Showing posts with label homelessness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label homelessness. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 31, 2023

Encampment Update

Earlier this year I wrote about a legal case pertaining to homeless encampments.

Justice M.J. Valente of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice had ruled that the Region of Waterloo couldn’t evict people living in tents from a vacant lot the Region owns. https://whenthemayorsmiles.blogspot.com/2023/03/encampment-precedent.html

At the time I understood that the ruling was precedent setting and would impact other municipalities.   It seems I was overly optimistic.

According to the Advocacy Centre for Tenants of Ontario (ACTO) municipalities are responding to the needs of their residents in different ways. 

Some are using enforcement and displacement as a last resort.

And some are taking a different approach. Take Cambridge, for example.

They are “focusing on clearing and forcibly removing residents, resulting in people being displaced with nowhere else to go,” claims ACTO, an Ontario specialty legal clinic.

"Some of these people were evicted three times in a matter of two months,” Ashley Schuitema, staff lawyer at Waterloo Region Community Legal Services (WRCLS) told Cambridge Today’s Joe McGinty.  https://www.cambridgetoday.ca/local-news/legal-action-in-the-cards-after-cambridge-encampment-evictions-7652134

Up North, Sault Ste Marie looked at other City’s bylaws and figured they could amend theirs.  Just in time for winter they decided to protect their parks. The only Council opposition came from Ward 3’s Angela Caputo according to CBC News. 

"I think it's imperative that we shift our attention to creating and advocating for a system to end homelessness rather than enacting laws to try and police our way out of it," said Ms. Caputo. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/social-services-legal-challenge-poverty-issues-1.6952421

Some cities like Kingston are in court where the arguments revolve around how much housing is available.  There is always lots of debate on such numbers. 

Let’s get real here. It is obvious to anyone that rental rates and availability are beyond the means of increasing numbers of people in the province.

Municipalities are spending taxpayers’ dollars on fighting our fellow citizens in courts.  The Hamilton Spectator reported today that lawyers representing Hamilton tried to recover court costs from those without housing who are in an ongoing human rights battle with the city.  Instead, Justice James Ramsay ruled the City should pay costs of $5,000.  

The last word today goes to ACTO:

“The Charter dictates that unless and until encampment residents are provided with truly accessible accommodation, evictions should not occur. Moreover, encampment residents deserve to be consulted and involved when municipalities are attempting to find solutions for them.”

Friday, March 31, 2023

Encampment Precedent

Here is a longer version of an article I wrote that was published in the Hamilton Spectator on March 25th.  You may find it at https://www.thespec.com/opinion/contributors/2023/03/25/kw-encampment-precedent-could-apply-in-hamilton.html

------------------------------------------
Last year in Hamilton a judge ruled that an encampment could be cleared from a city park as there were enough shelter spaces in the system to accommodate those living in the encampment.

It was a different judicial result in Kitchener when a ruling came down in January.
Justice M.J. Valente of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled that the Region of Waterloo can’t evict people living in tents from a vacant lot the Region owns. It is believed that the ruling is precedent setting.  

The issue revolved around a vacant lot at 100 Victoria Street in Kitchener’s downtown.

The Region wants to use the space for a lay-down area for the construction of a transit  hub. 
Back in December 2021, Waterloo had evicted tenants from an encampment on Stirling Street East using steps they believed “were consistent with the requirements of a by-law.”

They did concede that “the manner in which these actions were carried out did not reflect the dignity of those living at the encampment.”  No kidding!  Staff enlisted the help of a road maintenance crew with heavy equipment to clear the Stirling Encampment. 

As a result, the Region felt the need to clarify how it might enforce its legal rights and so brought an application to seek the direction of the Court.

It was the Region’s opinion that the conditions at the encampment posed a risk to the health and safety of encampment residents as well as to that of others. As a result, the Region determined that the encampment had to be disbanded. 
What is it like in that encampment?  

Every individual will have their own story but one that Justice Valente heard from 32-year-old Kathryn Bulgin, homeless for approximately 6 years, is instructive.   Ms. Bulgin is a victim of both physical and sexual assault and currently suffers from drug addiction.   Before living at the Victoria street encampment, she slept in hotel rooms, shelters, behind dumpsters and couch surfed. 

For her and many others shelter bed accommodation can be “very stressful” because there (is) no certainty if a bed (will) be available.  Ms. Bulgin (does) not have a watch or phone.”  The result is that she can’t always return at a designated time to claim a bed. If evicted from the encampment Ms. Bulgin would simply move to another campsite.

This is an important issue that Justice Valente explores in considerable detail. Shelters don’t work for many people.

Dr. Andrea Sereda is a physician practicing at the London Intercommunity Health Centre in London, Ontario. In testimony, she cited five reasons why encampments have advantages over shelter use.  Encampments decrease isolation and risk of fatality and decrease forced transiency that increases the odds that the unhoused can maintain a connection to outreach services. They give people a sense of community. minimize sleep deprivation and provide physical and mental rest.

Interestingly staff challenged Dr. Sereda’s value as an expert because she had not talked to any residents of the encampment.  Staff’s contact with residents was far from comprehensive.  

As local governments are inclined to do, the Region developed policies and procedures that would apply to the estimated 1,100 individuals considered homeless in Waterloo..  Justice Valente had some praise for their work; he had some criticisms as well. For example, it seems staff presented data in a way that would justify their opinion.  Small actual increases in incidents calculated as part of a risk assessment at the encampment site looked a lot more concerning when presented as percentage increases.  

Advocates have long argued that housing is a basic human right.  In fact, the government of Canada supports the progressive realization of the right to adequate housing as part of their National Housing Strategy.

Section 7 of the Charter states that  “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”

Justice Valente took a look at the fairly extensive litigation that has occurred regarding the right to shelter as it relates to Section 7 of the Charter.  His conclusion can be summarized in a few words.  

The individuals encamped at 100 Victoria St. have a right to be there under Section 7. 

“Because the By-Law prohibits the erection of shelter protection that is necessary to protect homeless individuals from risk of serious harm, and there is currently inadequate shelter beds in the Region, I conclude that it violates the Charter protected right to life,” writes Valente.

Shelter Beds

Municipalities have made this argument for years.  It goes like this: “There are vacancies in the shelter system.  So people are able to stay in shelters.”  

But the actual number of shelter beds available or not available is contentious. 
Justice Valente picks this up recognizing “that it is not just the number of available indoor sheltering spaces that frames the right but also whether those spaces are truly accessible to those sheltering in parks.”

The Region made two other arguments that were rejected.

First, they contended that the Charter doesn’t apply because the encampment residents were looking to protect property rights, which are not Charter protected.  Not so, said Justice Valente.  They weren’t making such a claim.  Encampment residents just preferred to be close to services they regularly use.

Another Regional argument was that previous Ontario court decisions supported evictions.  But those decisions dealt with parks, where the broader public had an interest in using, not a vacant lot such as the site in question.

If evicted from the encampment where will residents go, Valente wondered. Likely to live rough or set up camp somewhere else.  What choice do they have?  Creating shelter to protect oneself is, a “matter critical to any individual’s dignity and independence.” By preventing this, the Region interferes with the “choice to protect itself from the elements and is a deprivation of liberty within the scope of section 7.”

Waterloo Region has decided not to appeal the ruling. 

Sharon Crowe, a lawyer involved in the Hamilton case,, is optimistic that the decision will be a catalyst for change.
  
“Not only are they not appealing, they are investing $163 million into housing and homelessness.”

The City of Hamilton is now back at the table talking with advocates. Hopefully, others will follow suit. 

Thursday, December 15, 2022

Court Ruling on Homelessness Item in Regina Budget


A Regina City Councillor took his own municipality to court this week. 

On Tuesday December 13th Leblanc was before Justice John Morrall asking him to force the city administration to include $24.9 million for homelessness in the city budget.  A review of that budget began yesterday (December 14th).
 
LeBlanc was pushing for a mandamus order.  Such an order from a court obligates a government official to properly fulfill their official duties.

“Basically, three points are all agreed upon,” LeBlanc told reporters outside the courthouse afterwards as reported by sasktoday.ca. on Tuesday.

One is the city manager’s duties are outlined in the bylaws. I say that makes it public.

Second is we gave clear direction in June to put this money in the budget.

Third is she didn’t want to do that, so decided not to. I think that’s enough for mandamus, that’s the application we’re seeking.”
https://www.sasktoday.ca/provincial-news/arguments-heard-in-court-fight-against-city-manager-6240813

City manager Niki Anderson, was represented by Milad Alishahi. 

Alishahi’s argument was that the case for mandamus had not been made.  This isn’t a legal issue.  It is a political issue and other options were available to Council members than going to court. https://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/city-hall/judge-wont-decide-on-application-to-include-homelessness-plan-in-city-budget-until-wednesday

Judge Morrall agreed with lawyer Alishahi. 
 
“I find that the court should be quite leery of being involved in the political machinations and debates between members of municipal, provincial or federal decision-making bodies,” wrote Morrall.
 
More details can be found at https://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/city-hall/judge-dismisses-application-to-add-funding-for-ending-homelessness-to-city-budget
 
"This application is about the principle, not the politics," said LeBlanc. "If unelected officials can choose to not implement the decision of elected bodies then the system simply falls apart," LeBlanc told the CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/regina-ending-homelessness-court-1.6683016
 
From talking with Councillor LeBlanc, I anticipate that he will attempt to get money back into the budget to address the homelessness crisis but in a smaller amount.

Thursday, December 08, 2022

Councillors Take City to Court


Earlier this week Canadian Dimension published a story I wrote on city politics in Regina. It is not quite a man-bites-dog story but neither is it something that happens every day.   

Daniel LeBlanc, a Regina City Councillor is taking his own municipality to court.  Here is that story. https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/regina-has-a-plan-to-end-homelessness-so-whats-stopping-it
Councillor Daniel Leblanc

There have been some developments since that article was published.   On Tuesday most of the Regina Council signed on to a notice of motion that the Councillors who initiated the lawsuit have violated the Regina code of Ethics by-law.MN22.7 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/regina-city-council-mayor-manager-lawsuit-homelessness-1.6675651


To consider such a motion at yesterday’s (December 7th) Council meeting required unanimous support of Council.  That was received yesterday as the two Councillors who were involved in the suit did not vote because of what, I believe, would be a conflict of interest in Saskatchewan municipalities. https://regina.ctvnews.ca/regina-city-council-passes-motion-of-confidence-in-city-manager-niki-anderson-1.6185099 

In part the motion read: 

 “affirm and convey [council’s] continued confidence in City Manager Niki Anderson” and “express its disappointment over the negative impact on City Council’s operational integrity and oversight that the initiated court action has created.” 

Court proceedings are scheduled for next Tuesday ahead of Regina’s December 14th budget meeting.



Friday, June 04, 2021

A Preventable Crisis


I recall standing with a one-term Ontario New Democratic MPP on Pine Street in Burlington.  It is a beautiful spring day in 1995.  A newly built non-profit housing project, Wellington Terrace, was celebrating its grand opening.  Balloons, refreshments and there is a ribbon is ready to be cut. 

“You know if we aren’t reelected there will be no more places like this built,” he told me.

No more built, I thought.  While I was sympathetic to his perspective, the view seemed more self-serving hyperbole than realistic forecast.

But the MPP was right. You know the story. 

Following World War II the federal government jumped into the housing field in a big way. Polices were slanted towards home ownership. While social housing and creation of rental housing weren’t high priorities, there were some initiatives.

Major cuts to government funding for social housing began in 1984. The Brian Mulroney government slashed national affordable housing spending by almost $2 billion. In 1993, Mulroney’s successor, Kim Campbell, cancelled all new funding for affordable housing.

Then things worsened with Paul Martin’s 1995 budget. 

On February 27 that year, Martin put on his budget boots and kicked responsibility for social housing down to the provinces.  He cancelled all spending on new social housing projects. The Finance Minister hung his hat on many of the popular clichés of the day calling for “hard choices” and “real change,” “smaller and smarter government,” bucking the status quo and “simple common sense.” 

The rhetoric mattered not at all to those who were struggling to find housing that was safe and affordable. What really mattered, as we have discovered, was that Canada now had no housing strategy; the only developed country without such a plan. 

Back to that spring day in 1995:  As I enjoyed the opening of one of the last non-profit housing communities built in Ontario, we were just months away from more cuts from the new Mike Harris government.  Their idea of common sense (in fact, they called it a revolution) included the cancellation of 17,000 units of co-op and non-profit housing that had been approved but not completed.

New Book

Recently I flashed back to that day in 1995 while reading Denise Davy’s book Her Name was Margaret - Life and Death on the Streets.

Margaret Jacobson died after falling and hitting her head in a Mr. Sub, where she'd gone to keep warm.  She was 51. 

The author gained access to nearly 900 pages of Margaret Jacobson’s medical records going back to the sixties.  Davy is able to show the impacts of deinstitutionalization quite well by doing this. I knew a few specifics about the impacts of this process/policy of discharging people into the community but had never seen it all laid out like this as she has done by using the medical records of one individual.


Her Name was Margaret is a difficult read because it is a reminder of how we lack political will to solve a solvable problem. As the author writes: “If society is judged by the way it treats its most vulnerable, then the way Margaret was treated shows how we have failed.”

Margaret was a child with great potential who developed mental health issues as a teen.  She had the misfortune of entering into the Ontario mental health system when the new idea of deinstitutionalization was the order of the day. Eventually, 80% of psychiatric hospital beds in Ontario were closed.  The thinking was that people with mental health issues could be better served in the community. However, without appropriate supports available in the community the idea was doomed to failure. 

 Margaret and many others were discharged to rundown unregulated boarding houses (later called second level lodging homes and more recently known as residential care facilities).  She bounced around in this world for 23 years.  Her health did not improve.

Through this, Margaret’s parents were of no help. In a letter, her father put her problems down to her “unwillingness to be delivered from the bondage of Satan….”

Denise Day winds up her book with reasons to hope that things can improve.  She cites various successful Housing First programs running in Canada and around the world.

‘Housing First’ is a recovery-oriented approach to ending homelessness that centers on quickly moving people experiencing homelessness into independent and permanent housing and then providing additional supports and services as needed.   That is how the Homeless Hub, part of a research institute devoted to homelessness in Canada, defines Housing First.

While working with people experiencing homelessness some thirty years ago, we didn’t have this rather wordy rationale for our work. I seem to recall something more like “if people just have stable. safe and affordable housing they will better able to cope with life’s challenges.”    It just makes sense.

Denise Davy asks if Margaret would have responded to those kinds of Housing First programs if they had been available to her. Her answer is yes.

This brings me back to that opening of Wellington Terrace in Burlington more than 25 years ago – the same year that Margaret Jacobson died on the streets of Hamilton.  

Wellington Terrace functions today offering 126 units of housing for older adults. Forty of those units offer some level of support.

That is the kind of support that could have helped Margaret and others.  It was needed then and is needed now but its availability has been greatly reduced by governments’ badly thought out policy and funding decisions.

As Davy says, “The mess that exists today was entirely man-made and preventable.” 

Her Name Was Margaret: Life and Death on the Streets by Denise Davy, Wolsak & Wynn, 2021, 300 pages.


Monday, July 06, 2015

Street Soccer Championships in Hamilton This Month

This story orignally appeared in North End Breezes, the community newsletter of Hamilton's North End. http://www.northendbreezes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/July-Summer-2015-NEB-publisher-smaller-file.pdf-final.pdf)

A unique event is coming to Hamilton this month.
Street Soccer Canada will be running the National Homeless Championship. The games will be played in Gore Park on Saturday July 18th and Sunday the 19th.  Teams from Comox, Kelowna, Calgary, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Hamilton and other cities are expected.
Players from this competition will be selected for the Homeless World Cup. 

That event will be held in Amsterdam this September.

In 2003, Mel Young, a Scotsman, and Harald Schmied, an Austrian, were attending a conference dealing with the future of street newspapers.  They came up with the idea of a Homeless World Cup. 

It is a different game than the traditional soccer (football) you’ll see at the Pan Am Games.

It is played four players a side on 16 metre x 22 metre court.  The game lasts 14 minutes (two seven minute halves.) A three-on-two rule, intended to promote scoring, has evolved so that only two players are allowed in their own defensive end.

To be eligible, players must have been homeless in the past year (in accordance with the national definition of homelessness,) make their living as street paper vendor, be Asylum seekers or in drug or alcohol rehabilitation (and also have been homeless.)

Changing Attitudes

The Homeless World Cup is more than a competition. It is designed to challenge societal attitudes towards homeless people.

In that context it is worth reflecting on the situation in Hamilton.

Here, over 3,100 individuals experienced homelessness – staying at some point in the past year in one of the City’s emergency shelters.

Hamilton is part of a national movement of communities led by the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness. The movement is mobilizing people to house 20,000 of Canada’s most vulnerable people by July 1, 2018.  As part of that program, individual and families were interviewed this April. Four hundred and fifty four (454) individuals were canvassed by volunteers in Hamilton’s downtown streets, shelters and agencies.

Here are just a few facts from the survey that may surprise you.

• Two thirds of those interviewed had experienced homelessness for six months or longer.

• Seven percent of those surveyed had served in the Canadian Armed Forces.

• 266 of the individuals surveyed had visited hospital emergency rooms a total of 994 times in the previous 6 months.

Much work has to be done to solve our housing crisis.  Unlike other nations, Canada doesn’t have a national housing strategy.  Perhaps, we will hear about housing and homelessness during this fall’s federal election campaign.