[mr.x]

http://sfist.com/attachments/SFist_Brock/homeless%20encampments.jpg


http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Court+ruling+opens+parks+campers/1230211/story.html


A provincial court ruling has opened Victoria's parks for daytime camping, creating a situation called historic by a homeless activist but unmanageable by Mayor Dean Fortin.

Judge Brian MacKenzie declared Kristen Woodruff, David Johnston and Tavis Dodds not guilty yesterday of violating a city bylaw that banned public camping from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

"It means people could set up a tent right now if they were sick. And it's huge," a jubilant Woodruff said outside court. "This is a historic moment, not just for Victoria, but for the whole country because it means people can rest if they need to."

City councillors will tonight discuss a bylaw amendment which would formalize the bylaw enforcement policy that the judge just rejected. Councillors will be able to give up to three readings tonight but would have to wait 24 hours before giving final reading. That would mean the earliest the amendment could be passed would be Saturday. There are no council meetings scheduled for that time, but councillors could agree to a special meeting.

The ruling also creates the possibility of a tent city. Victoria police Acting Insp. Jamie Pearce said police now have limited tools to deal with that situation.

Fortin said council will meet this morning to discuss the issue, but he could offer no idea of what actions will be taken in the short term.

"Our municipality is trying to make the best of a bad situation," he said.

Fortin said unregulated camping would make it impossible to manage the city's parks effectively. But he added, "As long as we have people living on our streets, we have the responsibility to find them housing."

MacKenzie suggested city council could pass an amendment to its bylaws if it wants to continue to enforce the 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. ban on public camping. That ban was in response to an Oct. 14 Supreme Court ruling that said it was unconstitutional for the City of Victoria to prevent homeless people from erecting shelters to protect themselves from the elements in the absence of sufficient shelter beds.

Outside court yesterday, lawyer Irene Faulkner, who acted on behalf of the homeless campers in their Supreme Court challenge, said the judge had accepted her argument that the city imposed an enforcement policy on a bylaw that no longer exists.

"If the city does want to go back and amend the bylaw, they have to do that through the proper enforcement process, which requires public hearings and readings. We very much hope that they'll consider the needs of the homeless people."

Robert Randall, chairman of the Victoria Downtown Residents Association, noted that shelter space has been available, but some people insist on sleeping outdoors. "If they are allowed to camp there, regardless of whether there are shelter beds available, then it's clear this is no longer about shelter beds."

Johnston, who with Dodds was arrested in November and charged with the civil offence of continuing to breach a bylaw, called yesterday's court decision a small victory.

"There's going to be more politics and more ridiculousness coming from city council and the chamber of commerce," he predicted.

Woodruff, a former Victoria mayoral candidate, was arrested Dec. 9 after refusing to move from the tent she had set up in Centennial Square. She was charged with five counts of continuing to violate the city's parks enforcement bylaw.

In court, MacKenzie said the bylaw cannot be enforced when it applies to homeless people whose shelter is temporary. The judge concluded that all three accused were in fact homeless and their tents were temporary shelters.

[ravman]

Campbell must end his legacy of homelessness now
June 20, 2008

VANCOUVER - Premier Campbell must act now to reverse his legacy of homelessness, New Democrat Leader Carole James said today as she released a report on homelessness in B.C. containing 12 recommendations for government.
"Right now Gordon Campbell's biggest legacy is the explosion of homelessness in B.C. - and it's still growing," said James. "British Columbians find it shameful, and the Premier must change direction to end the crisis.

"Gordon Campbell promised action and a reduction in homelessness two years ago. The evidence is in and he has failed," said James. "So we've done the job for him, developing 12 proposals that he can enact right away."

The proposals are contained in Finding Our Way Home, a report based on a province-wide consultation launched by James and NDP homelessness critic David Chudnovsky in November, 2007.

Chudnovsky visited more than 130 organizations in 22 communities, and spoke with people who are homeless, community advocates, service providers, mayors and other civic leaders

"Out of these consultations, we have developed a clear set of recommendations for government to immediately tackle the homelessness crisis," said Chudnovsky. "It will take time, but with an energized social housing program the advocates, housing experts and municipal officials I spoke with believe we can end the crisis within five years."

Chudnovsky said the key recommendation is a significant expansion of social housing.

"We believe that the need is great and the government should use the $250 million B.C. Housing Endowment Fund to start the expansion now. Without that kind of kickstart, homelessness can't be reduced in B.C."

The 12 proposals are to:

1. Re-establish the stand-alone Ministry of Housing;
2. Set program targets to eliminate the homelessness crisis in five years;
3. Re-invest in a social housing program;
4. Provide local governments and community organizations with tools and resources to combat homelessness;
5. Recognize that the crisis is province wide and ensure solutions are as well;
6. Expand social housing on existing sites;
7. Include the principles of Housing First, homelessness prevention, adequate infrastructure and accountability into social housing and support programs;
8. Maintain and expand the public land bank;
9. Protect manufactured home tenants;
10. Strengthen security of tenure and rights for tenants;
11. Increase income assistance rates and the minimum wage; and
12. Increase mental health and addiction services.

For the full report, please visit www.bcndpcaucus.ca

[Spork]

Good to hear that the NDP doesn't know how endowment funds work.

I think that #12 is where we need to start. Many of the points are vague at best, and some of them are even unrelated.

I wonder if the Victoria ruling means that I can go to any BC Parks site and camp for free? I can declare that I am homeless. If not, can the province not pass legislation to effectively place fees on staying in a park overnight?

[wrenegade]

3. Re-invest in a social housing program;

Liberals have are are doing this

8. Maintain and expand the public land bank;

Liberals have and are doing this

10. Strengthen security of tenure and rights for tenants;

This isn't strong enough? Seriously? The Residential Tenancy Act favours the tenant pretty much 99.5% of the time.

12. Increase mental health and addiction services.

Agreed.

[Metro-One]

Honestly i think allowing homeless to stay in the park from 7pm to 7am is generous as it is. No need for them to be sleeping all day! Also parks are for everyones enjoyment, all this is going to create are drug trafficking zones. Sometimes i think these homeless advocates have their heads in their asses. Instead of supporting crap like this why don't they focus on such issues as lobbying the government for more mental health facilities, which we definitely need and i would happily support with my tax dollars.

[osirisboy]

so the court has allowed bums to sleep in parks BUT they havent allowed them to litter piss and shit and drink in the parks. Frankly all the city needs to do is make sure they enforce all the other bylaws and chances are the bums wont want to sleep in the parks.

[Metro-One]

:previous: Good point, hopefully the city does frequent checks and dumps out their booze and confiscates their drugs on a daily (wishfully hourly) basis. That is what i find funny about the homeless around here, there is still no excuse for them to be so messy. What i love about the homeless in Japan is for the most part they actually clean up after themselves and they will almost never ask you for money, unless they are willing to do a job.

[osirisboy]

I recently had a converstaion with a cop in stanely park regarding this and with the people that live there. I told him I could careless about people wanting to sleep in the park I just have a huge problem with walking through stanely park and suddenly coming across a ton of garbage. He completely agreed, I just wish they enforced it. And after having to pull out a dirty used siringe from my 3 month old puppy I get a little pissed off with these losers.

[mr.x]

The 12 proposals are to:

1. Re-establish the stand-alone Ministry of Housing;
2. Set program targets to eliminate the homelessness crisis in five years;
3. Re-invest in a social housing program;
4. Provide local governments and community organizations with tools and resources to combat homelessness;
5. Recognize that the crisis is province wide and ensure solutions are as well;
6. Expand social housing on existing sites;
7. Include the principles of Housing First, homelessness prevention, adequate infrastructure and accountability into social housing and support programs;
8. Maintain and expand the public land bank;
9. Protect manufactured home tenants;
10. Strengthen security of tenure and rights for tenants;
11. Increase income assistance rates and the minimum wage; and
12. Increase mental health and addiction services.

For the full report, please visit www.bcndpcaucus.ca

Ohhh please, the homeless problems started long before the Liberals came to power. And thousands of social housing units have been built in the past 5 years, but activists wouldn't want to acknowledge that would they because IT'S NEVER ENOUGH.

I think it's ridiculous that the courts allowed this.

[Stingray2004]

I guess baby steps in attempts to remove homelessness are always helpful:

B.C. to buy 700 units for homeless
About half of the 16 hotels and apartments will be in Vancouver, including St. Helen's

FRANCES BULA

Special to The Globe and Mail

January 30, 2009

VANCOUVER -- In the push to make a dent in B.C.'s massive homelessness problem as the 2010 Olympic Games approach, the Premier will announce today that the province has bought another 700 units of old hotels and apartments in 16 sites around B.C.

Sources say that about half the sites will be in Vancouver and will include at least four residential hotels in the downtown area, including the St. Helen's on Granville Street, where Premier Gordon Campbell and Housing Minister Rich Coleman will make today's announcement.

The massive purchase, which comes at the tail end of the province's fiscal year, is expected to allow BC Housing, the agency that oversees all social housing in the province, to try some unusual pilot projects.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090130.BCHOMELESS30/TPStory/National

[mr.x]

^ so much for lefties saying the gov't is doing nothing.

The article also notes: The government bought 16 hotels with 925 units over the past two years for around $100-million, and is cleaning them up and renovating them.





Late 2007:

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/7697/shousingkg7.jpg

From PriceTags/Oct. 20th:
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/7659/shousingib3.jpg

“There’s never enough” - that’s the first rule of non-market housing. Advocates for affordable housing in a tight market like ours have no difficulty making that case: the evidence is abundantly apparent, whether in the media or on the streets.

So it’s easy to lose perspective. In fact, the list below (circulated by the Mayor’s office) came as a bit of a surprise to me. I hadn’t realized there had been any completed projects this year, nor that there were that many units under construction.

Perhaps because Councils unanimously support these initiatives (with only a couple of exceptions I can think of in 15 years on Council) and the Left is reluctant to give the Right any credit at all, gains are discounted and difficiencies magnified.

It does look as though most of the housing to come will be the maintenance of existing SROs, upgraded and secured and concentrated in the Downtown East Side and Downtown South. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to make much difference, either in politics or perception. And in fact, I wonder if it really makes a difference to homelessness. The truly dysfunctional rarely find a place in these government-funded projects, since they’re often too disruptive to those who wish to maintain a stable environment.

Nonetheless, whether sufficient or not, it’s an improvement. And that’s always worth acknowledging.

[djmk]

B.C. to buy 700 units for homeless
About half of the 16 hotels and apartments will be in Vancouver, including St. Helen's

FRANCES BULA

Special to The Globe and Mail

January 30, 2009

VANCOUVER -- In the push to make a dent in B.C.'s massive homelessness problem as the 2010 Olympic Games approach, the Premier will announce today that the province has bought another 700 units of old hotels and apartments in 16 sites around B.C.

Sources say that about half the sites will be in Vancouver and will include at least four residential hotels in the downtown area, including the St. Helen's on Granville Street, where Premier Gordon Campbell and Housing Minister Rich Coleman will make today's announcement.

The massive purchase, which comes at the tail end of the province's fiscal year, is expected to allow BC Housing, the agency that oversees all social housing in the province, to try some unusual pilot projects.

It echoes purchases made around the same time in the past two years, as the Premier and Mr. Coleman used surpluses from other ministries to buy properties.

The government bought 16 hotels with 925 units over the past two years for around $100-million, and is cleaning them up and renovating them.

They will be operated by non-profit groups with experience housing the homeless, mentally ill and drug-addicted.

The first of those hotels, the Rainier, is set to open next week.

The question now is how much money Mr. Campbell and his cabinet will allocate in next month's budget to staff all of the buildings being purchased.

Housing agencies in the past have ended up with chaos when they've tried to run hotels housing 100 or more mentally ill and drug-addicted people, with only enough funding to hire minimal staff workers to supervise them.

At one point, Mr. Coleman had talked about getting as much as $1-billion for housing supports.

With the crashing economy, observers are expecting it will be far less.

Today's announcement adds to what has become an unprecedented surge of effort by the province and various B.C. cities to deal with a homelessness problem that has been growing steadily since the turn of the decade, when the new Liberal government ended the province's social-housing program.

The province has also committed to building 12 social-housing projects in Vancouver, although none have been started yet as the province waits for construction costs to drop.

That means none of them has any chance of being ready by the Olympics.

Vancouver's new mayor, Gregor Robertson, has made homelessness a priority.

His first act was to open four new shelters with very relaxed rules, so that people who usually avoid shelters would be encouraged to use the spaces.

Now, his council and a special group of advisers have been trying to find more permanent places for those people to move. They've been considering options ranging from temporary housing in prefab modular units to buildings that would become slightly better housing than the warehouses and churches now being used as shelters.

The anticipated announcement is being received with qualified praise by city housing groups.

"It's so good to see the province take these hotels out of the private market. But it's not a be-all-end-all solution to homelessness. These are not new units," said Laura Track of the Pivot Legal Society, which has closely monitored the province's moves and its promises from the Olympics bid to provide and protect low-income housing.

[Metro-One]

All this aside, i really think there should be more of a push for proper mental health instututions. That is one of the primary causes of homelessness and instead of them allowing to rot in hotels or the street, maybe we should have them in health facilities where they are given their medication and are not exposed to the criminal element.

Also would people here stop generalizing? There are many "lefties" out there, including myself, who think this is a really stupid idea. Parks are for everyone, and in some cases are more for nature, not residential use! The biggest problem is that we allow these people to live like pigs throwing their garbage everywhere and shitting/pissing everywhere. These activities should be stopped, being homeless is no excuse to be a pig and violate the rules. These homeless advocates are not right or left, they are just idiots who want to live a life of slum, they don't want to clean up or stop doing drugs, they just want to be losers.

[ravman]

One homeless person costs $171,000 a year

Updated: Fri Jan. 30 2009 19:21:48

ctvbc.ca

Friday's announcement of an additional 600 affordable housing units to B.C.'s stock has people once again addressing the costs of homelessness in the province.

There are thousands of homeless living in B.C.'s Lower Mainland, caught in the cycle because of mental illness and addiction. But this existence is expensive.

"In the back of our minds we know that it costs us but until you actually do the math, you don't have a real understanding of what it costs," says Lesley Tannen of the Downtown Surrey Business Improvement Association.

For the first time, we're getting a look at how much homeless people actually costs various levels of government.

The association compiled data on one homeless person over a year. The organization would not reveal who that person is, but CTV News has learned that it is Sue, a woman who has spent the last 13 years living on the streets of Surrey.

"It was horrible, just horrible," she says. "Everything's been horrible."

Sue says every night she spent on the street she was afraid.

"I'd stay awake and walk and walk. Walk. Keep walking."

You might be shocked at what Sue -- one single homeless person -- can cost taxpayers.

In 2007, Sue spent 63 days in hospital and 196 days in shelter. Police were called to deal with her more than 340 times, mostly because of mental illness issues. She was also on probation, spent time in a pre-trial centre and received income assistance.

That brings the grand total for one year for Sue to a staggering $171,000. According to the province, the average costs of services for a person living on the streets is around $56,000.

"That's a huge cost to the community of doing nothing," says Tannen.

In six years, someone like Sue would cost the system more than a million dollars.

The Surrey Business Association believes by putting someone like Sue in stable housing with a support worker could drop the cost to $17,000 -- a 90 per cent decrease.

"From a business perspective, that's a no-brainer," says Peter Fedos, an advocate working for Highland House. "Doing something makes economic sense."

Fedos says social housing is always more cost effective than doing nothing.

"There are costs. Leaving them on the streets means you'll pay later and you'll pay heavily."

For now, Sue is now in supportive housing. She might not recognize the financial benefit, but she knows that it's a safe place.

With a report from CTV British Columbia's Michele Brunoro

[Spocket]

I'm not of the opinion that we "do nothing" for the homeless but this "study" is hardly much more than an op-ed piece.
One person hardly constitutes any sort of reliable sample size for starters. Secondly , the homeless didn't cost taxpayers $171,000 bucks, Sue did. It seems to me that Sue would cost taxpayers $171,000 bucks whether she had a home or not. I'm not saying that her illness is her fault or anything like that but that's what is so expensive apparently.

If she's going to be given some tag then a more accurate one would be "mentally ill" rather than "homeless". She's homeless because she's mentally ill , not the other way around.