Should Edmonton Demand the Vote – Again?
A few weeks ago I was approached by a canvasser employed by Envision Edmonton and asked if I would like to sign the âDemand the Voteâ petition. I did not know much about the issue and the canvasser did not provide much explanation other than that the petition would require âa vote over whether to keep the [Edmonton] municipal airport openâ if the requisite number of signatures were collected. I signed, thinking that democratic input into the existence of the airport could only be a good thing.
Since then I have heard and read more about the issue and have changed my opinion. Petitions can have a legitimate role in bringing issues to the attention of governments and the public, but I feel that this particular issue has already received due democratic process: it was already voted on in a municipal plebiscite in 1995, received open debate in City Council, and been voted on by city council (10-3 in favour of closing the airport). Our democratic system works on the principle that elected officials represent their constituents and govern accordingly; Envision Edmontonâs members and the âDemand the Voteâ signatories should have voted for city council candidates who endorse keeping the airport open in past municipal elections rather than trying to waste Edmontoniansâ time and money repeating a single-issue plebiscite.
Given my regret at having signed the petition, I called Envision Edmonton to request that my name be removed, but was informed that since they now have (regrettably, in my opinion) received over 78,000 signatures it would be impossible to find and remove mine. When I asked if the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the signatories were entered into a database from which mine could be found and removed, I was informed that âthey were entered into lots of different computersâ and particular names or pieces of contact information could not be queried.
When I asked if I would have a chance to denounce my support when contacted for verification of my signature, I was informed that only those signatories whose addresses or phone numbers violate the petition guidelines (e.g. not an Edmonton address) would be contacted for verification. I, in fact, currently reside in Winnipeg, but because I gave my parentsâ Edmonton address (I was approached by the petition canvasser while on a visit home) this discrepancy would not be caught in the verification process and therefore I should not expect to be contacted. It occurs to me that any number of people could provide any Edmonton address (or any name, for that matter) on the petition and all of them could slip through the cracks of the so-called verification process. As such, retracting my signature was not only impossible, but my attempts to do so also raise doubts about the reliability of the rest of the petitionâs signatures.
All of the above does not even begin to discuss the validity of the reasons behind the City of Edmontonâs desire to close the municipal airport and its long-term plans for the development the airport land â including LRT expansion, housing, and business developments. Nor does it discuss Envision Edmontonâs alternate proposal for development, one which retains the airport while also incorporating LRT expansion and which it claims will benefit tax-paying Edmontonians more than the cityâs plan.
However, the questionable signature verification and collection practices (in addition to employing canvassers they also attempted to pay community leagues to collect signatures at their events) may hint at the vested interests that Envision Edmonton and those it represents have in keeping the airport open. Envision Edmonton may have developed its own alternate, shiny, ambitious development plan, but without the political will and municipal governmentsâ support it will never come to fruition. Instead, the petition and impending plebiscite will only serve to maintain the status quo by stalling or preventing sustainable urban development initiatives and wise land use as proposed by the City of Edmonton or Envision Edmonton.
Is the âDemand the Voteâ petition a legitimate democratic exercise, or is it a case of a well-organized and well-funded group of Edmonton elites and local businesses pushing their agenda on the rest of the city?
Dave Bruinsma is an alumnus of the Kingâs University College, having graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Environmental Studies (biology concentration) in 2005.
Posted: August 29th, 2010 under Bruinsma, King's Alumni.
Tags: demand the vote, edmonton, urban planning
Comments: none


