Subject: Immediate Action Required – Lack of Transparency, Coordination, and Accountability in Dunluce Renewal Project
I am writing on behalf of deeply the concerned residents regarding the recent letter sent out concerning the Dunluce neighbourhood renewal project. More information has come to fruition. This letter—delivered on May 30th—was not only devoid of crucial information but has added confusion, frustration, and mistrust among residents. It is unacceptable that something this consequential would be distributed so late and without a single contact name or number for follow-up. Some neighbors received it today, May 30th, others didn’t?
Here are the urgent issues we demand answers to:
1. Failure to Distribute Critical Information in a Timely Manner
Many residents did not receive the letter. Those who did, received it only on May 30th, despite its time-sensitive contents. If the City is serious about community consultation and procedural fairness, why wasn’t this mailed weeks ago? The selective and delayed distribution compromises the integrity of the entire process.
2. Incomplete and Misleading Information About Petition Procedures
City planners previously informed residents that Dunluce would be divided into thirds or quarters and that petitions would be based on these divisions. Your letter completely omits this critical detail. Are we being deliberately kept in the dark about the petition thresholds and zones? Clarify the structure immediately: How is the neighborhood being divided, and how does this affect petition requirements?
3. Vague Petition Thresholds and Lack of Address-Specific Guidance
You claim 50% +1 signatures are needed to reject sidewalk installation—but fail to specify which addresses or zones this applies to. If the petition process depends on defined sub-areas of the neighborhood, then residents must know precisely which homes are included in their count. Without this clarity, the petition process is fundamentally flawed and your time stamp and regulations can no longer be applied.
4. Legal Validity of a 30-Day Notice Timeline
Stating the project will proceed 30 days from the date of your letter is disingenuous, given that many have only just received it today—May 30th. This undermines residents’ legal ability to respond as the contents of the letter lacked pertinent information. Any timeline that fails to account for fair delivery and response windows will not stand up in court.
5. Lack of Transparency in Cost Estimates
As a homeowner being forced to pay for half the cost, as such we demand a detailed, itemized breakdown of the sidewalk work. When we obtain private quotes, we receive full transparency: material costs, cement type, rebar used, labor rates, etc. If the City expects us to fund this project, we have a right to know exactly where our money is going. Blanket costs are not acceptable.
6. Why Are You Charging Interest on Our Own Tax Money?
You are proposing to “lend” money to taxpayers using the tax money we already paid—then charging us interest on it? This is not just unethical; it borders on financial exploitation. Explain how this practice is justifiable under any fair or democratic public financing model.
7. Total Lack of Accountability and Access to Decision-Makers
The letter contained no contact names, no direct phone lines, and no way to seek clarification. When I called 311, I was informed that no individual contact information is ever given out. This is not only bureaucratically opaque—it’s a blatant refusal to be held accountable.
How is it that I can call an Alberta government office and speak to a staff member, but I cannot reach a single City of Edmonton official overseeing this multimillion-dollar neighborhood renewal?
In conclusion, we are demanding:
- A list of accountable project contacts with phone numbers and emails
- Immediate clarification of neighborhood petition zones
- A fully itemized breakdown of sidewalk construction costs
- A clear explanation of the interest policy on deferred payments which will be deemed unethical as its our money you are using.
- Confirmation that petition deadlines will be adjusted to reflect actual delivery dates of your letter as not everyone got this letter on May 30th.
- An investigation into the wasteful practice of pouring sidewalks before gas line work is completed and why work is being duplicated as new sidewalks are being poured as needed by gas company.
The Dunluce community will not accept half-truths, vague notices, and bureaucratic barriers. We are taxpaying residents, not bystanders in your planning experiments. If you value public engagement and democratic process—as you claim—then you must demonstrate that with action and transparency.
We expect a formal response within 7 business days. This letter will be shared publicly and circulated within the community and media as this is being done without proper consultation and Legislation. This is another huge example of unaccountability and a familiar pattern that we’ve experienced in our dealings with the city of Edmonton.
Sincerely,
Janina Syrnyk
Stop the Destruction of Dunluce Committee