The City of Nelson has proposed submitting a $145,000 bill to the province to cover the costs incurred while managing the unhoused encampment in front of City Hall.
In March, temporary shelters were set up in front of City Hall to protest the closure of the Coordinated Access Hub and highlight the need for housing solutions.
According to a city document, the protest resulted in significant vandalism, public drug use, safety concerns, sanitation issues, disputes, and mischief that required an emergency services response.
To address these concerns, the city was forced to hire security, which eventually expanded to 24-hour coverage on weekends and holidays to mitigate issues around vandalism and safety.
The city also reports that this situation placed significant demands on city resources, including legal, police, fire services, sanitation, and bylaw enforcement, with total expenses amounting to $145,139.
This created what the city called a “significant financial burden” not accounted for in the budget, and therefore it will need to be funded from other sources, such as surplus funds or by reducing costs in other departments. This is why city staff suggested submitting the bill to the province for reimbursement.
Given that the province and BC Housing have a responsibility to provide supportive housing and shelters for unhoused community members, it is within council’s authority to request compensation for costs associated with an encampment.
However, Nelson City Councillors did not agree with the motion during September’s city council meeting and directed staff to defer the request to the next meeting and explore the topic further.
Councillor Jesse Woodward was the only councillor in favour of the motion as is, stating, “We need to spend that money in our community, dealing with our community’s needs.”
“We have a $145,000 hole in our budget that wasn’t planned for, and there are many needs in our community that require this kind of money and funding. We need to spend this kind of money in our community to address our community’s needs. This was totally unforeseen, and we had to deal with it because it was right there, and there were a lot of issues. So, I think this is a good first step in trying to recover some of these funds.”
But Councillor Rik Logtenberg suggested considering the notion that encampments may be here to stay for the foreseeable future, proposing that the city be more proactive and work to create healthier and safer encampments.
He said the city should develop a policy with leadership from the province that creates supports for encampments, while also clearly stating the overriding principle that everyone needs to be in a form of stable housing as a municipality.
“Rather than just saying [to the province], ‘This is your fault, here’s the bill,’ we should say, ‘We recognize that you’re working really hard to resolve or manage a systemic problem, and we’d like to continue to be constructive partners in this as much as we can. So, in addition to paying us or covering the cost of this, we recommend you work towards developing systems, infrastructure, and policies about creating and supporting healthier encampments.’”
Councillors Kate Tate and Keith Paige requested more discussion around encampments and additional steps to ensure the community is comfortable requesting money and solutions from the province.
“I think we’ve got some research to do. There are challenges that could be provincially regulated rather than trying to address them at the municipal level, especially if this is a reality that many places are trying to manage,” said Tate.
“I think another piece of the puzzle is that if encampments are part of the housing spectrum, it’s still a provincial responsibility, and that could potentially be part of the language in communication.”
Council voted in favour of deferring the motion to the next meeting, with Woodward voting against the deferral on the record.
Be the first to know! Don’t miss out on breaking news and daily updates in your area. Sign up to MyKootenayNow News Alerts.
