far more important than public hearings, Walcott argued. He criticized hearings for often being filled with heightened emotions and misinformation, rather than real debate or discussion.

“It’s an outdated model of engagement that goes back to the times where we had town squares,” said Walcott.

“99.9 per cent of the time, council has done their legwork, they should know the issues when they enter into that room. You don’t want us coming in blind and making decisions on the fly. That would be dangerous.”

Opportunity for councillors to better reach public

Being open to persuasion in public hearings is a common value in municipalities across Canada, said University of Calgary political science professor Jack Lucas.

He pointed out while a similar standard is expected of committees at the provincial and federal levels, it’s more noticeable in local government because councillors are often seen as more accessible to the public and don’t often have a party system influencing their votes.

But Lucas noted there’s good evidence to show public hearing participants often aren’t representative of the wider community they’re drawn from, and the public may not want this form of engagement alone influencing votes.

“It would be a bit concerning if after public hearings, councillors were just completely changing their views on the basis of who happened to show up in that particular hearing,” said Lucas. 

After the blanket rezoning hearings, council has an opportunity to think about what they want public engagement to look like moving forward, Lucas said.

He pointed to promising alternatives that could be more efficient and representative, like surveys, focus groups, small citizen assemblies or town halls where politicians meet with a randomly drawn sample of constituents.

“There’s a whole range of creative approaches that municipal councils are taking across Canada,” said Lucas. 

“While there are certainly important goods that come out of a public hearing process, it’s not the only game in town.”