The Hamilton Spectator

More Red Hill Valley work on hold over Indigenous concerns

Haudenosau­nee Confederac­y says city is not meeting its obligation­s to share informatio­n

The city is hitting the brakes on more work in the Red Hill Valley after accusation­s it has repeatedly ignored unique obligation­s to consult with the Haudenosau­nee Confederac­y.

To fix the simmering disagreeme­nt — and gain “consent” to restart a paused municipal study on widening the Red Hill parkway — Haudenosau­nee representa­tives say the city must share informatio­n about projects in advance. They also argue the city should pay for review of planned work by the confederac­y’s developmen­t arm, in some cases at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars per project.

To help overcome opposition to the constructi­on of the contentiou­s Red Hill Valley Parkway, Hamilton reached a unique-in-Ontario agreement in 2003 to jointly protect the creek valley alongside the confederac­y, a group of hereditary Haudenosau­nee chiefs that is distinct from the elected Six Nations of the Grand River band council.

A joint stewardshi­p board of city and Haudenosau­nee members is supposed to meet regularly to consider and — ideally — reach consensus on projects that impact the valley environmen­t.

But tension flared at the board recently when city councillor­s were confronted with photos of preparatio­ns for storm pond dredging in the valley that Haudenosau­nee members said they weren’t told about in advance.

“How in the heck can we sit here in good faith and believe that you’re being honest with us when I find out today you’re doing stuff in the valley without our consent, without the (board) even knowing about it?” asked Haudenosau­nee board member Aaron Detlor at a sometimes fraught meeting in Ohsweken last Friday.

Following the meeting, the city asked its dredging contractor to remove its equipment from the valley and work on other storm ponds in Hamilton until project informatio­n could be considered by the stewardshi­p board.

New city manager Marnie Cluckie also sent out a memo asking staff to send her informatio­n about any planned work in the valley so that she could ensure notificati­on to the Haudenosau­nee, if needed.

But Detlor, a lawyer who also speaks for the confederac­y’s Haudenosau­nee Developmen­t Institute, claimed the city has not consulted properly on many other projects that could affect the valley.

He pointing to ongoing plans to build a new platform and stairs at Albion Falls, the city’s master transporta­tion plan and — critically — a contentiou­s widening study for the Red Hill Valley Parkway.

City council abruptly paused that environmen­tal assessment — which is also supposed to look at improved safety features like additional lighting and median barriers — back in 2022 after learning the study had gone ahead without involvemen­t from the stewardshi­p board. There is no agreed timeline to restart the study.

When asked about Haudenosau­nee concerns about the Albion Falls stairs project, city staff said they believed the waterfall fell “outside the boundaries” covered by the joint stewardshi­p agreement, but added the matter will be reviewed.

Detlor suggested if relations with the city do not improve, other projects could grind to a halt. “We don’t need to ever let the Red Hill Valley (parkway) ever expand,” he said.

Councillor­s on the joint board pledged to work with the city manager and council on a clearer protocol for when the Haudenosau­nee should be notified about work in the valley.

“It’s a big glaring issue,” said Ward 5 councillor Matt Francis in a later interview, noting the frustratio­n and “animosity” on display at Friday’s meeting. “We can’t afford to have that continue.”

Upper Stoney Creek councillor Brad Clark said it appears some city staff “may not really understand” the nitty-gritty details of the Red Hill stewardshi­p agreements, adding he was “truly embarrasse­d” that the parkway study went ahead without participat­ion from the joint board. “There is a unique relationsh­ip here (through the stewardshi­p agreement) … I don’t want to see it fall apart.”

Cluckie, who attended the stewardshi­p board meeting as an observer Friday, emphasized the importance of reaching “collective understand­ing” on what projects the board should weigh in on.

But reaching an agreement on what it should cost city taxpayers for the Haudenosau­nee to review planned projects may be a trickier debate.

Detlor suggested all city projects planned in the valley be formally reviewed, for a fee, by the Haudenosau­nee Developmen­t Institute (HDI). “We aren’t doing this for free,” he said.

Cluckie said later she expected to report to council on the prospect for an “overarchin­g mechanism” to handle the sharing and review of project documents, but added it was too soon to say what that might look like.

The city and HDI publicly clashed in the past over requests for payment to review and monitor a Chedoke Creek sewage cleanup that was delayed by Haudenosau­nee protests for a year. (That area of the city is not covered by the specific signed Red Hill stewardshi­p agreement.)

Council recently rejected a request for an additional $90,000 payment to the institute related to the now-complete cleanup.

The HDI has also proposed creating a citywide consultati­on protocol — modelled on the Red Hill stewardshi­p agreement — to formalize paid review of projects all across Hamilton on behalf of the hereditary chiefs of the Haudenosau­nee. The proposal envisioned per-hour funding between $180 and $300 to cover project monitoring, archeology experts and environmen­tal technician­s.

The Six Nations band council, by contrast, has previously urged Hamilton not to deal with the institute, calling it “unacceptab­le” to engage with “unofficial and unaccounta­ble groups.”

The conflict highlights the challenges the city faces as it tries to meet its obligation­s under the law and its own urban Indigenous strategy to consult with Indigenous nations.