Hi. I joined up as well after following this project, seems like a friendlier community than Twitter.
I'm confused that this project has gone this far without more input and involvement with indigenous peoples from the get-go. I think it could have cooled some of the city councilors reservations, specifically Aaron Paquette.
I'm not surprised that the city administration doesn't have more data on this supposed burial site though. I work in the nondestructive testing industry, I'm not certified for GPR though. I've seen it used, and my impression is it's pretty crude. I inspect ferromagnetic and paramagnetic metal, and we barely interpret our examinations anymore, it's too much liability. They keep bringing up GPR, but I'm not confident a technician or engineer, could extrapolate any more information from a GPR examination other than, dirt may have been disturbed here (or not). I doubt we will know for sure until sholves are in the ground.
The challenge is that the site in question is covered in concrete & has a small structure on it so GPR before disturbance makes sense. It also right next to where 50ft down catwalks are in the plant. So I really wonder what could be under there. The archeologist's presentation was great! He's worked in the area on multiple occasions. I really think that human remains would he a deal breaker for everyone & that if they are under concrete that maybe isn't particularly respectful. But I get not moving them if that's the case.
Also there were many Indigenous voices who supported next steps yesterday, including people involved in the fight to gain recognition & designation of the cemetery, repatriate remains & current monitoring of anything EPCOR does on the site.
With all the HRIAs & the ongoing work PrarieSky has done building relationshios through protocol & ceremony as referenced by Indigenous leaders yesterday & the ongoing work of the City at River Crossing I think it's disingenuous a best to suggest there hasn't been consultation & it rejects the testimony of many Indigenous people who have been working on issues related to that land for decades. The rejection of this complexity doesn't do anyone any favors.
Chief Darlene Misik -- Papaschase First Nation
Yes!
Will the council be voting on the project on Monday? If so, how do we see the vote shaking out? I am a bit worried right now.
Looks like it, it's item 7.5.
Vote intention is a bit hard to assess. My guess:
Sohi (if he can be assured that everything will stop re: human remains I think he could support but he needs a very clear way to assure people of that) leaning no
Janz - no (honestly wondering if his anti-gondola petition doesn't violate the code of conduct - his current violation will be discussed by Council on Monday too - which could have some indirect influence to the positive since he was so oppositional on this & he's bound to be making their jobs harder because he keeps picking fights.
Rice - likely yes
Rutherford - likely no (much like Sohi needs something concrete she can point to re: burial grounds)
Stevenson - I was thinking yes, but Rob Houle was working in her office & is not a fan so maybe not?
Salvador - probably yes - she gets the process
Hamilton - probably yes
Cartmell - probably yes
Principe - probably yes
Wright - probably no
Knack - probably yes
Paquette - no
Tang - maybe yes? But not sure.
So there is a path based on this but likely requires some very clear communications with Stevenson & Sohi & Tang about steps that would be taken if likely human remains were located by GPR or test digs & a mechanism for them to assure their constituents. Some more comprehensive information re: the amount of work done in the area to date would be good for them to have in front of them too. (HRIAs River Crossing engagements etc) that could swing Rutherford as well I think?
It will be tight. If it's last item before a break it will be less likely, right after a break more likely to pass. (Decision fatigue makes people risk averse).
Super curious what others think. Listening on Monday will give us a better idea but by then it's too late.
I do think support letters expressing support for next steps and support for halting if there are human remains & encouraging robust consultation once these are in place might help. Maybe a checkpoint with Council as "for information" that gives them info during engagement/archeology prior to an actual public hearing.