Supportive Social Housing heats up again

It’s been a busy few weeks what with running in the upcoming election, dealing with work and all of my other commitments. Sadly it looks like the Supportive Social Housing will be one of the main issues.

With the announcement of the North End location things have really been heating up. A particularly nasty little group calling themselves the Concerned Citizens of Nanaimo has a website up, What’s Wrong with this Picture where a lot of misinformation and fear is being spread. They have a lot of money behind them and have sent out a card, with some of this misinformation, which people can send to their MLA and City Council. The group has also placed a number of full page adds, seen at the bottom of their home page, in the papers in order to galvanize and misinform the community.

As a response to this the Working Group on Homelessness decided to do an ad of their own thanking council for their steadfast support of housing the Homeless. On Monday the 17th I also appeared at council, council video Nov 17 2011, to reiterate that support personally. Go to the first delegation after Cathy Davis, 917pm, for delegations from the North End as well as my own.
Below are copies of the ad we put out, spent many hours pulling it all together with the help of Lynn Burrows and we still have more than 100 names that came in that we were unable to put in the ad, as well as my delegation. Have to head out soon to do some of my regular pickups for the 7-10 Club but wwill hopefully be able to spend the afternoon wwith more updates to the blog, things are pilling up. You can also find out more about what I have been doing by checking my facebook page for the election Elect Gordon Fuller to Nanaimo Council
















Delegation to Council:

October 17, 2011

Gordon Fuller
604 Nicol St.
Nanaimo, BC

I want to keep this simple and to the point so as not to take up any more of your time than needed.

I personally want to thank the Mayor and all on Council who have steadfastly supported Nanaimo’s Homelessness & Harm Reduction Strategy.

The housing first concept, used throughout North America, has proven itself in alleviating homelessness and by attaching supports to meet the need of the individual has allowed many to move forward in their fight against addiction.

Some would like to see Nanaimo revisit its strategy a strategy based on the success of the Housing First concept. I and many others in the community spent years to develop this plan and to gain support of the province towards its funding. Should we start over? No, we need to keep moving forward with a proven strategy.

As an Advocate for Social Change on Homelessness and poverty issues in Nanaimo, for well over a decade, I have attended memorial services for far too many in the community who, I have no doubt whatsoever, would still be here had the strategy been implemented sooner. It is on their behalf, and the many this will save, that I so adamantly believe Nanaimo’s Homelessness & Harm Reduction Strategy must continue to move forward.

Again I wish to thank you and the many others in the community for your continued support of this valuable initiative.

More on North End Housing

Below a few more stories on the Supportive Housing Debate. Not going to say much as if other posts re this subject are checked you will get my views. You can also see them in the comments section of the stories as well.

Sept 24
Housing debate highlights city's north south divide
Sept 23
Nanaimo's homeless getting much needed help when Wesley St. facility opens
Darrell Bellaart: Anti housing debate stale

Supportive Social Housing enters Nanaimo's North End

Post started as draft on 14th posted on 17th

The issue of Supportive Social Housing has reared its ugly head once again with the recent announcement of the location for housing in the North End of Nanaimo. I'm not going to go into a long diatribe about why I support this type of housing, my views can be seen on previous posts on the subject. Below are news stories to date, September 17th as well as a letter to the editor by me and a couple against the concept of Supportive Social Housing.

At the end of this post are comments from a housing provider in Seattle. They have 9 housing projects that house 800 with no conditions about sobriety and almost 100% accept services within 3 months. Very enlightening Comment.

When folk comment about abstinence based and a will to get clean they neglect to mention that Nanaimo has a number of small abstinence based houses, with more in the works, for people that have gone through treatment. What we need is a place to house people whom may at some point wish to access Detox and Treatment services. The Social Suppotive Housing ( Low Barrier) being built in Nanaimo will address this.

Bulletin
Sept 17 Invitation goes out to meet social housing clients
Sept 13 Uplands Drive identified for social housing
Sept 15 Editorial: Social housing needs open minds
Sept 16 Letter by me Social Housing needed city wide

Daily News
Sept. 15
Nanaimo housing strategy leaves city residents divided
Philip Wolf: Responsibility must be shared
Letter as published City must keep moving forward with housing
Sept 14
Government announces location of low barrier housing project
Editorial: North Nanaimo needs low-barrier project
Sept 13
Government refuses to say when it will announce location for new Nanimo low-barrier housing project

Letters against
Sept 17
Low-barrier housing does not belong in north end
Housing strategy about economics not people

This comment from a provider of Supportive Social Housing in Seattle seems to address what the above letters speak about;

"I would say that chronically homeless people are often mis-perceived as being dangerous when in actuality people who are living with major mental illnesses are no more assaultive than all the rest of us. Indeed, they are the victims of predatory crime, not the perpetrators. Your second question goes to the heart of the housing first concept, that being its services are not coerced. No one is forced to accept them. In our 9 housing projects with over 800 residents nearly 100% of the residents voluntarily accept services within 3 months of moving in. The reason is simple. Service providers in our housing projects are useful resources for residents helping them secure entitlement benefits, food, clothing and other life necessities as well as offering clinical treatment services."

Just plain nasty

I had to put the following letter in here simply because of its sheer nastiness. I will however give him credit for using his real name, at least I am assuming so.

Using tax money to give homeless comfort wrong

Putting aside Mashinter's reference to the homeless as vermin I will however touch very briefly on his comments about costs of housing the homeless. This link, http://www.streetohome.org/ , will take you to a page where you can access a couple of studies that show there is actually a savings to the taxpayer by housing the homeless.

"It costs $55,000 a year to leave a homeless person on the streetcompared to only $37,000 a year to provide housing with support services- Calgary study and Carmha study."

Cold Wet Weather Shelter

First Unitarian Fellowship asked by council to keep shelter doors open

It is for this reason that I am vocal on homeless and social issues in the community. Getting council, with the help of Wallace Malay, to approve and put forward the monies needed to see this happen has been a highlight of this year and if the only highlight will have been well worth the effort.

I have known Orville Drake, profiled in the above story, for many years and while he does drink a bit, too much some would say, he has always been a respectful and courteous individual and someone I am proud to call friend. He and his perenial companion Carol are exactly the type of people who will benefit from the supportive housing that will be built in the community.

Stories such as this in the Daily News put a human face on those that the community fear will eat their kids and steal their pets, or vica versa, and if the community were to get to know them they would see first hand why Supportive Social Housing is needed and that many of their fears are unfounded.

More on Low barrier suportive housing

This incorporates and expands on some of the stuff in my last post. I have also included every story and letter from the Daily News to date.

WARNING: The following is lengthy but in my opinion necessarily so.

Homelessness and Housing the Homeless has proven to be a contentious issue throughout North America. Strategies in the past have included creating shelters and housing and concentrating the facilities and other services to provide for large numbers in one location. Just about every recent study done would say that doing so leads to urban blight and the ghettoization of these areas.

Housing first is not a new idea; it has been practiced in cities like New York and Toronto for over a decade, with great success, and has gradually become the ideal being practiced in other cities. Essentially the premise is to get the homeless, many with concurrent disorders(mental health & addiction), into housing ASAP and then through assessment attaching supports to the individual or family. Housing can take the form of New Build and existing Social Housing or be accomplished through rent subsidies for market based rental accommodation. Locations are spread throughout the city.

Nanaimo’s strategy, developed over the last few years, proposes both of the above. Despite recent news stories and letters to the editor, close to 30 in the Daily News, about the proposed location in the Hospital area of two new build projects there seems to be one area where all agree, that being concentration and the need to place facilities and services in all areas of Nanaimo. Easy to say but difficult when the reality of a service becomes imminent in a neighbourhood.

Despite what many think of the current provincial government and despite the fact that this government is responsible for the dramatic increase, some say 2 or 3 hundred percent, in homelessness they have in the last couple of years been committing funding to cities that have a comprehensive homeless action plan. Nanaimo is one such city which has received a commitment to address homelessness through Housing First. Approximately 40 million has been promised to 160 units in 7 locations throughout Nanaimo as well as separate funding for an Assertive Community Treatment team, VIHA ACT TEAM meant specifically for those with concurrent mental health and addiction issues.

One flaw in the provinces plan is with regards to creating more Detox and Treatment/Recovery Facilities.. This aspect, while happening, falls far short in relation to the housing that is being created. Without far more detox and treatment beds becoming available as people are transitioning into housing opt for change those options will remain limited.

The issue of the Dufferin/Boundary (Townsite) location is proving to be contentious partly because of the misinformation and fear being spread by the Hospital Area Neighbourhood Association (HANA) as well as letters in support of their position that also spread misinformation. Comments that the complex “will inevitably lead to an increase in crime and urban blight” as well as spreading fear that the people being housed will contribute to youth drug use and prostitution are examples of the fear being spread in order to gather support.

A recent letter to the editor Low density for 'wet' housing better option is a prime example. It tries to compare Pruit-Igoe, without stating the fact that this was 33 - 11 story buildings, with the Dufferin/Boundary building. The writer is also misinformed in his comments with regards to Toronto’s Streets to Homes & Affordable Housing Program being all low density. Of the 20 complexes recently completed or in progress, Toronto Affordable Housing Development Status, only two are comprised of below 30 units with the majority above 100 and rising to 427 units.

Another fear being put forward, that property values will drop has no basis on fact. Properties beside Clearview Detox, Surfside Recovery House and Columbian Centre Societies housing have kept pace with those in the general vicinity with the assessed values rising and falling with the economy not because of any social facility. One property next to Surfside is actually valued far higher than much larger properties 6 blocks away. It is important to know that Surfside Recovery House and Columbian Centre Societies housing are located literally a stones throw from one another.

A simple question; How well do you know your neighbours?

Physical, Child, and Sexual abuse; Pedophiles, Alcoholics, Drug Addicts and Criminal activity, are all happening within homes in Nanaimo. Perhaps even in the home of your neighbour.

Low Barrier, Wet House, the reality is that these terms describe every house, condo and apartment in the city. One can do pretty much anything in their home provided they remain under the radar. Rather than using the terms Low Barrier or Wet Housing, which are also proving contentious and misleading, I much prefer the term Supportive Social Housing.

The people you see on the street are, for the most part, not there because they want to be but because of the very behaviours that happen behind closed doors. Many do drugs to cope with what has happened to them behind those closed doors and many to cope with emotional or mental illness.

The bottom line is that the proposed Supportive Social Housing and the people that are housed there will have the same right to maintain their addiction (aka Behaviour) as anyone else in the city. The biggest difference will be that when they do choose change they will have it far easier to do so because of the supports in place.

As someone who for years has advocated a ‘housing first approach’ and the decentralization of services, even before the concepts became the adopted approach in the city, I have seen firsthand how stable housing can enable people to address barriers that might seem overwhelming without the option of easily accessible supports. The overwhelming anxiety/fear that is being generated by misinformation put out by HANA and the lack of overall communication on the part of the City has generated a response in the Hospital Area that was easily predicted.

As Douglas Hardie so aptly puts it in a recent letter, Low barrier housing can work in any community , regarding the South End Community Associations opinion on the issue, "Anxiety is remarkably contagious. It's easy to get swept up in an emotional process that tends to simplify and polarize the issues in a way that makes the development of good, long-term solutions less likely."

HANA, despite spreading fear and misinformation, does however have a legitimate concern when it comes to concentration. As stated in the MOU ( Memorandum of understanding ) signed by BC Housing and the Municipality Nov. 12, 2008, the site proposed for Boundary and Dufferin (Townsite) was put forward as “suitable for tenants with mental health and addiction issues” the proposed site on Bowen Road, not relatively far from the other, “could accommodate commercial or service uses on the ground and residential units above” and “could serve more independent tenants.” Somewhere along the way the City began stating all will be low barrier and this type of designation is what is causing the recent problems in the Hospital Area.

In my opinion the City should sell the property on Bowen to a developer for mixed use with a 5 year covenant on the residential for people with an income of less than $20,000 and basing rent on 30% of income. After the 5 years the city could covenant a percentage of the units to stay that way with the rest either being sold or rented at market value. Once the property is sold to a developer the City could then look at purchasing properties in other areas of the city.

Part of the problem in touting these facilities as low barrier is people assume that the units will only be available to those with mental health and addiction issue. The reality is that most of the extreme cases will likely end up housed at Wesely Street it being the first under the MOU to come on line. The reality is as people move towards treatment and other housing options you would likely see a variety of people being housed in the buildings which could be a good thing.

The primary goal of Housing First is to get the person off the street and then look at each individual and tailor supports to their need at that particular time and place in their life. The first step, getting the person(s) off the street or out of the revolving door of substandard accommodation, is immediately creating a better/safer lifestyle.

I was recently asked if this type of housing is actually able to get the monkey off people’s backs, or just provide more comfortable surroundings. The easy answer would be yes if looking at the Balmoral Hotel, converted to low barrier housing by CMHA in 2009, and Columbian Centre Society located on Rosstown Rd.. Both provide safe and supportive housing, the latter for over 25 years, and both have not resulted in degradation of their neighbourhoods or a drop in property values, but have proven beneficial, in the case of the Balmoral, to a reduction of crime.

Myself, I prefer to think of it not as more comfortable, though it is that, but that they are safer surroundings. Getting the proverbial monkey off someone’s back will depend on the willingness of the person to access supports. In some cases the safer more comfortable surroundings may be enough to promote change even without the need to look at things like detox or treatment. For many however these later two options as well as counselling will be necessary and by having the person in safe/comfortable housing they are far easier to bring to bear than if the person is cycling on and off the street.

Many housing first strategies, Toronto for example, rely on both putting people into existing accommodation http://www.toronto.ca/housing/about-streets-homes.htm through out the city and then lining up supports as well as providing new build housing http://www.toronto.ca/housing/about-partnership.htm .

When looking at existing accommodation; rent subsidies can be used to top income assistance rental rates which are usually far less than for most decent housing. I know of nowhere where Income assistance rates alone will provide enough for a single person to find adequate safe accommodation and this is a problem. Any housing first strategy must look at all means of getting people into housing and then doing it. Rent subsidies are the quickest way to do so and should be the initial focus, and then moving on to new builds of various types of social and supported social housing.

The vast majority of people with substance abuse issues are and will be able to maintain housing. The related behaviour issues, crime and violence are, in my belief, exhibited by the minority. Some, being the most entrenched, may have to resort to petty crime to both maintain their habit as well as safe accommodation. That being said there are many that are extremely vulnerable to the predators of society, the bottom feeders such as slumlords and pimps who profit from the misery they help and want to maintain.

One thing that has come out of the recent uproar by the HANA residents is that the scale of the project on Boundary/Dufferin has been reduced to 35 – 40 units from the initial 70 units. Another property in the North End is being proposed but at this point the location has not been released. Personally I think that 25 or 26 units would be a more ideal number and ensure greater success, a fact that was supported in a conversation I had with the Vancouver Island Health Authorities Marg Fraser at the HANA meeting.

While the Nanaimo Homeless Strategy may not be perfect; it is this writer’s opinion that the city needs to move forward with its Housing First Strategy. It has been known for years that well-placed social investments are able to save government millions of dollars over the years as people became more self-reliant and are diverted away from high-cost public services like jails and emergency rooms. Housing BC homeless could save $211M There are many easily accessible studies showing the savings provided.

Meaningful consultation must take place, and adjustments made as need be. The provincial government must also initiate the creation of detox and treatment facilities to keep pace with the creation of housing. With the monies in place council must stay the course in the strategy moving forward as it will help to greatly alleviate Homelessness and will result in a healthier overall community. If Council chooses not to do so we will be back at square one with no funding in place and none forthcoming in the foreseeable future


TIMELINE

May 2008: A Response to Homelessness in Nanaimo: A housing first approach
July 2008: Nanaimo's Response to Homelessness Action Plan
November 12, 2008: Memorandum of understanding between BC Housing and City of Nanaimo signed. Proposed properties are listed in appendix A
November 12, 2008 Press Release 160 NEW HOUSING UNITS FOR NANAIMO HOMELESS
April 2009 $14.95M HOUSING INVESTMENT TO CREATE 96 JOBS IN NANAIMO
This was for housing on 10th st.(First Nations) and Wesely St.(low barrier expected to be completed in 2011. While I do recall stories in the local media with regard to the above I have been unable to find them.
June 2010: $36.5M SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INVESTMENT CREATES 227 JOBS
This was to allocate funds to the rest of the housing outlined in the MOU. Shortly after this announcement there was a community meeting scheduled in the Hospital Area. While the townsite (dufferin/ boundary) housing did make it onto the agenda most thought the meeting was to do with crime, parking and other issues in the area.
I’m not sure when the City started publishing this, expect it was at some point this year, and while primarily with regard to the Wesely St. Location this document offers a pretty good general overview as well. Supported Housing Overview . Another with regard to dufferin/Boundary has been published but I am unable to find the link to it.

September 14, 2010: First story published in the Nanaimo Daily news resulting in almost consistent letters and stories since.
October 21st: HANA Meeting
October 25th: Council Meeting October 25 Council Meeting 7:11pm Delegations pertaining to items not on the agenda.
Some councillors had a lot of good stuff to say, the delegation and Q&A was almost an hour long, but pay attention to Merv Unger’s comments 57:45 into the council meeting. The guy is a social worker wannabee with really no idea what is going on. He does however mention that there was notification 2 years ago. Interestingly SAFER, a committee Merv Chairs, was the lead group when consultants were brought in to help develop Nanaimo’s Homeless & Harm Reduction Action Plan.
Merv was also responsible for making the motion to abandon rezoning, that would have allowed the 7-10 Club, Loaves and Fishes Food Bank and other community groups, to use the Harewood Firehall. He did this the day after telling me that we were on the right page and should keep moving forward. I would not be surprised if, to serve his own interests, he were to make a motion towards putting Nanaimo’s Homelessness Strategy on hold. Lets hope he has more sense than to do so.

Nanaimo Daily News Stories & Letters (will add as they come in)


Residents may step up fight over housing
Walter Cordery, The Daily News
Published: Monday, December 13, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=8ffd138a-21d7-4cac-9483-8ce3abc02f43
Wet house should not go in Townsite area
Jim Swanson, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, December 09, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=a94010c7-072e-49de-9e3f-dbe2fe7cab2b
Housing needed to reduce harm caused by drug use
Expert tells symposium nation's harm-reduction strategy has deteriorated under Tories
Walter Cordery, The Daily News
Published: Tuesday, December 07, 2010http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=c50594bd-ebcd-4cb0-840e-16e8b7ccbaac
Be 'fearless' about harm reduction: Expert
Founder of Toronto task force addresses needle exchanges, supported housing
Dustin Walker, Daily News
Published: Tuesday, November 16, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=45e77bbf-defb-4575-9442-b7ba045a18f0
All areas must share in social responsibility
Jim Swanson, The Daily News
Published: Monday, November 15, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/upfront/story.html?id=c9889fc6-3649-40e0-83c7-a0585bf27e62
Low-barrier housing: Crime rates went down around successful project where residents get safety, stability
Derek Spalding, Daily News
Published: Friday, November 12, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=bdff2da0-7375-40ad-b94a-b951b1ac34d3
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=bdff2da0-7375-40ad-b94a-b951b1ac34d3&p=2
People in need of housing not monsters
The Daily News
Published: Friday, November 12, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/opinion/story.html?id=362d4bab-007f-4cbf-8848-d88c56c989f3
Plan to help homeless not perfect, but needed
Gord Fuller, The Daily News
Published: Monday, November 08, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/opinion/story.html?id=f6b936a5-1b15-4060-a9c7-905b74e8e09d
Low density for 'wet' housing better option
Gareth S. Gardiner, The Daily News
Published: Friday, November 05, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=c3bb58b6-a845-4726-9016-b1074d0b227d
Housing plan is good for the entire community
Bill Bard, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, November 04, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=9bae0c43-0c3c-4c76-9cc1-78841b280a9f
Everyone deserves safe, affordable housing
Josephine Staddon, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, November 04, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=b9e249f5-f3df-4e06-b34f-33756fa401dc
City should review cost of project with residents
Nicole Sendey, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, November 03, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/opinion/story.html?id=8a5d3d06-92f5-44d3-ada2-a7c8f8bd5019
Stop coddling drug users with wet houses
Shirley Lee, The Daily News
Published: Monday, November 01, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=ebef974f-dcd1-45a7-894d-72d49e62ef93
Poverty, addiction not limited by geography
Gordon W. Fuller, The Daily News
Published: Saturday, October 30, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/upfront/story.html?id=6111b761-066f-451a-8b97-e9fc333e0d8b
Fresh start can be a remarkable opportunity
Bev Cole, The Daily News
Published: Friday, October 29, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=23511538-9253-44b2-9b9e-71aa1f2e330c
Group housing can be detrimental for some
Madeline Bruce, The Daily News
Published: Friday, October 29, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=2d4879cd-dc3b-40a3-aa5b-4a71a9c626df
Residents grapple with city's housing plan
Council members prepared to stay the course with its plan to build 160 units of housing for homeless people
Derek Spalding, Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 27, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=7df01b35-bcc8-4ca2-b194-324bd52829e6
'Wet' housing is worrisome
Darrell Bellaart, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 27, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=9c1a9043-a491-43a7-a4f0-507b03d69f3c
Low-barrier housing is unfair to local residents
Carol Anderson, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 27, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=dbb93bdb-b788-40ce-8ce3-eebaa57c3f82
Those in hospital area have a right to be angry
Barb Wilson, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 27, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=16055f8d-363e-4622-97fd-84708738722a
Low-barrier housing can work in any community
Douglas Hardie, The Daily News
Published: Monday, October 25, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/upfront/story.html?id=b770c081-853e-4b92-8004-1d78f667edf1
Neighbours still fume about housing project
Meeting does little to dispel fears about plans for proposed unit
Robert Barron, The Daily News
Published: Saturday, October 23, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=ceaac0bf-46a2-4b7a-aa00-098a57a784b3
Fears about 'wet house' are real for neighbours
Denise Goldsack, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, October 21, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=8e1c1f25-90df-4207-b47f-4e3e540995bf
People in recovery need somewhere to get clean
Vivian Johnson, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Re: 'Fight against low-barrier housing isn't
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=a5784c67-8374-4a7a-9232-da96ff2f895f
Do we really aspire to be a classless society?
Gordon Youngman, The Daily News
Published: Tuesday, October 19, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=839f4322-4614-4dbd-9994-dc8c3d4f9447
Don't assume worst of housing residents
Wallace Malay, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, October 14, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/upfront/story.html?id=9c1caed9-6ce4-471b-948f-952244be6335
Compassion is crucial in our community
Gordon W. Fuller, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 13, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/upfront/story.html?id=bd5af4e4-0868-4165-8403-c9ef761a63c4
Fight against low-barrier housing isn't over
Susan Knight, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, October 07, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=17fc88d6-0a28-486e-8d99-1045ec39adab
Conclusions about housing are absurd
Cody Harman, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=e89ba8f3-d535-429e-86b2-f85d070891d0
Idea of social housing is more popular than the reality of it
Community tensions rise over integration plan
Derek Spalding, Daily News
Published: Saturday, October 02, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=5e61a832-fa91-4091-a035-ed544f21219a
Low-barrier housing residents not welcome
Tina Coates and Michael Coates, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, September 30, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/upfront/story.html?id=2b4b7348-9954-49ee-ab27-1b06f5e77927
NIMBY noise makers are in the minority
Gordon W. Fuller, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, September 29, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/ours/story.html?id=35c4ff47-a376-46ec-9195-d0d2ffb9847d
A little tolerance could go a long way
Sue Kurucz, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, September 29, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/letters/story.html?id=75e47cdb-6809-442c-871e-77c2d85f89a4
Don't risk safety of hospital workers
Denise Goldsack, The Daily News
Published: Tuesday, September 28, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=e69abaad-f115-4940-8a0e-135bf982a0a9
Services should be available in all areas
Editorial, The Daily News
Published: Wednesday, September 22, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/opinion/story.html?id=f07a1b6a-fcdc-4ea8-a9ee-c48d9cf5910d
'Rich' end of Nanaimo has its share of problems
Social services concentrated in south
Dustin Walker, The Daily News
Published: Monday, September 20, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=8e628071-037d-44a7-82e0-26161e0a3715
Neighbours don't want low-cost housing nearby
Hospital-area residents fear safety at risk from unsupervised drunks, drug addicts
Walter Cordery, Daily News
Published: Tuesday, September 14, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=16efb8d5-d352-4888-b722-e08354f5fcd5

Low Barrier ie. Supportive Social Housing

There is a fairly large bit of information below but I sincerely welcome and will answer any questions regarding what is a very complex issue. The debate rages on in Nanaimo around placing so called Low Barrier or Wet Housing into the Hospital Area. Below you will find every link, from the Daily News, to stories and letters about this particular issue at Dufferin and Boundary Crescents. I am also pasting some commentary with regards to questions asked of me (looks better here because I actually ran spell check).

Correspondence with Jim Taylor – Nanaimo Info Blog
As a voice for social change I am seeking your opinion on the effectiveness of the 'low barrier' housing program which is causing a bit of a stir in the hospital area. Any light you can shed on the matter would be helpful?

As someone who for years has advocated a ‘housing first approach’ and the decentralization of services, even before the concepts became the adopted approach in the city, I have seen firsthand how stable housing can enable people to address barriers that might seem overwhelming without the option of easily accessible supports.

The overwhelming anxiety/fear that is being generated by misinformation put out by HANA and the lack of overall communication on the part of the City has generated a response in the Hospital Area that was easily predicted. As Douglas Hardie so aptly puts it in a recent letter regarding the South End Community Associations opinion on the issue, "Anxiety is remarkably contagious. It's easy to get swept up in an emotional process that tends to simplify and polarize the issues in a way that makes the development of good, long-term solutions less likely."
HANA (Hpospital Area Neighbourhood Association) does however have a legitimate concern when it comes to concentration. As stated in the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) {see attached} signed by BC Housing and the Municipality Nov. 12, 2008, the site proposed for Boundary and Dufferin (Townsite) was put forward as “suitable for tenants with mental health and addiction issues” the proposed site on Bowen Road, not relatively far from the other, “could accommodate commercial or service uses on the ground and residential units above” and “could serve more independent tenants.”

Somewhere along the way the City is stating all will be low barrier and this could cause problems when locating these services. Then again I would contend that every house, apartment and condominium is low barrier. Provided you stay under the radar a person can do pretty much whatever they want in their own home.

In my opinion the City should sell the property on Bowen to a developer for mixed use with a 5 year covenant on the residential for people with an income of less than $20,000 and basing rent on 30% of income. After the 5 years the city could covenant a percentage of the units to stay that way with the rest either being sold or rented at market value. Once the property is sold to a developer the City could then look at purchasing properties in other areas of the city.

Part of the problem in touting these facilities as low barrier is people assume that the units will only be available to those with mental health and addiction issue. The reality is that most of the extreme cases will likely end up housed at Wesely Street it being the first to come on line other than the old Balmoral. The reality is as people move towards treatment and other housing options you would likely see a variety of people being housed in the buildings which could be a good thing.

Do you know if these programs are actually effective in assisting people with many different 'issues' in getting off the streets and into what we may think is a better lifestyle?

Yes. The primary goal of Housing First is to get the person off the street and then look at each individual and taylor supports to their need at that particular time and place in their life. The first step, getting the person(s) off the street or out of the revolving door of substandard accommodation, is immediately creating a better/safer lifestyle.

Are they actually able to get the monkey off people’s backs, or just provide more comfortable surroundings?

I prefer to think of it not as more comfortable, though it is that, but safer surroundings. Getting the proverbial monkey off someone’s back will depend on the willingness of the person to access supports. In some cases the safer more comfortable surroundings may be enough to promote change even without the need to look at things like detox or treatment. For many however these later two options as well as counselling will be necessary and by having the person in safe/comfortable housing they are far easier to bring to bear than if the person is cycling on and off the street.

I sometimes wonder if getting people off the streets, is the issue, then what is lacking with our social assistance programs if they are not allowing folks enough money to afford to live in a safe apartment which must already exist someplace, rather than building another institution and putting everyone together in one place?

Many housing first strategies, Toronto for example rely on both putting people into existing accommodation http://www.toronto.ca/housing/about-streets-homes.htm through out the city and then lining up supports as well as providing new build housing http://www.toronto.ca/housing/about-partnership.htm .

When looking at existing accommodation rent subsidies are used to top up from the income assistance rate. I know of nowhere where Income assistance rates alone will provide enough for a single person to find adequate safe accommodation and this is a problem Any housing first strategy must look at all means of getting people into housing and then doing it. Rent subsidies are the quickest way to do so and should be the initial focus then moving on to new builds of various types of social and supported social housing.

Is the issue, that these folks are not candidates for most landlords because of alcohol or drug use and the related behaviour issues which arise as a result?

The vast majority of people with substance abuse issues are able to maintain housing. The related behaviour issues, crime and violence, I am assuming you speak of are, in my belief, exhibited by the minority. As an abuser for over 20 years of pretty much any substance I could get hold of I was never evicted because of my substance use. The few times I was evicted it was for failure to pay rent. Most people using alcohol or drugs are not violent and can do so in a very social manner and without having to resort to crime. Some, being the most entrenched, may have to resort to petty crime to both maintain their habit as well as safe accommodation. That being said there are many that are extremely vulnerable to the predators of society, the bottom feeders such as slumlords and pimps who profit from the misery they help and want to maintain.

My comment online to Darrel Bellart story (link below).

A simple question; How well do you know your neighbours? Physical, Child, and Sexual abuse; Pedophiles, Alcoholics, Drug Addicts and Criminal activity, are all happening within homes in Nanaimo. Perhaps even in the home of your neighbour. Low Barrier, Wet House, the reality is that these terms describe every house, condo and apartment in the city. One can do pretty much anything in their home provided they remain under the radar. The people you see on the street are, for the most part, not there because they want to be but because of the very behaviours that happen behind closed doors. Many do drugs to cope with what has happened to them behind closed doors and many to cope with emotional or mental illness. The bottom line is that the proposed Supportive Social Housing and the people that are housed there will have the same right to maintain their addiction aka. behaviour as anyone else in the city. The biggest difference will be that when they do choose change they will have it far easier to do so because of the supports in place.

VIHA

There have been a number of stories in the local rags of late about the Vancouver Island Health Authorities (VIHA) latest plans to distribute Crack Kits under the guize of Harm Reduction. Don't get me wrong, I think there is a need for harm reduction strategies but one has to think of when are the so called strategies actually causing more harm.

I have been able to find only one study, out of Ottawa, that was done on the handing out of Crack Kits as a means to reduce HIV and HEP C as well as intravenous drug use. While it could not categorically state any reductions of the above what it did find was an increased use in Crack. Personally I don't really have a problem of handing these things out, in existing needle exchange services, though I think just providing the mouth piece as opposed to the whole crack pipe should suffice.

What I really have a problem with is VIHA's lack of consulting with neighbourhoods and their apparent forcing on some front line services the added responsibility of handing out needles and crack kits. This type of behaviour on the part of VIHA will only result in supporting some of the NIMBY attitudes that exist. Obnly through open communication and education will we ever be able to reduce these attitudes.

Below is a copy of a letter I sent as well as a link to the published version which in my opinion was overly edited.

Related Stories VIHA and their plan to distribute Crack Kits:

http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/story.html?id=567f77b8-611c-47b3-9d57-4f1da5ebb3fa

http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/story.html?id=60e1bc31-a0a3-48c2-ad34-7ea2964c94d7

http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/nanaimonewsbulletin/news/88645657.html

Letter To The Editor As Sent March 24th.

VIHA’s management, no disrespect to the many excellent frontline staff of and funded by VIHA, has taken its communication strategy to a whole new level. The level I speak of is one of intimidation and an utter disregard of the opinions of the people they serve.

Openly stating that their proposal to distribute crack kits from frontline services will not include discussion with surrounding community and that service providers can only opt out with ‘compelling’ reasons smacks of intimidation and coercion. If I were a service provider I would certainly feel any funding received from VIHA could be in jeopardy if I were not to comply.

VIHA’s website states it is "committed to being accountable to the public" and "committed to informing the public about how they plan to deliver services to meet the needs of communities." Their mission is “serving and involving the people of the islands to maintain and improve health.” Two of their core values, Partnership and Collaboration & Integrity, Accountability and Ethics talk about working in partnership and sharing responsibility with our colleagues, clients, communities; honouring their commitments to each other and every person they serve and communicating with openness and honesty as well as holding themselves to the highest ethical standards.

I see no talk of secrecy and intimidation in the above. These behaviours will only work to cement the publics’ already low opinion of this organization.

Published: Thursday, March 25, 2010 VIHA failing to listen to public on crack kits

This in the D/N March 26 Harris House success due to partnerships a good letter from Gord Cote of Nanaimo and Area Resource Services for Families.

On Housing the Homeless and Government Stupidity

The two letters following my little diatribe, with links to attendant stories, were written as news of upcoming housing developments and the implementation of the ACT team has come to the for in local news media. The first letter has been published in both local rags and will wait and see if the latter letter gets published in the Daily News.

You can find out more with regards to What is happening and what is proposed in Nanaimo with regards to Homelessness and Housing at the following link Social Planning which will also lead to this link as well Nanaimo's Response to Homelessness Action Plan .

Bottom line is that we need the rent subsidies and not just new housing. Rent subsidies are by far the quickest means to house the disenfranchised in safe accomodation and not continually having people cycling in and out of substandard accomodation provided by the slumlords of the community. This is a NO Brainer and actually ends up costing the government nothing when you consider the cost of providing a $200 per month subsidy is born out by the fact that housing a homeless person saves the governmtent $8,000 to $12,000 per year. In effect the government actually makes money.

Something else I am working on is getting the City to require significant contributions to the Housing Legacy Fund from land developers ie. Oceanview (Cable Bay) etc.. More on this at a later date.


Written February 16, 2010

In response to

Homeless strategy needs support Feb 10th Daily News

Letter to the editor:

That we are moving forward with Nanaimo ’s housing strategy is great, just how far we move forward is entirely up to the Provincial Government and one would hope help from the Feds as well. Recent announcements of the 40 unit low barrier housing on Wesley St. and Tillicum’s 18 units for seniors and youth are indeed good news but have been a given since the province contributed close to 15million in funding in late 2008. Where do we go from here?

It is important that people remember the province, in a memorandum of understanding with the city in November 2008, committed to providing funding for 160 units of housing and not just 58. One has to ask, how will the province honour this commitment when they are continually cutting back funding to services helping the provinces most vulnerable. The provincial government itself has stated that, "it is no longer possible to achieve the fiscal targets for 2010/11 without baseline reductions to funding for community service providers."

Since coming to power in 2001 this government has seen gutting social programs as a means of balancing budgets. It is time this policy was abandoned. Research shows housing a homeless person saves government between 8 & 12,000 dollars a year. On the low end the savings by housing the estimated 15,000 homeless in BC would be 120 million dollars, on the high end 180 million. Even a 2nd grader would recognize this as preferable.


Written February 18, 2010

In response to
Outreach workers face rent challeges to help homeless Daily News Feb 18th

Letter to the editor:

For year’s Social advocates such as I have mentioned rent subsidies as an easy cost effective means to get the homeless into safe housing. While creating new housing is another component these projects take time and large funding commitments before they even get off the ground. Nanaimo is lucky that 58 such units are in the process of development but the likelihood is that it will be 2011 or 2012 before they are move in ready.

The province is and has been aware for years of the need to implement rent subsides in Nanaimo . It is after all a major component of Nanaimo’s Homeless and Harm Reduction Plan developed in 2008, the very document that initiated provincial commitment to Nanaimo’s plan in the first place.

It is important to know that monies available last year through the Federal Governments Homeless Partnering Initiative that could have easily gone to providing rent subsidies were not allowed to be allocated as such. Why, because they say it is a provincial responsibility.

Nanaimo’s action plan also called for the creation of ACT teams. Providing the funding to staff the team without providing the easiest and most cost effective means to get the homeless off the streets and into safe housing is ludicrous.

Both the feds and the province need to take ownership of the problem of homelessness and work closer together.

Letters to the Editor (part six)

The following are some of my letters to the editor over the past couple years. I have found, since submitting my first many years ago, that this is a means, one widely read, to express an opinion on events in the city and realms further afield. I fully encourage people to write letters to the editors of what some fondly consider our local rags, though don’t be surprised when they appear and are edited by the paper. In one letter I submitted the editor changed one word, eliminated one sentence and totally changed the context of what I was saying.

2007
Re Obsession with security

What is it with Nanaimo and its obsession with Security Guards? We constantly hear what a safe place the Downtown is and yet we are soon to have security patrols through the night and on Victoria Crescent during the day. Seems to me this sends the opposite message to our citizens whom we want to come downtown and to tourists who we wish to see more of in the downtown.

Now we hear that Nanaimo Seniors Village has hired security to “keep the peace in the building”. What are the managers afraid of, insurrection on the part of the seniors? If so then I say good for the seniors, rise up and confront your oppressors. That Management would “lay off” 168 employees simply to attempt to rehire them at a lesser wage should be of concern to both the seniors and their families who rely on Nanaimo Seniors Village to provide quality care.

Lastly I am reminded of the offices of former Liberal MLA Mike Hunter. Shortly after the Liberal Party came to power in 2001 and promptly started implementing massive cuts to social and other programs, as well as bill 29 which allows the firing and rehiring of employees, Liberal MLA’s across BC were under siege. Mike Hunters office went from welcoming to having cameras and a security system installed, only allowing those deemed worthy to cross the threshold.

We certainly live in a strange world with Nanaimo being even stranger still. Perhaps that is what I love about living here, though lately I have been thinking I might need to hire security to watch my back.

Re: Victoria crescent security considered fascism

Mr. Rick Hyne’s plans to rid Victoria Crescent of the addicted and homeless are simply ludicrous. The idea that our public walkways would be reserved simply for the deserving smacks of fascism or discrimination to say the very least. While I empathize with business owner’s plight of open drug dealing and aggression we have laws in place to deal with this. Did not Mr. Hyne and others laud the Red Zoning (drug dealers/users banned from the area upon conviction) of the Victoria Crescent area, were they not in support of Nanaimo’s own aggressive panhandling bylaws despite a provincial bylaw already in place?

To think that in anyway this will be helpful is delusional on the part of Mr. Hyne. One cannot mandate people to “get help or get out,” unless in a court of law in which it would be get help or go to jail. One can however look at the broader social issues contributing to the problem in the area, one of the latest being the Vancouver Island Health Authority giving out free crack pipes. If this doesn't attract the very people the area fears I don't know what would, other than giving free crack out to go with the pipes.

Perhaps if this group were to put their money towards affordable housing or drug treatment, these addicts and homeless they so fear would have safe places to go and not have to frequent the streets of Victoria Crescent .

Re: Slumlord

That the building on Victoria Rd., recently declared a nuisance property, housing a variety store dealing in crack pies and other drug paraphernalia, caught fire would come as little surprise to many people in the downtown who have been aware of owner Paul Saroya’s propensity to provide little if any maintenance or security at his many rental properties in the area. This is the same owner of what used to be a beautiful Character Home at 365 Milon Street . The house was in good condition but shortly after purchasing and turning it into a rooming house, cramming as many people as he could into the building, inevitable deterioration soon followed. Within a few short years the building was condemned and demolished due to neglect.
After purchasing properties in the Gulf-view area for development, by Mr Saroya’s company Akal Developments, he had his business license rescinded in March of 2004 for deficiencies in many of the homes built. The company was again refused a business license in December of the same year. A long well documented history of the many problems associated with Paul Saroya’s properties can be found by looking back through the annals of Nanaimo and how often one or another has been before council as unsightly or having unresolved building deficiencies.

While it is sad that his behaviours, and those of certain other downtown landlords sometimes referred to as slumlords, continue it highlights once again the extreme need for safe affordable housing and a Minimum Standard of Safety and Maintenance bylaw put in place by the City of Nanaimo.

Letters to the Editor (part five)

The following are some of my letters to the editor over the past couple years. I have found, since submitting my first many years ago, that this is a means, one widely read, to express an opinion on events in the city and realms further afield. I fully encourage people to write letters to the editors of what some fondly consider our local rags, though don’t be surprised when they appear and are edited by the paper. In one letter I submitted the editor changed one word, eliminated one sentence and totally changed the context of what I was saying.

2007
Re: Harewood resident opposes firehall location

Once again we have another Harewood resident, Paul Walton, espousing why the Harewood Fire Hall was inappropriate for use by the 7-10 Club. I have a question for all those who deemed it an inappropriate location; did you ever come down and take a look at the service, sit down and talk to the people using it? My guess is no. If you had you would have seen that by far the majority of people using the service are simply Families Individuals and even Students who cannot make ends meet through government subsidies or low paying employment. You would have seen people that for the most part are your neighbours, currently living quietly amongst you, in Harewood and surrounding neighbourhoods and that the space in the Fire Hall was actually larger than that used at St. Peters .

Most of the outcry against the service moving to the Fire Hall was put out by a few people spreading doom and gloom propaganda to the larger masses of Harewood. Was NYMBYism involved, most certainly? Amanda Young, a local teacher, at least had the courage to state publicly that no matter what the 7-10 Club did she would never support its relocation to the Fire Hall, Jack Tielman put together a Web BLOG that was full of misinformation and postings bordering on hatred of the poor, usually anonymous. Again had either one visited the service, NO?

The vast majority of people in Harewood are by no means NIMBY’s, sadly they are being coloured by the minority who had no qualms about spreading false information.

Oddly enough this is exactly what happened to the 7-10 Club, the view of the many being influenced by the actions of but a few.

Re: handing out crack kits

I am greatly confused with regard to the rational of handing out Crack Kits to addicts. After much research on the inter-web I have been unable to find any concrete studies on the transmition incidence of HIV and Hepatitis C through the shared use of crack pipes or evidence supporting the harm reduction aspect of these kits.

What I have found is that one supposed reason for handing these kits out is the wish to reduce the intravenous use of crack and the higher risk of the spread of HIV and Hepatitis C through the shared use of needles. If this is the case then it seriously puts into question the very efficacy of needle exchange programs. The problem is, there is a dearth of evidence that suggests needle exchanges have had a significant effect on the reduction of HIV and Hepatitis C.

Rather than handing out free crack kits on the streets, which may have the effect of drawing on the curiosity of youth to obtain such followed by the logical outcome of then trying them out, a greater focus should be made towards the awareness of existing needle exchange programs. If one still insists on handing out crack pipes then let it be done through these existing programs, not in the middle of residential neighbourhoods. .

VIHA’s behaviour in all of this is questionable to say the least. To not involve City Council, local residents & businesses, in there decision to hand out free crack kits and now removing vehicle identification in hopes of continuing the handout surreptitiously leads one to seriously question their motives.

Letters to the Editor (part two)

The following are some of my letters to the editor over the past couple years. I have found, since submitting my first many years ago, that this is a means, one widely read, to express an opinion on events in the city and realms further afield. I fully encourage people to write letters to the editors of what some fondly consider our local rags, though don’t be surprised when they appear and are edited by the paper. In one letter I submitted the editor changed one word, eliminated one sentence and totally changed the context of what I was saying.

Re: Alternative approval process

Kudos go out to Beverley Eert and the many others who helped coordinate and volunteer in the gathering of Electoral Response Forms regarding the annexation of Regional District Lands.  As one of those volunteering, both at Maffeo Sutton Park and the FPN sponsored table at Port Place Mall, a number of concerns about the process arose for me.  Cedar residents have no say with regard to annexation of land from their community; this specific process implies that those not signing are agreement with the annexation; the city only had to put a couple notices about the process into the newspapers, yet notice of the parking survey is in the papers almost daily; and, the fear of sanctions, by the city or developer, that was a concern of many of those who would not sign.

For me, I found that equally as many people who signed the forms did so not only because they did not like the potential development, environmental impact and ongoing cost to taxpayers, but because they thought the process undemocratic.  Having collected the required 10%, not including those handed in to City Hall, a number of us will be out again over the long weekend at Maffeo Sutton Park .  I encourage anyone who has not filled out the required form to drop on down and do so.  If Nanaimo City council decides to go further, having failed by this means, let’s hope they do so without exorbitant cost to the taxpayers of Nanaimo by tying a referendum to the upcoming municipal election.

 
Re: Chamber of commerce awareness of homelessness issue

I congratulate Mr. Lobay, and hopefully the rest of the Chamber of commerce, on being aware that homelessness is a complex issue that needs all sectors, social, political as well as business, to be onside when developing solutions for community.  I do however have to correct him on one thing; the city does not as yet have a plan.  What was essentially presented for public input was a plan for a plan and not the plan itself.

Many of us look forward to the actual plan which will hopefully be comprehensive enough to allow us to move forward, leveraging funds from all levels of government to provide the supplements and housing needed to alleviate the growing homeless problem in Nanaimo .  Yes the municipality will have to contribute as well, something they have done in the past, and one hopes the means for doing this will be firmly entrenched in upcoming revisions to the Nanaimo Official Community Plan.

When all is said and done the Homeless/Harm Reduction plan, as well as the OCP, will either guide the way or gather dust as have so many other plans.  As Mr. Lobay says, “solutions can only be developed with collaboration and tenacity.”   As we move forward I sincerely hope the Chamber of Commerce will be tenacious in taking an active role in this collaboration.

Re: Homeless & Harm reduction action plan

After 6 months work and $60,000 spent the citizens of Nanaimo finally had a chance to view what will be Nanaimo 's own "Harm Reduction and Housing First Action Plan."  In my opinion we have taken a step forward in looking at the provision of housing for the City's homeless population but the process itself has been less than community friendly. 

It was decided by Council that the SAFER Nanaimo Committee would be the steering committee for the process.  SAFER, formed as a result of recommendations from the Downtown Security and Downtown Social Response Committees recognizing that "'communication and coordination' between stakeholders will be key to managing the issues of public order and social exclusion in the city centre."  They called for a group comprised of  the RCMP, Bylaw Services, Social Planning, Downtown Nanaimo Partnership, Vancouver Island Health Authority and members of the downtown business & residential communities.  Despite this and after several requests SAFER will not allow representatives of Downtown Neighbourhoods on the committee.

In seeking out input for the action plan City Spaces Consulting interviewed the heads of the three downtown neighbourhood associations with little or no input from the association members.  Two of these groups hold monthly meetings and would have been ideal venues, had City Spaces chosen, for greater community input.  Finally we had the open house; great idea though how much input does one really have at these even assuming they can get there?

 
While I personally think the plan good it relies heavily on the political will of the municipality. With the upcoming public hearing of the revised Official Community Plan it is important for people to know that the OCP contains little on attaining affordable housing.  Unlike the Kelowna , Victoria and Vancouver  Official Community Plans, that have extensive sections on housing, ours is but a page and a half that is wishy washy at best.  I encourage everyone to attend the public hearing, June 19th, and speak out.  I also have been assured that feedback from the public regarding the Harm Reduction and Housing First Action Plan will still be accepted.  The action plan is to be posted on the City of Nanaimo Website, where one can also view the most recent draft of the OCP, and comments can be sent to Brenda McBain – City Spaces Consulting via e-mail at bmcbain@cityspaces.ca .