Kapyong Barracks Discussion

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by wardlow

Yes, it may be about as far into the future as the days of an active army base is into the past.

Yes, it's a long process. It will likely go as follows:

1. Sagkeeng First Nations (SFN) negotiates with Feds on land claim settlement (6+ months);
2. SFN holds community vote to ratify the approval of offered settlement (3-9+ months);
3. Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) Trust is created for SFN (1-5+ months);
4. SFN negotiations 'common reserve' with 6 other nations. Since an agreement in principal is already signed with the Feds, this process is expedited (4-18+ months);
5. Former offer to purchase lands is received by the Feds (1-2+ months);
6. Feds accept or reject or conditionally approve offer (1-3+ months);
7. Minister formally signs approval of lands sale (1-6+ months);
8. Communities hold ratification to formally 'designate' land as an urban reserve (1-9+ months);
9. City and common reserve negotiates the Municipal Services Agreement (1-9+ months); and
10. Federal government formally designates land as urban reserve (6-24+ months).

The reason why the timelines are so large varying from 1 month as high as 24 months is because it depends on how motivated and important the communities and Feds are in expediting the process. The 'Additions To Reserves' Policy is also comprehensive and can be slowed down when an uneducated elected government (municipal or provincial) slow down the consultations processes.

When Roseau River Anishinabe Nation saw an oil pipeline going through their reserve, it first wanted it's land claims settled or it would seek a court injunction to block the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline.

The outstanding land claim from 1903 was rejected about 3-4 times by the Feds. In a 22-year span from 1986, every single claim was rejected. But when the oil came through the reserve and Roseau sought 'gridlock' negotiations, suddenly these land claims became a priority.

Finally, strong negotiations were tabled December 2010, resolved January 2011 and voted 'approved' by February 2011 for a settlement of $80M.

Within 4-5 months, the settlement was deposited into the band's account compared to the 100+ years it took to even hear the case.


Usually, TLEs are more structured and easy to settle as a framework agreement is already in place compared to a less structured specific land claim.

Roseau River's specific land claims are an example of how fast the Feds can act, settle, approve and award reserve lands in such a small window of time.

A petition to our local MPs to expedite the process can certainly be beneficial to First Nations as Winnipeggers as the next federal election approaches. Whether you support the Liberal party or not (which I don't just for the record), the petition can still act as pressure to resolve land claims and begin a working process with the First Nations to widen Kenaston.

Personally, I've met Trudeau and Jim Carr (who is the MP for the area around Kenaston's widening) and neither like me very much. Lol!

But hey, this is why we have MPs in the City of Winnipeg. If the MPs don't want to vouch for the solutions to widen Kenaston in Winnipeg, then there isn't a need to vote for them.

11 Winnipeg-area MPs can literally lobby the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations (Carolyn Bennett) to settle these outstanding issues by summer 2019 if they wanted to.

All it takes is pressure from Winnipeggers to direct their efforts at the MPs to make this a priority.

The First Nations would gladly welcome an expedited process to begin reaping the fruits of their business endeavours and settled land claim(s). It would be a win-win.

[KellyEdwards]

Found an photo from earlier this year used in a presentation.


According to a briefing online created by Myers LLP, the Agreement In Principal (AIP) is that 68% of the land will be sold to First Nations of Treaty 1.

More details here: http://www.sagkeeng.ca/wp-content/up...une-6-2018.pdf

It also mentions something called the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement. Considering that Sagkeeng has 3 open land claims against Canada, it will be interesting to see if those are settled prior.

Those three land claims are:
1) The absolute surrender of lands for the Pine Falls Mill Site;
2) The Treaty Land Entitlement; and
3) Unceded territories relating to the White Shell area where Manitoba Hydro currently pays Sagkeeng annual licenses payments for usage of their lands.

Manitoba Hydro acknowledges this territory belongs to Sagkeeng and has voluntarily created a working relationship rather than through litigation. However, Canada hasn't settled this land claim yet.

Technically, some lands within Manitoba are unceded (meaning the lands were never signed a treaty for, never lost to war, never surrendered, etc.) and thus, these lands weren't even supposed to be a part of Canadian territory.

It's almost how nearly all of B.C. is technically unceded territory. Even Vancouver formally declared this and is negotiating with First Nations to formally convert the lands from First Nation title to legal Canadian title.

An online debriefing from Maurice Law says that a dollar amount to settle Sagkeeng's TLE claim is the last thing currently being negotiated. The deadline for that negotiation was August 2018 with no formal update.

All other logistics have been settled for Sagkeeng's TLE, just not the worth of acreage (which is usually pegged around $500 per acre).

After the TLE is settled, Sagkeeng is entitled to the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement for Kapyong (which seems to be simultaneously being negotiated).

However, since the Treaty 1 First Nations have signed the AIP for only 68% of the Kapyong Barracks. The AIP was also signed with Canada's National Defense, not the federal government directly (even though ND is a federal branch).

The estimated 132 acre size of Kapyong means that the 32% National Defense keeps is about 42.2 acres. Kenaston's widening would take an estimated 15.5 acres of land and thus, leave 26.7 acres to transfer to the Canada Lands Corporation (a federal crown corporation) for re-sale to private investors.

Now, this makes me wonder: Is Canada's National Defense even considering widening Kenaston? If so, why hasn't it even been negotiated?

There are clear terms to do so and the AIP never highlighted any exclusivity to road-front property which means Kenaston's widening can actually happen within the next year or two if everything can successfully be negotiated.

The CLC can literally sell the 15.5 acres to widen Kenaston the moment Treaty 1 First Nations designate which lands they want in particular.

After all, the site design proposed by Chief Meeches of Long Plains was just a preliminary starting point and not the final design. Even in the press releases, Meeches stated that the design needed input from all Treaty 1 First Nations prior to full approval.

Personally, I believe this is 100% widening is possible as long as the City of Winnipeg provides a better plan to provide easier access to the future development. Under it's current design from Winnipeg, Kapyong becomes a by-pass corridor without any sufficient access.

To make a left-turn onto Grant Ave or Kenaston from Kapyong in the new design, you literally need to make a u-turn after making a right-turn just to make a left-turn. Not only that, but if a u-turn prohibition sign is placed on Grant Ave or Kenaston or even Taylor, it means you will need to drive 2-5 blocks away from Kapyong to make a left-turn by doing a u-turn.

I think the City of Winnipeg needs to provide reassurance and incorporation of the urban reserve into the design. Without that incorporation, I see Treaty 1 First Nations holding onto the lands to ensure the lands remain accessible.

So far, I haven't seen the City of Winnipeg move on a new design that incorporates sufficient access to Kapyong.


PS: Here's the Agreement in Principal:
The Treaty 1 First Nations will receive 68% of the land at Kapyong Barracks;
• The Treaty 1 First Nations will jointly hold the land as reserve;
• Canada will pay the costs for all required demolition and remediation of the land;
• The Treaty 1 First Nations will negotiate a Municipal Development and Services
Agreement with the City of Winnipeg;
• Canada will work to explore options for Treaty 1 members to receive tax benefits when
working on the Kapyong Barracks prior to reserve creation;
• Canada will cover a portion of the costs of negotiating the AIP and of negotiating and
implementing the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement; and
• Canada and the Treaty 1 First Nations committed to working in good faith to complete
the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement.

Presentation source: http://www.sagkeeng.ca/wp-content/up...cks-Update.pdf

[bomberjet]

How can the City plan anything when they don't know what's going on with the land? All the design work done on Kenaston is contingent upon them getting the strip of land for widening.

I'm sure they could provide access to the development as there's already numerous access points to Kenaston just across the street. No additional traffic lights should go in other than what's already there. Maybe a median opening mid way between grant and Taylor.

I'm looking forward to seeing what all parties come up with for this site.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

How can the City plan anything when they don't know what's going on with the land? All the design work done on Kenaston is contingent upon them getting the strip of land for widening.

I'm sure they could provide access to the development as there's already numerous access points to Kenaston just across the street. No additional traffic lights should go in other than what's already there. Maybe a median opening mid way between grant and Taylor.

I'm looking forward to seeing what all parties come up with for this site.

In a properly planned city the widening of Kenaston would have taken place 30 years ago and the sale or non sale of Kapyong wouldn't have made a difference.

Way too many politicians from all levels of govt. and from all political stripes dropped the ball big time!

[bomberjet]

Yup. IMO properly done would be to leave it two lanes each way and put up some bridges. But hey, that's just me.

Dealing with the current situation, they're waiting..

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Yup. IMO properly done would be to leave it two lanes each way and put up some bridges. But hey, that's just me.

Dealing with the current situation, they're waiting..

I concur with that mostly

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

How can the City plan anything when they don't know what's going on with the land? All the design work done on Kenaston is contingent upon them getting the strip of land for widening.

I'm sure they could provide access to the development as there's already numerous access points to Kenaston just across the street. No additional traffic lights should go in other than what's already there. Maybe a median opening mid way between grant and Taylor.

I'm looking forward to seeing what all parties come up with for this site.

Let's DEFINITELY not do that.

The urban reserve in Polo Park often has a 20-car back-up that blocks Madison Avenue, St. Matthews and sometimes even backs up onto Route 90 because city planners did not expect large volumes of cars for any urban reserve.

People on Grant Ave making a left-turn into Kapyong don't have a dedicated turning lane. This means that Grant Ave will mostly be down to 1 lane during rush hour if a proper traffic solution isn't produced.

There definitely needs to be a double-turning lane (light included) to cross Grant Avenue. We did a lot of these double-turning lanes for Lyon Sterling in front of Four Seasons.

I think that same capacity should be mirrored -- especially for gathering and events where a conference and a hockey game can literally happen at the same time during rush hour.

[bomberjet]

Kenaston and Sterling Lyon is the model of what not to do. 3 turning lanes? 3?! That's insanity. Sterling Lyon has an excess of turning lanes IMO.

All of the roads in the Kapyong area will require upgrades. I don't see why access couldn't come off Grant or Taylor. A new light will be required on both Grant and Taylor for the road shown going down the centre of the site. If traffic backs up during peak times, it will be controlled by the traffic signals. Good design can mitigate the issues. This is different than the Madison thing. There were no upgrades or anything done to traffic there.

I'm coming at this from an engineering point of view. I put that hat aside as I realize this is not a freeway and will never be. So providing more access points from Kenaston is that compromise.

The map here doesn't really show much in the way of connecting to the site because they didn't really know what's going on.

https://winnipeg.ca/publicworks/cons...Map_FIN-sm.pdf

My question Kelly is what would you like to see done?

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Kenaston and Sterling Lyon is the model of what not to do. 3 turning lanes? 3?! That's insanity. Sterling Lyon has an excess of turning lanes IMO.

All of the roads in the Kapyong area will require upgrades. I don't see why access couldn't come off Grant or Taylor. A new light will be required on both Grant and Taylor for the road shown going down the centre of the site. If traffic backs up during peak times, it will be controlled by the traffic signals. Good design can mitigate the issues. This is different than the Madison thing. There were no upgrades or anything done to traffic there.

I'm coming at this from an engineering point of view. I put that hat aside as I realize this is not a freeway and will never be. So providing more access points from Kenaston is that compromise.

The map here doesn't really show much in the way of connecting to the site because they didn't really know what's going on.

https://winnipeg.ca/publicworks/cons...Map_FIN-sm.pdf

My question Kelly is what would you like to see done?

1. The City of Winnipeg and Treaty 1 First Nations reach an agreement on the City's promise to expropriate the 15.5 road-front acres which allows the First Nations to be road-front property;

2. National Defense leave those 15.5 acres to the Canada Lands Corporation (CLC) to allow the City of Winnipeg to expropriate those lands;

3. The City widen Kenaston while providing sufficient and easy access to Kapyong; and

4. The remaining lands of Kapyong (minus those owned by the CLC) converted into an urban reserve to promote economic development, self-determination and financial self-sufficiency of the Treaty 1 First Nations.

Don't get me wrong, I do want Kenaston to be widened. However, the practices the government has done to First Nations, at this point, is obviously untrustful.

Even with Trudeau's promises stating that "no relationship is more important to him" in my opinion was just a bunch of cow pies. Trudeau infringing on the rights of First Nations with the TransMountain pipeline is evidence that we have not yet gone past this litigation phase of our relationships. I'm glad the courts kept him in check and shot down his attempts at trampling First Nation's rights.

But that's a whole other story.

Honestly, I don't think First Nations have brought their guard down quite yet. The City of Winnipeg, especially with an Indigenous mayor, should bridge that relationship and negotiate the widening.

Without that unprecedented step, the political landscape looks the same and Winnipeg stands to lose an opportunity.

[CoryB]

For those that haven't been to the area recently there is significant work being done on demolition of the long vacant base housing north of Grant along Kennaston. It almost seems like there is an agreement in principle that those lands fall outside the claim area and are being cleared before being turned over to the city.

The area of the main base could still be the area of potential dispute. I would imagine that the possible widening of Kennaston between Grant and Wilkes is one of the many issues on the negotiation table for the urban reserve status and the related services agreement. The city isn't going to want to undertake that project and have access points constantly yet the land claim is going to want fair access to the road network from their site. It isn't an easy issue to settle as the desired position from both sides is very far apart.

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by CoryB

For those that haven't been to the area recently there is significant work being done on demolition of the long vacant base housing north of Grant along Kennaston. It almost seems like there is an agreement in principle that those lands fall outside the claim area and are being cleared before being turned over to the city.

The area of the main base could still be the area of potential dispute. I would imagine that the possible widening of Kennaston between Grant and Wilkes is one of the many issues on the negotiation table for the urban reserve status and the related services agreement. The city isn't going to want to undertake that project and have access points constantly yet the land claim is going to want fair access to the road network from their site. It isn't an easy issue to settle as the desired position from both sides is very far apart.

I referenced the Agreement In Principal's points a few posts up. The AIP hasn't negotiated specifics of land but did say that the buildings will be demolished and the ground have remediation completed.

100% of Kapyong Barracks is required under these provisions of the AIP regardless if they're going to be First Nation-owned or not.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by KellyEdwards

I referenced the Agreement In Principal's points a few posts up. The AIP hasn't negotiated specifics of land but did say that the buildings will be demolished and the ground have remediation completed.

100% of Kapyong Barracks is required under these provisions of the AIP regardless if they're going to be First Nation-owned or not.

They have torn down all the buildings south of Taylor now the main warehouses , they also cleared out the one building the city or rcmp was using to store their new vehicles.

I'm sure they will be tearing the rest down very shortly.

[Biff]

There is a $20 million demo tender coming out shortly for the remaining structures and all infrastructure and in ground services.

[Riverman]

That entire complex was centrally heated, lots of buried asbestos covered pipes to remove. Big job.

[bomberjet]

I always find campus style plants like that fascinating, for some reason.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by KellyEdwards

Trudeau infringing on the rights of First Nations with the TransMountain pipeline is evidence that we have not yet gone past this litigation phase of our relationships. I'm glad the courts kept him in check and shot down his attempts at trampling First Nation's rights.

Uh, what? Everything I have read says just the opposite. The natives want the TMP to go ahead.

https://theprovince.com/opinion/colu...EQ4tUh6EpJ4cuk

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Uh, what? Everything I have read says just the opposite. The natives want the TMP to go ahead.

https://theprovince.com/opinion/colu...EQ4tUh6EpJ4cuk

1) You're referring to an opinion column that has cherry-picked information;
2) The natural resources law changes are to give First Nations more of a say in natural resources, not just oil; and
3) If First Nations supported the pipeline, more than 70% of them wouldn't have filed injunctions or enforced their legal rights to halt the pipeline.

133 First Nations are affected by the pipeline. Only 43 of them have signed an explicit agreement to either support or consent or agree to work with (sometimes in principal) with the pipeline while the remaining have rejected to accept Canada's consultation as-is.

This rejection is what shot down the TransMountain pipeline. The First Nations alleged that their consultation and concerns were ignored while Canada said, "Nope! We're done here."

Furthermore, Chiefs across Canada have created one of the largest coalitions to oppose a natural resources project ever. https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...e-and-oilsands

It's been a long going vow to oppose such projects. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ticle32001239/

Every cancelled pipeline joins the long list of $56B already-cancelled projects that have fallen out of feasibility after violating Indigenous rights across Canada. https://business.financialpost.com/c...ctional-policy

I guess some people are just in their own world and choose to read opinion columns rather than a wide variety of unbiased articles.

Anyway, I've got great news, guys. It appears that First Nations have unofficially consented to the widening of Kenaston boulevard. The Feds plan on having the project's negotiations complete by Fall 2019.

The proposed site plan layout, as previously stated, was not the final design.

[Riverman]

The notwithstanding clause should be used to override that judicial decision. It is parliment that is supposed to be running the country, not the courts. The next government will fix this, it is too important to the country to be held up by what amounts to nothing.

[KellyEdwards]

Originally Posted by Riverman

The notwithstanding clause should be used to override that judicial decision. It is parliment that is supposed to be running the country, not the courts. The next government will fix this, it is too important to the country to be held up by what amounts to nothing.

There was a simple consultation process that was required. Those federal laws were created by the federal government itself as First Nations do not have parliamentary powers to impose such laws in Canada's government.

However, B.C. is a unique case as the territory of those lands are considered unceded where those First Nations have neither sold, signed a treaty, surrendered or gave permission to Canada to use those lands.

This is how precedent court rulings, including the 2014 one of Tsilhqot'in Nation v British Columbia saw the First Nation win the landmark Supreme Court decision that recognized unceded territory (outside a reserve) as having Indigenous (Aboriginal) title.

Since the land is ultimately the First Nation's, they require consultations. So, while Albertan First Nations can be mowed over, B.C. First Nations cannot under the notwithstanding clause.

Why? Well, if you overlay a map of all the treaties, surrenders and self-governing agreements over Canada, you'll notice that a large amount of B.C. remains unceded territory.


NOTE: This map does not include the Upper Canada, Robinson, Douglas and Williams Treaties for Ontario/Quebec.

Even, as previously mentioned, Vancouver formally declared its land as unceded territory and began negotiating with the First Nations to compensate them for lands they've legally never been compensated for.

Despite Canadian land laws, Indigenous title holders remain the ultimate owners of those lands in B.C.

Although this case was explicitly for clear cutting, further litigation into the matter can set a precedence for oil projects when challenged as oil is also defined as a natural resources project just like clear cutting.

Since the notwithstanding clause is a domestic provision within Canadian law, it would be interesting to see it try to be used in these cases as Canada's Supreme Courts have recognized First Nations as legally separate nations who still hold titles to the lands of B.C.

In U.S. cases, this is referred to as "Imperium in Emperio" and even the outcome of the court case does not solidify the nation-to-nation outcomes that otherwise might be negotiated. By law, even if the Supreme Court decides otherwise, the cases must still be negotiated on a case-by-case basis with the Indigenous people.

In terms of the TMP, more than 130 sovereign Indigenous nations (of 40 which have signed Treaties have also signed agreements) still need to negotiate or directly be consulted with regardless if a notwithstanding clause is placed or not.

This is simply because the notwithstanding clause, in hard terms, applies to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, not nation-to-nation negotiations like Treaties and other international affairs.

If that were false, Canada could invade Greenland's territory and say, "we've applied this notwithstanding clause against you."

That's simply not how it works. The notwithstanding clause is a domestic provision, not an international application.

To date, Canada is still signing Treaties with First Nations for unceded territories. The last Treaty/Self-Government Agreement for unceded territory was signed in 2016 with hundreds more in negotiations to finally complete Canada as a fully ceded country.

Even under the Numbered Treaties, First Nations were not fully included in those negotiations. This is how Whitecap Dakota First Nation in Saskatchewan, a province fully covered by the Numbered Treaties, signed a Historic Framework Agreement towards a Treaty earlier this year.

Even Eastern Ontario remains in question as Canada works towards fully and legally obtaining full rights to the land by negotiating with the Algonquins of Ontario for an Algonquin Nation-Canada Treaty.

In other words, Canada cannot rule with brute force, with the notwithstanding clause, on lands it simply doesn't own. That exact thinking is what allowed First Nations to win Supreme Court cases that forever cemented their rights to be consulted with.

This brute force almost always backfires as we've seen with the Kapyong Barracks.



KAPYONG

Furthermore, my recent contact with a Chief working closely with the project says that the City of Winnipeg will likely not be widening Kenaston until 2022 because of budgeting and funding hurdles by the City itself.

Regardless, the Chief said the goal for construction for Kapyong is 2020 as all the funds to purchase and construct are already in place. It looks like everything is going to be a win-win. Private investors still get access to Kapyong, First Nations get theirs, Tuxedo residents get participation and Winnipeg gets the Kenaston widening complete.

Don't you just love negotiating? It's so much better than the courts.

[KellyEdwards]

This is random, but here's what Kapyong Barracks should look like in the future the more the First Nations have the means to full develop the lands to their full extent.

This is is the Tsuut'ina Nation in Alberta that is located in SW Calgary. Although it was not initially an urban reservations, the urbanization of Calgary has made this reserve become urban with interconnected infrastructure.

During the preliminary developments of this, Tsuut'ina agreed to sell reserve lands to make way for Calgary's Ring Road (which is like a high-speed version of Kenaston).

Coincidentally, Winnipeg's Kenaston is also in the SW corner of the city where development is rapidly growing.

Altogether, the Indigenous-created, privately-funded project in the Tsuut'ina reserve will cost $4.5 billion to develop 1,200 acres of land in 3 distinct villages. The real estate project will rent/lease lands to private individuals regardless of whether or not they're First Nations descent.

The project is called the "Taza Development."

This definitely provides some perspective in what Kapyong Barracks could be in the future!







Sources: https://experiencetaza.com/
https://renx.ca/massive-calgary-taza...t-valued-4-5b/