They packed the gallery this week for the monthly Joint Social Services and Land Ambulance Committee meeting at Wellington County. The proposal from the Guelph Tiny Home Collision was on the agenda after being given a hearing last month at Guelph city council, and if I was sure of one thing, it was the following statement: Tiny homes were going to the County to die.
Well, the project didn’t die, but it was met with such yawning disinterest that I might have more respect for the process if they had just shut down the proposal instead of punting it back to city council after another month of uncertainty.
And to be clear, if there is uncertainty, it was not from any lack of effort on the part of the Guelph Tiny Home Coalition, who, I think, put on an even better, and more powerful presentation at the joint committee then they did at council. Perhaps they understood that there was a bigger wall to get over on Woolwich Street than Carden.
In support of the coalition were the heads of the Guelph General Hospital, the Canadian Mental Health Association Waterloo-Wellington, Guelph Community Health, and Stonehenge who offered their united support for the project. There was also a woman who talked about her son’s experience at A Better Tent City in Kitchener, and how that once novel project has allowed someone once besieged by mental health and addiction issues to flourish in a community and have some permanency in his life.
So naturally, presented with first-hand testimonials, a united vote of support from Guelph’s frontline workers, and a passionate community group who seem to have organized considerable local resources to make tiny homes happen, the joint committee directed County staff to write another report.
Frustratingly, there wasn’t even an endorsement of the idea, or the success its fostered in other communities that have tried it. I think we understand that there are still some boxes that need to be checked off, and that there’s still some question about finding a piece of land where a tiny home community can be established, but there was no indication that the joint committee will give the project the support it needs to succeed, even in-kind support, when those questions are answered.
The lack of support may stem from the apparent confusion about the project. The joint committee seemed to get hung up on the idea of how tiny homes will fit into the housing continuum and whether it will be temporary or permanent. They’re trying to cram a square peg into a round hole while completely missing the fact that the system of shapes and holes was established for an entirely different time when the scope of the problem was less severe.
And if there weren’t problems with the housing continuum, we would have all the tools we need to figure out how to help people and what’s been dreadfully apparently in the last few years that there are tremendous gaps. We hear politicians all the time talking about “thinking outside the box” to find solutions, but that’s not where we get tripped up. Acting outside the box is the place that most politicians never want to end up.
Another issue is the sclerotic way that the meeting was handled. No formal report about temporary structured encampments was included in the agenda, just correspondences from the City of Guelph. The committee heard delegations, and then went into a 45-minute closed session out of which there was not even a verbal report of what was discussed or what results came from it.
The committee then went through the rest of the agenda before discussing the Guelph council resolutions again, bringing the organizers of the Guelph Tiny Home Coalition back to the podium to answer questions, and then coming up with a direction for county staff to write another report.
In the process, Warden Andy Lennox said something interesting. He said that he appreciates the way that city council sent the proposal to committee for feedback, but it’s not explicitly clear that this is a project that the City wants to pursue.
Before that, Ward 7 county councillor Matthew Bulmer took issue with recommendation number five from city council, which asked the county to “respectfully” offer an alternative to the Tiny Homes Coalition to address the issue of people living in encampments if they decide to pass on that proposal.
One might read that as an inference that the city wants the project, or at least they want it enough to ask “respectfully” for other ideas, but that was not “respectful” enough for Bulmer who noted that it seems to put the burden on the county, and essentially puts the blame for inaction on them too.
There’s a lot of blame to go around though because I think Lennox is on to something when he talks about Guelph council’s lack of endorsement of the Tiny Homes Coalition, and I think that’s tied to the city’s relationship to the county. After years of separation anxiety, everyone’s walking on eggshells – at least publicly – in fear of rupturing the sutures on the newly realized inter-region camaraderie.
But let’s poke a bear with a stick because as a reporter and commentator I’m enormously frustrated with the County in terms of both style and substance.
On the substance, we’re still waiting for a formal report about the Health and Housing Symposium from January and April; so far, we’ve only gotten verbal reports. I also think that the county presentation at this week’s Strategic Plan workshop at city council was the weakest, speaking only to the County’s provincially mandated bailiwick and not the big yawning chasm that the symposium and tiny homes are trying to address.
On style, I have to note my absolute frustration that county council and committee business is not accessible unless you’re there in-person. There’s no video or audio, which makes the sharing of verbal reports problematic, but it also makes it hard to foster trust that there’s any progress in addressing an issue of profound community concern.
If the Joint Social Services and Land Ambulance Committee doesn’t want to be seen doing nothing to fill the gaps in homelessness they have, at the very least, accomplished that goal.
