Modular/Homeless Housing in Expensive Neighborhoods?

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by misher

Note this is partially because Canadian cities ship them all here
I wrote a nice post somewhere with sources explaining how a good portion of our homeless are from out of province.

A good portion may be out of province, but it is a lie that Canadian cities ship them here.

Ralph Klein did that a couple decades ago as a publicity stunt (he also went to a shelter and yelled at the people there: "GET A JOB!, which in all honesty, I find hilarious). But no one since.

Please provide links and prove me wrong, otherwise, like Vin, you're just lying.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...-man-1.1329520

[240glt]

A good portion may be out of province, but it is a lie that Canadian cities ship them here.

It definitely not the truth. People seem to forget that in Canada, even for poor people, we have a highly mobile population. I'd wager that if you were to find out where the homeless population in any city is from, you'd find that they come from all over the place.

In Vernon for instance there was an article published about a homeless couple who got a ride from Winnipeg to Vernon, because they heard it was a better place to be homeless. No one shipped them there. They went there all by themselves.

Unless we're going to take the extraordinary step of limiting Canadians movements within their own country (which undoubtedly would be found to be illegal and unconstitutional) People are going to move from one place to another, rich & poor alike

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by 240glt

It definitely not the truth. People seem to forget that in Canada, even for poor people, we have a highly mobile population. I'd wager that if you were to find out where the homeless population in any city is from, you'd find that they come from all over the place.

In Vernon for instance there was an article published about a homeless couple who got a ride from Winnipeg to Vernon, because they heard it was a better place to be homeless. No one shipped them there. They went there all by themselves.

Unless we're going to take the extraordinary step of limiting Canadians movements within their own country (which undoubtedly would be found to be illegal and unconstitutional) People are going to move from one place to another, rich & poor alike

Exactly. Which is why we should not even be discussing this and instead focus on solutions, right here in our city, and deal with the homeless and mental health issues. It's not going to go away on it's own, we can't force people out because, like you said, it is unconstitutional and illegal.

Modular housing is a great step in providing temporary housing. I also truly believe that some decentralization of housing from the downtown east-side is necessary, it gets people away from the chaos and hopefully back on their own feet.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Jalapeño Chips

A good portion may be out of province, but it is a lie that Canadian cities ship them here.

Ralph Klein did that a couple decades ago as a publicity stunt (he also went to a shelter and yelled at the people there: "GET A JOB!, which in all honesty, I find hilarious). But no one since.

Please provide links and prove me wrong, otherwise, like Vin, you're just lying.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...-man-1.1329520

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...uver-1.3484511

Vancouver City Councillor Kerry Jang calls the report and its conclusions "laughable."

"When I saw the report I couldn't help but laugh. They said they worked within policy but their basic policy is wrong."

"These gentlemen were expected to sleep out in the snow, so they asked for bus tickets to see their relatives in B.C. and they said fine... It's ridiculous."


Charles Neil-Curly and Jeremy Roy hopped on a Greyhound bus from North Battleford to Vancouver after they were unable to secure a spot at a Battlefords -area shelter.
"They have a policy that will actually deny people shelter. They have a policy that will put people on a bus and send them across the country without telling anyone. That's wrong."

Is an example. It just makes logical sense that when transit is free and shelters are full homeless will choose to move to the city with the best climate and debateably the biggest pockets for donations.

Another example is this article which states

B.C. is seen as the prime destination for the homeless in Canada, who are migrating from Alberta and Ontario to reach their preferred destination...In Vancouver, a recent study out of Simon Fraser University found that 52 per cent of the homeless in the Downtown Eastside had come from outside the city. Of those, many had already been homeless.

Homeless people know that Vancouver has better services, citizens who give to panhandlers and police officers who are accustomed to the unnerving tics that come with heroin addiction or untreated mental illness, says the study’s lead author.

“The word is out that there are certain places in Canada … where those behaviours will be more likely tolerated,” says the SFU study’s lead author Julian Somers, adding that it’s “not really that remarkable a finding” that homeless people are moving into Vancouver.

Given the sheer density of poverty, drug addiction and homelessness in the Downtown Eastside “it just doesn’t stand to reason that it is an entirely homegrown set of social and health challenges.”

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-...less-head-west


While I don't agree with forcing people out I would say lets deny social services to people from out of province who just came here within the past 2 years. Give them a bus ticket back to their province so their province can pay for them. Its not like we're asking them to go to Africa, just back to another city in Canada. Why should we prioritize other province's problems over our own? Its not like they will receive much better care in Vancouver over another Canadian city (Despite how much we all love it, Vancouver is not superior!!!). Likely the more money we pump into social services, the more attractive Vancouver gets to the rest of Canada's homeless, and the more who will move here causing an unsolvable problem unless we draw the line somewhere. This is paired with the example of Medicine Hat who provided housing similar to what Vancouver is trying to do and experienced a huge surge in homeless immigration

Medicine Hat last year famously became the first city in Canada to virtually end homelessness and is now, in small part, a victim of its own success. Nobody spends more than 10 days sleeping rough or in a shelter before being paired with housing, and so far the city of 61,000 has housed 885 people.

Just as publicity of Medicine Hat’s success spread, a 2015 homeless count found that 45% of those sleeping rough were new to the city.

Letting homeless from across the country settle here is not a solution.

as Somers found, simply having hundreds of homeless people flooding westwards isn’t helping anybody.

His team followed 400 homeless people over a 10-year period and identified a clear pattern. The (usually mentally ill) person settles into the Downtown Eastside and soon begins a steady routine of hospital admissions, clinic visits, arrests and court appearances.

Their health heads into a tailspin and soon, after racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in services, they die early.

“This is clearly not a positive story.”

[ranvancan]

Listen, If we build them, they still won't live in them. Why would they want to spend what little welfare cheque money they get on an upgrade of a roof over their heads when they can spend that money on drugs and drink and just get by on our streets???? They survive that way and it won't change. The government needs to get tough and force rehab on them. It won't be easy and there will be major issues but enough is enough. This city is ultra sick.
I walk to and from work everyday downtown and last night at midnight, I counted 15 sleepers and loiterers between McDonald's and Denman on lower West Robson and it felt like DTES............THAT IS DISGUSTING! I feel for them individually but when you have this epidemic, I only loath them. Sorry. Where does my taxes go in this sick, sick dirty city?

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by misher

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...uver-1.3484511



Is an example. It just makes logical sense that when transit is free and shelters are full homeless will choose to move to the city with the best climate and debateably the biggest pockets for donations.

Another example is this article which states https://vancouversun.com/news/local-...less-head-west

That was also an isolated case, and it was not the city, it was the provincial government. Even with those two isolated cases, the cities are not shipping them here, they all come on their own. No one forces anyone to come here.

I don't disagree that they are attracted here, but so are many other people, rich and poor. You can't say that they should be stopped, it's not ever possible, so why try and discuss it anyway? Maybe we should be discussing the issue as a national problem and try and have positive and honest discussions about solutions, in every city and province.

[whatnext]

Misher sure sounds a lot like Wai Young and/or the Coalition Vancouver party, right down to cracks about Jean Swanson:

From amplifying disparaging messages calling homeless people “crackheads,” to publicly criticizing the wardrobe of a political opponent, senior members of the upstart Coalition Vancouver are bringing a new style of political discourse to the city’s looming municipal election.

In a recent example, Coalition Vancouver’s mayoral candidate Wai Young used her official Twitter account to spread a negative message about Vancouver’s temporary modular housing program. Last week, Young retweeted a message from a Vancouver-based Twitter user called Niko, sharing a news item about a temporary modular housing project in Strathcona, with the commentary: “In Vancouver if you stay clean, study, borrow, finish university, get a job & pay taxes, you’ll be renovicted to Surrey. But if you’re crazy, a crackhead or a criminal you get a free apartment in an expensive neighbourhood.”..

...Coalition Vancouver president Peter Labrie kept the ball rolling, publicly praising the tweet, writing his own post on Twitter describing the original message as “the most perfect summary of Vancouver.” Labrie also told the creator of the original tweet that if he was interested in running in the election, to “let me know.”

On Monday, Labrie turned his attention to Jean Swanson, a council candidate for the Coalition of Progressive Electors who recently completed a four-day jail sentence for violating a court injunction by taking part in the Trans Mountain pipeline protest.

“Who dresses Jean Swanson?” Labrie wrote. “This is the only person who gets a wardrobe upgrade by going to prison.”...

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-...e-of-discourse

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by ranvancan

Listen, If we build them, they still won't live in them. Why would they want to spend what little welfare cheque money they get on an upgrade of a roof over their heads when they can spend that money on drugs and drink and just get by on our streets???? They survive that way and it won't change. The government needs to get tough and force rehab on them. It won't be easy and there will be major issues but enough is enough. This city is ultra sick.
I walk to and from work everyday downtown and last night at midnight, I counted 15 sleepers and loiterers between McDonald's and Denman on lower West Robson and it felt like DTES............THAT IS DISGUSTING! I feel for them individually but when you have this epidemic, I only loath them. Sorry. Where does my taxes go in this sick, sick dirty city?

I agree with the sentiment, it sucks and I hate it, and we all know it's only getting worse. It's affecting us all.

I also agree that rehab, or mental health services, or whatever is needed per individual should be a condition of assistance. But we first need to build and supply those services, otherwise it's a moot point discussion.

I think that they do live in the modular housing, last I heard they are all full, but it's only enough so far for a small percentage of homeless.

[logicbomb]

You have mental illness being a real legit issue. Services for those suffering schizophrenia or bipolar disorders are non-existent. You will never get the help you need unless you – a paranoid schizophrenic- are willing to advocate for yourself. This is why we should incarcerate anyone deemed to have severe mental disorders and forcefully rehabilitate them. Unfortunately the SJW are most vocal about “free choice” and the right-wing governments could care less about mental health and addictions services….so they are really fucked for life.

Back to the issue at hand though. I will repeat my sentiment when I say Vancouver is the most desirable City in the world to live in. Too many people want to move here and our resources (tax contributions) are so limited.

I anticipate there will be immense pressure to relocate the homeless over the next decade to areas further away from the City. Governments cannot force people out of an area, but they can heavily deter individuals from residing in that area (limiting resources, increased police presence, new laws targeting homeless and squatting).

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

You have mental illness being a real legit issue. Services for those suffering schizophrenia or bipolar disorders are non-existent. You will never get the help you need unless you – a paranoid schizophrenic- are willing to advocate for yourself. This is why we should incarcerate anyone deemed to have severe mental disorders and forcefully rehabilitate them. Unfortunately the SJW are most vocal about “free choice” and the right-wing governments could care less about mental health and addictions services….so they are really fucked for life.

Back to the issue at hand though. I will repeat my sentiment when I say Vancouver is the most desirable City in the world to live in. Too many people want to move here and our resources (tax contributions) are so limited.

I anticipate there will be immense pressure to relocate the homeless over the next decade to areas further away from the City. Governments cannot force people out of an area, but they can heavily deter individuals from residing in that area (limiting resources, increased police presence, new laws targeting homeless and squatting).

Actually, there are some services for that. It's the access that's limited. It's just not enough.

Laws like that have been struck down as being unconstitutional (Victoria tent city, as an example). It will never pass. We will never have those kinds of laws, they will keep being struck down.

Sure, more policing and limiting resources may deter some, but it won't stop it.

I'd rather see all these issues in a national discussion, obviously something is way wrong. I'm not advocating for more tax dollars to be thrown at it, nor should we just sit back and just ignore it. It won't go away either way. I think if we take a hard look at where resources are needed (stop spending the billions on multiple organizations doing the same thing, and nothing, in the DTES), support people in their own communities, and create national mental health institutes (imagine many Riverview's), then we might be spending a lot less and making some progress.

Some people are criminals, with out a doubt, and a hard line will the only way.

It's not working they way it is now, but we should't just vilify without justification, or attempts at solutions.

[Jalapeño Chips]

This problem is also a North American problem, not just Vancouver and Canada. The housing and homeless crisis affects most mid-size and major cities across the US and Canada. The flood of cheap and easily available drugs don't help, thanks to Mexican cartels, just a couple of borders away.

If you think it's bad in Vancouver, check out near L.A. (Orange County):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYh6RgTFnA0

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by ranvancan

Why would they want to spend what little welfare cheque money they get on an upgrade of a roof over their heads when they can spend that money on drugs and drink and just get by on our streets???? They survive that way and it won't change.

Actually people who are homeless have a problem with getting welfare as they don't have an address. *IF* they are on it and become homeless, the shelter portion of their cheque is deducted because they don't have a home to pay for. Also homeless people can't update their ID (again because of no address) so there are a lot of services they can't access.

Do you still think they have an easy time?

Originally Posted by Jalapeño Chips

I also agree that rehab, or mental health services, or whatever is needed per individual should be a condition of assistance. But we first need to build and supply those services, otherwise it's a moot point discussion.

Closing Riverview and forcing a lot of the people living there onto the street was a bad decision. Sure reopening places like it won't help everyone who's homeless but it'll be a lot better than the next to nothing that's happening now.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by Jalapeño Chips

Actually, there are some services for that. It's the access that's limited. It's just not enough.

I was out in the field, some genuinely wanted help but there are no long-term mental health outpatient facilities for those capable of seeking help. It used to be that a person suffering from severe schizophrenia would be admitted to a long-term bed for months while they were subjected to force injections/medications (especially if they were deemed to be a threat to themselves or others). Completely different nowadays where those who are vulnerable to mental health relapses are ostracized and subject to short-term stays of less than 2 weeks.

For all intents and purposes...the services are no longer there.

Laws like that have been struck down as being unconstitutional (Victoria tent city, as an example). It will never pass. We will never have those kinds of laws, they will keep being struck down.

Sure, more policing and limiting resources may deter some, but it won't stop it.

Never say never. Money talks and there is increasing angst and resentment towards these people. Homelessness is no longer a societal issue in the eyes of many here but rather a downright nuisance. Adding more wealth into this city will further the gap and bring political pressure to address this issue.

I'd rather see all these issues in a national discussion, obviously something is way wrong. I'm not advocating for more tax dollars to be thrown at it, nor should we just sit back and just ignore it. It won't go away either way. I think if we take a hard look at where resources are needed (stop spending the billions on multiple organizations doing the same thing, and nothing, in the DTES), support people in their own communities, and create national mental health institutes (imagine many Riverview's), then we might be spending a lot less and making some progress.

Obviously. In an ideal world, we know that addressing/solving poverty is more cost-effective in the long-run. We're solely relying on charity and measures aimed at maintaining the status quo. Any government that ever takes power will never address poverty as an issue...it would be political suicide.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Jalapeño Chips

Actually, there are some services for that. It's the access that's limited. It's just not enough.

Laws like that have been struck down as being unconstitutional (Victoria tent city, as an example). It will never pass. We will never have those kinds of laws, they will keep being struck down...

Any Premier could invoke the Notwithstanding Clause, if they had the political will.

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Any Premier could invoke the Notwithstanding Clause, if they had the political will.

Only Quebec has political will to do things. Thus why when we all decided to be bilingual Quebec decided to be English-only but we all got stuck with French despite a 2001 poll showing that we have 20x more asians then French, hell even Spanish would be more useful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Columbian

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by misher

Only Quebec has political will to do things. Thus why when we all decided to be bilingual Quebec decided to be English-only but we all got stuck with French despite a 2001 poll showing that we have 20x more asians then French, hell even Spanish would be more useful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Columbian

Is this a joke? Are you for real? Quebec is french, last time I checked. Oh, and the only official bilingual province in Canada is New Brunswick. BC is English only. The federal government does conduct business in both federal official languages, but that's it. Missed that in classes?

Also, what does the notwithstanding clause have to do with any of this???

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Any Premier could invoke the Notwithstanding Clause, if they had the political will.

True, can be, specially if it's seen as a "national crisis" and deemed to be in the best interest of the public, it could work. But there better be a plan behind it, otherwise the political fallout would be enormous.

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Actually people who are homeless have a problem with getting welfare as they don't have an address. *IF* they are on it and become homeless, the shelter portion of their cheque is deducted because they don't have a home to pay for. Also homeless people can't update their ID (again because of no address) so there are a lot of services they can't access.

Do you still think they have an easy time?




Closing Riverview and forcing a lot of the people living there onto the street was a bad decision. Sure reopening places like it won't help everyone who's homeless but it'll be a lot better than the next to nothing that's happening now.

Riverview is being renovated and expanded, it will reopen once all that is done. The question is, will it be enough to put a dent in the problem? Hope it does.

[ranvancan]

Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
Actually people who are homeless have a problem with getting welfare as they don't have an address. *IF* they are on it and become homeless, the shelter portion of their cheque is deducted because they don't have a home to pay for. Also homeless people can't update their ID (again because of no address) so there are a lot of services they can't access.
Do you still think they have an easy time?


You need not put false words from my quotes. I never once said they have an easy time........

[Sheba]

This seemed to be the closest place to post this...

The rhetoric in Maple Ridge reached the boiling point this week with the mayor complaining on YouTube that too many homeless people are "basically raping and pillaging" the community, and it has to stop.

Mayor Mike Morden spoke out in a 34-minute interview he did with a private public relations firm, where he outlined his views on the growing problem with homeless people in Maple Ridge.

In the interview, Morden says he believes drug dealers are keeping homeless people addicted so that they will steal from local businesses.

He said Maple Ridge went from having 84 homeless people to close to 1,000.

Morden says he's tired of his town being a hot spot for theft that's forcing "many businesses" to fold.

He blamed addiction on people's genetic makeup and rejected being forced into a "battle of wills" with the province

The interviewer never challenges Morden's statements or statistics. On Wednesday, Morden wasn't returning reporters' calls.

But he's still on the hot seat.

Homelessness is a divisive issues in Maple Ridge. It drove the past mayor into hiding after she was bullied by people who were against her plans for housing them.

Morden says the homeless camp is "untenable" and he is not pleased with the move by the province to force council to create temporary modular homes.

In a written statement, Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Selina Robinson said Wednesday that while she understands the frustration in Maple Ridge, the mayor's comments are not helpful.

"This has been going on for four years, through two tent cities. They want to see workable solutions. No one is helped by pitting the community against people who are homeless," she wrote.

The province is pitting itself against the city by building 51 supportive housing on a Burnett Street site, a plan rejected by the city council last May, according to Morden.

...