After several weeks of hype, Guelph City Council held a meeting meant to rake out most of their concerns about housing, homelessness, social services, addictions and mental health. A substantial agenda requires a commensurate meeting length, and council tackled seven hours worth of facts, figures and insights into all those issues to find the gaps, and hopefully start to find some solutions. Here’s the recap from this week’s council meeting…
Special Meeting of City Council – September 12
Technical difficulties kicked off this very special meeting of city council on Tuesday evening, but they were sorted out eventually and the rather lengthy meeting was able to begin.
First up were the details from Collective Results report about the gaps in the provision of social services in Guelph, specifically covering homelessness, addictions, and mental health support. You can consult the Twitter thread for what was learned from the full presentation and all the directions given, but for the most part the report directed council and staff to do more advocacy work and find more opportunities for formal collaboration between city services and agencies.
There were three delegates responding to the report. Michael Keegan, who delegated to council last year about safety concerns downtown, and noted how the work of the report was extensive yet still felt inadequate due to the size of the issue. Guelph Chamber of Commerce CEO Shakiba Shayani said that the complex problems have overwhelmed the current ecosystem, and that there needs to be integrated health and housing plans. She added that Guelph can play a critical role in setting new standards.
Jennifer Gibson from Homewood Health Centre was perhaps the most controversial. She said that the Collective Results report shouldn’t be accepted as it was presented because it didn’t have a data validation process, and that might have long-lasting effects if decisions are made based on its potentially flawed findings. There was apparently some last-minute co-operation with Homewood last weekend to update some of the information in the report, but Gibson recommended that council vote not to receive it just the same.
After a 25-minute break, council had questions for staff and the consultants.
When asked if advocacy can have any success, Jodie Sales, General Manager of Strategy, Innovation and Intergovernmental Services, said that advocacy is key, and the City now has substantive data thanks to the consultant’s report to back up their requests for funding. Staff will begin strategizing about how best to use the information, which is one of the reasons why council needed to vote to receive the report. It gives staff more direction to take things to the next level.
Council also asked about best practices from other municipalities around Canada, why certain things fell outside the scope of the review, and the existence of accessibility barriers in services. In terms of the important takeaways from the report, the consultants pointed to two specific recommendations: the human rights approach to housing and the clarification around the roles of the City and Wellington County. In terms of what a “human rights approach” means, it’s the idea that having a place to live is not a privilege, and getting more specific than that will be left up to council, and that will also likely involve some consultation with the County.
Speaking of Wellington County, it was their turn to present next. Social Services Administrator Luisa Artuso was joined by Warden Andy Lennox and County CAO Scott Wilson to present the Housing and Homelessness Plan.
Artuso laid out how the County tries to take a home first approach since being homeless is a pretty big contributor to stress, which can have an impact on issues involving addiction and mental health. She also talked about a planned housing symposium that will happen sometime later this fall or winter that will bring all stakeholders into one place and lay out a strategy that will treat housing and health as a single issue.
In terms of present concerns, Artuso said that the County has seen a big a shift in the number of people that need housing and supports in 2023, and the biggest pressure now is keeping up with demand. She added that having a robust By-Name List is helping but the key is to be ready to address the need if it continues to grow, which is doubly difficult because people have complex needs. That’s why it’s hard to answer a question like, How many emergency shelter beds should the region have?
The big piece that’s missing, Artuso explained, is rent-geared-to-income housing. She said that between the City and the County they’re about 4,000 units short right now, and that they’re at the mercy of private developers and their kindness. She also said that the County’s diversion team has become critical as people on the edge of homelessness are being pushed over the edge. It’s the County’s philosophy that it’s better to keep someone in a home than to have them lose it and end up in the system.
There was some praise for the housing and social services workers, many of whom are battling burnout and trauma. The success in starting new housing projects was also noted, but a couple of members of council expressed concern about losing momentum after the combined efforts of the City, the County, and community partners got five new facilities built in two years.
After the County report, council went in-camera for 70 minutes to discuss interview findings in the Collective Results report, and a potential property acquisition to support the housing supply. Nothing noteworthy came out of that closed session.
Last but not least, City staff presented the Affordability Strategy – Project Initiation. That last strategy was passed in 2017, and in the last six years, while income has increased an average of 31 per cent, housing prices have increased an average of 59 per cent for new homes and 79 per cent for resale homes. To quote the report, “There is a significant gap.”
There are three goals for the project: To enable a greater supply and mix of housing; to maximize and protect the use of existing housing resulting in a greater supply of affordable housing; and to enhance capacity, awareness, and supports for affordable housing. Questions focused on the speed of the project, the use of consultants, and the definitions of affordability. On that last one, staff might have to play multiple choice because they’re still waiting for the official provincial definition of what counts as affordable.
Another special meeting to follow up on some of the reports and directions discussed this week will be held on October 17.
Click here to see the complete recap of the meeting.
Guelph Politico 