I’ve watched this issue simmer in our city for years now, and it’s finally boiling over.
Mayor Andrew Knack is stepping up to push the provincial government on something that affects nearly every Edmonton household. He wants Alberta to ban restrictive covenants that let grocery chains block competitors from empty store locations. This isn’t new territory for Knack, who says he’s tackled this problem three times during his council tenure.
On Tuesday, Edmonton city council voted overwhelmingly in favor of directing the mayor to advocate for change. The vote was 12-1, with only Ward tastawiyiniwak Councillor Karen Principe voting against. The motion calls on the province to enable grocery store competition by removing restrictive covenants through changes to the Land Titles Act.
These covenants are the root of what many call grocery deserts across Edmonton. When a grocery company sells a property, they often include a clause preventing any other grocery store from opening there. The building sits empty even though neighborhoods desperately need access to fresh food.
I’ve driven past these vacant storefronts countless times, seeing the potential wasted while communities go without.
Ward papastew Councillor Michael Janz brought the motion forward after speaking with all three major grocery companies. What he learned was encouraging but frustrating. The big players—Loblaws, Sobeys, and Metro—told him they’d end restrictive covenants if everyone else did too.
“They were interested in making changes here, but they want to do so knowing that everybody else will as well,” Janz explained to council. He added that industry representatives acknowledged the practice looks anti-competitive. No one wants to be the first to change, fearing they’ll lose advantage.
The solution Janz proposes mirrors Manitoba’s approach. The Manitoba NDP passed the Property Controls for Grocery Stores and Supermarkets Act, which changed their Land Titles Act. It forbids new restrictive covenants and voids existing ones. Grocery chains got six months to apply for exceptions, and 46 did.
Edmonton’s situation isn’t unique, but our repeated attempts to fix it have gone nowhere.
This fight has deep roots in our city. Back in 2007, then-mayor Stephen Mandel wrote the Alberta government requesting rules against restrictive covenants. He never got a response. Six years later in 2013, Don Iveson, who was then a councillor, moved to contact the Competition Bureau. The answer came back clear: the city’s hands are tied. Only the provincial legislature can make this change.
More recently, when Sobeys bought Safeway in 2019, they cancelled plans for a Griesbach store. Knack said the city sent Sobeys a letter about it, but they never heard back. It’s a pattern that leaves neighborhoods without options and residents without convenient access to groceries.
Ward Nakota Isga Councillor Reed Clarke brought a personal perspective to Tuesday’s debate. “As someone who has local grocery stores in my blood, I have to support this,” he said. His family connection to the grocery business gives him insight into how these practices hurt communities.
Ward pihêsiwin Councillor Mike Elliott pointed out the real-world impact. “There are a number of dead zones in the city that don’t have access to groceries,” he noted. These aren’t just inconveniences. Families without nearby grocery stores face higher costs, less fresh food, and more reliance on convenience stores.
The financial stakes are enormous. A 2023 Competition Bureau report revealed that Loblaws, Sobeys, and Metro earned more than $3.6 billion in profits in 2022. The same report concluded that bringing more competitors into the industry could reduce grocery prices for consumers.
That finding matters deeply right now as Edmonton families struggle with food costs. I hear it constantly from neighbors and sources. Grocery bills have become a major household stressor. More competition could ease that burden.
Still, not everyone believes this advocacy will succeed. Ward Dene Councillor Aaron Paquette supported the motion but expressed skepticism about convincing the United Conservative Party government to act. “I don’t expect it to change,” he admitted during the council meeting.
Paquette acknowledged room for improvement exists, which is why he thinks advocating remains important. “Having studied this for many years, I don’t expect any major changes — but I could be wrong,” he added. His words captured a feeling many Edmontonians share about this long-standing issue.
The mayor doesn’t have illusions about the challenge ahead. “Really for this topic, there’s one solution — the province can remove it or not remove it,” Knack stated plainly. He knows the city can ask, advocate, and push, but the decision ultimately rests with the provincial government.
What makes this moment different is the alignment of several factors. Grocery companies have indicated willingness to change if regulation forces everyone to play by the same rules. Manitoba has already shown a legislative path forward that works. And public awareness about grocery affordability has never been higher.
I’ve covered enough Edmonton city politics to know that persistence sometimes pays off. This council has shown it won’t give up on issues that matter to residents’ daily lives. Grocery access falls squarely in that category.
The Manitoba model provides a clear blueprint. Their law doesn’t completely eliminate all covenants, but it creates a framework where exceptions must be justified. Most importantly, it ends the practice of indefinitely blocking competition from empty buildings that communities need.
For Edmonton neighborhoods currently sitting in grocery deserts, that change could mean everything. It could mean a store opening in a vacant building that’s sat empty for years. It could mean lower prices from increased competition. It could mean families spending less time driving across the city for groceries.
Whether the provincial government will listen remains uncertain. The UCP hasn’t indicated any interest in following Manitoba’s lead. But Edmonton council has now given Mayor Knack a clear mandate to make the case. The question is whether seventeen years of asking will finally produce action.
