Horse Hill Annexation and NEEA

Upon going to City Councils Executive Committee to address the recent document which was put together by a wide range of "Stakeholders" is now being challenged by some the same stakeholders who participated in the creation of it. Fact is they want this $750,000 study redone or sent back for more information requiring nothing but delays and money.

"City- Wide Food and Urban Agriculture Strategy" is a project that many people have dedicated an enormous amount of time to develop. NEEA has heard many comments from other Blogs and media sources who consistently want to discredit the hours of time volunteered to review the insurmountable pile of information and then attempt to come to a conclusion to be a win win for everyone. From comments written in the social media and Blogs that attempt to discredit the outcome or back grounds of the people representing each of the stakeholder groups, Are you truly ever happy?

In the beginning of this project, our Community felt we were being excluded and left behind. Imagine before NEEA was formed, and residents found out there was a Questionnaire being circulated throughout the farmers markets. We initially weren't too concerned but when we investigated the questions being asked of the public, it was clear, land preservation was on the topic. Not City wide, NE Edmonton in particular so we questioned the Horse Hill Community League if they had been advised and offered the electronic copy to circulate throughout our Community? This is where things got interesting because we got the big   "NO".   Further investigating, we found out the Greater Edmonton Alliance (GEA) had, it was on their website with comments prior to filling it out to direct their members to indicate land preservation in NE Edmonton.

We now felt left behind!

For those who direct North East Agricultural Producers (NEAP) and Greater Edmonton Allianace (GEA), this is why NEEA was formed. We as landowners and former supporters of your cause need, to explain why we will not support your cause and let the public you are misinforming understand;

• We as residents supported the commercial agricultural producers who, while they owned their properties (which consisted of contiguous tracts of prime agricultural and micro-climate claiming soils) we supported them as a Community would so they could continue their farming on their lands. Justt as what is being done in City Council today.
• Upon completing two agricultural land studies, it became apparent to everyone in the City Planning Department and within the Community, this soil and micro-climate are simply nothing out of the ordinary for the regional area. There too was a third  study (prior to this one) that was never allowed to be reviewed. NEEA has it! NEEA has exhausted the search for this "MICRO-CLIMATE" in NE Edmonton. We have asked our Provincial Government representative to supply the documented study showing the data for our area. "None Existant"                                                                
• Approximately 2005, prior to the recent Municipal District Plan (MDP), these same commercial agricultural producers requested our assistance again for the most recent MDP process. Now twenty five years since annexation, our Community has gone without many of the same conveniences that our urban residents enjoy, in fact we have seen an enormous amount of development take place in all areas of the City excluding, NE Edmonton. 
• At the 2005 meeting , the Community questioned the commercial agricultural producers about land sales as many residents had only heard the rumors. Much of their land (contiguous tracts of prime agricultural and micro-climate claiming soils) had been been sold by them to a new owner. Not to their  families in the commercial agricultural producing business but to investment companies willing to pay far more per acre than any farming Community. As the new owners were not in attendance, our Community refused to represent their interests as we had no idea what they were. The Community was astonished these commercial agricultural producers were more than willing to impose constraints upon property they no longer owned? Never the less trying to get the Community to support them? Without the investment company in attendance, we refused to support them any longer. How far were these commercial agricultural producers willing to go?
• While attending the most recent MDP process, our Community was handed the blindsiding of our existence! A food and agriculture strategy for the city wide before any MDP's can go ahead and for us as a Community, yet again another land study! Who was leading this charge? GEA and ?...our NE Commercial Agricultural Producers (neighbors)? These members of our Community have turned their backs and treated us with the same respect they showed for the purchasers of their (contiguous tracts of prime agricultural and micro-climate claiming soils) land! The same Community who has supported them since annexation! We as a Community are now hugely stunned, how long had they been organizing. No consideration or concern for those they call, neighbors. Apparently they have a new Community and we are expendable. This is not how an agricultural community, treats one another!
• NEEA is formed. The residents of this Community feel betrayed, let down by the commercial agricultural producers (our neighbors) and GEA. Upon realizing money is the ultimate reasoning to their approach we can't help but suspect GEA and their supporters are being played as we had. These producers had used us until we realized their intent, they easily replaced our Community with GEA's and kept us in the shadows of their intent on this food and agriculture initiative. Ill prepared going into the MDP and what was going to be pressed upon us yet again! Imagine how we felt when we found out recently our producers have been working with GEA since 2006. Notice the events from 2005 and then in 2006, they wasted no time!
• January 2012 - An Advisory Committee is formed to detail and design the "City Wide Food and Urban Agriculture Study." Today this is what is being debated in City Council.
•  Executive Council meeting Oct 26/2012 in City Council Chambers. Interesting day to say the least as we were to witness,

Comments like; 

1. "Why should the Developers be involved when its about saving land for food security?"              
2.  They were very clear in their messages to those who attended, "this is the common good for the citizens" without so much as inviting one member of our community to a meeting so the common could hear how this would affect you. NEEA too was excluded in participating in the Advisory Committee, that left the Community League President and these food people to speak on the rights of our Community's land owners, properties?  GEA, Local Foods and NEAP stakeholders were involved.
3. "Property rights carry little right to zoning" as said by a Local Foods representative. "No compensation has to be given for their zoning rights. The Federal government has done it in the past."
4. Our members in the audience clearly heard, "NEEA was invited to these meetings" which is a false statement. They are the ones who could not meet at least three meeting dates that were attempted by NEEA. Whether we were invited (NEEA) or not, How many residents in the area received a flyer inviting you personally to a house or Church meeting hosted by GEA , NEAP or the Local Foods Team? They held at least forty five of them in Urban Edmonton. 

That tells us they know our Community does NOT support NEAP or having a group who is unseen or heard from representing OUR interests.
Had they approached us with everyone's interests in hand, we would be standing there with them.

This is what we will support, since annexation (1981) we as residents of OUR Community have lived by as the commercial agricultural producers, the same conditions that were presented to us word for word by the                     City of Edmonton;

Not withstanding the City's belief in, and support of, the principle advocating the preservation of the Province's agricultural land base, the City must view the matter of agricultural land management from an urban perspective. That perspective centres on the following assumptions;

• agricultural lands within the corporate limits of the City of Edmonton will ultimately be developed for urban use;
• urban development represents the highest and best use for all incorporated lands;
• urban centres constitute the most efficient and economical opportunities to accommodate the Province's population and industrial growth and;
• ultimately, urban development represents a legitimate use of all incorporated lands, irrespective of soil productivity considerations.

The City of Edmonton Planning also stated;

"Agriculture zoning for the urban growth areas (UGA) will be an interim use until the land is required for urban development."

This was to prevent fragmentation of the land and prevent "Leap Frogging" something GEA has stated they support to stop the development of this ag land? That means allowing the Municipalities to grow and not Edmonton?

Regardless of your position, our Community as the NEAP organizers have been living with the same understanding for thirty two years. TOPSOIL was their name prior to 2006, unfortunately they wore out their welcome as explained earlier. The same arguments and attempts for justification then, as today, only now they own little of what they have suggested for GEA to represent in their vision.

We as a Community have a hard time believing the Community in Edmonton will support these individuals, once they hear the facts behind what NEAP is.

Conclusion;

There are people out there that want to argue and discredit this fabulous Horse Hill Community and it's resident owners. For those people, we will give you every opportunity to hear us and get involved, should you have the perspective our history, property rights and voices be eliminated from any discussion; We as a Community will challenge your perspective.