Two sites identified for ‘village’ for homeless people
City administration has pinpointed two south-side locations for the proposed “temporary village” that would provide shelter for homeless individuals.
One possible site is the Kam River Heritage Park off Syndicate Avenue, where administration says there is space for up to 100 units.
The other potential site is a vacant lot at 114 Miles St. East, which could accommodate up to 80 units.
The locations are identified in a report prepared for city council’s consideration at its meeting on Monday evening.
Administration currently estimates it would cost between $4 million and $4.3 million to place the village at the Miles St. site, with annual operating costs of $1.5 million to $2 million.
At Kam River Heritage Park, the initial estimated cost would be $5.9 million to $6.8 million, and annual operating costs would be $1.5 million to $2.5 million.
The report acknowledges choosing this site would result in costs that exceed the city’s current self-imposed cap, but adds that administration wants to explore ways to reduce costs because of the advantages the location offers, including the capacity for more units than the Miles St. site.
It also states that putting the village in the park may generate “less community opposition” and notes that people already live in an encampment there.
At 114 Miles St. East, however, less site preparation would be required, and the fact that it would have higher public visibility “may increase public awareness and understanding of the model.”
At a meeting earlier this month, administration stressed “This is not another encampment. It is a structured community designed to provide stable, dignified temporary shelter.”
Wrap-around supports would be provided to residents of the village in a secure, staffed environment under the supervision of a service provider with experience in sheltering/housing populations with complex needs, or an operator who can obtain that expertise through sub-contracting.
Although the initial cost would come from the city’s reserve funds, administration says it is confident of recovering costs through federal and provincial government programs.
It also proposes to pursue external funding for the annual operating costs, but says pending any approval of such a request, the financial impact of $1.5 million would be included in next year’s tax-supported budget.
Administration describes the project as a “thoughtful, temporary solution while long-term housing developments are underway,” and says it positions Thunder Bay as a model for other cities facing similar challenges. – tbnewstch.com
article website here
$6.8 million to build and 2.5 million annually to maintain? We are soooo screwed. I can’t believe that our high salaried residents of city hall are actually considering this. Its insane.
Although the initial cost would come from the city’s reserve funds, administration says it is confident of recovering costs through federal and provincial government programs.
Our high salaried residents of city hall must make the decision to spend this money on the assumption that the will receive NO financial aid from other levels of government. No matter where the money comes from, its all tax dollars that comes out of the pockets of taxpayers.
There is only one taxpayer funding three levels of government. Its you. Remember that.
There will always be more ‘unhoused’ coming to the city because of the generous ‘temporary shelter’ program. Free housing, free food, free clothing, free everything. Its a wonderful life! In return, the taxpayer gets what? Higher taxes. Great.
Also, there are waaaaay too many people and groups whose paychecks and entire business model is dependent on servicing the ‘unhoused’. In the meantime, we have to import workers to fill employment vacancies.
My solution, that I have mentioned before that would cost the taxpayer zero dollars, is the Adopt The Unhoused. This is a way that the people who are talking about a ‘humane’ solution can step forward and adopt one of the tent people. They can house, feed and clothe them. Take them to see doctors and dentists. They can help them with the addiction issues.
How many people do you need? One hundred? One hundred big hearted people with an empty sofa or a spare bedroom or space in the basement to set up a bed. The big hearted people get to feel fulfilled and the ‘unhoused’ get three hots and a cot.
Step up or shut up.
What I see here is that the working poor, the people who have jobs and are paying rent, raising children and buying food get nothing, while the non-working segment of the city’s population gets millions. Does not seem fair to me. Why work? Why bother?
previous related posts here