SHELTERS: Public Consultations Demanded By Law: BENN

Haste makes waste. And city hall generates a lot of waste.

The proposed by law to allow shelters anywhere in the city is in response to an “actual emergency”. Not my words. That is what Somerset Councillor Ariel Troster described the problem as. A clarification required presumably so that we can sort it out from the multitude of not-actual-emergencies declared by council.

There are so many problems with this motion that will go before council next week. It is difficult to list them all. It is difficult to articulate them without generating another round of fear-mongering and name-calling.

Let’s start with the official reasons for pushing this by-law through before the omnibus bylaw amendments flush through council in nine months. Public consultations are time consuming. Some of the remarks made during the public consultations are offensive. Staff are overwhelmed by the workload or challenged to meet deadlines.

Yes, public consultations are time-consuming. But they are also required by provincial law. Can the city really pass a motion that exempts it from a law? Even if it could, should it?

Yes, some of the remarks made by people are offensive. Sometimes out of prejudice. Sometimes out of frustration. Frustration created by the arbitrary control of the moderator of video conferences. Frustration created by seeing staff nod their heads but not make notes. Frustration created by reading, months later, the What We Heard report that does not fully reflect what was said. In other words, frustration with a process that has staff and council just going through the motions rather than listening. Of staff and council entering the room with closed minds.

Are staff overwhelmed by the work load? Probably. Is it because they or council have set deadlines without sufficient thought as to how much work is actually required? Probably.

Next up, let’s examine the definition of what constitutes a shelter. Oops. Staff hasn’t provided one, per Barrhaven East Councillor Wilson Lo. If councillors don’t know what constitutes a shelter, how are they capable of making an informed decision? Seriously!

Shelters take many forms. Shelters can accommodate a wide variety of residents. Shelters can accommodate, or not, a set of requisite support services. The point being that the details matter. Here are two examples, chosen because they are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

There might already be a shelter in your neighbourhood. One in a house down your street that accommodates people who have developmental problems. There are on-site supervisors 24/7. The number of residents is limited by the size of the house. So benign that many of the people in the neighbourhood are not even aware that the house is a shelter.

At the other end of the spectrum, there are the large dormitory-style structures such as those in the ByWard Market. They provide people with a warm, dry place to sleep, but require the residents to leave for the day. The on-site supervision might be effective during the hours that the residents are on site but it is non-existent the moment that the residents walk away in the morning.

Compatibility with specific location is also an issue. Compatibility being a function of the nature of the shelter.

The province recently passed legislation limiting the location of safe or supervised injection sites, notably to set the minimum distance from elementary schools. Why? Because there were safety issues. Real safety issues. Problems like improperly disposed of needles, crack pipes and the like. Not by the shelter staff. By the people who congregated adjacent to the site. This led to the very real problem of elementary school aged children picking the improperly disposed of detritus to see what it is. Those kinds of problems.

How did this situation arise? One of two possible reasons come to mind.

Staff did not think of the dangers associated with safe injection sites when it approved the locations. That council did not pick up on this is indicative of a failure by council to provide adequate oversight. Or staff and council thought of it, but didn’t care enough about the safety of elementary school aged children. Neither is a particularly glowing endorsement of staff or council.

A prudent council, one that took its statutory role of oversight seriously, would instruct staff to proceed with a process that provides them with sufficient information to make informed decisions. A process that includes definitions for the full range of types of shelters. That addresses compatibility of each type of shelter with existing land uses, in particular land uses involving vulnerable people. That involves objective analyses of possible outcomes, both positive and negative.

Finally, a prudent council would recognize that Just because Troster has declared this to be an “actual emergency” does not mean that it is. A prudent council would recognize that by proceeding in haste it risks, once again, being  embarrassed when Premier Doug Ford steps in to make another adult decision.

For You:

Bring Good Baseball To Ottawa, Your Worship

Big Media Dodge Huge Shelter Story

City Badly Misses Housing Targets: STANKOVIC

OC Transpo’s ‘Abundance Of Caution’

Trade Mayors, Not Beavertails

Bookmark The Bulldog, click here