26 commitments, followed from the vote or statement to the latest public evidence we could identify. An approved budget is not counted as a completed project.
“Not publicly verified” does not mean the work was not done. It means the public record reviewed here does not yet prove completion. The City can correct or update any entry with documentation.
Eight existing entries were updated from October 6 and 20 meeting material and recreation notices. Registration is now marked delivered. Three new follow-ups cover Council documents, Heritage Centre correspondence and the indemnity review. Other entries keep their own earlier review dates.
The July 10 approved Council minutes record the report-back and staff saying a $2,500 fine was issued and immediately paid. Council then approved LUP 24-004 under 24-195.
No missing report-back is identified. A separate payment receipt or ledger has not been inspected.
The written minutes record that staff would provide a report.
The report and a recorded council response have not been matched in the indexed public record.
Administration agreed to review the available tools and report back.
The promised report has not been matched in the indexed public record.
Council later debated the Public Safety Committee and an internal interagency working group, but that does not by itself establish delivery of the promised plan.
A clearly identified plan or program matching the commitment remains to be located.
The project team said dashboard material was available and accepted monthly reporting in principle.
A complete public series of monthly executive summaries has not been located in the indexed record.
The CAO said he would review the contract terms after Mayor Awa asked whether the City received money from scrap-metal removal.
A public answer identifying any sale proceeds has not been matched in the indexed record.
Council adopted Motion 24-91 after removing a proposed $500,000 amount from the direction.
The final reserve amount and implementation result have not been matched in the indexed record.
Motion 24-296 directed a new registration system. The March 3, 2026 committee review identifies a lottery-based approach, and the May 12 City notice publishes summer-camp lottery instructions through ActiveNet. A September 2025 notice also describes the lottery for swimming lessons.
The registration-method change is publicly documented. This does not establish a new software purchase or independently assess fairness and results.
March 3 committee review, Recreation section ↗
Draft terms were presented February 25 and committee appointments were completed March 11.
No missing delivery is identified for this commitment.
The written minutes record Flaherty's request for the assessment.
Delivery of the assessment to council is not confirmed in the indexed public record.
Planning gave the registration estimate while answering Mayor Awa.
A registration date or registered survey was not matched in the indexed record.
The June 2025 promise sought an explanation of low Motor Vehicle Act enforcement numbers. On October 27 police described recent impaired-driving checks, more planned enforcement and highest-offence file scoring. Those are relevant operational updates, but the discussion was not identified as the promised 2025 follow-up report.
Locate a report explicitly answering the original commitment. Recent enforcement activity alone does not establish that the report was delivered.
The original commitment ties traffic calming to work after paving. The October 20 capital presentation describes continued Plateau paving proposed for 2027 and 2028. It does not establish delivery of the specific traffic-calming measures.
Locate the 2027 operating decision, the traffic-calming design and an implementation timetable. Continuing paving alone does not satisfy the safety commitment.
Motion 26-14 makes regular reports part of the approved replacement model.
No standalone summary under the working group’s name was identified in the public records indexed through August 25.
The public record now includes the May 5 Fire update, September 15 Recreation update (minutes in the October 27 package), October 6 Public Works presentation and October 20 Municipal Enforcement presentation. This establishes further reporting but not a full three-month rotation for every department.
A department-by-department reporting schedule and evidence of each quarterly return remain to be matched.
October 6 package, Public Works presentation ↗
Public Engagement Items appear in May and October agendas. October 6 includes the Heritage Trust delegation and youth turf correspondence; October 20 includes the College student pool-access request.
These examples demonstrate use of the agenda route. A complete town-hall calendar and a clear public submission procedure remain to be verified.
Motion 26-51 folds the existing committees into Governance and Priorities Committee of the Whole.
No public crosswalk listing every former committee, its unfinished files and the new reporting location was identified.
Motion 26-49 approved the $860,000 water amendment. Council approved the 2027 capital plan as presented on October 27, including the Ulu Lane water-infrastructure allocation. This is later budget authority, not evidence that the physical work is complete.
A completion record, revised construction schedule and final cost remain unverified.
October 20 proposed capital plan, Ulu Lane line 16.06 ↗
Motion 26-47 approved the earlier $3.925-million amendment. Council approved the 2027 capital plan on October 27, including Lift Station No. 1 protection and AV205 to AV601 upgrades. Later budget allocations do not establish delivery of the original scope.
Match procurement and construction milestones to the original scope, and confirm final costs and completion.
October 20 proposed capital plan, lines 5.01 and 5.05 ↗
The October 20 written update reports drafting and translation progress and gives a revised timetable. It targets draft publication for Council and public comment in December 2026, first reading in January 2027 and adoption in May 2027.
The earlier fall 2026 return target is retained for comparison. Draft publication, hearings, ministerial approval and adoption still need later evidence; the timetable is not completion.
Motion 26-131 records the contract award. During the October 20 capital presentation, the CFO reported paving in Plateau and on Apex Road and described further paving in the proposed 2027 plan. This is staff-reported progress, not certification that the original contract is complete.
Match completed streets and quantities to the $6.441-million contract, including change orders and final cost. Proposed future paving is separate from acceptance of completed work.
During the full June 16 recording, the CAO committed to returning in the fall after councillors expressed both support and concern about delegated authority.
No resulting request for decision or policy was identified in the public records indexed through August 25.
Staff told council the selected proposal contained a detailed schedule and identified 2027 as the target season.
The public should be able to compare permits, lease execution and site work with the target as each milestone occurs.
The October 6 memo describes software research and an expected early-2027 system. The Clerk said public documents would continue on the City website.
No selected supplier, approved price, executed contract or launch is established by the information item.
The October 27 Council package contains the requested draft correspondence. In the recording Council approves the letter, with the chair announcing unanimous support. This delivers the preparation and Council-consideration commitment.
A signed, transmitted copy and GN response remain to be located. Those later steps do not undo delivery of the narrower drafting commitment. Land and construction approvals remain separate.
Near the end of the October 20 recording, the chair requests an allowances review and fuller discussion early in the new year, suggesting January. The Clerk says elected-compensation changes would apply to the council elected in 2027.
A follow-up report, proposed bylaw and Council decision remain future records. No pay increase or change to the mayor’s role was approved.
An adopted motion, an administration commitment and a staff target are not treated as the same thing.
Later minutes, registries, contracts and reports are matched back to the original commitment.
Authorization is not completion. When the public record stops, the tracker says so plainly.