THUNDER BAY — In a 12-1 vote, council has decided Kam River Heritage Park will not be the site of a temporary shelter village.
Coun. Michael Zussino was the lone vote against the motion to rescind council's site decision, which was finally ratified on May 5 after months of back and forth on a number of site options.
Monday’s vote was pushed through quickly, with same-day debate and decision (requiring an exception to procedure rules) as the city is working against the clock.
There is $2.8 million in provincial funding that will be lost if construction doesn't begin in July, within 120 days of an agreement signed with the District of Thunder Bay Social Services Administration Board.
Council voted 12-1 to have staff review alternate locations for the temporary village, including locations previously rejected by council, such as the Miles Street East and Cumberland Street North sites. Coun. Rajni Agarwal was the only opposing vote.
The Lakehead Region Conservation Authority property in the Intercity area is no longer on the table as the LRCA has revoked their support, according to city manager John Collin.
The motions were put forward by Coun. Kasey Etreni, who said the safety measures needed to “satisfy external partners” at the Kam River site were “too cost-prohibitive.”
Agarwal said she is “heartbroken to see how much time has been spent” on the Kam River site.
“The railway had announced back in April that they were not in favour of the site, and we tried to negotiate with them, but they said no, we're not in favour of the site. It's not safe. But we still went and plowed ahead for all of May and most of June, regardless of what the railway said,” Agarwal said.
“Then we got some other notices which were a lot stronger, and we can't mitigate those challenges with the railway being there. The railway's always been there, but we took 2 months to do that. I'm glad we're not going there because it is not a safe site between the water and the rail, but we knew, many of us knew that going forward.”
Collin said Agarwal's statement was “factually incorrect.” City staff didn’t just “plow ahead” with their plans for the shelter village.
“We did not disregard the views of those who expressed concerns, as we do with all issues, when concerns are addressed to us and we are fully open and transparent with this council that the concerns existed. We try to find solutions. We try to find mitigation. That is what we have done since April 28th, when initial concern was voiced,” Collin said.
“As we mentioned the last time that this council spoke about this, we were quite clear. I was quite clear, and in fact, I believe administration as a whole must have mentioned at least three or four times during the meeting, there were safety concerns.”
“We were going to do a safety assessment, and if we were unable to satisfy those safety concerns or if the mitigation became untenable, we would return to counsel with additional direction for additional direction. We have not plowed ahead.”
Coun. Hamilton asked about the chance, if the Miles Street site, first recommended by staff, is once again voted down, a designated encampment site would be placed in the south core.
As part of the city's 10-part human rights plan, once a temporary village location was in place, city staff would designate up to three encampment sites in the city.
Collin said, “there is a need in the south core to provide shelter to a relatively large population of people who are experiencing homelessness. Some will be addressed through the temporary village. There may be others who wish to be outdoors.”
“Tent encampments are a necessary thing, and a tent encampment in the south core is a necessary thing unless the village addresses the entire need in the south core. So, without doubt, I would suggest to you that if the temporary village is not in the south core, we are going to be coming to you with a recommendation for a tent encampment somewhere in the south core to address the need.”
Collin also said that if the temporary village is located in the south core, the staff would recommend a designated tent site in the north core.
City staff will report back to council with a new possible location on July 14.
