Wednesday’s special council meeting saw the approval of the controversial public space use bylaw after hours of delegations and discussion.
In total, there were more than 40 delegates, with over 60 letters sent in ahead of the meeting voicing concerns with or support for the bylaw.
Here a summary of 12 of the most impactful delegations:
Jason Ashdown – in support
Co-founder of the Skyline Group of Companies Jason Ashdown said the Skyline office has “a front-row seat to what goes in on the encampment area around the fountain.”
“We get to watch daily people bathe and do laundry in the fountain, congregate in hoards, engage in open drug use, heckling, crowding, and general intimidation of people passing by, internationally or unintentionally.”
He said Skyline fails to see the role that downtown encampments can play in the solution to homelessness “other than to put on display the extent of the problem, in which case that outcome has been clearly achieved.”
The company's staff is “faced daily with difficult situations (while) simply doing banking or grabbing lunch or heading to a meeting becomes risky."
Ashdown said the encampments are deterring business and investment, and driving people away from downtown.
“There are many things as a city that are out of our control, but this situation of encampments is totally within our control. I believe there is a solution for homelessness, but encampments in the downtown core (is) not one of them.”
Morgan Dandie – in opposition
Morgan Dandie said nothing has changed since the bylaw was last brought up in February, besides more people dealing with loss of shelter every day.
“Those of us unhoused and precariously housed, our most vulnerable neighbours, are facing yet another winter outside with access to fewer and fewer services to keep them alive.
“Guelph is not the only community dealing with the results of decades of government disinterest and inaction in equitable wealth distribution. Please do not let us be a test community in the courts by allowing this bylaw against human rights to pass as written.”
She said concerns around open drug use aren’t relevant – “open use of illegal substances is already an offense under the law, and as written, the public space use bylaw does nothing more than the law already on the books.”
Dandie said she doesn’t understand how the bylaw could be enforced, even with a map listing acceptable areas, and questioned the lack of meaningful public engagement.
“How is one to determine where 10 metres from a boundary is? How will boundaries be identified? There are just too many questions without adequate answers.”
Ella Elliot - in opposition
Ella Elliott has lived in Ward 5 for 22 years in a house on the river. When she was young, her parents found the decomposed remains of Cody Thompson while kayaking nearby.
Elliott is 24, the same age Thompson was when he died.
She has since developed her own health problems, and has watched friends fall into tumultuous cycles of drug addiction and homelessness.
“There’s not a lot that separates Cody and I, really, at this point,” she said, adding there is nothing that separates her from those in encampments besides pure luck.
“Every single dollar that we spend discussing this bylaw and hopefully not enforcing it, is a dollar that could be spent by actually solving the root causes.”
Many of those causes, she said, were brought up by delegates who have been working in the community longer than she’s been alive and providing actual solutions the city could invest in.
“But we are choosing to prioritize the comfort of the people that shop downtown over the lives of people on the street, and that is despicable to me.”
The area Thompson’s body was found, she noted, is an area encampments will be allowed.
“Which means that he was not near any community resources at the time of his passing, and as a direct result of that, we lost a life. This is going to continue to happen if we let this pass.”
Nadine Graham – in support
Nadine Graham raised environmental concerns around the encampment, and shared what she feels the city will lose if nothing is done.
Graham has lived in the Cardigan Street neighbourhood for 36 years, “and in the last few months, it has been totally heartbreaking to see what has happened to our area.”
She said people have always set up encampments along the river, and that there’s nothing wrong with that, and nothing was ever done about it because no one in the area felt the need to unless they felt threatened.
“And that has happened.
“The disrespect for the area is unmatched, and I feel this will have very large-scale consequences if we do not do something about it. Environmental, mental health and sanitary health are all at risk if we allow this to continue as-is.”
She doesn’t like feeling like a 'villain' for being upset the place she’s known and loved her whole life “is being destroyed, and that just because I am fortunate to have a roof over my head, I am a bad person.”
Graham said there are countless dead crayfish laying along the shores of the river, and fewer ducks and fish in the water this year.
“I have watched people in the encampment in the Herb Markle (Park) area do their laundry in the river with Tide. I have called bylaw, and nothing has been done, this is not ok. We are killing the waters, which in turn is going to have an impact on all the other animals that count on it.”
She said people put tents directly on trails, leave sanitary products everywhere, trash is thrown everywhere, people defecate in and around the area and leave things like needles. "They are chopping down things and making it a scary area.”
She also referenced multiple propane tank explosions, fires and drug deals.
“Why is this ok just because they are in tents? Respect works both ways.”
Horeen Hassan – in opposition
In her delegation against the bylaw, Horeen Hassan referenced a letter sent to council by Leilani Farah, global director of The Shift and former United Nations special rapporteur on the right to housing.
“This letter shared concerns with bylaws like this one, and highlighted that developing a policy pathway for prohibiting erection of encampments and facilitating encampment evictions from city and county lands within the downtown is not in keeping with the right to housing approach,” she said.
She also pointed to the Oct. 17 council meeting where council unanimously passed the motion that Guelph adopt a human rights-based approach to housing, including a housing-first philosophy to align with the national housing strategy.
“This bylaw would not be consistent with the human rights-based approach to housing.
“You will be sued for this, and Guelphites do not want their municipal tax dollars to be spent on legal challenges, especially when that money should be going towards the affordable housing reserve.
“It is absolutely shocking that you are even considering passing something that was developed in such little time and with no meaningful consultation with those most impacted. Passing this bylaw completely circumvents the city’s standard process and engagement. It sets a dangerous precedent for policy development… and undermines the integrity of your own commitments.”
She said it is also in “bad faith and bad governance” to have people engage with the same bylaw twice, when “we’ve already shown our overwhelming community dissent to this bylaw. It’s unfortunate we’re here again, and I’d like to say thank you so much for wasting everyone’s time.”
Michael Kennedy – in support
Michael Kennedy said he moved from Toronto to Guelph because he thought it was safe, but doesn’t feel safe anymore.
“Homelessness is a complicated issue. The solutions are not easy, (but have) nothing to do with the fact that tents should not be in St. George’s Square. They shouldn’t be beside the children’s music centre, and they shouldn’t be in our sensitive areas.
“My neighbours feel the same way I do. We don’t walk past St. George’s Square anymore. We don’t use trails or pathways that we used to. I’ve been yelled at. My little girl, who was four years old at the time, had branches thrown at her.
“Our downtown is now embarrassing, and these tents need to be dealt with because more continue to pop up. I’m starting to think it’s because the city has been way too lenient for far too long.”
Dean Martin – in opposition
Dean Martin said failing the homeless has led to failing the downtown core, “plain and simple.”
“I’m angry. The homeless are angry. The downtown core is angry,” he said. “In Februray, we were given legal advice to defer until the Kingston decision. Mayor Guthrie chose to go against (that advice).
“Here we are again, wasting time, taxpayer dollars, for something that’s not going to solve the problem. Because what this bylaw is intended to do is remove tents from downtown Guelph. It will not remove the presence of the homeless because their supports are down there. It’ll remove them for short periods of time as they travel (to and from permissible areas), but they will still be there.”
He said they have a right to be there because their supports are there, and the bylaw will only bring costly legal ramifications for the city.
Charles Nash – in support
Charles Nash delegated on behalf of the Downtown Guelph Business Association (DGBA), which represents more than 400 businesses in the downtown core.
He said the DHBA supports the bylaw, because “the business environment in our core has become untenable.”
“Having said that, the DGBA is not without sympathy to the housing crisis that we all share and witness every day,” referencing the $29,000 the DGBA raised and donated to help address the crisis.
He compared the public space use bylaw to the city’s existing noise bylaw, saying he loves to blast his stereo and has a right to, but he doesn’t have the right to do so in a way that infringes on his neighbour’s right to enjoy the comfort of their own home.
“The same principles should be applied to encampments. While there is a right to encampments, it shouldn’t infringe upon the employees, business owners and community at large to use their downtown and their place of business in an environment that is safe, respectful, and able to flourish.”
Nash said he’s “quite certain the encampment we currently have in our downtown core does not comply or live up to our property standards, bylaws, zoning bylaws.”
He said efforts to beautify, promote and essentially reinvigorate the downtown core will be negated by the current environment.
“It is without question that we have heard from hundreds of businesses who have heard from thousands of your constituents that you have the super majority support of the community (for this bylaw),” he said. “Failure to provide an environment for business to prosper will only lead to more unemployment, loss of wages, which in turn leads to more vulnerable people.”
Richard Overland – in support
Richard Overland, who co-owns NV Kitchen and Bar, said he talks to his neighbours every day – they’re scared and worried.
“Their customers are feeling unsafe. My customers are feeling unsafe.”
While he said the community and city needs to and can do more to help those in need, “the business centre of downtown isn’t the place for (encampments). It is going to destroy our economic centre. We’re going to end up with empty stores downtown. We need to protect our downtown.”
He said if downtown is an inappropriate place for encampments, “maybe we need a bylaw to define which (places) are and which ones aren’t,” and that he loves the fact the bylaw doesn’t have punishments in it, because while he wants to protect downtown, he doesn’t want to “punish anybody.”
Carleen Paterson – in support
Carleen Paterson lives close to Herb Markle Park and has safety concerns about the encampments along the river there.
“Like many of the residents of the area, I visit the park on a daily basis with my dog. The situation allowing the encampments along the river has forced all of us to stop using the areas based on what we have all encountered in our daily walks.”
She said there are “horrendous amounts of garbage, needles, feces, dead animals, fires, people out enjoying a walk being followed by some uttering death threats. We are concerned for the safety of our children, pets and each other.”
Paterson agrees with the bylaw but thinks encampments should not be allowed in public parks.
“The proximity stated in the proposed bylaw from playgrounds and rivers is inadequate,” she said, referencing a recent propane explosion and wondering what would have happened if it was only 10 metres from a playground.
They should be permitted on city-owned vacant land instead, she said, to properly receive services and be provided with mental health support.
“Our parks and downtown core are for enjoyment for everyone. We should not have anxiety or fear for our safety by going downtown or entering a park,” she said. “What is this costing us, the people who work hard and contribute to society?”
Aerin Milley Smith – in opposition
Aerin Milley Smith said it brings her hope that everyone in the room Wednesday cared deeply about finding a solution to the overlapping crises of poverty, homelessness and addiction, but wondered why the bylaw was brought forward with such urgency over other measures.
“We all agree that no one should live in a tent on the sidewalk or in a park, and we all want people with addictions to be healthy. We all agree there are serious problems of public drug use, people using public spaces for shelter, people in crisis, behaving aggressively, discarded needles, sanitation issues and property crime,” she said.
“Why, then, is this bylaw the only option on the table today at this emergency meeting?
“This bylaw will not make downtown safer by any definition. Unhoused people will still be unhoused. Addicted people will still be addicted, and their services will still be downtown.
“Why are we here to discuss only this bylaw and not how our elected representatives should be fighting like hell to keep our safe injection site? Why are we not here today to pass an emergency anti-renoviction bylaw?”
She said the bylaw will push the city into a costly legal battle, and asked why there is money for a legal battle but not funds to help Royal City Mission stay open seven days a week, “something that would actually address the issue of providing the unhoused with a space where they are legally allowed to exist.
“If you don’t like seeing people urinating or defecating in public, I don’t either. Why aren’t we here today to talk about providing porta potties and hand wash stations? If you don’t like finding needles in the park, I don’t either. Why aren’t we here today to talk about funding sharps disposal? If you don’t like seeing garbage around encampments, I don’t either. Why aren’t were here today to talk about providing encampment locations with sanitary services?”
She said the bylaw is already causing harm by association “victims of the housing crisis with addictions and criminal activity.”
“It’s harmful. The rhetoric surrounding it is dangerous, and will not solve any of the problems we are all here today to solve.”
Bree Woods – in opposition
Bree Woods argued against the bylaw, comparing it to what we allow to help struggling businesses survive.
“The people we target with a bylaw such as this to move along from public spaces, their stresses, their pains, cannot be kept behind closed doors. They have little to call their own, and they have no places to just go and be. There’s no rest.
“The majority of us get to go home and deal with our lives privately. I know seeing folks struggle is hard and disturbing and alarming, but putting it out of view doesn’t actually make it better or safer. It causes further harm.”
She said the patios that “spill onto our sidewalks” downtown are accepted "because businesses are trying their hardest to survive. We accept that. We made allowances (with the patio program during the pandemic).
“I never opposed them, because maybe they were good for the community as a whole,” she said, implying Guelph should be making those same allowances for those in encampments struggling to survive.
Afraid to speak up
Prior to voting in favour of the bylaw, Coun. Carly Klassen said she's received a number of anonymous submissions “from folks who expressed their concerns and who wanted to be acknowledged as being in support of the public space use bylaw, but they felt that because of the adversarial nature of the bylaw that they didn’t want their names to be known publicly.
“It’s hard to put your voice forward. I have had so many meetings with people who are in support of the bylaw but feel that there might be repercussions to their businesses or to their work if they do put their names forward, so I would just like to acknowledge those people because there was a significant number of them this evening.”
