A group of landowners in Saskatchewan is grappling with uncertainty as they await responses regarding the proposed AI data centre by Bell Canada. The seven families, residing adjacent to the intended site, have raised concerns for months, only to receive minimal communication from local authorities. Their apprehensions centre around the potential impact on their quality of life and property values.
Residents Voice Their Concerns
In a poignant letter to the Rural Municipality (RM) of Sherwood council, the families expressed their frustrations, stating, “At every stage of this process our concerns have been deferred, reduced, or ignored.” While they do not oppose the data centre outright, they seek assurance that their interests will be protected. Doug McKell, whose family has deep roots in the area, lamented the lack of engagement from the RM, likening the quest for answers to “pulling teeth.”
“We have the governance system in place so that these kinds of concerns should be able to be handled through their regular process,” McKell remarked. “For them to ignore that and not deal with us in their normal fashion has left everyone here feeling very frustrated.”
A Series of Unanswered Requests
From January to March 2026, the group made four formal requests to the RM of Sherwood, seeking binding commitments on crucial issues including noise control, lighting, drainage, storm-water management, groundwater protection, and roadway maintenance. The first request, submitted on January 29, was the only one to appear on the public record, while subsequent submissions remained unacknowledged.
After receiving no responses, the concerned residents escalated their grievances by filing a formal complaint with the Ombudsman on February 25. The RM’s council meeting on March 16 revealed that their Code of Ethics and the Ombudsman complaint were under discussion. Just two days later, four out of seven council members, including the Reeve and Deputy-Reeve, unexpectedly resigned without explanation.
New Leadership and Promises of Progress
In response to the sudden departures, Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Government Relations appointed former SARM president Ray Orb as Reeve, along with Mitch Huber, Donna Strudwick, and Judy Harwood to fill the vacant council roles. This change in leadership coincided with a slight shift in the dialogue between the residents and the council.
On March 25, the landowners reiterated their demands in a letter to the RM, requesting a formal resolution that would ensure specific binding conditions were included in the development agreement. A week later, an executive summary of the development agreement was posted online, seemingly addressing some of the residents’ concerns regarding noise and roadway upgrades.
However, McKell and his neighbours insist that assurances are insufficient without enforceable obligations attached. “A good faith process is not the same as a binding obligation,” they wrote. “We cannot accept one in place of the other.” Their call for measurable commitments is a plea for accountability that reflects their deep-rooted concerns.
A Meeting of Hope
On April 14, the residents met with the newly appointed council to discuss their ongoing concerns about the development. Many left the meeting with renewed optimism, noting that the council appeared genuinely interested in addressing their issues. Dan Rink, President of Bell AI Fabric, also presented at the meeting, contributing to a constructive dialogue.
McKell expressed cautious optimism afterwards, stating, “I think moving forward, we’ll be able to work with this… I think they heard our issues and concerns, so that was positive.” However, no commitments were made during the meeting, and the fate of their binding conditions remains uncertain as the development agreement is scheduled for review on April 20.
Why it Matters
The situation unfolding in Saskatchewan illustrates the delicate balance between technological advancement and community rights. As the world increasingly embraces cutting-edge developments like AI, the voices of local residents must not be overlooked. Their desire for transparency and accountability reflects a broader need for responsible governance that prioritises the well-being of communities while fostering innovation. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how future developments are managed, addressing both economic growth and the preservation of community integrity.
