Opinion: Edmonton's new river valley bylaw falls short
The North Saskatchewan River Valley is far more than a scenic landmark. It is a vital, living system that supports biodiversity, helps buffer extreme heat, reduces long-term climate and economic risks, and holds cultural significance, especially for Indigenous communities. Yet the current area redevelopment plan (ARP) bylaw falls short of protecting this treasure.
Article content
Article content
Through my work with the Edmonton River Valley Conservation Coalition (ERVCC) as a law student, I've come to appreciate a central truth: Only strong, binding legal frameworks can truly protect the river valley. We need stronger protection measures now, for ourselves and future generations.
Article content
Article content
The ARP's modernization offers a major opportunity to do so, yet what has been proposed is a weaker bylaw with vague language and potential gaps in enforcement. This is not a bylaw that will offer council clear guidance or uphold the city's goal of protecting the river valley.
Article content
Recent cases like the Epcor solar farm, Hawrelak Park tree removal, bike skills park, and the near-loss of Fulton Creek have sparked public concern. While the city has acknowledged a climate emergency, the draft ARP does not yet reflect that urgency, lacking meaningful provisions to protect biodiversity, prioritize nature-based solutions, and honour the city's Indigenous framework and constitutional obligations.
Article content
Article content
First, the draft ARP employs weak and legally non-binding language.
Article content
Subtle shifts in the redlined document meaningfully weaken protections. To carry real weight, the bylaw's language must be strong and binding.
Article content
The absence of enforceable language like 'shall,' and the replacement of 'shall' with 'should' in multiple sections in the redlined document are not minor. If we are serious about protection and enforcement, the use of 'should' must be altered or restored to 'shall' to be binding and impose a legal obligation.
Article content
The draft also erodes existing procedural safeguards. In Section 5.2, replacing 'city council approval' of strategic assessment with mere 'consideration' dilutes oversight. 'Approval' carried an outcome and stronger legal weight than mere consideration.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Cision Canada
10 minutes ago
- Cision Canada
50 years after it closed, the Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation honour the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School
This commemoration is an important part of the Government of Canada's response to Call to Action 79 in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report. PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, MB, Aug. 14, 2025 /CNW/ - The Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School was part of a system of residential schools for Indigenous children officially established by the federal government in the 19 th and 20 th centuries. Born of colonial policies in Canadian history, this system removed Indigenous children from their families and communities, not only denying them their traditions, language and culture, but also exposing children to grievous harm and even death. The residential school system is a tragedy that has adversely affected generations of Indigenous people and the Government of Canada is committed to reconciliation and renewed relationships with Indigenous peoples, based on a recognition of rights, respect, collaboration, and partnership. Today, Ginette Lavack, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services and Member of Parliament for St. Boniface—St. Vital, Manitoba, on behalf of the Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, and Minister responsible for Official Languages, and Long Plain First Nation commemorated the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School with a special ceremony to unveil three plaques at the National Indigenous Residential School Museum of Canada. Built in 1914-1915, the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School is located on Keeshkeemaquah Reserve, part of the reserve lands of Long Plain First Nation. This building was nominated for designation by Long Plain First Nation who worked collaboratively with Parks Canada to identify the historic values of this Former residential school. This large, three-storey brick building is a rare surviving example of residential schools that were established across Canada. The school closed in 1975, and six years later, the building and its surrounding lands were transferred to Long Plain First Nation to fulfill part of their treaty land entitlement. Since that time, the building has been given new meaning by the community as a site of commemoration and resilience that keeps the legacy of the residential school era alive and educates the public. The Government of Canada, through the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, recognizes significant persons, places, and events that shaped our country as one way of helping Canadians and youth connect with their past. The designation process under Parks Canada's National Program of Historical Commemoration is largely driven by public nominations. To date, more than 2,270 designations have been made nationwide. Quotes "Fifty years ago, the Portage la Prairie Residential School closed its doors, ending a painful chapter in our shared history. Yet, the harm caused by the residential school system is still felt today by families in Portage la Prairie and in communities across Canada. As we mark this anniversary, we honour the strength and resilience of Survivors, mourn those who never came home, and recommit ourselves to continuing the journey toward Truth and Reconciliation together." The Honourable Rebecca Alty, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations "Today, we take time to acknowledge the painful legacy of the Former Portage La Prairie Residential School and the harmful and lasting impact that this institution, and many others like it under the residential school system, had on generations of First Nations, Inuit and Métis families and communities. We hope this commemoration allows Canadians to reflect on this tragic history, acknowledge the past, honour missing children and recognize the extraordinary strength and resilience of the survivors and all Indigenous peoples. The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that the voices of Indigenous peoples are heard, and that this history is never forgotten." Ginette Lavack, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services and Member of Parliament for St. Boniface—St. Vital, Manitoba "Today, we pay tribute to Indigenous residential school survivors of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School that operated from 1915 - 1975. The plaques are symbols of resilience, strength and a place where stories are embedded in truth and the spirits honored. These memorials acknowledge their legacy of pain and injustices endured with courage and dignity. Their lives matter. Their voices matter. Their healing matters. We are still here." Lorraine Daniels, Second generation survivor Executive Director National Indigenous Residential School Museum of Canada Inc. Quick Facts Children who were sent to the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School came from many First Nations and other Indigenous communities within Manitoba and elsewhere. There, they faced severe discipline and abuse, harsh labour, emotional neglect, the attempted suppression of their language and cultures, and isolation from their families and communities. The Former Portage La Prairie Residential School now houses the National Indigenous Residential School Museum which was created as "a place where people can learn, share, heal and move forward with a greater understanding of the forces that shaped and forever changed multiple generations of First Nations people." Parks Canada and Long Plain First Nation worked collaboratively to identify the historic values of this former residential school, and the report on the building prepared for the Historic Sites and Monuments Board was co-authored by members of the First Nation and Parks Canada. The plaques are written in Anishinaabemowin, Anishinaabemowin syllabics, Cree, Cree syllabics, Dakota, English and French. Created in 1919, the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada advises the Minister responsible for Parks Canada regarding the national historic significance of persons, places, and events that have marked history in Canada. Together with Parks Canada, the Board ensures that subjects of national historic significance are recognised, and these important stories are shared with Canadians. The vast majority of nominations brought forward for the consideration of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada originate from members of the public. To nominate a person, place or historical event in your community, please visit the Parks Canada website for more information: Indian Residential Schools Resolution Health Support Program Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada Parks Canada Long Plain First Nation National Indigenous Residential School Museum of Canada Framework for History and Commemoration SOURCE Parks Canada (HQ)
Cision Canada
4 hours ago
- Cision Canada
/R E P E A T -- Media Advisory - The Government of Canada and Long Plain First Nation recognize the national historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School/ Français
PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, MB, Aug. 12, 2025 /CNW/ - Ginette Lavack, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services and Member of Parliament for St. Boniface—St. Vital, Manitoba, on behalf of the Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, and Minister responsible for Official Languages, along with Long Plain First Nation, will participate in a Parks Canada and Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada plaque unveiling ceremony to commemorate the historic significance of the Former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School. Built in 1914-1915, the former Portage La Prairie Indian Residential School functioned within the residential school system whereby the federal government and certain churches and religious organizations worked together to assimilate Indigenous children as part of a broad set of efforts to destroy Indigenous cultures and identities and suppress Indigenous histories. The building has been given new meaning by the community as a site of commemoration and resilience that keeps the legacy of the residential school era alive and educates the public. The details are as follows: SOURCE Parks Canada (HQ)
National Post
6 hours ago
- National Post
Terry Glavin: A better response to B.C.'s Cowichan land ruling — calm down!
Article content It is customary for British Columbians to set their hair on fire whenever the courts remind them that they've been losing that bet as far back as the Calder case of 1973. This latest case involves a Cowichan fishing village on the Fraser River that Colonial Governor James Douglas had set aside from pre-emption that was swindled from the tribe only two years after Confederation by Richard Clement Moody, the former colonial commissioner of lands and works. Article content Not satisfied with deliberately overlooking the presence of a village that was home to as many as 1,000 Cowichan people during the fishing season, and then selling it off illegally in the province's first rounds of land pre-emptions, Moody sold a big chunk of the old village site to himself via the connivings of a land agent. Article content Moody had no legal right to buy the village lands, it should go without saying — he ended up selling roughly 2,000 acres to himself in 11 different pre-emptions on British Columbia's mainland — but the point is he had no right to sell the Cowichan land, either. The whole thing was illegal and unconstitutional. Article content While the federally-owned lands are no small matter — about 260 hectares are under the jurisdiction of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority — it's the City of Richmond that's been shouting the loudest about Judge Young's declaration. Richmond owns several lots and the entirety of the foreshore along the Fraser River at the site, which the judge described as 'essentially undeveloped land that Richmond does not use.' Richmond acquired the land over the years mostly as 'windfall' from municipal tax sales. Judge Young said she agrees with Richmond's lawyers that a declaration of Aboriginal title creates a degree of uncertainty about the fee-simple private properties in the 2,000-hectare claim area. However, 'there is greater uncertainty if I do not declare that Richmond and Canada's fee simple titles and interests are defective and invalid.' Article content It's the Cowichan victory in its fishing-rights arguments that are likely of greater significance, and it was because of those assertions that the Cowichan claim was opposed by the Tsawwassen and Musqueam nations. As for the precedent the decision sets, it's in Judge Young's explicit finding that a provincial Crown grant of fee-simple title is not sufficient to extinguish Aboriginal title. That's a power available only to the federal government, and only according to a fairly severe test of justification in the interest of a valid public purpose. Article content Article content 'Neither Aboriginal title nor fee simple title is absolute,' the judge noted 'Aboriginal title and fee simple interests are not unqualified interests.' And they can coexist, or rather they already do coexist. The provincial Land Titles Act doesn't apply to Aboriginal title. It never did. Both Crown title and Aboriginal title can underlie private property without the world coming to an end. Article content But how all this will come out in the wash will depend largely on the sophistication and the stamina of the provincial and federal governments. And that's a matter that's very much worth worrying about. If the Cowichan decision is handled badly, we may all end up paying very dearly. Still, it doesn't have to be this way. Where the pattern of settlement and the advance of Crown sovereignty failed in Canada, it was in the breach of an Aboriginal rights doctrine that stretches back to 1763 and in the slovenliness of politicians who preferred the easy way. Article content
