quote:

---

G Pie: I was wondering why those 350 couldn't always be available.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by G. Pie:
Didn't know where to put this ...

I was reading today in one of the local free weeklies that Victoria has (something like) 280 shelter spots but (something like) 350 in extreme weather. I was wondering why those 350 couldn't always be available. And who decides what "extreme" weather is, anyway?

---

In Toronto, extreme weather alerts are issued by the Health Department.

In some cases, extra shelter beds means that a shelter runs over it's legal capacity by putting mats on the floor and such.

I'd really like to see homeless shelters modelled on university residences - your own bedroom but shared bathroom and cafeteria-style dining. Staffing could be from EI programs, youth training, etc. I'm quite sure such a shelter could run for hundreds of dollars per month per occupant, cheaper than policing and emergency services costs currently.

quote:

---

Victoria does experience more extreme temperatures (but only very occasionally)the coldest temperature on record was -15.6°C on December 29, 1968. Victoria has not recorded a temperature below -10°C since 1990.

---

And those days when the temp does drop are short lived and may only be 2-3 days in a row.

When I lived down there, the emergency beds were in church halls, and in current shelters who were given short term funding to cover the extra costs.

And I know we're fairly tropical compared to, say, Winnipeg, but we still can get some pretty uncomfortable weather in the winter. I wouldn't want to be living outdoors in sideways rain.

quote:

---

Staffing could be from EI programs, youth training, etc.

---

Yes, it is a disgrace that homelessness in Canada hasn't been minimized or banished altogether. This is one of the few problems that could be solved by having more money/resources applied. There are creative alternatives to either having an independent apartment, some of which you mentioned, G. Pie, that also aren't the disastrous rooming houses that are often touted at the solution.

And you're right, it doesn't make sense that spots are denied to people who need them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by G. Pie:
I guess I just don't understand why there are spots available (as temporary and inadequate as they are) that are being withheld from people who need them.

And I know we're fairly tropical compared to, say, Winnipeg, but we still can get some pretty uncomfortable weather in the winter. I wouldn't want to be living outdoors in sideways rain.

We have a local election coming up and every candidate says homelessness is one of his or her top priorities. We'll see.

---

Well, as I said, emergency bedding isn't necessarily legal accomodation.

If a church or whatever opens it's doors for those days, they may call in volunteers or a city shelter may call in emergency overtime staff. For whatever reasons, those levels can't be kept up permanently.

That would require putting in more full-time shelter beds that fall within legal guidelines.

The real problem isn't shelter beds. It's lack of affordable housing and the laws that stop people from creating their own accommodations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
I disagree. Staff need to be trained well and supervised well, this is very challenging front-line work with very marginalized folks. I see a broader role for shelters to play, with more services associated with them, such as advocacy, legal advice, services to find people more permanent housing, etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TVParkdale:
For whatever reasons, those levels can't be kept up permanently ... That would require putting in more full-time shelter beds that fall within legal guidelines.

---

And I'm wondering why this hasn't been done.

quote:

---

The real problem isn't shelter beds. It's lack of affordable housing and the laws that stop people from creating their own accommodations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TVParkdale:
The real problem isn't shelter beds. It's lack of affordable housing and the laws that stop people from creating their own accommodations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
GPie, the number of homeless in BC has been steadily growing since the advent of Gordo and the BC Liberals. Not a thing will change until Gordo and the BC Liberals are gone.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:

I disagree. Staff need to be trained well and supervised well, this is very challenging front-line work with very marginalized folks. I see a broader role for shelters to play, with more services associated with them, such as advocacy, legal advice, services to find people more permanent housing, etc.

Yes, it is a disgrace that homelessness in Canada hasn't been minimized or banished altogether. This is one of the few problems that could be solved by having more money/resources applied. There are creative alternatives to either having an independent apartment, some of which you mentioned, G. Pie, that also aren't the disastrous rooming houses that are often touted at the solution.

And you're right, it doesn't make sense that spots are denied to people who need them.

If local political candidates are naming homelessness as an issue, and such promises go further than simply reflecting what the public wants to hear, they should have detailed plans available. Fixing homelessness, if it's a true commitment, is not rocket science.

---

My experience has been for every 1000 hours of yapping that this city does about "the homeless problem" maybe 5 people get housed.

The reports/commissions/theories/paperwork is endless.

As you said, it's not rocket science.

Also, as you mentioned, some people who have been de-housed are in need of greater supports for mental health struggles or substance use.

As well, the longer people "live rough" the more likely it becomes that they will develop long-term physical or psychological ailments thus exponentially increasing the healthcare costs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
What do you mean create their own accommodations?

---

My tenants' association was involved in a community project opening up a block of supervised flats for de-institutionalised people and others at risk of homelessness. There is a social worker or other health worker there at all times, but each tenant has a normal small flat. The social worker helps them with stuff like administering a budget (that is, setting enough of their disability or welfare cheque aside for rent, food etc).

The housing seems to be doing well, but it is just one little block of flats and many more would be needed, even in this neighbourhood (working class but not core-of-city).

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
My tenants' association was involved in a community project opening up a block of supervised flats for de-institutionalised people and others at risk of homelessness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by G. Pie:
I don't know. I think Victoria might be finally facing up to it at the local level.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

What do you mean create their own accommodations?

---

There are squatters all over the country. We don't hear about them because the media doesn't tend to cover their situation in any positive way.

There's tons of empty housing that stays empty year after year while people go without.

The problem starts for the squatters when a squat [like Tent City Toronto] becomes large and political. There were actually 6 other squats in the area that received NO media coverage.

There are a number of areas in most major cities with what used to be called "hobo camps". The problem for squatters is not having any legal title to the area/property where they live, opening them up to abuses by local police and losing their accumulated possessions over and over, decreasing their ability to build community ties and upsetting the stability of the crew.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
They do not have the money to do anything other than create short term stop gap measures.

---

quote:

---

TVParkdale: My experience has been for every 1000 hours of yapping that this city does about "the homeless problem" maybe 5 people get housed.

---

Yes, exactly. Unfortunately.

A quick google search found these two examples of youth shelters in Toronto. They offer far more than simply a bed or mat to sleep for the night.

Covenant House

Youth Without Shelter

And I found a link for a shelter in Victoria: Victoria Cool Aid Society who offer "a wide range of programs including supported housing, community health and dental services, emergency shelter, and a casual labour pool for adults who are homeless or in need of help."

quote:

---

Originally posted by G. Pie:

The tent city at Beacon Hill Park, recently deemed legal by the Supreme Court. The city's trying to negate the ruling by having the police banish people at 7:00 a.m. Pure harassment.

---

Exactly Pie.

Everyone assumes that government institutions/solutions are the ultimate answer.

People are surprisingly resilient. Especially financially disadvantaged people who often find incredibly creative ways of dealing with their circumstances.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TVParkdale:
Keep me apprised of the Beacon Hill developments will you?

---

Sure. The latest I heard was that four campers were arrested for not taking their tents down fast enough.

Added: I hope they got coffee and breakfast in jail, at least. Wonder how much it costs to incarcerate someone for a day.

[ 05 November 2008: Message edited by: G. Pie ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by G. Pie:

Sure. The latest I heard was that four campers were arrested for not taking their tents down fast enough.

Added: I hope they got coffee and breakfast in jail, at least. Wonder how much it costs to incarcerate someone for a day.

[ 05 November 2008: Message edited by: G. Pie ]

---

At least $90 per night, EACH. Plus the cost of however many cops it took to bust them.

Now, what did it cost to let them sleep there?

$0.

*bangs gavel*

Case closed.
____________
I'll give you the most bizarre one that was ever sent to me on SquatNet.

Fella in Washington state somewhere [few years ago, details are fuzzy] squats in a tree in a park protesting homelessness.

Makes the news.

People start coming to his tree with food, clothes, that sort of thing. Generally being nice.

The city puts up a $20,000 fence AROUND the tree, to stop people from encouraging the protesting squatter.

General nice public people climb the fence and hand him food, water and more clothes.

So they put two cops on duty 24-7 FOR THE NEXT TWO MONTHS to stop people from giving him food/water/clothes.

Finally, they carted him away as a mental health case.

For the cost of that--they could have housed the guy for 10 years at market rent

[ 05 November 2008: Message edited by: TVParkdale ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
As for harassing people in Tent City, the same thing happened in Toronto a few years ago. Great planning, urban pols. . First, cut funding to housing/ shelter initiatives and then throw people out of constructed homes that they never should have had to construct in the first place. And these are our leaders. Great.

---

The BC Liberals did not just cut funding for housing and shelter, they actively made it impossible for many many, and mainly FN's, people to collect income assistance.

Then they started paying religious organizations to run low BC income housing, and if you are not a church member you do not get into low income housing unless there is no religious person on the waiting list. Moreover, they spend more on administration payouts than they did by having the ministry attend to BC low income housing. It is bascically a pay off for certain religious communities supporting their bid for office.

The BC Supreme Court threw out the challenge to disallow people tenting in city parks, and now the city is having the police officers give them "wake up" calls as GPie said at 7am, so they are out of the rest of the public's eye before they go to work, and before the tourists start exploring.

----------------------------

I hear you on the Christmas decorations, GPie as well as all the baskets of flowers, light pole banners etc etc...however, we are talking about the 10's of millions it will take to build, or renovate existing empty buildings, and develop programs and staffing costs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

The BC Liberals did not just cut funding for housing and shelter, they actively made it impossible for many many, and mainly FN's, people to collect income assistance.

Then they started paying religious organizations to run low BC income housing, and if you are not a church member you do not get into low income housing unless there is no religious person on the waiting list. Moreover, they spend more on administration payouts than they did by having the ministry attend to BC low income housing. It is bascically a pay off for certain religious communities supporting their bid for office.

The BC Supreme Court threw out the challenge to disallow people tenting in city parks, and now the city is having the police officers give them "wake up" calls as GPie said at 7am, so they are out of the rest of the public's eye before they go to work, and before the tourists start exploring.

---

Ah so I see the residential school system has now moved onto the "residential housing system".

Throwing people out of their tenting areas isn't just about moving them around.

It's about keeping them poverty ridden and in economic crisis.

If the only possessions you can keep must fit on your back, you can NEVER stabilize yourself. If you can squat/stay in the same place, you might be able to find employment, organize yourself politically and do any number of other useful actions that might upset the status quo.

For anyone who is interested in what "homeless" people can really do for themselves, look HERE:

Dignity Village
Dignity Village Their Own Website

quote:

---

Originally posted by TVParkdale:

Ah so I see the residential school system has now moved onto the "residential housing system".

Throwing people out of their tenting areas isn't just about moving them around.

It's about keeping them poverty ridden and in economic crisis.

If the only possessions you can keep must fit on your back, you can NEVER stabilize yourself. If you can squat/stay in the same place, you might be able to find employment, organize yourself politically and do any number of other useful actions that might upset the status quo.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

And Penny Priddy said, for example, that very many people in Surrey shelters do work full time. They go to work all day, then do their best to fritter away a few hours until the shelter opens to go to sleep for a few hours. It's like the ultimate flexible labour force. Even slaves knew slightly more stability in regard to where they would be sleeping every night.

---

Actually, a few years ago I had to deal with a group because the local church shelter was forced to close for breaching town ordinances.

The small town never HAD a shelter, until construction boomed and the companies were pulling in all this casual labour.

The young workers couldn't keep their housing in their home towns and also pay for shelter when they were seasonally employed so the shelter housed them during the construction season.

At least in the old days, an employer like that had to provide either a shantytown or the resources to build one, to keep labour.

They wound up hiding in the woods, to keep their jobs.

We managed to negotiate an agreement with a nearby landowner to let them camp together during the working season.

There are definitely low wage temp employers who are benefiting from this situation. Some of them *recruit* at the shelters. The shelter residents are pressured to work for these companies in order to keep their beds/time limited stay, so they can save money for rental deposits.

Once they are housed, they can't afford the rent anymore on their part-time, temporary positions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
It's ridiculous. Duncan Cameron said that New York City has more social housing units for seven million people than Canada has for 33 million. We need socialism American style I guess.

---

There also has been some pretty creative negotiating around building camps and tent cities there. See my link to Dignity Village.

With this housing crunch, as homeowners are foreclosed on, they are going to be competing for the stock of housing that the underprivileged, who cannot compete, are living in now.

While houses and condos are going to be empty. So, we will let people freeze to death rather than pizz off big brother by making squatting legal in any accommodation that is empty for a full year. Watch how quickly rents would drop if landlords knew there would be no tax write-off for empty units and that squatters would be moving in for free if they didn't make an agreement to rent for a reasonable price.

As well, what most people DON'T know, is that condos get bought up through businesses. If they cannot get FULL RENT, they just have someone from out of town sleep there [I forget the amount of days per year it has to be, it's not much] then TAX-WRITE OFF THE ENTIRE INFLATED RENT rather than rent it at a lesser amount.

There's loopholes all over that keep livable property empty.

Contrary to popular opinion, there is *enough housing* in almost every city in Canada IF it was all being used efficiently instead of sitting empty.

Crack open a renter's paper. See how many offer bonuses to "good" [meaning gainfully employed, good credit, making good dollars] tenants.

Look around at all the empty government buildings and speaking of closed industries--look at all the funky warehouses and factories. They all have plumbing, electricity and heat.

What about empty land? All that reno scrap that's useful to build "green" housing. Straw bale, concrete, wood, rock, old bricks--throw in a $50 bag of mortar, it's all recyclable building materials.

The only reason anyone is "homeless" is because there's an advantage to keeping them that way.

20,000 people in this province did not suddenly develop mental illnesses and addictions when Harris gutted social services and rent controls.

27% are women

80% have health related problems, mental illness, addiction or physical disabilities

33% are FN's

Homelessness has jumped 373 per cent since 2002

quote:

---

Originally posted by TVParkdale:
Contrary to popular opinion, there is *enough housing* in almost every city in Canada IF it was all being used efficiently instead of sitting empty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
This is outrageous. Thanks remind.

And this government in Ontario also has no interest in efficiency at any level. We have thousands of drafty, leaky apartment houses, dingy basement and attic rabbit warrens costing people big time on utility bills and personal health, and I dare say mental outlook on life, in this semi-frozen Puerto Rico. But weak provincial Liberal governments are not all to blame. Weak federal Liberal governments canned our once semi-adequate national housing strategy in Canada.

---

One option that went on in several cities was that all developers, in obtain permits, had to have 10%rent-geared-to-income units when building more than 100 units.

IN THE 70's the potential homeowners, landlords and developers whined "poor me" and "we'll go somewhere else BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWW" until Vancouver, Toronto and others caved into their threats.

The bottom line here is that housing is about to CRASH, and crash hard, across this country.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
It cost twice as much for public services related homelessness,I.e. emergency housing, health care, policing, crime, than it does to provide supportive housing measures.

---

Tents work only that they are better than no tents. However tent city's allow to many opportunities for vulnerable people to be victimized by drug dealers and others. When I attend the UN public forum in Vancouver many homeless spoke of their experience and whenever someone demanded that something be done about the drug dealing in their community there was general applause. We don't need to make drug dealers (the ones exploiting societies most vulnerable) lives easier.

quote:

---

This is what is so frustrating to me! We don't even have to come up with more money, just spend our current budget proactively rather than on after-the-fact fallout. Why the resistance to common sense?

---

They were asking questions about how one felt about said data, and about who one felt should be foremost in assisting, what one thought about differing strategies to combat it, and if one had any ideas of their own.

Of note, 2 of the questions were in regards to a notion whether or not more arrests and jail time were needed to combat it.