Summary#

Calgary City Council passed Bylaws 31M2026 and 32M2026 at third reading on July 28, 2026. They amend the City Clerk Bylaw 73M94, repeal the Records Retention and Disposition Bylaw 54M2023, and designate a stand-alone City position as Head of the Local Public Body. City staff say the goal is to support the City’s duties under provincial access and privacy laws.

• The new position will be designated to handle duties under the Access to Information Act and Protection of Privacy Act. It is a position within the City, not a new independent agency.
• Responsibility for records destruction moves from the City Clerk to the Chief Administrative Officer, who will delegate it to the new position.
• The vote on the motion adopting the report was 15 to 0.

What it means for you#

• People seeking City information or concerned about privacy: The decision changes who holds the City’s designated role for access and privacy matters. The materials do not say it changes your rights or how to make a request or complaint.
• City staff: The Chief Administrative Officer must take on responsibility for records destruction and delegate that function to the designated position.
• City residents and taxpayers: City staff say the change is intended to support compliance with provincial law. It does not create a new public service or a new way to apply for access to records in the supplied material.

Money#

City staff report no anticipated financial impact.

• The report gives no cost estimate or staffing details for the stand-alone position.

What is unclear#

• The supplied material does not name the position or explain its reporting and oversight arrangements. No publicly available information.
• It does not give details about how the City will assign staff or resources to the role.
• The report says the City had two Heads of the Local Public Body during a transition in 2025, but does not explain how the new designation changes their responsibilities in practice.

Case for#

• City staff say provincial access and privacy laws brought new duties, including privacy impact assessments, a privacy management program and breach reporting when there is a real risk of significant harm.
• A stand-alone position could give the City one designated role to coordinate access and privacy work across its organization.
• City staff say delegating records destruction through the Chief Administrative Officer to that position aligns with the City’s existing delegation structure.

Case against#

• The materials do not explain the new position’s authority, oversight or reporting arrangements, making it hard to assess how accountability will work.
• City staff expect no financial impact, but the report gives no estimate or staffing plan. The actual resources needed are therefore unclear.
• The City did not undertake public engagement, so the supplied material does not show how people who use access or privacy processes view the change.