Landowners against Niverville annexation

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 06/03/2024 (418 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Landowners to the east of Niverville made their voices heard against the proposed annexation of more than 2,600 acres of land during the municipal board hearing, Feb. 21 to 23.

“I just simply don’t trust them…,” said Autumn Youngs, a fourth-generation landowner who owns nine acres in the proposed annexed area. “They obviously have other plans going forward for the lands and how to accomplish that, because if they listened to the landowners they wouldn’t have even come to a place of a hearing because they would have simply realized the objection and walked away. I don’t want development. We live outside of town for a reason. We live in the country for a reason as do our neighbours. We don’t want development.”

During the hearing, lawyers for both sides presented their cases for and against the annexation.

Town Mayor Myron Dyck claimed the town would be entering into an indefinite contract agreement with the landowners whereupon they would be guaranteed that no development and no changes in bylaws or zoning would be done regarding their land unless approved by the landowner. The lawyer for the landowners questioned the legality of this move and whether that could ever surpass the rights of the minister to direct the town to have a development plan in place as the contract would veto any development plans the town would set for the land. If the agreement is seen as illegal then the landowners would lose their veto power.

Karen Friesen, who has 400 acres of her farm in the annexed area, said the mayor’s comment that the town will allow farming families to continue to cultivate their lands after annexation is debatable.

“Once they bring us into the town limits the writing is on the wall. They have flagged you for development. Sure the landowner still needs to sell to developers, but you can still have difficulties trying to farm within land use conflicts when you’re in a town limit…These plans are going out 20 to 50 years, why would you annex almost 2,700 acres of prime agricultural land today if you’re not going to need it for 50 years?”

The landowners also have concerns about the conflicts that would occur between urban and rural residents in terms of odour as there are manure spreading fields in the annexed lands as well as hog and poultry operations. They are also concerned about the conflict of machinery running at off hours on the farm, which could disturb urban residents.

The lawyer for the landowners claimed that the request for proposal that was sent out in the spring of 2022, and the growth study that followed, was done to justify a plan to annex land east of the town, land that CAO Eric King admitted developers were interested in acquiring. Further, the landowners allege that they were never consulted about the annexation and were only informed by a letter and later an open house in December 2022 that their properties could be subject to annexation. No further consultations were done before the plan to annex was submitted to the municipal board.

The lawyer for the landowners highlighted the fact that the city planner who wrote the growth study for the town had no expertise in demographics or statistics and didn’t consult professionals in these roles in his study when reporting the growth of the town’s population into 2056. It’s expected the population will grow from 5,947 in 2021 to 28,868 in 2056. The lawyer pointed out the fact that the city planner admitted he was no expert in regards to population growth and used the Canadian census for Niverville and the country when determining population growth. Also, another growth study was done by another firm, which was not hired by the town, which showed the town’s population growth to be half of what its hired planner projected during the same time period.

Regarding taxation, the town plans to set the mill rates at rural levels so that landowners would not be subject to urban taxes.

Should the lands be annexed, the landowner’s lawyer said that development could be like a checkerboard with some landowners in the future possibly selling their acres for development and some not. They pointed to the 2050 Winnipeg Metro Region plan which, although it is in the draft phase, directs 18 municipalities within the capital region, of which Niverville is a part of, to have planned development that is consistent and not random.

Should annexation not be approved, Dyck said it would affect future development for the town.

“We just finished a water treatment plant at a cost of $10 million I can tell you when you’re finding the life cycle of some of your assets and asset management, you’re looking much beyond 20 years to 30 and 40 and 50 years for the life cycle. And that you’re also looking at your sewer and water rates as to what that’s going to mean for current population versus a growing population and you need that growth in order to offset that cost in order to do proper asset management.

“We have a $190 million mechanized wastewater facility that is in process together with three other municipalities and when you’re looking at a $190 million project and you know you’re out of land in 20 years you’re certainly not building a project of that scope for a community that’ll only be what it’ll be at a 20-year mark.”

Youngs said the mayor failed to answer direct questions in regards to the concerns of landowners and dismissed the fact that all the landowners are in opposition to annexation.

“In my opinion there is no benefit to the landowner. We have our own wells, we are not part of the septic, we are not part of the recycling, the garbage, the Town of Niverville doesn’t offer any of that to the landowners nor will they. That won’t change. So there is actually no benefit, at least in the property I own.”

Friesen said that one of their biggest concerns farmers have is that some of the farms are in the process of transitioning to the next generation.

“We’re talking about families that are planning on farming these great agricultural lands for the next 50 years minimum into the next generations. It’s basically a situation where are not prepared to sell any of these lands to developers because it’s prime agricultural land and you just can’t replace prime agricultural land. It’s a finite resource.”

At the hearing were delegates from the province representing the department of agriculture, municipalities, and transportation. The government’s position is that prime agricultural land should not be used for urban development. While the government is not opposed to the town growing, it is opposed to the amount of land it wants to annex. The government believes the town should decrease the number of acres it wants for urban development. The province also had concerns that the town wants to develop right up to Highway 59. The department of transportation has plans to twin the highway and sees development along this corridor as impeding that project.

Benefits to the RM of Hanover should the annexation proceed is taxation on the annexed land at a de-escalating rate of 10 percent a year for 10 years and a share in the commercial/industrial corridor along twinned Highway 59.

The municipal board will make a decision on the matter and submit it to the minister for approval. While there is no time limit, the municipal board said it will try to make its decision within the next 60 days.