Summary#

On October 20, 2026, Edmonton’s Urban Planning Committee recommended that City Council approve new Terms of Reference and a 2027–28 work plan for the Naming Committee. The recommendation is not yet Council’s decision; Council approval is still required.

• If Council approves, the Terms of Reference would set out how the Naming Committee operates within its existing mandate.
• If Council approves, the two-year plan would set out the committee’s objectives, activities, timelines, deliverables and progress measures for January 2027 to December 2028.
• The committee’s existing mandate is to name development areas, parks, municipal facilities, roads, honorary roads and wards, subject to City policy restrictions or exemptions.

What it means for you#

• Residents and organizations: The recommendation does not change the Naming Committee’s stated naming mandate or create a new public application or review process. The supplied material does not describe how the proposed terms or work plan would affect naming decisions.
• Naming Committee: If Council approves, the committee would operate under Council-approved Terms of Reference and a Two-Year Work Plan, as required by the City’s Governance Framework for Council Committees.
• City Council: Council must decide whether to approve both documents. The committee’s recommendation carried 4–0.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

• The report does not state a cost, staffing change, or new funding for the Terms of Reference or work plan.

What is unclear#

• The actual Terms of Reference and Two-Year Work Plan attachments are not included, so their detailed rules, activities and timelines cannot be checked.
• The report does not say when Council will consider the recommendation.
• The material does not describe public input, application steps, or appeal rights for naming decisions.

Case for#

• City staff say the City’s Governance Framework requires Council committees to have Council-approved Terms of Reference and Two-Year Work Plans, and to report annually through standing committees.
• City staff say the framework is intended to support clearer mandates, stronger accountability and better alignment with Council priorities. Approval would put the Naming Committee’s operating terms and 2027–28 plan through the required Council process.

Case against#

• A concern from the available material is that Council’s recommendation cannot be assessed in detail without the attachments, which contain the proposed operating terms and work plan.
• The report describes planned outcomes and progress measures, but the supplied material does not show what they are or how Council and the public would assess the committee’s performance.