City council last week approved the New Hope homeless shelter in the east end of Toronto. While the approval of these facilities should be good news for those concerned with the plight of Toronto’s homeless, it also revealed that we can do a better job of introducing homeless shelters to communities.

The conversation surrounding emergency shelters is one that Toronto needs to have. At least 15 new shelters will be needed in just the next five years. With the cost of space downtown rising, these services will be pushed outward; many communities without homeless shelters today will soon be asked to accept them.

By and large, residents of Toronto understand the need for homeless shelters in the abstract; it’s where to put them that causes dispute.

When I announced that a shelter was proposed in Leslieville, the reaction was mixed. Many immediate neighbours were concerned about an increase in crime and a decrease in their property values. Those with the most concerns asked why they hadn’t been consulted on the location, or, how they could convince city council to refuse it.

Their reaction is understandable: if a condo is proposed in your neighbourhood or a park is being renovated, a robust community consultation is required. But, if a shelter moves in next door, the opinions of neighbours are not solicited.

By the time you get a letter in the mail announcing a homeless shelter is proposed, it is ostensibly approved.

Of course, a shelter is not a condo. It does not follow the same process of approval, nor should it. However, the current process is confusing and misleading. To gain final approval a positive vote by city council is required; this presents the possibility that with enough pressure the local community could convince their representatives to reject the shelter. The reality is that shelters are permitted almost everywhere in Toronto, and a shelter has never been refused or relocated because residents were unhappy. Furthermore, the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Toronto Housing Charter both dictate that the homeless cannot be discriminated against through a prolonged or needless consultation processes.

Unfortunately, if we asked for the permission of neighbours prior to locating shelters, Toronto would have no shelters. The prejudice toward the homeless is still so great that no community would unanimously endorse housing dozens or hundreds of shelter beds.

(It is interesting to note that shelters housing women, children and families are more warmly received than the shelters housing only men. If the homeless are stigmatized in our society, homeless men are doubly so.)

I believe there are two ways we can improve the conversation with the local community when a homeless shelter is proposed: increased education and transparency.

We must spread the word that the homeless are more likely to be victims of crime than perpetrators. And, that in our society there are a multitude of ways that a person, through no fault of their own, can become homeless.

If we can improve the image of the homeless in the minds of Torontonians, having them as neighbours will not be received with fear and apprehension.

To increase transparency we must reform how shelters are approved. To do that, we need to remove politicians. As strange as it may seem for me, a councillor, to suggest this, politicians should not have a say in the location of shelters. The involvement of me and my colleagues in shelter approvals suggests, incorrectly, to our constituents that there is a chance to convince us to refuse it.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

We must be completely clear to all Torontonians: you do not get to choose your neighbours.