Show Notes
This episode is a discussion between host Jenny Yeremiy and Professor Duane Bratt from Mount Royal University about Alberta’s Electoral Boundaries Commission process, their one-of-its-kind report, and recent government intervention which looks a lot like gerrymandering. TAKE ACTION: Email Your MLA, the Premier, and the Justice Minister, cc’ing every elected official in Alberta. Scroll down for an example letter! On the Original Commission Process The Alberta government created an Electoral Boundaries Commission in 2024 to redraw electoral maps for the 2027 election. The commission was structured with five members: a retired judge (Justice Miller) as chair, two government appointees, and two NDP appointees. They were limited to increasing seats from 87 to only 89. The commission spent about a year conducting public hearings and reviewing submissions, ultimately producing a unanimous interim report that all five members agreed upon. The report recommended adding seats in Calgary, Edmonton, and Airdrie due to population growth, while amalgamating some rural ridings in Central and Northern Alberta. The Split in the Final Report Something unusual happened between December and January - the two United Conservative Party (UCP) appointees completely changed their position and created an entirely different map . This resulted in two separate reports: a majority report (supported by Justice Miller and the two NDP appointees) that largely maintained the interim recommendations, and a minority report from the two UCP appointees that proposed extensive “hybrid ridings”. The minority report extended urban ridings far into rural areas - for example, a Lethbridge riding extending to the BC border and Calgary’s Glenmore riding extending almost to BC. Professor Bratt argues this appeared to be gerrymandering designed to dilute urban (NDP-leaning) votes by combining them with rural (UCP-dominated) areas. Summary continues below ad. Join Markham Hislop and I, THIS FRIDAY from 6-8 pm in Calgary at the Montgomery Community Association. Let’s talk water, energy, and any other concerns you’d like to discuss under Danielle Smith’s Alberta and Mark Carney’s Canada. Ask me questions about the recall campaign, ask Markham about guests and what he sees coming in the global electric revolution. Don’t let the ticket price be a barrier, grab a Student & Senior free ticket! Government’s New Process Rather than adopting either report, the government announced yesterday they will recreate the entire process. They’re establishing a new legislative committee chaired by MLA Brandon Lunty, supported by another independent panel with the same structure as the original commission. This new process will take only six months instead of over a year and won’t hold new public hearings. Constitutional and Legal Concerns Justice Miller’s majority report stated the minority recommendations were likely unconstitutional under Section 3 of the Charter of Rights (fair elections). Unlike other Charter sections, Section 3 cannot be overridden using the notwithstanding clause. If a gerrymandered map is adopted, court challenges are expected that could nullify it, potentially forcing use of the old 87-seat map despite significant population changes. Broader Democratic Concerns Professor Bratt places this within a pattern of “erosion of Democratic norms in Alberta,” including attacks on universities, judges, municipalities, weakening Elections Alberta, and frequent use of the notwithstanding clause. He argues this undermines public trust in electoral fairness and feeds into separatist narratives. The timeline is also problematic - Elections Alberta needs about 18 months to prepare for elections, but the new report won’t come until October 2026, just one year before the 2027 election, while also handling up to 10 referendum questions. My Take Smith’s UCP wants to forget the ABEBC’s efforts and use the 2023 maps, this way urban votes count less than rural votes and defeat the entire pu
More from The Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy
This Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy conversation is an urgent discussion about a proposed AI data centre project in Calgary, Alberta, with guests Sarah Yurchevich of Alberta Data Centre Watch and Nick Tsergas of Stop the Data Centre. The immediate concern is a rezoning application filed by Stantec Consulting on August 13th, 2026, seeking to change land use in northeast Calgary to accommodate data centres and associated power generation, with a public engagement deadline the day of the recording. I emphasize that 68 data centre projects are currently tracked in Alberta, with approximately [40] in planning stages. Sarah warns that once zoning changes are approved, future opportunities for public input narrow significantly. Nick explains how citizens can easily voice concerns through https://calgary.stopthedatacentre.ca/council, which provides a tool to email city council with either a pre-written template or personalized message, noting that individualized letters carry more weight but template submissions still help demonstrate numbers. Both guests stress early public engagement and monitoring of municipal zoning processes. Sarah encourages non-experts to participate by asking questions of elected officials and sharing the file number widely, while Nick describes how Stop the Data Centre connects activists across cities, offers updates via newsletter, and now accepts donations to support legal challenges when administrative channels fail. Jenny mentions unverified reports that the broader Meta project may impact 350 wetlands without changes to the Environmental Protection Act aiming accommodate them. Also remember to take action for the Alberta Wilderness Association today! Call you MLA, MP and Environment Ministers to list these concerns regarding proposed changes to EPEA and EIA, respectively: 1. Mandatory EIA list: Proposal to exclude expansion of already operational facilities, remove red tape on smaller projects or projects where standardized requirements are deemed sufficient, for example power plants under 10 MW. This would directly allow the EETP 920 MW project to avoid full EIA by phasing / expansion loophole. This must not be removed. 2. Wetlands and Water Act linkage to EPEA: Alberta is simultaneously proposing to remove Water Act approvals for temporary and seasonal wetlands on private cropland — same prairie pothole wetlands that recharge Beverly Channel Aquifer >20 m thick connecting Redwater River Natural Area OC 454/71-13 (159.63 Ac) and Redwater Provincial Recreation Area — Sandhills 5,498 Ac Twp 57 Rge 20-21 to the EETP site. Removing EPEA oversight compounds loss. 3. Cumulative effects — Industrial Heartland: The Canada-Alberta Co-operation Agreement April 2, 2026 aims for one project one review but must not reduce ecological integrity. EETP data centre sits in Designated Industrial Zone with existing air, water, noise impacts — needs full cumulative assessment, not streamlined codes of practice. 4. Public participation: 9 days is insufficient. I request: * Confirmation my submission is logged before Oct 30 deadline * 60-day extension for public and Indigenous consultation * Public release of all proposed Activities Designation Regulation changes * Retention of mandatory EIA for energy projects >100 MW, data centres >100 acres, and any project within 20 km of UNESCO Biosphere or Provincial Natural Area 5. Stronger protections needed: Not just illegal dumping fines ($10k-$100k individuals, $100k-$1M corporations), but also protection of species at risk habitat, wetlands of all classes including ephemeral, seasonal, temporary, and environmental reserves under MGA. Thank you, Sherry Heschuk for your guidance!
Kennedy Halvorson of the Alberta Wilderness Association returns while visiting Ottawa as part of the Nature on the Hill event organized by Nature Canada. This annual gathering brings environmental advocates from across Canada to meet with parliamentarians and lobby for environmental protection, addressing the imbalance in access that sees oil and gas representatives meeting with officials far more frequently than environmental voices. Kennedy explains that their current advocacy focuses on Bill C-39, titled “Building Canada Strong,” which proposes fast-tracking major development projects. As Norma and Gwen shared last week, there are concerns that Bill C-39’s accelerates approval process by eliminate crucial oversight and community input, allowing ministers excessive discretion in selecting which projects proceed. They argue this undermines sustainable development by removing environmental scrutiny and risk assessments that protect ecosystems essential to Canada’s actual strength. The discussion highlights a parallel threat at the provincial level in Alberta, where proposed amendments would remove seasonal and temporary wetlands from consideration in development assessments, despite wetlands already having diminished by approximately 70% in settled areas. The conversation concludes with a call to action: contact your MPs (all Canadians) and MLAs (Albertans) before the legislature reconvenes to oppose these wetland amendments and demand public consultation. Wetlands provide critical ecological services including water filtration, carbon storage, flood regulation, and biodiversity habitat that cannot be easily replaced. Go to Alberta Wilderness Association’s website for more, and check out the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) and Yellowstone to Yukon (Y2Y) for additional resources for engagement on environmental issues. https://www.albertawilderness.ca/act-now/we-need-wetlands/ https://www.albertawilderness.ca/send-a-letter-demand-better-protections-for-wetlands/
Gwen Muskwa is the Treaty Relations Director for Treaty 8, having worked with the organization for 29 years. She describes her work as honouring the legacy of elders who taught her everything she knows, with a focus on ensuring treaties are respected, honoured, and upheld. Norma Large is from the Saddle Lake Creek Nation in Treaty 6 territory, currently living in Treaty 7 territory in Calgary. She explains she has spent approximately 30 years doing advocacy work to address inequities between First Nations and non-First Nations peoples, and sees the current referendum moment as an opportunity for change. Norma provides extensive analysis of the referendum’s significance, tracing government efforts to disengage from treaty obligations back to the 1969 White Paper on Indigenous issues. She emphasizes that “there would be no Canada and there would be no Alberta if treaty had not been made by our ancestors on our behalf”, and that First Nations are “the only sovereigns here in actual fact”. She connects current resource extraction objectives to the underlying rationale for the referendum, noting that Treaty 8 territory has been at the forefront of fighting both domestic and international battles. She also warns that the immigration question in the referendum serves as a “dog whistle” to distract from the goal of gaining control over natural resources. Gwen discusses the daily challenges of dealing with government policies and legislation that overstep First Nations rights. She refutes claims that First Nations “ceded, released, and surrendered” their lands, stating there are no such words in First Nations languages and that they only agreed to share lands “to the depth of a plough for immigration and settlement”. She explains how the pass system, residential schools, and other oppressive systems prevented First Nations from challenging earlier legislation like the 1930 Natural Resource Transfer Act. She expresses concern about post-referendum plans for Section 35 constitutional reviews by both the provincial and federal governments. Both Gwen and Norma elaborate on the sacred nature of treaties as international instruments made with the Imperial Crown of Great Britain and Ireland, not Canada or Alberta. Norma describes the pipe ceremony and smudge that accompanied treaty-making as creating “an invisible jurisdiction” as binding as a judge’s gavel, lasting “forever in perpetuity for as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the waters flow”. Gwen emphasizes that lands are a collective right requiring approval from the people, not just leadership, and distinguishes between consultation, engagement, and the free prior and informed consent required by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Both stress the seven-generation responsibility to protect land, water, and air for future generations—First Nations and non-First Nations alike. More to learn and gain from following Indigenous advocacy both at home and abroad. Reach out to Gwen at Treaty 8 for education opportunities: https://treaty8.org/about/education/. Note: Norma said Bill C-69 but meant C-39.
Tami Smith and Linda Walker are the hosts of “This Is B******t,” a podcast born out of AB Resistance, which focuses on analyzing legislation and political developments in Alberta. Tami is a retired teacher who works with AB Resistance, writes newsletters, and conducts research, while Linda brings an American perspective from having grown up in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where she witnessed the decline of public education and the rise of televangelist movements that she sees parallels with in Alberta. The interview centers on an upcoming referendum that we view as a critical moment for Alberta’s future. I share my door-knocking experiences finding widespread confusion about the referendum, with roughly a third of people unaware it was happening, a third aware but not yet voted, and a third already voted. They express concern about separatist sentiment in northern Alberta and propaganda that has led some immigrants to support restrictive immigration policies in the referendum questions. Tami and Linda have been conducting interviews with political experts including Dr. Bratt, Dr. Parks, and Dr. Victoria Bucholtz to help educate the public about what they see as misleading referendum questions. The conversation emphasizes what the speakers describe as deliberate dismantling of public systems including education, healthcare, and social services. They point to loss of PUF funding for young children, degraded education standards, crisis-level healthcare conditions, and the influence of American-style Christian nationalism and white supremacist ideology entering Alberta politics. We frame the referendum as an opportunity for Albertans to reject US political influence and protect Canadian values of universal healthcare, truth and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and international law. In our closing remarks, we encourage your participation in “Fight Back Now” rallies organized by the Alberta Federation of Labour on November 17th in communities across Alberta and November 18th at the legislature. Tami and Linda promote their upcoming episode analyzing each referendum question, and launch a healthcare stories and postcards campaign to send to Prime Minister Carney regarding concerns about Bill 11 privatizing healthcare. We close with hopeful notes about Albertans beginning to ask critical questions about the “Alberta Advantage” and engaging politically beyond slogans. Follow “This is B******t” on YouTube
Morrow County Oregon’s Barrett Dash, farmer, environmentalist and community leader joins me to discuss why and how to dodge big data as Morrow County’s AI data centre assault began in the 1990s. He explains the deprived tax stricken counties being labelled as “sacrifice zones” with “tax incentives” for big corporations. He fights and educates in four different ways at the moment. He encourages your participation and support as do I! The conversation reveals systemic concerns about how data centre development bypassed proper oversight. Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) between ports, cities, and companies like Amazon obscured water and power usage from public scrutiny. Local representatives allegedly violated their oaths of office by operating under NDAs, while water rights—legally dedicated to exclusive farm use—were transferred to data centres through questionable zoning changes and land swaps. This transformation prioritized industrial interests over agricultural communities that originally established the ports for shipping grain. Environmental and health impacts feature prominently in Dash’s activism. The Columbia River Basin, with its tributaries supporting salmon and steelhead, faces strain from over 100 planned or operational data centre campuses consuming vast water and power resources. Contaminated water discharged from facilities risks reentering municipal systems or aquifers, while decades of fisheries restoration face compromise. Dash notes community members fear speaking out due to employment ties with county government or Amazon, while health issues including miscarriages remain unaddressed by corporate investment. Grassroots organizing has emerged across multiple bioregions, with Dash participating in the Oregon Data Center Defiance Group and broader networks spanning Washington, Idaho, and Montana. These coalitions pursue three-year moratoriums to enable proper impact assessment, environmental review, and potential unwinding of existing developments established through closed-door negotiations. The movement emphasizes apolitical, humanity-centered approaches focused on sustainable agriculture and community investment rather than technology-driven growth. Barrett’s community: * Join his rural movement for the people: https://www.oregonrural.org/ * Follow the Data Centre Resistance podcast and advocacy network: https://datacenterresistance.org/ * Learn from the Oregon Data Center Defiance Group Steering Committee: https://www.damdatacenters.org/ * Collaborate at http://grassrootsdatacentercoaltion.org/