If youre confused about all the churn in the media about who is being housed in the new social housing sites in Vancouver, I can help.
The Courier broke the story last week about this issue when a city staff report entitled Tenanting Update on the 14 Social/Supportive Housing Sites was posted on the citys website.
Vision Coun. Kerry Jang requested the report. He received reports that the new buildings, built on land donated by the city using provincial dollars for construction and operating funds, were not only housing the homeless. In fact, it was far from it.
Essentially, the report noted that of the 388 newly completed supportive housing units built on four of the 14 sites, only slightly more than one third has been allocated to the homeless.
But before the council committee could meet to discuss the report Thursday, stories appeared first in the Courier and elsewhere recording reactions. The bluntest of headlines appeared in The Â鶹´«Ã½Ó³»Sun Monday: Homeless get short straw in housing allocation: Unit meant for street people go to convicts, addicts.
Mayor Gregor Robertson told Courier reporter Mike Howell he was surprised by the revelations in the report. He told the Globe and Mail: I am very concerned if we are not housing 100 per cent of the units with people who are homeless. Then he said the decision about who goes into those units is made by B.C. Housing, not the city.
His opponent in next months municipal election, the NPAs Suzanne Anton, first raised the same concern: Why are people coming out of correctional facilities being placed ahead of Vancouvers vulnerable homeless population?
Then, not surprisingly, Anton used the opportunity to attack Robertson calling his plans to reduce street homelessness a sham. On Tuesday she said: This is Gregors pattern, point to other people and say it is their fault. And she added: The buck stops at his desk, and if he cant take responsibility for his number one issue, then it is time to step aside pal.
And what did the province have to say? Well, Housing Minister Rich Coleman stepped up to tell us that the way those buildings were being populated was in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by B.C. and the city regarding all 14 sites back in 2007 when, incidentally, Anton was on council and her NPA party held the majority.
So, who is right? Well, as it turns out, Robertson was right and Anton was wrong about where the buck stops on the issue of who gets to live in those units. That decision is not made by the city. B.C. Housing and contractors they hire to run the buildings make it.
But both Robertson and Anton were wrong on the question of who gets to live in those units.
Robertson shouldnt have been surprised and Anton shouldnt have questioned why people coming out of correctional institutions are being placed ahead of Vancouvers vulnerable homeless population. As she should know from her time as a prosecutor, homeless people often end up in the slammer and have nowhere to go when they get out.
Both Robertson and Anton should have read the MOU before sounding off. They would have seen, as we were reminded this week by the citys former director of housing and an architect of that MOU, Cameron Gray, the buildings tenants would include low income singles living in the Citys SROs, homeless individuals and those at risk of homelessness, many of whom are mentally ill and /or suffering from addiction and need supports.
The province isnt entirely without fault. In spite of the MOU, B.C. Housing confuses matters when it cites Coleman, as it did in a December 2009 press release, announcing the latest supportive housing projects 129 units would be for people who are homeless.
