Downtown Eastside - DTES Issues

[SpongeG]

A crew member and a responding police officer were assaulted by someone while they were filming for Batwoman down near crab park from the looks of the footage they just showed on the news. They said the suspect went off into the water but it wasn't clear if they had him in custody. That can't be good for the film industry.

[MIPS]

I don't see a problem with the film industry threatening to leave or scale back Vancouver operations because of "not really a problem" crime issues.

If anything we'll see the issue get magically resolved within a month.

[casper]

Originally Posted by MIPS

I don't see a problem with the film industry threatening to leave or scale back Vancouver operations because of "not really a problem" crime issues.

If anything we'll see the issue get magically resolved within a month.

We are talking about an industry that is based out of LA. This may be weird by Canadian or Vancouver standards but not in comparison to a major US city.

[MIPS]

If you are implying having to maintain a police presence (other than traffic control or specialty security) in order for a scene to be filmed in a public location, then we can do a hell of a lot better than that.
Most unions and agencies get antsy when they have to repeatedly deal with crazies wandering onto the set. Vancouver isn't Chicago, or Harlem and some films are shot here specifically it's not either location. If they don't like the neighborhood they'll go somewhere else with their money.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by MIPS

If you are implying having to maintain a police presence (other than traffic control or specialty security) in order for a scene to be filmed in a public location, then we can do a hell of a lot better than that.
Most unions and agencies get antsy when they have to repeatedly deal with crazies wandering onto the set. Vancouver isn't Chicago, or Harlem and some films are shot here specifically it's not either location. If they don't like the neighborhood they'll go somewhere else with their money.

Cops are already required on film sets in the city. I have no idea what your point is.

[MIPS]

The point was it looks bad and if the threat of losing money loomed over the city/province they would clean it up to appeal to them.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

A crew member and a responding police officer were assaulted by someone while they were filming for Batwoman down near crab park from the looks of the footage they just showed on the news. They said the suspect went off into the water but it wasn't clear if they had him in custody. That can't be good for the film industry.

All in a day's work in this part of town.

Originally Posted by SpongeG

There is an old guy who hangs out on Davie street, many west end residents know him or of him. He smells really really bad, like you can smell him from a good distance away. If you ever get to see him sitting around you can see his legs and feet are practically rotting, its pretty gross and pretty sad. He doesn't seem to want to seek any help. Hes probably not as old as he looks but he doesn't seem to want help from anyone, he needs some kind of intervention and medical and mental health help. People should not be allowed to just literally rot away on the streets.

In humane societies, City authorities would've forced him into treatment or rehab a long time ago.

[SeymourDrake]

Nobody is on the street unless they want to be. They might not like the options they are given. The Govt has bent over backwards to help the homeless and addicted members of our society.

You can't violates someones rights just because you think they should be hospitalized.

I'm willing to bet, that homeless guy with the so called rotting legs has been hospitalized and has been treated and is financially supported by the govt. But he chooses to be on the street.

It's not illegal to not give a **** what anyone else thinks about your decisions in life. Even if you have a mental illness and are medicated. You are still free to sleep, eat, crap where you want. Just because some of us are bothered by it doesn't mean it's wrong.

Think of your family, friends, coworkers, neighbors. You have no idea how close they are right now to being on the street. Would you look at them the same if they were on the street?

Opinions change real quick when you run out of options.

I get the american mentality from a lot of you. Be Better!!!

[scryer]

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

Nobody is on the street unless they want to be. They might not like the options they are given. The Govt has bent over backwards to help the homeless and addicted members of our society.

I agree to an extent but we are at the point where we need to change the system to adapt to the growing severity of the situation.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

You can't violates someones rights just because you think they should be hospitalized.

Everyday working people pay taxes so that they can go about their everyday lives without being assaulted. For example, the Batwoman crew assault incident near Crab Park. Those were innocent people assaulted in their workplace trying to make a living and they do deserve justice and answers from the individual who decided violate their rights.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

I'm willing to bet, that homeless guy with the so called rotting legs has been hospitalized and has been treated and is financially supported by the govt. But he chooses to be on the street.

I think I know the gentleman that you are talking about. As far as I know he isn't violent and I'm not going to pretend to know his situation... to play a little devil's advocate: IF he is given all of the support that you are assuming he is being given then wouldn't that bring into question his mental capacity to make safe decisions for himself and his well-being? I have seen this guy out in the middle of winter with exposed wounds and I don't have to be a psychiatrist to tell you that this isn't normal (or safe) behaviour.

IMO if his government funding was contingent upon him visiting an outpatient psychiatrist once a week or bi-monthly then he could very well benefit from the mental help that he wouldn't seek for himself - as would others.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

It's not illegal to not give a **** what anyone else thinks about your decisions in life. Even if you have a mental illness and are medicated. You are still free to sleep, eat, crap where you want. Just because some of us are bothered by it doesn't mean it's wrong.

However it is illegal though to violate someone else's human rights, including assault and intimidation.

Residents of Gastown building moving out as they fear for their safety

Downtown Vancouver resident fears for family’s safety after drug user chases her with needle

Vancouver police re-arrest pair charged with sexual assault at homeless camp This one deserves a special shout out because the victim was sexually assaulted for 15 HOURS if you read the article; it goes to show that these homeless camps are anything but safe nevermind the irreparable psychological trauma that the victim will have to face for the rest of her life.

Man with exposed genitals jumps on car in Vancouver intersection

If individuals don't care about what others think on their decisions then that is totally fine BUT when their behaviours threaten the safety of others and violates basic human rights guaranteed for Canadian citizens then those trespassing individuals need to face justice; the fact that this is now a systemic issue that is interacting with everyday people shows that we simply need to change the system.

If the perpetrators in the articles that I linked above weren't homeless then this would be a totally different conversation - and as a society we owe it to the future generations to question why a population can transgress many laws without consequences whereas the average working tax-payer would receive those consequences written into law. And I am not talking about serious transgressions with this statement, rather I am talking about more minor offences like public intoxication, littering, petty theft, indecent exposure, etc.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

Think of your family, friends, coworkers, neighbors. You have no idea how close they are right now to being on the street. Would you look at them the same if they were on the street?

You do realize that you are asking this question during a pandemic where a lot of people have to worry about economically persevering for themselves, right? I don't mean to be a dick but trying to appeal to pity like this in 2020 is a little out-dated.

Just because I am not playing into the game of "what if my brother/friend/whatever became homeless overnight" to get my socialist heart to bleed for the stranger next to me, it doesn't mean that I am responsible for someone else's existence and life decisions.

Most of us have the mental capacity and capabilities to make adult decisions that benefit us without putting others in danger; especially when a lot of us have had to make decisions to pivot alongside the pandemic.

For those that don't have the mental capacity to make safe life decisions then I believe that there should be a system designed to aid people in developing those capacities so that they can independently function safely in society. The current homeless system doesn't work and I think that having a system that helps people without the mental capacity to exhibit safe behaviours by giving them the mental help that they deserve, is something that I can easily get behind. After all the most severe mental cases out in the street are not going to consciously check themselves into psychiatric treatment; especially if they have a mental disorder combined with a drug addiction.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

I get the american mentality from a lot of you. Be Better!!!

If you are trying to make it an insult to be American or to agree with them on whatever level (which is xenophobic, mind you), then I suggest taking your own advice.

[SeymourDrake]

scryer

What an absolute self serving pile of garbage that reply was. Not only did you put words in my mouth to meet your own agenda. But you insulted me. Classy!!

You added absolutely nothing helpful to the issue.

Also, have you looked at the stats in the DTES compared to other areas of the lower mainland?

[scryer]

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

What an absolute self serving pile of garbage that reply was. Not only did you put words in my mouth to meet your own agenda. But you insulted me. Classy!!

I literally quoted you and responded with my opinions . I didn't need to change anything that you said to juxtapose your position on the issue.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

You added absolutely nothing helpful to the issue.

Actually I made a few suggestions in regards to folks that lack the mental capacity to make safe decisions for themselves in my response. Let me help you:

Originally Posted by scryer

...IMO if his government funding was contingent upon him visiting an outpatient psychiatrist once a week or bi-monthly then he could very well benefit from the mental help that he wouldn't seek for himself - as would others.

Originally Posted by scryer

For those that don't have the mental capacity to make safe life decisions then I believe that there should be a system designed to aid people in developing those capacities so that they can independently function safely in society. The current homeless system doesn't work and I think that having a system that helps people without the mental capacity to exhibit safe behaviours by giving them the mental help that they deserve, is something that I can easily get behind. After all the most severe mental cases out in the street are not going to consciously check themselves into psychiatric treatment; especially if they have a mental disorder combined with a drug addiction.

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

Also, have you looked at the stats in the DTES compared to other areas of the lower mainland?

Have you looked at the stats in the DTES compared to other areas of the Lower Mainland? Because I can start with the Homeless Count for 2020 (preliminary) and the Homeless Count for 2019 and use the figures and metrics to make you a goddamn graph that shows that homelessness has been increasing for the last 5 years. I'm also not planning on ping-pong'ing points based on semantics when a woman was raped for 15 hours in Oppenheimer Park; and we as a society aren't outraged that this happened under the government's current approach to homeless camps. That was 15 hours of straight up rape and imprisonment with no intervention from emergency services AFAIK. The fact that a crime of that horrific nature can occur in Canada, in a place that's known to be unsafe by the local government, is shocking. As everyday people, we should be demanding that this is un-acceptable in our society.

I also kindly invite you to supplement your opinions with data that shows that the current lassez-faire approach to homelessness is eliminating the issue as a whole. I have already supplemented my opinions with news articles from just this year alone, along with some stats links in this post so you need to catch up since your statements aren't immune from needing to be supported with stats.

[s211]

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

I get the american mentality from a lot of you. Be Better!!!

Uh, American mentality? Must be humbling to be so Canadian-perfect.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by scryer

Have you looked at the stats in the DTES compared to other areas of the Lower Mainland? Because I can start with the Homeless Count for 2020 (preliminary) and the Homeless Count for 2019 and use the figures and metrics to make you a goddamn graph that shows that homelessness has been increasing for the last 5 years.

I've looked at the reports you linked to. Have you? If you had, you would see that homelessness in The City of Vancouver fell (very slightly) between 2019 and 2020. And I'm pretty sure you won't find any statistics that tell you where the homeless are located within the city, so you have no idea how many are in the DTES and how many in the rest of the city.

The only way to 'solve' homelessness is to have more homes available for those who are homeless. Almost all the new non-market residential facilities that have been built in the City of Vancouver in the past few years, the two large projects currently under construction, (at East Cordova, and Dunlevy Ave) and most of the ones currently planned like those on West Hastings, East Hastings, Powell Street, another on East Cordova and another on East Hastings (for example) have facilities for mental health support. But individuals can still choose not to use that support, and additionally you can read any number of studies that show how someone in the grip of psychosis will behave in ways dangerous to their own health, and potentially of others, even when they are being supported. That can also happen if medication starts working, so someone 'feels better', stops taking their medication, and then starts acting irrationally again.

[SeymourDrake]

Originally Posted by s211

Uh, American mentality? Must be humbling to be so Canadian-perfect.

Skid Row - Los Angeles, 60 Blocks of Homeless people, drugs, organised crime etc... people getting dumped there from a brief stay at the hospital because they have no insurance.

[casper]

Originally Posted by s211

Uh, American mentality? Must be humbling to be so Canadian-perfect.

I would not view any of this as Canada being "better" than the US. As a society we have adopted different values and principles to how our society functions.

Canada has a very different approach to public health and how we create a basic safety net. We also have a different approach to law enforcement and drugs. We have some skeletons in the closed and some historical decisions that as a society we are still struggling to overcome, e.g. residential schools.

The US has a very different approach and its unique history. S

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Vin

All in a day's work in this part of town.



In humane societies, City authorities would've forced him into treatment or rehab a long time ago.

he has been treated, you can see he has hospital bracelets on. People I know talk to him often when they see him, he is a fixture on Davie street. They all feel bad for him but he doesn't seem to want the help. Clearly there are some mental issues that he chooses to stay on the street.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

I've looked at the reports you linked to. Have you? If you had, you would see that homelessness in The City of Vancouver fell (very slightly) between 2019 and 2020. And I'm pretty sure you won't find any statistics that tell you where the homeless are located within the city, so you have no idea how many are in the DTES and how many in the rest of the city.

The only way to 'solve' homelessness is to have more homes available for those who are homeless. Almost all the new non-market residential facilities that have been built in the City of Vancouver in the past few years, the two large projects currently under construction, (at East Cordova, and Dunlevy Ave) and most of the ones currently planned like those on West Hastings, East Hastings, Powell Street, another on East Cordova and another on East Hastings (for example) have facilities for mental health support. But individuals can still choose not to use that support, and additionally you can read any number of studies that show how someone in the grip of psychosis will behave in ways dangerous to their own health, and potentially of others, even when they are being supported. That can also happen if medication starts working, so someone 'feels better', stops taking their medication, and then starts acting irrationally again.

I dont want to have this direct at you, but some of you guys are so damn close to seeing the point, but miss it so completely.

In the same post you say the solution to homelessness is homes for everyone. Seems a pretty logical statement on the surface.

Until you yourself give the reasons why people choose to refuse housing, be it mental health, "overbearing" rules to abide by, etc.

This is the epitome of have your cake and eat it too;

- Have mental health issues, unaddressed, and expect the public to deal with your sh*t on the daily.
- Refuse expensive tax dollar funded housing, because of "rules". Rules that all of us follow as a simple means of living in a society.
- Get to defecate and urinate on the streets, shoot up, indefinitely because freedoms or something.
- Complain that not enough is done for the homeless.

ENOUGH.

This is such a ridiculous circular logic.

If you're not in the state of mind to treat yourself in a healthy way and continually demonstrate an inability to adhere to the most basic requirements of society then at some point there must be a line drawn where you forfeit your ability to make decisions for self.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by SeymourDrake

scryer

What an absolute self serving pile of garbage that reply was. Not only did you put words in my mouth to meet your own agenda. But you insulted me. Classy!!

You added absolutely nothing helpful to the issue.

Also, have you looked at the stats in the DTES compared to other areas of the lower mainland?

I suggest you reread the reply. Youre getting emotionally triggered, and the irrationality is showing.

scryers reply was measured, and informative.

You might disagree with it, that's your right, but to call it a pile of garbage is a brilliant way to try and shut down a converstaion that challenges your biases.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

I dont want to have this direct at you, but some of you guys are so damn close to seeing the point, but miss it so completely.

In the same post you say the solution to homelessness is homes for everyone. Seems a pretty logical statement on the surface.

Until you yourself give the reasons why people choose to refuse housing, be it mental health, "overbearing" rules to abide by, etc.

This is the epitome of have your cake and eat it too;

- Have mental health issues, unaddressed, and expect the public to deal with your sh*t on the daily.
- Refuse expensive tax dollar funded housing, because of "rules". Rules that all of us follow as a simple means of living in a society.
- Get to defecate and urinate on the streets, shoot up, indefinitely because freedoms or something.
- Complain that not enough is done for the homeless.

ENOUGH.

This is such a ridiculous circular logic.

If you're not in the state of mind to treat yourself in a healthy way and continually demonstrate an inability to adhere to the most basic requirements of society then at some point there must be a line drawn where you forfeit your ability to make decisions for self.

There are three separate but inter-related problems. Posters here confuse, combine and mix and match them. One is homelessness, which exists across the Lower Mainland, but with a current very visible concentration in Strathcona. Another is the significant population of - using an unscientific, but broad description - mentally challenged people. Again, they're located all over the Lower Mainland, but there is a concentration of support services in the DTES. There's also a historical concentration of welfare-rate (or near) housing in the DTES, which is all someone with limited or no employment prospects can afford. The third is drug use. That's everywhere too, you just see it in the DTES, but the current health crisis and fentanyl related deaths are happening more outside the DTES, with most deaths happening in people's homes - not in SROs or on the street.

We don't have enough housing for the homeless. The City and Province are building more, although the Feds aren't actually putting much money into BC. We also don't have enough low income rental housing, and there are a lot of people at risk of homelessness. Vancouver has, in my opinion, done surprisingly well to keep the number of homeless relatively stable, especially if you examine the numbers in US west coast cities, or Alberta, or Toronto.

The problem with providing support and services for mentally challenged individuals isn't as straightforward as adding more services, but that's necessary. You seem to be advocating for some mechanism to remove people from the streets, or if they're homeless, from where they're living. I'm not clear what legal basis there would be, or who you want to do that, and where you want them to go? There aren't, as far as I know, empty beds in psychiatric wards, or available in-patient mental health facilities. Currently there's a big problem in the DTES because a lot of day centres and drop-in facilities have had to close or restrict numbers. Some people want to see the streets cleared of the people hanging out, but I have no idea where they expect them to be taken to.

Many of those on the street are also drug users. Some posters here think they should be forced to accept treatment, although realistically all the existing treatment centres operate at close to full capacity, so that's not actually going to happen, even if it was legally enforceable. Again, covid19 has made treatment availability more complex. I don't see things getting any better unless a safe drug supply and more treatment is made available, and treatment isn't a cheap option, or successful in many cases.

So, to clarify, I'm willing to see more taxes spent on providing more housing more support services and more treatment options. I don't see those as 'solving' anything, just, perhaps, improving the current situation. I personally support some of the organizations working in the DTES, and I don't think that organizations like UGM, Lookout, Mission Possible or PHS are 'poverty pimps' as some disparagingly describe them. I think that almost universally, today agencies like them are doing their best to make a bad situation better. I'd like to see more housing, treatment and support services outside the DTES, and outside Vancouver as well.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by rofina

If you're not in the state of mind to treat yourself in a healthy way and continually demonstrate an inability to adhere to the most basic requirements of society then at some point there must be a line drawn where you forfeit your ability to make decisions for self.

Exactly. There are many examples from just this year alone that demonstrate that we are at this point where we need to draw that line.

Originally Posted by Changing City

I've looked at the reports you linked to. Have you? If you had, you would see that homelessness in The City of Vancouver fell (very slightly) between 2019 and 2020. And I'm pretty sure you won't find any statistics that tell you where the homeless are located within the city, so you have no idea how many are in the DTES and how many in the rest of the city.

It's a preliminary report. Hence the title preliminary. Methinks that when winter settles in that folks working the shelters are able to gather more accurate numbers as well. Don't fret: I'm sure that it will be updated by next year. It also still doesn't deny the fact that homelessness has been increasing since they started recording it years ago . And who knows? It's also very likely the pandemic will hold some influence over the stats for 2020 including the number of people that shelters can now accommodate with social distancing in place.

If all of the homeless populations were residing in Maple Ridge or North Van for example, it still doesn't deny that we have a big homeless problem in Metro Vancouver and it wouldn't necessarily change the approach (lol, what approach?) that the local governments would take but rather where they would implement their actions. I say this because I'm not trying to shit on the DTES and paint it out to be the big bad villain but rather I am trying to shit on the local government's approach since the problem has gotten much worse since when they first recorded homeless statistics.

Originally Posted by Changing City

One is homelessness, which exists across the Lower Mainland, but with a current very visible concentration in Strathcona.

....And East Hastings, and Granville Street, and Davie Street, and Thornton Park, and Victory Square, and East Pender-Main, and Surrey Central, and Surrey's Gateway neighbourhood, and Whalley to name a few more visible concentrations...

Originally Posted by Changing City

Another is the significant population of - using an unscientific, but broad description - mentally challenged people. Again, they're located all over the Lower Mainland, but there is a concentration of support services in the DTES.

I was very careful when wording my posts to specifically stipulate that I was talking about people who do not have the mental capacity to make safe decisions for themselves and to function safely in society. We can't be afraid to call unstable mental health as being dangerous to society because there are several examples from this year where innocents' rights were violated because someone didn't have a healthy mental condition; and there is no system in place to protect those victims and future victims from these violent episodes.

Originally Posted by Changing City

There's also a historical concentration of welfare-rate (or near) housing in the DTES, which is all someone with limited or no employment prospects can afford. The third is drug use.

This is actually exactly where the line gets blurry because you can have individuals that fall under all of those categories. Those that are mentally ill may (and have) use(d) illegal drugs to try and treat their condition and then BAM: you now have an individual who not only has mental health problems but they now have an addiction. Unfortunately I feel that this is a common story but I don't have the stats to back it up.

Originally Posted by Changing City

That's everywhere too, you just see it in the DTES, but the current health crisis and fentanyl related deaths are happening more outside the DTES, with most deaths happening in people's homes - not in SROs or on the street.

The point of discussing and finessing our approach to create a system that treats homelessness effectively, is to eventually reintegrate these individuals into society with a better outlook on life and to be able to function safely in society.

I personally think that you are comparing apples to oranges when you are comparing overdoses in the DTES to someone who overdosed in their own home. Those individuals overdosing in their own home generally have more resources available to them to be able to turn their lives around, starting with the roof over their heads. Read below for further discussion on housing as I will address the counter-argument there...

That statistic could also prove that the distribution of Naloxone kits (including the take-home kit program) are effective in reducing overdose deaths which is good but (and I don't meant to get morbid) what life can this second, third, fourth chance in-a-vial give to someone if they aren't seeking help to get off the drugs? When you use Naloxone it completely eradicates the high of the drug and so the user goes right back to finding that next high not breaking the cycle of addiction. Harm reduction was one of the four pillars of the COV drug strategy and the reason that I bring this up is because it needs to be balanced with the other 3 pillars to be an effective approach.

One of my suggestions for a more accurate reading on overdose data across the city would be a comparison of Naloxone kit use (without medical intervention) data compared to Naloxone kits used in a medical setting. Whether or not such a statistic exists (or is even being recorded) is a whole other story but I think that we don't have all the facts to state that because there was a statistic that showed more medically intervened overdoses occurred in someone's private home that it directly means that there is less use of drugs in the high profile homeless areas. To add to that, there is also a BIG difference between overdose and drug use data. One of which is much easier to record than the other.

Originally Posted by Changing City

We don't have enough housing for the homeless. The City and Province are building more, although the Feds aren't actually putting much money into BC. We also don't have enough low income rental housing, and there are a lot of people at risk of homelessness.

You kind of took the words out of my mouth... Vancouver doesn't actually have enough housing for regular everyday working people that actually put money in the city's coffers to run the harm reduction and Naloxone programs in the DTES. If you make under 80k a year, you can't afford a decent home and I don't want to get too off-topic but the homeless have a whole other challenge to face that everyone of us faces in Vancouver and that is its rental and RE markets. That's the cold reality of living here for EVERYONE.

This is not to say that I wouldn't support housing solutions but rather I would support more half-way housing programs that tries to reintegrate people into regular housing/rental markets.

Originally Posted by Changing City

The problem with providing support and services for mentally challenged individuals isn't as straightforward as adding more services, but that's necessary.

Wait... what? Feel free to clarify .

Originally Posted by Changing City

I'm not clear what legal basis there would be, or who you want to do that, and where you want them to go?

Well for starters there are Canadian loitering and Disturbing the Peace laws that somehow don't get enforced...

I'm not suggesting that filling up our jails is the solution rather I am just pointing out that enforcement is a huge issue with this demographic and that there is an ACTUAL legal basis for law enforcement to intervene from what I can tell. The legality is mostly already there but I will agree that further legislation needs to be drafted to address appropriate punitive measures like appropriate mandatory community service or out/in patient mental health services.

Originally Posted by Changing City

There aren't, as far as I know, empty beds in psychiatric wards, or available in-patient mental health facilities. Currently there's a big problem in the DTES because a lot of day centres and drop-in facilities have had to close or restrict numbers. Some people want to see the streets cleared of the people hanging out, but I have no idea where they expect them to be taken to.

Well, the St. Paul's development is aiming to bring more mental health care access so we have some more resources on the way. And I think that it in this economy, on the heels of this pandemic, that it is unrealistic to see further investments in harm reduction services before the support of the tax payer that pays for these services as it would almost be political suicide. Hell it might even be unrealistic for the public to expect the St. Paul's development to be delivered on time with the expenses this pandemic has incurred.

Originally Posted by Changing City

I'm willing to see more taxes spent on providing more housing more support services and more treatment options. I don't see those as 'solving' anything, just, perhaps, improving the current situation. I personally support some of the organizations working in the DTES, and I don't think that organizations like UGM, Lookout, Mission Possible or PHS are 'poverty pimps' as some disparagingly describe them. I think that almost universally, today agencies like them are doing their best to make a bad situation better. I'd like to see more housing, treatment and support services outside the DTES, and outside Vancouver as well.

There is over 5 years of data that shows that we tried that and things have gotten worse. The fact that the situation is now spilling over into tax payer neighbourhoods (like Strathcona) means that it can no longer be an issue that we can conveniently ignore and blindly throw money at the same strategies and expect different results. We shouldn't be lowering our expectation to just simply make a bad situation better; we should be demanding our governments to implement wise strategies to ultimately solve it with measurable results.

I would rather see my tax dollars spent on enforcement to keep our neighbourhoods safe and to follow the 4 pillar approach completely as outlined by the city. Right now the approach is maybe 2 pillars at best (and that's me being generous) and it is completely unbalanced and yielding worse results. Ideally I would like to see a national strategy implemented since I think that Vancouver serves as the Utopia for homeless Canadians across the country.