1. homelessness and the safe streets act – task force recommendations

les sans-abri et la loi sur la sÉcuritÉ dans les rues – rapport du groupe de travail

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

That Council receive the report from the Task Force and approve the following staff comments on each of the recommendations contained in the report, as amended, with the exception of Recommendations 17, 18, 19, 21 and 22 which have been referred to staff:

Housing/Shelters

1. That the Provincial and Federal governments be requested to provide funding for additional second stage housing and supportive housing to meet the needs of the population of shelter users who require supportive housing.

Staff supports this recommendation.

2. That the Provincial, Federal and municipal governments be requested to provide funding for a full range of social housing to meet the needs of low-income populations who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless.

Staff supports this recommendation.

3. That the City’s Housing Branch be directed to review the safety of Shelters and address the impact of high occupancy levels in the Adult Shelter system.

Staff supports this recommendation.

4. That the Housing Branch establishes an advisory committee in each shelter. The Advisory Committee would assist individuals through the public complaints process. The advisory committee will be supported by the City of Ottawa (administration) and develop a process for an ombudsman review.

Staff does not object to the establishment of shelter advisory committees but believes that the intent is well served by recommendation 3 respecting shelter safety as well as recommendation 6 respecting establishment of an ombudsman, recommendation 7 respecting requirement for a report back with progress, as well as recommendation 8 respecting establishment of a peer support system.

5. That the Provincial and Federal governments be requested to reinstate and\or provide new funding for day programs, currently funded 100% by the City, to meet the needs of the individuals who experience homelessness or risk becoming homeless.

Staff supports this recommendation.

6. That the City of Ottawa establish a mechanism, such as an ombudsman, so that people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness can address concerns that they have about the treatment they receive within City-funded service agencies including experiences under the Safe Streets Act.

That staff will meet with the appropriate agencies and representatives from the homeless community and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee.

Staff notes that establishment of an Ombudsman would require staffing and associated administrative costs.

7. That the Homelessness and Safe Streets Act Task Force reconvene once a year to review the status of the recommendations and to propose modifications or enhancement to the recommendations as required.

Staff supports this recommendation.

8. That the Task Force establish \ endorse a peer support system whereby former homeless individuals assist current homeless individuals through their “on street experiences” thus being able to intervene and assist with housing and any form of counseling.

Staff supports the intent of this recommendation, which relates to the staffing of service and support agencies in the community.

9. That the City of Ottawa continue to support the coordination of street outreach services, including the role of the Street Health Outreach Coalition, and advocate for the resources needed to integrate, support and coordinate Community and Social Services Agencies involved in street outreach.

Staff supports this recommendation and will continue to facilitate the coordination of these important services.

10. That the City of Ottawa be directed to review the conditions of all rooming houses within the City, to address the unsafe conditions, safety and dangerous factors that have an impact on people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, by implementing strict By Laws to adhere to.

Staff supports this recommendation.

11. That the City be directed to review the priorities for homeless status, to include, that 2 out of 10 applications goes to an applicant with the homeless status, remove barriers for the people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness when applying to the registry, and redefine the term homelessness to include all those who are without a permanent address. Further, that the review include:

i. Involvement of the HSAG (Housing Stakeholders Advisory Group);

ii. An assessment of supports required;

iii. An assessment process to ensure that applicants have the ability to live independently or the supports required;

iv. The issue of required supports includes help with housekeeping;

v. A discussion around the issue of tenants refusing supports and the impact on social housing landlords and tenants;

vi. Involvement of representatives of the homeless community.

A review of the local priorities for access to rent geared to income social housing is being undertaken in 2006, and the Task Force recommendation regarding definition and priority ration will be considered within the policy review process, the results of which will be tabled with Committee and Council.

12. That the Housing Branch appoint a tenant to sit on the Registry board to provide a balanced perspective.

The Registry is a community-based agency, and this recommendation will be forwarded to the Board for their consideration.

Safe Streets Act (SSA)

13. The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal the Safe Streets Act.

This recommendation is not supported by the Ottawa Police Service (OPS). The Safe Streets Act is a legislative tool similar to other pieces of legislation that assists the OPS in fulfilling its broad community safety mandate. Repealing the Safe Streets would eliminate an effective alternative to criminal charges in certain circumstances and compel the OPS to escalate its response unnecessarily. Similarly, the repeal of the Act would create gaps leading to dissatisfaction in other communities served by the OPS. Ultimately, these gaps would have to be filled by the City through one or several by-laws to address the conduct and issues targeted by the SSA.

14. That the City of Ottawa recommend to the Police Services Board that, since the Safe Streets Act, theoretically, targets aggressive panhandlers and therefore impacts the homeless above all, that the Ottawa Police Service draft strict guidelines with respect to enforcement of the Safe Streets Act so that all citizens will know where they stand regarding their rights to public space and that these guidelines be widely circulated and debated by the public before being put into effect.

15. That the City of Ottawa recommend to the Police Services Board that they formalize and expand the training program to promote consistent enforcement of the Safe Streets Act (SSA) including a public education component that includes visiting shelters and other local agencies to foster an open dialogue and to clarify enforcement of the SSA.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) supports this recommendation.

16. That the City of Ottawa recommend to the Polices Services Board a review of the enforcement of the Safe Streets Act for consistent application since its inception and that the review be made available to the public.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) cannot track the disposition of PONs through the court system.

Employment Opportunities

* 17. That Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow the on-sidewalk distribution of not-for-profit newspapers distributed by the homeless, without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person does not remain at a particular location while distributing the newspaper.

That staff will work with agencies to develop a model for the implementation of this recommendation and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee and Council.

Staff supports the recommendation and further proposes that persons distributing the not-for-profit newspapers not be allowed to remain in a particular location longer than 10 minutes which is a standard presently used for mobile refreshment vehicles. It is proposed that this standard will only be enforced on a request-for-service basis.

* 18. That Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow homeless persons to sell original arts, crafts and jewelry on the sidewalk without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person selling the original arts, crafts and jewelry does not remain at a particular location while selling the articles.

Staff propose that this recommendation be referred to staff with a direction to report back to Committee and Council subject to consultation with the wider community.

* 19. That City land be used to create several permanent sites for street markets to be operated by a mix of local artists and artisans and street people (for example the area under the Terry Fox underpass known as the “Bridge”).

Staff supports the intent of this recommendation. Further to Recommendation 18, staff would review prospective sites subject to consultation with internal and external stakeholders with a report back to Committee and Council.

20. That the City provide a letter to be written to any Private Landlord advocating and supporting the use of their own empty land as a designated area for the homeless to vend their arts, crafts and to busk freely

Staff supports this recommendation.

* 21. That City jobs such as poster removal and hand snow shovelling be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage homeless people or those at risk of becoming homeless.

The Public Works and Services Department is supportive of this recommendation subject to meeting its operational requirements (i.e. meeting its quality standards for snow removal).

* 22. That there be a separate process for establishing the contracting of additional City work (non unionized) and that the additional work be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage the homeless, with funding for the additional work to be allocated in the budget annually for this purpose.

City Purchasing staff supports the intent of this recommendation. Purchasing proposes that this process would be undertaken outside of the Purchasing By-Law, although Supply Management would facilitate and report on the award, ensuring that the contract meets the fair and reasonable requirements, and due diligence associated with all City contract awards.

23. Continue to support organizations such as Rideau Street Youth Enterprises; pursue an integrated approach across the City to explore additional possibilities for purchasing services from social purpose enterprises thus ensuring cost-effective delivery while supporting street-involved and at-risk persons to pursue income-earning opportunities and greater self-sufficiency.

Staff supports this recommendation consistent with recommendation 22 above.

24. Support local enterprises, such as Roasted Cherry and Centre 507, to build capacity for the employment of street involved youth.

The City could work with a network of service providers and businesses to assess what supports are needed to further employment related activity.

25. That the City engage in discussions with interested stakeholders on Social Purchasing Portal (a collaboration between community economic development organizations and private sector business partners).

Staff supports the recommendation and proposes to engage in discussions with interested stakeholders on Social Purchasing Portal, as outlined in the recommendation and report back to Committee and Council with findings and recommendations.

26. The City of Ottawa lobby the Provincial Government to change the OW/ODSP regulations relative to "earned income" to enable the homeless or those at risk of homelessness to retain work related earnings without having their OW/ODSP financial assistance reduced.

City staff supports this recommendation.

27. The City of Ottawa lobby the Provincial Government to change the OW/ODSP regulations relative to the Canadian Child Tax Benefit to enable the homeless or those at risk of homelessness to retain the CTB without having their OW/ODSP financial assistance reduced.

Staff supports this recommendation.

28. The City of Ottawa maintain the current funding level for Social Services programs in the event the Provincial Government allows OW/ODSP individuals to retain their Child Tax Credit (i.e., ends the “clawback”).

While the City supports in principle both the end of the claw-back from social assistance payments and the retention of the Reinvestment Fund, this would create a budget pressure of $4.15 Million for the City. The Province has not made any formal announcement regarding any 2006 increases or the claw-back in general.

29. That the City of Ottawa lobby the Ontario government and that the Police Services Board be recommended to lobby the Ontario Government to increase OW rates to pre-1995 levels.

At its meeting of April 13, 2005 Council considered a report respecting the Reinstatement of Social Assistance Rates to pre-1995 Levels (ACS2005-CPS-EFA-0001) and approved that a letter be written to the Province of Ontario advocating a re-instatement of social assistance rates to pre-1995 levels.

Inclusion of the Police Services Board in this recommendation is an effort to reinforce the message to Queen’s Park of the implications of poverty to policing as well as all City activities.

Supported but out of Scope

That the following recommendation be referred to the Minister of Children and Youth Services and to the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa for their consideration;

That the Community and Protective Services Department continue to represent the City’s interests with respect to this recommendation including, if feasible, being on any future task force regarding this issue;

That staff report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee by September 2006 regarding this exercise and the resulting investigation of issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population:

30. Therefore the Foster Care Council of Canada recommends that the City of Ottawa, create a “Task Force on Foster Care Outcomes” or a sub-committee of the Task Force on Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act which would investigate the issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population, alarmingly high rates of O.D.S.P. or O.W. recipients and emergency shelter users and what could be done to prevent and address these serious and potentially long-term negative outcomes of Ottawa’s vulnerable youth.

The Task Force was supportive of the proposed initiative but the review of foster care was not part of the terms of reference of the Task Force and accordingly, the Task Force determined to forward the recommendation to Ottawa City Council for its consideration.

And that this include comments from Ottawa Community Housing Corporation, the Ottawa Police Service, Crime Prevention Ottawa, and community partners (including the Coalition of Community Health and Resource Centres, the Coalition of Community Houses, the Social Planning Council, etc.).

* FOR THE INFORMATION OF COUNCIL

The Committee approved the following direction to staff:

That Recommendations 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22 be referred to staff to work with the Business Advisory Committee and the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force, City staff and other levels of government to find solutions that the business community and the homeless community will support to meet the needs of the homeless community and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee;

And that the process will include an analysis of the panhandling/homeless population in order to distinguish between the poverty, begging, and addiction issues.

Recommandations modifiÉes DU COMITÉ

Que le Conseil prenne connaissance du rapport du Groupe de travail et qu’il approuve les commentaires du personnel suivants au sujet de chacune des recommandations contenues dans le rapport, telles que modifiées, à l’exception des recommandations 17, 18, 19, 21 et 22 qui ont été renvoyées au personnel :

Logement/refuges

1. Qu’il soit demandé aux gouvernements fédéral et provinciaux de fournir du financement pour des maisons d’hébergement transitoires et pour des logements en milieu de soutien pour ainsi répondre aux besoins de la population des utilisateurs de refuges ayant besoin de logements en milieu de soutien.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

2. Qu’il soit demandé aux gouvernements fédéral, provinciaux et municipaux de fournir du financement pour une vaste gamme de logements sociaux pour ainsi répondre aux besoins des populations à faible revenu qui sont sans abri ou à risque d’itinérance.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

3. Que la Direction du logement de la Ville revoie la sécurité des abris et aborde les répercussions des niveaux élevés d’occupation dans le système des refuges pour adultes.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

4. Que la Direction du logement crée un comité consultatif dans chacun des refuges. Le comité consultatif aiderait les personnes dans le cadre du processus de plaintes du public. Le comité consultatif recevra l’appui de la Ville d’Ottawa (administration) et élaborera une procédure d’examen par un ombudsman.

Le personnel ne s’objecte pas à la création de comités consultatifs dans les refuges mais croit que l’objectif est bien servi par la recommandation 3 à l’égard de la sécurité dans les refuges, ainsi que par la recommandation 6 sur la création d’un poste d’ombudsman, la recommandation 7 sur l’exigence d’un rapport sur l’évolution, ainsi que la recommandation 8 à l’égard de la création d’un système de soutien par les pairs.

5. Qu’il soit demandé aux gouvernements fédéral, provinciaux et municipaux de rétablir le financement ou de fournir un nouveau financement pour les programmes de jour, des programmes actuellement financés à 100 % par la Ville, pour ainsi répondre aux besoins des personnes qui doivent faire face à l’itinérance ou qui sont à risque d’itinérance.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

6. Que la Ville d’Ottawa crée un mécanisme, comme un ombudsman, permettant aux personnes sans abri ou à risque d’itinérance de faire part de leurs préoccupations à l’égard du traitement que leur offrent les organismes de services financés par la Ville, y compris leurs expériences à l’égard de la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues.

Que le personnel rencontre les représentants des organismes concernés et de la communauté des sans-abri et qu’il fasse rapport au Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux.

Le personnel fait remarquer que la création du poste d’ombudsman exigerait une dotation en personnel et engendrerait des coûts administratifs connexes.

7. Que le Groupe de travail sur les sans-abris et la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues se rencontre une fois par année pour voir où en sont les recommandations et proposer, au besoin, les modifications ou améliorations à apporter aux recommandations.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

8. Que le Groupe de travail établisse un système de soutien des pairs ou lui donne son aval, un système dans lequel d’anciens sans-abri aident les sans-abri actuels grâce à leur « expérience de la rue ». Ils pourraient ainsi intervenir et les aider à régler les problèmes de logement et leur offrir du counseling.

Le personnel appuie l’objectif de cette recommandation qui porte sur la dotation des organismes de service et de soutien dans la collectivité.

9. Que la Ville d’Ottawa continue d’appuyer la coordination des services d’intervention dans la rue, y compris le rôle de la Street Health Outreach Coalition, et recommande les ressources requises pour intégrer, soutenir et coordonner les organismes de Services sociaux et communautaires qui interviennent dans la rue.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation et continuera à faciliter la coordination de ces services importants.

10. Que la Ville d’Ottawa examine l’état de toutes les maisons de chambre de la Ville, pour ainsi corriger les conditions dangereuses et évaluer les facteurs de sécurité et de danger pouvant avoir des répercussions sur les personnes sans abri ou à risque d’itinérance, en mettant en œuvre des règlements administratifs stricts auxquels ces maisons devraient se conformer.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

11. Que la Ville révise les priorités à l’égard du statut des sans abri, pour inclure, que 2 demandes sur 10 soient envoyées à une personne sans abri, qu’elle supprime les obstacles auxquels font face ces personnes sans abri ou à risque d’itinérance lorsqu’elles présentent une demande par l’intermédiaire du registre, et que la Ville redéfinisse le terme « itinérance » pour qu’il inclue toutes les personnes sans adresse permanente. De plus, que la révision comprenne :

i. La participation du HSAG (Housing Stakeholders Advisory Group);

ii. Une évaluation du soutien requis;

iii. Un processus d’évaluation visant à faire en sorte que les demandeurs aient la capacité de vivre de façon indépendante ou qu’ils obtiennent le soutien dont ils ont besoin;

iv. La question du soutien requis, qui comprend une aide pour l’entretien ménager;

v. Une discussion sur la question des locataires qui refusent l’aide et sur les incidences pour les propriétaires et les locataires de logements sociaux;

vi. La participation de représentants de la communauté des sans-abris.

Un examen des priorités locales concernant l’accès au logement social à loyer indexé sur le revenu sera entrepris en 2006 et la recommandation du Groupe de travail concernant rapport entre la définition et la priorité sera étudiée au cours du processus d’examen de la politique dont les résultats seront déposés au Comité et au Conseil.

12. Que la Direction du logement nomme un locataire qui siègera au conseil du Registre pour ainsi offrir une perspective plus équilibrée.

Le Registre étant un organisme de type communautaire, cette recommandation sera transmise au conseil pour examen.

Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues

13. Le Groupe de travail recommande que la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression auprès de la province pour modifier ou abroger la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues.

Le Service de police d’Ottawa (SPO) n’appuie pas cette recommandation. La Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues est un outil législatif semblable à d’autres lois qui aident le SPO à remplir son vaste mandat de sécurité dans la collectivité. L’abrogation de cette loi supprimerait, dans certaines circonstances, une solution de rechange efficace aux accusations criminelles et obligerait le SPO à augmenter inutilement son intervention. De même, l’abrogation de cette loi créerait une lacune qui mènerait à un mécontentement dans d’autres collectivités desservies par le SPO. En bout de ligne, cette lacune devrait être comblée par la Ville par le biais d’un ou de plusieurs règlements municipaux axés sur les comportements et problèmes visés par la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues.

14. Que la Ville d’Ottawa recommande au Conseil des services policiers que, puisque la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues cible, en théorie, les mendiants agressifs se trouvant dans la rue et qu’elle a surtout des répercussions sur les sans abri, les services de police d’Ottawa rédigent des lignes directrices strictes à l’égard de l’application de la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues pour qu’ainsi tous les citoyens connaissent leurs droits à l’égard des endroits publics et que ces lignes directrices fassent l’objet d’une vaste publicité et qu’il y ait un débat public à cet égard avant la mise en place de ces lignes directrices.

Le Service de police d’Ottawa (SPO) n’appuie pas cette recommandation. Il est d’avis que, la loi énonçant elle-même les critères définissant la perpétration d’une infraction, toute directive serait redondante. Si la recommandation vise à obtenir l’aide du SPO pour communiquer ces critères de façon globale, il est alors possible de la mettre en pratique, et elle se rapprochera alors d’autres initiatives du SPO en matière de communication à la collectivité. De plus, conformément à la Loi sur les services policiers, il incombe à la Commission de services policiers d’Ottawa de déterminer de façon générale, après consultation auprès du chef de police, les objectifs et priorités des services policiers dans la municipalité. La recommandation, telle qu’elle est formulée par le Groupe de travail, ne reconnaît pas l’imputation d’une responsabilité entre le chef de police et la Commission sous le régime de cette loi, et serait donc en violation de la Loi sur les services policiers.

15. Que les services policiers d’Ottawa officialisent et modifient leur programme de formation pour ainsi promouvoir une application uniforme de la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues, y compris un élément d’éducation du public incluant la visite des refuges et d’autres organismes locaux, pour ainsi favoriser un dialogue ouvert et clarifier l’application de la Loi.

Le Service de police d’Ottawa (SPO) appuie cette recommandation.

16. Que le Conseil des services policiers d’Ottawa examine l’application de la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues pour vérifier si elle a été appliquée de façon uniforme depuis son adoption et que cet examen soit rendu public.

Le Service de police d’Ottawa ne peut suivre le parcours des avis d’infraction provinciale dans l’appareil judiciaire.

Occasions d’emploi

* 17. Que le Conseil modifie ou adopte tous les règlements administratifs appropriés et applicables pour permettre la distribution dans la rue, par les sans-abri, de journaux sans but lucratif, sans que ceux-ci aient besoin d’un permis d’entreprise ou d’un permis avec places désignées, à la condition que la personne n’occupe pas un endroit précis lorsqu’elle distribue ses journaux.

Que le personnel élabore, de concert avec les organismes, un modèle pour la mise en œuvre de cette recommandation et qu’il fasse rapport au Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation et propose que les personnes distribuant ces journaux sans but lucratif ne soient pas autorisées à rester plus de 10 minutes dans un endroit précis, ce qui est la norme actuellement utilisée pour les véhicules de marchands ambulants. Il est proposé que cette norme ne soit appliquée qu’en fonction des demandes de service.

* 18. Que le Conseil modifie ou adopte tous les règlements administratifs appropriés et applicables pour permettre aux sans-abri de vendre des objets d’art, des œuvres artisanales et des bijoux originaux sur le trottoir, sans permis d’entreprise ou sans permis avec places désignées, à la condition que la personne qui vend les œuvres d’art, les œuvres artisanales et les bijoux originaux n’occupe pas un endroit précis lorsqu’elle vend ces articles.

Le personnel proposerait que cette recommandation soit envoyée au personnel, avec la direction que qu’il fasse rapport au Conseil municipal et aux comités, sous réserve de consultation auprès de la collectivité au sens large.

* 19. Que les terrains de la Ville soient utilisés pour créer plusieurs sites permanents pour que des marchés en plein air puissent être exploités par un ensemble d’artistes et d’artisans locaux ainsi que de gens vivant dans la rue (par exemple, la zone sous le viaduc Terry Fox, zone appelée le « pont »).

Le personnel appuie l’objectif de cette recommandation. Pour faire suite à la recommandation 18, le personnel examinerait les sites possibles, sous réserve de consultations avec les intervenants tant à l’interne qu’à l’externe, pour ensuite présenter un rapport au Comité et au Conseil.

20. Que la Ville fournisse une lettre qui serait envoyée à tous les propriétaires de terrains privés recommandant et appuyant l’utilisation de leurs terrains inutilisés comme endroits désignés où les sans-abri pourraient vendre des objets d’art et des œuvres artisanales et jouer librement de la musique.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

* 21. Que les tâches exécutées par la Ville, comme l’enlèvement des affiches et le pelletage à la main de la neige, soient attribuées aux groupes sans but lucratif qui engagent des sans-abri ou des personnes à risque d’itinérance.

Le Service des travaux publics appuie cette recommandation à condition qu’elle satisfasse les exigences opérationnelles (c.-à-d. qu’elle soit conforme aux normes de qualité pour l’enlèvement de la neige).

* 22. Qu’une procédure distincte permette d’attribuer la sous-traitance de travaux supplémentaires (non syndiqués) devant être effectués pour la Ville à des groupes sans but lucratif qui engagent des sans-abri et qu’un financement pour ces travaux supplémentaires soit prévu à cette fin, chaque année dans le budget.

Le personnel du Service des achats de la Ville appuie l’objectif de cette recommandation. Le Service des achats recommande que cette procédure soit prise en charge sans tenir compte du règlement municipal sur les achats, bien que la Gestion de l’approvisionnement faciliterait l’attribution et ferait rapport sur celle-ci en s’assurant que le contrat satisferait les exigences de justice, d’équité et de diligence raisonnable liées à toutes les attributions de contrats par la Ville.

23. Continuer à appuyer les organisations comme le Programme de la rue Rideau pour la jeunesse; conserver une approche intégrée dans la Ville pour explorer les autres possibilités d’utilisation de services offerts par des entreprises à but social et ainsi garantir une prestation rentable tout en appuyant les personnes de la rue et les personnes à risque et leur permettre d’exercer des activités productives pour avoir une plus grande autonomie.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation conforme à la recommandation 23 ci-dessus.

24. Soutenir les entreprises locales, comme le café Roasted Cherry et le Centre 507, pour ainsi permettre d’employer des jeunes de la rue.

La Ville pourrait collaborer avec un réseau de fournisseurs de services et d’entreprises afin d’évaluer le soutien requis pour favoriser ces activités reliées à l’emploi.

25. Que la Ville engage des discussions avec les intervenants intéressés à l’égard du Social Purchasing Portal (une collaboration entre les organisations de développement économique et des partenaires commerciaux du secteur privé).

Le personnel appuie les recommandations et propose d’engager des discussions avec les intervenants intéressés à l’égard du Social Purchasing Portal, comme il est indiqué dans la recommandation, et de remettre un rapport avec des conclusions et des recommandations au Comité et au Conseil.

26. Que la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression auprès du gouvernement provincial pour modifier les règlements sur les programmes OT/POSPH à l’égard du « revenu gagné » pour permettre aux sans-abri ou aux personnes à risque d’itinérance de conserver les revenus liés au travail sans que cela ne réduise le montant d’aide financière qui leur est versé en vertu des programmes OT/POSPH.

Le personnel de la Ville appuie cette recommandation.

27. Que la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression auprès du gouvernement provincial pour modifier les règlements sur les programmes OT/POSPH à l’égard de la Prestation fiscale canadienne pour enfants pour permettre aux sans-abri ou aux personnes à risque d’itinérance de conserver cette prestation sans que cela ne réduise le montant d’aide financière qui leur est versé en vertu des programmes OT/POSPH.

Le personnel appuie cette recommandation.

28. Que la Ville d’Ottawa conserve le niveau de financement actuellement accordé aux programmes de Services sociaux si le gouvernement provincial permet aux personnes recevant des montants connexes aux programmes OT/POSPH de conserver la Prestation fiscale canadienne pour enfants (mette fin à la « disposition de récupération »).

Bien que la Ville soutienne en principe les deux extrémités de la récupération fiscale des versements d’aide sociale et du Fonds de réinvestissement, cela imposerait une pression de 4,15 millions de dollars sur le budget de la Ville. La Province n’a pas encore fait d’annonce officielle à l’égard des augmentations de 2006 ou de la récupération fiscale, en général.

29. Que la Ville d’Ottawa et la Commission des services policiers de la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression sur le gouvernement de l’Ontario pour augmenter le taux du programme OT aux niveaux antérieurs à 1995.

À sa réunion du 13 avril 2005, le Conseil a examiné un rapport sur le Rétablissement des tarifs de l’aide sociale aux niveaux en vigueur avant 1995 (ACS2005-CPS-EFA-0001) et a approuvé l’envoi d’une lettre à la province d’Ontario recommandant le rétablissement des tarifs de l’aide sociale aux niveaux en vigueur avant 1995.

L’inclusion de la Commission de services policiers d’Ottawa dans cette recommandation est un effort visant à renforcer le message envoyé à Queen’s Park quant aux répercussions de la pauvreté sur les activités policières ainsi que sur toutes les activités de la Ville.

Appuyés mais hors de portée

Que la recommandation suivante soit transmise à la ministre des Services à l’enfance et à la jeunesse et à la Société de l’aide à l’enfance d’Ottawa pour examen;

Que les Services communautaires et de protection continuent de représenter les intérêts de la Ville en ce qui a trait à cette recommandation, y compris, si possible, la participation à tout autre groupe de travail à venir concernant cette question;

Que le personnel produise un rapport pour le Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux d’ici septembre 2006 au sujet de cet exercice et de l’examen des questions concernant les enfants en famille d’accueil qui en viennent à l’itinérance.

30. Par conséquent, le Foster Care Council of Canada recommande que la Ville d’Ottawa crée un « groupe de travail sur les résultats du placement en famille d’accueil » ou un sous-comité du Groupe de travail sur les sans-abris et la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues qui ferait enquête sur la question des enfants et des jeunes en famille d’accueil qui font de plus en plus partie de la population des sans-abri, sur le nombre de bénéficiaires des programmes OT ou POSPH ou des utilisateurs de refuges qui atteint maintenant des niveaux alarmants et sur les mesures qui pourraient être prises pour traiter et empêcher les répercussions graves et potentiellement négatives à long terme que ces questions peuvent avoir sur le segment vulnérable de la population que sont les jeunes d’Ottawa.

Le Groupe de travail appuyait l’initiative proposée mais l’examen des soins en famille d’accueil ne faisait pas partie du mandat du Groupe de travail et, de ce fait, ce dernier a décidé d’envoyer cette recommandation au Conseil municipal d’Ottawa pour qu’il l’étudie.

* POUR LA GOUVERNE DU CONSEIL

Le Comité a approuvé la directive au personnel suivante :

Que les recommandations 17, 18, 19, 21 et 22 soient renvoyées au personnel afin que celui s’emploie, de concert avec le Comité consultatif sur les affaires, le Groupe de travail sur les sans-abris et la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues, le personnel de la Ville et les autres ordres de gouvernement, à trouver des solutions qui puissent répondre aux besoins de la communauté des sans-abri et qui reçoivent l’appui de cette dernière ainsi que du milieu des affaires, et qu’il fasse rapport au Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux;

Et que la démarche comporte une analyse des populations mendiante et sans abri afin d’établir une distinction entre les questions de pauvreté, de mendicité et de toxicomanie.

DOCUMENTATION

1. Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force report dated 9 February 2006 (ACS2006-CCS-HRS-0001).

2. Extract of Minutes, 16 February 2006.

3. Coordinator, Business Advisory Committee, memo dated 20 April 2006.

4. Extract of Draft Minutes, 4 May 2006.

Report to/Rapport au :

Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee

Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux

and Council/et au Conseil

9 February, 2006/le 9 février 2006

Submitted by/Soumis par:

Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force/ Groupe de travail sur les sans-abri et la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues

Contact/Personne-ressource : Sean McKenny, Task Force Chair/ Président du Groupe de travail

(613) 233-7820, smckenny@ottawalabour.org

City Wide/Portée générale

Ref N°: ACS2006-CCS-HRS-0001

SUBJECT:	HOMELESSNESS AND THE SAFE STREETS ACt – Task force report

OBJET :	LES SANS-ABRI ET LA LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ DANS LES RUES – RAPPORT DU GROUPE DE TRAVAIL

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force recommend that the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend that Council approve:

Housing/Shelters

1. That the Provincial, Federal and municipal governments be requested to provide funding for additional second stage housing to meet the needs of the population of shelter users who require supportive housing.

3. That the City’s Housing Branch be directed to review the safety of Shelters and address the impact of high occupancy levels in the Adult Shelter system.

8. That the Task Force establish \ endorse a peer support system whereby former homeless individuals assist current homeless individuals through their “on street experiences” thus being able to intervene and assist with housing and any form of counseling

11. That the City be directed to review the priorities for homeless status, to include, that 2 out of 10 applications goes to an applicant with the homeless status, remove barriers for the people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness when applying to the registry, and redefine the term homelessness to include all those who are without a permanent address.

12. That the Housing Branch appoint a tenant to sit on the Registry board to provide a balanced perspective.

Safe Streets Act (SSA)

13. The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal the Safe Streets Act.

14. That the City of Ottawa recommend to the Police Services Board that, since the Safe Streets Act, theoretically, targets aggressive panhandlers and therefore impacts the homeless above all, that the Ottawa Police Services draft strict guidelines with respect to enforcement of the Safe Streets Act so that all citizens will know where they stand regarding their rights to public space and that these guidelines be widely circulated and debated by the public before being put into effect.

16. That the City of Ottawa recommend to the Polices Services Board a review the enforcement of the Safe Streets Act for consistent application since its inception and that the review be made available to the public.

Employment Opportunities

17. That Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow the on-sidewalk distribution of not-for-profit newspapers distributed by the homeless, without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person does not remain at a particular location while distributing the newspaper.

18. That Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow homeless persons to sell original arts, crafts and jewelry on the sidewalk without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person selling the original arts, crafts and jewelry does not remain at a particular location while selling the articles.

19. That City land be used to create several permanent sites for street markets to be operated by a mix of local artists and artisans and street people (for example the area under the Terry Fox underpass known as the “Bridge”).

20. That the City provide a letter to be written to the Rideau Viking Corporation advocating and supporting the use of the land also known as the “square” as a designated area for the homeless to vend their arts, crafts and to busk freely

21. That the City provide a letter to be written to any Private Landlord advocating and supporting the use of their own empty land as a designated area for the homeless to vend their arts, crafts and to busk freely

22. That City jobs such as poster removal and hand snow shovelling be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage homeless people or those at risk of becoming homeless.

23. That there be a separate process for establishing the contracting of additional City work (non unionized) and that the additional work be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage the homeless, with funding for the additional work to be allocated in the budget annually for this purpose.

24. Continue to support organizations such as Rideau Street Youth Enterprises; pursue an integrated approach across the City to explore additional possibilities for purchasing services from social purpose enterprises thus ensuring cost-effective delivery while supporting street-involved and at-risk persons to pursue income-earning opportunities and greater self-sufficiency.

25. Support local enterprises, such as Roasted Cherry and Centre 507, to build capacity for the employment of street involved youth.

26. That the City engage in discussions with interested stakeholders on Social Purchasing Portal (a collaboration between community economic development organizations and private sector business partners).

27. The City of Ottawa lobby the Provincial Government to change the OW/ODSP regulations relative to "earned income" to enable the homeless or those at risk of homelessness to retain work related earnings without having their OW/ODSP financial assistance reduced.

28. The City of Ottawa lobby the Provincial Government to change the OW/ODSP regulations relative to the Canadian Child Tax Benefit to enable the homeless or those at risk of homelessness to retain the CTB without having their OW/ODSP financial assistance reduced.

29. The City of Ottawa maintain the current funding level for Social Services programs in the event the Provincial Government allows OW/ODSP individuals to retain their Child Tax Credit (i.e., ends the “clawback”).

30. That the City of Ottawa lobby the Ontario government and that the Police Services Board be recommended to lobby the Ontario Government to increase OW rates to pre-1995 levels.

Supported but out of Scope

31. Therefore the Foster Care Council of Canada recommends that the City of Ottawa, create a “Task Force on Foster Care Outcomes” or a sub-committee of the Task Force on Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act which would investigate the issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population, alarmingly high rates of O.D.S.P. or O.W. recipients and emergency shelter users and what could be done to prevent and address these serious and potentially long-term negative outcomes of Ottawa’s vulnerable youth.

RECOMMANDATIONS CONTENUES DANS LE RAPPORT

Que le Groupe de travail sur les sans-abris et la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues recommande que le Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux recommande au Conseil d’approuver :

Logement/refuges

1. Qu’il soit demandé aux gouvernements fédéral, provinciaux et municipaux de fournir du financement pour des maisons d’hébergement transitoires pour ainsi répondre aux besoins de la population des utilisateurs de refuges ayant besoin de logements en milieu de soutien.

3. Que la Direction du logement de la Ville revoie la sécurité des abris et aborde les répercussions des niveaux élevés d’occupation dans le système des refuges pour adultes.

12. Que la Direction du logement nomme un locataire qui siègera au conseil du Registre pour ainsi offrir une perspective plus équilibrée.

Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues

13. Le Groupe de travail recommande que la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression auprès de la province pour modifier ou abroger la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues.

Occasions d’emploi

17. Que le Conseil modifie ou adopte tous les règlements administratifs appropriés et applicables pour permettre la distribution dans la rue, par les sans-abri, de journaux sans but lucratif, sans que ceux-ci aient besoin d’un permis d’entreprise ou d’un permis avec places désignées, à la condition que la personne n’occupe pas un endroit précis lorsqu’elle distribue ses journaux.

18. Que le Conseil modifie ou adopte tous les règlements administratifs appropriés et applicables pour permettre aux sans-abri de vendre des objets d’art, des œuvres artisanales et des bijoux originaux sur le trottoir, sans permis d’entreprise ou sans permis avec places désignées, à la condition que la personne qui vend les œuvres d’art, les œuvres artisanales et les bijoux originaux n’occupe pas un endroit précis lorsqu’elle vend ces articles.

19. Que les terrains de la Ville soient utilisés pour créer plusieurs sites permanents pour que des marchés en plein air puissent être exploités par un ensemble d’artistes et d’artisans locaux ainsi que de gens vivant dans la rue (par exemple, la zone sous le viaduc Terry Fox, zone appelée le « pont »).

20. Que la Ville fournisse une lettre qui serait envoyée à la Rideau Viking Corporation recommandant et appuyant l’utilisation du terrain aussi appelé « carré » comme endroit désigné où les sans-abri pourraient vendre des objets d’art et des œuvres artisanales et jouer librement de la musique.

21. Que la Ville fournisse une lettre qui serait envoyée à tous les propriétaires de terrains privés recommandant et appuyant l’utilisation de leurs terrains inutilisés comme endroits désignés où les sans-abri pourraient vendre des objets d’art et des œuvres artisanales et jouer librement de la musique.

22. Que les tâches exécutées par la Ville, comme l’enlèvement des affiches et le pelletage à la main de la neige, soient attribuées aux groupes sans but lucratif qui engagent des sans-abri ou des personnes à risque d’itinérance.

23. Qu’une procédure distincte permette d’attribuer la sous-traitance de travaux supplémentaires (non syndiqués) devant être effectués pour la Ville à des groupes sans but lucratif qui engagent des sans-abri et qu’un financement pour ces travaux supplémentaires soit prévu à cette fin, chaque année dans le budget.

24. Continuer à appuyer les organisations comme le Programme de la rue Rideau pour la jeunesse; conserver une approche intégrée dans la Ville pour explorer les autres possibilités d’utilisation de services offerts par des entreprises à but social et ainsi garantir une prestation rentable tout en appuyant les personnes de la rue et les personnes à risque et leur permettre d’exercer des activités productives pour avoir une plus grande autonomie.

25. Soutenir les entreprises locales, comme le café Roasted Cherry et le Centre 507, pour ainsi permettre d’employer des jeunes de la rue.

26. Que la Ville engage des discussions avec les intervenants intéressés à l’égard du Social Purchasing Portal (une collaboration entre les organisations de développement économique et des partenaires commerciaux du secteur privé).

27. Que la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression auprès du gouvernement provincial pour modifier les règlements sur les programmes OT/POSPH à l’égard du « revenu gagné » pour permettre aux sans-abri ou aux personnes à risque d’itinérance de conserver les revenus liés au travail sans que cela ne réduise le montant d’aide financière qui leur est versé en vertu des programmes OT/POSPH.

28. Que la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression auprès du gouvernement provincial pour modifier les règlements sur les programmes OT/POSPH à l’égard de la Prestation fiscale canadienne pour enfants pour permettre aux sans-abri ou aux personnes à risque d’itinérance de conserver cette prestation sans que cela ne réduise le montant d’aide financière qui leur est versé en vertu des programmes OT/POSPH.

29. Que la Ville d’Ottawa conserve le niveau de financement actuellement accordé aux programmes de Services sociaux si le gouvernement provincial permet aux personnes recevant des montants connexes aux programmes OT/POSPH de conserver la Prestation fiscale canadienne pour enfants (mette fin à la « disposition de récupération »).

30. Que la Ville d’Ottawa et la Commission des services policiers de la Ville d’Ottawa fasse pression sur le gouvernement de l’Ontario pour augmenter le taux du programme OT aux niveaux antérieurs à 1995.

Appuyés mais hors de portée

31. Par conséquent, le Foster Care Council of Canada recommande que la Ville d’Ottawa crée un « groupe de travail sur les résultats du placement en famille d’accueil » ou un sous-comité du Groupe de travail sur les sans-abris et la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues qui ferait enquête sur la question des enfants et des jeunes en famille d’accueil qui font de plus en plus partie de la population des sans-abri, sur le nombre de bénéficiaires des programmes OT ou POSPH ou des utilisateurs de refuges qui atteint maintenant des niveaux alarmants et sur les mesures qui pourraient être prises pour traiter et empêcher les répercussions graves et potentiellement négatives à long terme que ces questions peuvent avoir sur le segment vulnérable de la population que sont les jeunes d’Ottawa.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

At its meeting of October 13, 2004, Council approved the establishment of a Task Force to review how the homeless are treated in the City of Ottawa and recommend solutions.

The establishment of the Task Force was precipitated by a protest that took place in July and August of 2004 on the Lisgar and Elgin corner of the City Hall site. The main reasons for the demonstration were to draw attention to the experience of individuals on the street including issues associated with: access to basic shelter; treatment under the Safe Streets Act, and; opportunities to earn additional income on the street. Accordingly, the Task Force focused its attention on the development of practical recommendations related to those three key areas.

Public meetings of the Task Force were held once per month from January through June. The Task Force received a number of recommendations from public delegations (attached in Document 2). Given that some of the recommendations received from public delegations overlapped or conflicted with each other, the formal membership of the Task Force met several times to separate and refine the recommendations. Those recommendations were tabled and vetted at public meetings of the Task Force in June, September and November with the final recommendations of the Task Force contained in this report.

With a few exceptions, the recommendations are widely supported by City staff as described within the body of the report. Most of the recommendations can be actioned immediately while others will require City staff to report back with program details for the consideration of Committee and Council. The Task Force proposes to reconvene annually to report on the status of the initiatives.

SOMMAIRE EXÉCUTIF

À sa réunion du 13 octobre 2004, le Conseil a approuvé la mise sur pied d’un Groupe de travail visant à examiner la façon dont les sans-abri sont traités dans la Ville d’Ottawa et a recommandé des solutions.

La mise sur pied du Groupe de travail fut précipitée par une manifestation qui s’est tenue en juillet et en août 2004 sur le terrain de la mairie, au coin des rues Lisgar et Elgin. Cette manifestation visait principalement à attirer l’attention sur l’expérience que vivent les personnes de la rue, y compris à l’égard des questions connexes à l’accès à un logement de base, au traitement qu’ils reçoivent en vertu de la Loi sur la sécurité dans les rues et à la possibilité de gagner un revenu supplémentaire sur la rue. En conséquence, le Groupe de travail a concentré son attention sur l’élaboration de recommandations pratiques portant sur ces trois éléments-clés.

Les réunions publiques du Groupe de travail ont eu lieu une fois par mois, entre janvier et juin. Le Groupe de travail a reçu un certain nombre de recommandations qui lui ont été présentées par des représentants du public (document 2, ci-joint). Puisque certaines de ces recommandations se chevauchaient ou étaient en conflit, les membres officiels du Groupe de travail se sont rencontrés à plusieurs reprises pour séparer et préciser ces recommandations. Celles-ci ont ensuite été déposées puis étudiées en détail lors des rencontres publiques du Groupe de travail en juin, septembre et novembre. Les recommandations finales du Groupe de travail sont présentées dans le présent rapport.

À quelques exceptions près, les recommandations bénéficient d’un vaste appui du personnel de la Ville, comme il est décrit dans le corps du présent rapport. La majorité des recommandations peuvent être immédiatement mises en place alors que d’autres exigeront que le personnel de la Ville présente au Comité et au Conseil des rapports avec des détails. Le Groupe de travail propose de se réunir chaque année pour faire rapport de l’état d’avancement des initiatives.

BACKGROUND

Membership of the Task Force was to include representatives from the homeless community, City Council, the Alliance to End Homelessness, from shelter and day programs, the Ottawa Police (both staff and Board members), and staff from the Community and Protective Services Department and other relevant organizations.

The Task Force was established and first met on December 6, 2004.

Sean McKenny (Ottawa & District Labour Council) was selected as the Chair of the Task Force at its first meeting and the Task Force included the following membership:

1	Sean McKenny (Chair)	Ottawa & District Labour Council
2	Diane Holmes	City Councillor
3	Mary Martha Hale	Anglican Social Services - Centre 454
4	Karen Dawe	Homeless Advocate
5	Perry Rowe	Salvation Army
6	Jim MacEwen	Police Services Board
7	Gilles Larochelle	Police Staff
8	Phil Waserman	Downtown Business Community
9	Andy Kusi-Appiah	Mayor’s Office
10	Russell Mawby	City of Ottawa Housing Branch
11	Castille Troy	Minwaashin Lodge
12	Peter Hume	City Councillor
13	Denise Vallely	Youth Services Bureau
14	Des Doran	Police Services Board
15	Liette Duguay	Youth Services Bureau
16	Bizzi	Street Delegate
17	Andrew Nellis	Street Delegate
18	Jean LaHaie	Salvation Army

Terms of Reference

Per the Task Force Terms of Reference, the general scope of issues to be addressed by the Task Force relates to how homeless individuals are treated “on the street’, including access to services and supports, and enforcement of bylaws and regulations.

All directions received emanating from the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act report considered by Ottawa City Council on October 13, 2004 form part of the scope of the Task Force, including:

· Provision of information and resources respecting preventing and addressing homelessness

· Support strategies for income earning opportunities (e.g., Rideau Street youth Initiative, Centre 507)

· Review of regulations respecting sale of newspapers and goods on the sidewalk

· Identification of external legal services provided on a pro-bono basis.

The primary objective of the Task Force was to document conditions affecting the homeless and make recommendations on how those conditions can best be addressed via new or improved services, policies and procedures.

For the purposes of this Task Force, “homeless” was defined to mean any person who self-identifies themselves as being low-income below the poverty line with experience of homelessness or risk of becoming homeless.

Meetings of the Task Force

The Task Force resolved to meet once per month beginning in January 2005 to identify key issues for review, to receive reports and information on those issues, review and debate those issues and to develop recommendations on how to address those issues in Ottawa.

Task Force meetings were open to the public and received delegations on issues or on matters related to the treatment of the homeless in Ottawa.

Every effort was made to ensure that homeless individuals had the opportunity to directly participate in the Task Force, via meetings of the Task Force and research or investigations undertaken in support of the Task Force objectives.

Public meetings of the Task Force were held once per month from January through June. After a summer hiatus the Task Force had one public meeting in September and another public meeting in November to vet the formal recommendations of the Task Force.

Meeting Themes

The establishment of the Task Force was precipitated by a protest that took place in July and August of 2004 on the Lisgar and Elgin corner of the City Hall site. The main reasons for their demonstration were to draw attention to the treatment of individuals on the street: their access to basic shelter, their treatment under the Safe Streets Act as well as their opportunities to earn additional income on the street.

Presentations and discussions at the Task Force Meetings focused on these issues. Topics presented included:

· Presentations on affordable housing initiatives being undertaken by the City of Ottawa

· Emergency Shelter Services

· Review of Safe Streets Act enforcement

· Police complaints system

· Ticket Defence Program

· Street vending

· Homelessness survey

· Review of police complaints system

· Employment by Public Works Services (snow shovelling, poster removal)

· Social assistance rates

A number of groups made presentations and recommendations to the Task Force including:

· The Ottawa Witness Group, a community organization that monitors police relations with the public;

· The Ticket Defence Program, a collective of volunteers, law students, social workers and anti-poverty activists who represent persons charged under the Safe Streets Act (SSA);

· Homeless Action Strike, a collective of anti-poverty activists who were instrumental in the 2004 City Hall protest;

· Health and Social Services Advisory Committee representatives who presented Employment Opportunities;

· Under Pressure Collective, anti-poverty activists who presented details of an under-utilized Special Diet Allowance program offered by the Ontario government to Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) recipient;

· Carleton School of Social Work (Professor Alan Moscovitch) presented on Employment Opportunities;

· University of Ottawa (Professor Martha Jackman) presented on the constitutionality of the Safe Streets Act.

In addition, a number of individuals presented their individual experiences of living on the streets of Ottawa, which was a key purpose of this process.

Task Force Recommendations

Recommendations were focused on three key areas: Housing\Shelter; the Safe Streets Act (SSA), and; Employment Opportunities.

The Task Force received a number of recommendations from public delegations (attached in Document 2) that were grouped around the three theme areas.

Given that some of the recommendations received from public delegations overlapped with each other, and other recommendations conflicted which other, the formal membership of the Task Force met several times to separate and refine the recommendations. Those recommendations were tabled and vetted at public meetings of the Task Force in June, September and November with the final recommendations of the Task Force contained in this report.

As noted above, Document 2 sets out all recommendations received from public delegations and identifies how they were dealt with by the Task Force (i.e., either supported as originally proposed, supported as revised, or, not supported).

The following sections sets out the intent and rationale for the final recommendations of the Task Force including comments from City staff.

DISCUSSION

Housing\Shelters

Recommendation 1 – Funding for Additional Second-Stage and Supportive Housing

Second Stage Housing is transitional housing providing accommodation focused primarily on women fleeing abuse, with or without support, for periods of 6 weeks to 1 year. There is one second-stage housing service for women and children fleeing abuse in Ottawa. It has only 16 beds available and very little sustainable funding.

Supportive housing is permanent housing that includes various kinds of on-site support services to enable residents to maintain their independence. Examples would include Options Bytown and Ottawa Salus.

The Task Force recommends that federal and provincial funding for second stage housing and on-site supportive housing be increased.

Staff supports this recommendation.

Recommendation 2 – Funding for a Full Range of Social Housing

There are presently 22,400 subsidized social housing units in the City of Ottawa, plus 1,579 units in privately owned building in which rent supplements are provided.

Presently, there are 9,500 households on the waiting list for social housing.

Given this gap in the supply of social housing, the Task Force recommends that the City request that the Provincial, Federal and Municipal Governments increase their funding for the full range of social housing.

Staff supports this recommendation.

Recommendations 3 & 4 – Review of Shelter Safety

The City of Ottawa has responsibility for providing emergency shelter on an 80/20 cost-shared basis with the Province through the Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS).

The City, through the Housing Branch, directly operates two shelters for families and directly administers the overflow services for families and individuals. The City also administers the contracts for community-based shelters through seven non-profit agencies. There is an arrangement for overflow beds at the YM/YWCA and in motels, as needed. Details are set out in the following table:

Emergency Shelter Capacity 2005
Adult Women: Cornerstone Shepherds of Good Hope Total	49 40 89	3 - 3
Adult Men: Shepherds of Good Hope The Salvation Army The Mission Total	158 168 184 510	35 + 25 at 233 Murray 25 40 125
Youth: The Salvation Army (young men) Youth Service Bureau (young women) Total	24 12 36	- 2 2
Families and Mixed: Reception House Oshki Kizis Carling Family Shelter Forward Family Shelter Total	25 19 176 84 304	15 5 Cots and cribs as needed for children Minimum 20
Overflow: YM/YWCA Motels Total	25 (contracted) - 25	as needed
Total shelter beds	964	150

Emergency Shelter Capacity 2005

Agency

Bed capacity

Extra space/sleeping mats as needed

Adult Women:

Cornerstone

Shepherds of Good Hope

Total

Adult Men:

Shepherds of Good Hope

The Salvation Army

The Mission

Total

158

168

184

510

35 + 25 at 233 Murray

125

Youth:

The Salvation Army (young men)

Youth Service Bureau (young women)

Total

Families and Mixed:

Reception House

Oshki Kizis

Carling Family Shelter

Forward Family Shelter

Total

176

304

Cots and cribs as needed

for children

Minimum 20

Overflow:

YM/YWCA

Motels

Total

25 (contracted)

as needed

Total shelter beds

964

150

Given concerns respecting safety at shelters, the Task Force recommends that a review of shelter safety be undertaken and that, in addition, an advisory committee be established at each shelter to assist individuals through the complaints process.

Staff supports the review of shelter safety. The Emergency Shelter Standards and Review Framework were approved by Council on November 30, 2005. There are elements of the Standards that will assist the Housing Branch in assessing client safety in the shelter environment (e.g. staffing model, criteria for restricting service, measurements of personal space). There will also be a review of the policies and procedures for receiving, addressing and documenting client suggestions, concerns, or complaints in a clear, fair and objective manner and a review of the effectiveness of these policies. The review team will be receiving input from management, staff and clients on this issue.

The Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS) requires emergency shelters to submit to the City a Serious Occurrence Inquiry Report for any serious incident in the shelters involving staff and/or clients. The last report received was in March 2004.

Recommendation 5 – Federal and Provincial Funding for Day Programs

In 2005, the City of Ottawa provided $1.5 Million in annual funding to seven Day Programs: Anglican Social Services - Centre 454; The Well/La Source; Caldwell Family Centre; Shepherds of Good Hope; St. Joe’s Women Centre; St. Luke’s Lunch Club and Drop-in Centre and Centre 507.

Day Programs have a mandate to provide a safe, supportive and accepting drop-in environment for Ottawa’s most vulnerable individuals who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. Clients served by these agencies include those who have low-income, dealing with mental health issues, physically challenged, socially isolated, street-involved or addicted.

The range of services provided by drop-in Day Programs is determined by the agency, based on its specific population demographics and clientele needs. Services offered include: Food and meal services, breakfast and lunch clubs, snacks; Emergency food/groceries; Meal preparation and cooking lessons; Counselling, crisis intervention; Personal and practical supports and daily living skills; Referral services; Access to phone, computer, fax, mailing address; Access to showers, and personal hygiene facilities; Clothing, laundry, personal toiletries; Educational and language programs/workshops; and/or Crafts, social recreational events/outings and homework help for children.

Day Programs received cost shared funding from the Provincial Government and the City of Ottawa (formerly the Regional Municipality of Ottawa Carleton) until December 31, 1995. Effective January 1, 1996, the Province terminated its cost sharing arrangement and the City assumed the Province’s share in addition to its own portion. This recommendation proposes that the provincial and federal governments be requested to reinstate and\or provide new funding for day programs.

Staff supports this recommendation.

Recommendation 6 – Establishment of Homelessness Ombudsman

The Task Force proposes that the City establish an ombudsman to investigate complaints and mediate resolutions with respect to treatment received from City funded services as well as experiences under the Safe Streets Act.

Staff notes that establishment of an Ombudsman would require staffing and associated administrative costs.

Recommendation 7 – Ongoing Working Group to Review Recommendations

The Task Force proposes that the Task Force reconvene once per year to review the status of the recommendations as well as propose modifications or enhancements.

Staff supports this recommendation.

Recommendation 8 - Peer Support System

Public delegations appearing before the Task Force emphasized the value that formerly homeless persons are able to bring in support of those who are newly or chronically homeless. Accordingly, the Task Force recommends the establishment of a peer support system where formerly homeless persons are engaged to assist with homeless support and counselling.

Staff supports the intent of this recommendation, which relates to the staffing of service and support agencies in the community. The use of peer systems already occurs, both formally and informally, especially in drop-ins. This recommendation can be communicated to service agencies for their consideration.

Recommendation 9 - Coordination of Street Outreach Services

Outreach services are focused on supporting people on the streets, assessing their needs and connecting them with appropriate services and supports.

Outreach services are provided by the Salvation Army, Centre 507, Operation Go Home, Odawa Friendship Centre, Wabano Health Centre, Jewish Family Services and Ottawa Inner city Ministries.

Task Force members emphasized the importance of coordinated street outreach services to ensure that homeless persons are connected to the right services at the right time.

Staff supports this recommendation and will continue to facilitate the coordination of these important services. The Street Health/Outreach Coalition already coordinates many of these front line services on the street. The management of these organizations are involved in systems planning to ensure ongoing, strategic coordination. Staff will provide updates to the Task Force as part of its annual review.

Recommendation 10 – Review of Rooming Houses

The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa be directed to review the conditions of all rooming houses within the City, to address the unsafe conditions, safety and dangerous factors that have an impact on people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness including the implementation of strict By Laws to adhere to.

Rooming Houses fall under the Tenant Protection Act and are private or non-profit residential premises where four or more rooms are available for rent. For many low-income people, particularly those who are single, rooming houses are an appropriate, affordable housing alternative.

There are currently 199 confirmed rooming houses, mostly within the former City of Ottawa, with 1939 rooming units verified by City of Ottawa staff.

There is concern that in spite of efforts to increase the quality of rooming house accommodations, a portion of the current rooming house stock continues to experience building and fire code violations which, combined with a lack of security for residents, may result in unsafe accommodations. Approximately 86% of the current rooming house stock is over seventy years old. (City of Ottawa, Planning and Economic Development Committee, Rooming House Initiatives Evaluation and Licensing, Draft Working Document, 1998).

Staff supports the Task Force recommendation.

There are presently a number of mechanisms that have been established in support of improved Rooming Houses.

· A Rooming House Response Team, funded by the City, has been in place since 1995 in the former City of Ottawa. This team, now located in the Rooming House Service in the Residential and Support Services Division of the Housing Branch ensures an effective, co-ordinated response to both site-specific and systemic rooming house issues in order to ensure that rooming houses are maintained as a safe form of affordable housing. They provide support for tenants, landlords and neighbourhoods.

· A Rooming House Landlords Association was set up in 1998 by a group of rooming house landlords. This group works with the City of Ottawa and the spectrum of community stakeholders, including other landlords, to address rooming house issues.

· The Rooming House Information Exchange Network is a coalition of social service agencies interested in improving the level of supports to tenants living in rooming houses and maintaining existing stock.

· Rooming House Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program funded by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation

The Rooming House Response Team, in conjunction with members of the Rooming House Information Exchange Network, and with the support of the Alliance to End Homelessness developed a project proposal that called for the funding of four components, including the (already existing) Rooming House Response Team, the (already existing) Rooming house Landlords Association, tenant peer support workers and housing support workers. Currently, only the Rooming House Response Team is being funded. Funding for this initiative comes from the City of Ottawa. The Rooming House Landlords Association functions as a volunteer initiative. The Rooming House Response Team has one community worker for the entire rooming house sector. There is a major gap in terms of services designed to help people maintain housing in the rooming house sector. In addition, rooming house landlords have few supports they can access to assistance them in dealing with tenants coping with issues such as mental health and addictions.

In terms of licensing regulations, rooming houses in the former City of Ottawa fall under Licensing Bylaw L6-2000. Currently there are 41 licensed rooming houses with 90 applications presently being processed. Health inspections occur yearly and other inspections bi-annually once a rooming house is licensed. In addition, inspections by all agencies can occur in between if a complaint is filed.

The Director of By-law Services is serving as chair of the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers (AMCTO) that is developing a model by-law for municipalities and will be reporting to Committee and Council in September of this year with amendments to the Rooming House By-law which is proposed to be expanded city-wide.

The Housing Branch can incorporate such a review into its development of a Rooming House Strategy by the end of 2007. By then, the licensing process will be fully implemented and the CMHC report on rooming houses will be available to inform the methodology and the scope of developing this strategy.

Recommendation 11 – Review of Homeless Status

In order to access social housing in Ottawa, homeless people must apply through the Housing Registry for access to the over 24,000 existing social and affordable housing units in Ottawa. Under Council’s direction, homeless applicants presently have priority for one out of every ten social housing units that becomes available and at year end 2005, there were 83 applicants identified as homeless listed on Ottawa’s Social Housing Registry.

Under Local Policies governing access to social housing, homeless is presently defined as those living on the street or in emergency shelters. It is proposed that the definition be changed to include all those who are without a permanent address. The Task Force further recommends that priority for homeless applicants be increased to two out of every ten applicants.

Staff supports review of the priorities for homeless status. The Local Policies for access to social housing are being reviewed in 2006 in consultation with service agencies and housing providers. The Task Force recommendation regarding definition and priority ratio will be considered within the policy review process and a report will be tabled with Council on the results of this process.

Recommendation 12 – Appointment of Tenant on Registry Board

The Task Force proposes that a tenant be designated to sit on the board to provide a more inclusive and balanced perspective for the board.

The Registry is the community entity responsible for maintenance of the centralized waiting list for social housing and is governed by a community-based Board of Directors. While the Registry provides this legislated service under agreement with the City (as Service Manager), decisions regarding the composition of the Board are wholly within the purview of that organization. Board composition, as defined by their by-laws, includes non-profit housing providers as well as community agencies who represent the interests of applicants to RGI housing (as opposed to tenants). Currently, both CMHA and Housing Help are represented on the Board of the Registry and actively bring perspectives to the table for those seeking access to social housing including those who are homeless. As the Registry is a community-based agency, requests for additional representation should be raised directly with their Board.

Safe Streets Act (SSA)

Recommendation 13 – Repeal \ Change the SSA

Representatives of the Ticket Defence Program (TDP) noted that there is a long-standing common law principle that penal legislation should be applied as narrowly as possible. For example, concern was expressed that the Act is being applied in a manner that is too broad – with passive panhandling being interpreted, in some cases, as “aggressive” simply because a person is dressed in a manner that is off-putting to some bystanders. Similarly, concern was expressed that the short form wording of some offenses under the Act provide for ticketing people for being "near" public transit stops, "near" vehicles, "near" ATMs, etc. The TDP contends that the “captive audience” provisions, cited above, as well as the continuous misapplication of the broadly interpreted “aggressive” panhandling provision of the Act are unreasonable and unjustly criminalize homelessness and poverty.

The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal the Act. At a minimum the Act should be amended so that its provisions are explicit and can be clearly interpreted by enforcement officers administering the regulations as well as the public who must abide by them. Failing that, the province should repeal the Act.

The Safe Streets Act (SSA) was enacted in 2000 to prohibit squeegee cleaning and other forms of “aggressive” begging. A consolidation of the SSA is attached as Document 1.

A number of public delegations including the Ottawa Witness Group, the TDP, and Homeless Action Strike as well as a number of individuals presented their findings and experience under the Safe Streets Act to the Task Force.

A Social and Economic Impact Study of the Ontario Safe Streets Act on Toronto Squeegee Workers [Online Journal of Justice Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1 (January): 2003 - by Bill O’Grady Associate Professor, and Carolyn Greene, B.A.; Department of Sociology and Anthropology University of Guelph] was distributed at the February meeting of the Task Force. The following is quoted from the Abstract:

“This paper reports on the social and economic impact that the Ontario Safe Streets Act (OSSA) has had on a sample of 50 homeless youth in Toronto. Youth who were once actively engaged in squeegee cleaning prior to the OSSA are now living more difficult lives. Although the legislation has not had the effect of completely eradicating this work, two years after squeegee cleaning was banned homeless youth who once heavily relied upon the income from squeegee cleaning are now more likely to be sleeping in more dangerous environments, are more likely to be panhandling, selling drugs (males), and collecting social assistance. There is also evidence to suggest that relations with the police have worsened for these youth since the OSSA came into effect.”

Surveys conducted by Homeless Action Strike as well as delegations appearing before the Task Force expressed concerns respecting unclear, inconsistent and overzealous enforcement of the Act focused primarily on panhandlers and other persons living on the streets.

Representatives of the Ticket Defence Program (TDP) [a collective of volunteers, law students, social workers and anti-poverty activists who represent persons charged under the Safe Streets Act] presented to the Task Force at its May 9 meeting.

At the time of the presentation, the TDP had represented approximately 113 tickets issued under the SSA approximately 74 of which still had pending court dates. As of the date of their presentation the TDP had not experienced a single conviction with respect to SSA tickets that they had defended.

A review TDP activity reports revealed that the majority of tickets had been issued in areas where there are shelters and other services for homeless people such as King Edward Avenue, Rideau Street, Murray Street and St. Patrick.

This recommendation was not originally supported and continues not to be supported by the Ottawa Police Service (OPS). The Safe Streets Act is a legislative tool similar to other pieces of legislation that assists the OPS in fulfilling its broad community safety mandate. Repealing the Safe Streets would eliminate an effective alternative to criminal charges in certain circumstances and compel the OPS to escalate its response unnecessarily. Similarly, the repeal of the Act would create gaps leading to dissatisfaction in other communities served by the OPS. Ultimately, these gaps would have to be filled by the City through one or several by-laws to address the conduct and issues targeted by the SSA.

Recommendation 14 – Police Guidelines Re: Enforcement of the SSA

The Ottawa Witness Group (OWG) is a local volunteer community organization concerned with preserving public space and protecting the right to protest and dissent. OWG representatives come from all walks of life, including the labour, human rights and faith communities. Representatives attend major demonstrations in the Ottawa area to observe interactions between police and demonstrators. The OWG reports on actions of the police and monitor their adherence to standards of human rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of assembly that characterize a democratic society.

The OWG presented to the Task Force at its meeting of May 9 and made a number of recommendations respecting shelters, vending, civilian complaints, and, the Safe Streets Act (SSA) all of which are captured in Document 2. In addition to voicing its support for the change or repeal of the SSA, the OWG also expressed its support for the drafting of strict enforcement guidelines by the Ottawa Police “so that all citizens will know where they stand regarding their rights to public space.”

The OWG, like the Ticket Defense Program (TDP), was concerned that the legislation is overly broad and leaves too much discretion to individual officers.

Given that the Province may not change or repeal the SSA pursuant to Task Force Recommendation 13, the Task Force agrees that the Ottawa Police Service should draft strict guidelines respecting enforcement of the SSA.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) does not support this recommendation. The OPS is of the position that the legislation itself sets out the criteria for the commission of an offence making any guidelines redundant. In the event that the recommendation is seeking to have OPS assistance in communicating the criteria generally, such a recommendation is feasible and similar to other OPS community communication initiatives. In addition, pursuant to the Police Services Act, the Ottawa Police Services Board is responsible for generally determining, after consultation with the Chief of Police, the objectives and priorities with respect to police services in the municipality. Any policy responsibility is necessarily of a general and administrative nature. The type of policy contemplated by the task force is not only very specific, but is also essentially operational in nature. In fact, it is the responsibility of the Chief of Police to see to the day to day administration of the Service, including any policy which will guide police officers in the execution of their duties. The recommendation as worded by the task force does not recognize the allocation of responsibility as between the Chief and the Board under the act and would therefore be in violation of the Police Services Act.

Recommendation 15 – Police Training and Public Education Program Re., the SSA

Further to Recommendation 14, the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) representative on the Task Force indicated that the OPS has a training program to promote consistent enforcement of the SSA. The program includes a public education component that includes visits to shelters and other local agencies to foster an open dialogue and to clarify enforcement of the SSA.

The Task Force proposes that this training program be formalized and enhanced to increase clear and equitable enforcement of the Act.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) supports this recommendation. General police training on the Safe Streets Act and other pieces of provincial legislation is carried out by the Ontario Police College in accordance with the curriculum set by the province. With respect to sensitizing OPS officers through visits to shelters and other local agencies to foster dialogue and understanding, the OPS has been working with the community on this issue for some time prior to the creation of the task force. Community outreach is not new for the OPS. In addition, Central Division officers attend such agencies regularly and will continue to do so.

Recommendation 16 – Review Enforcement of the SSA Since Inception

The Task Force recommends that the Ottawa Police Services Board should review the enforcement of the Safe Streets Act since its inception, to ensure consistent application of the Act, and the results of that review should be made available to the public.

The Ticket Defense Program (TDP), at the May 9 meeting of the Task Force, had presented some summary statistics respecting enforcement of the SSA in Ottawa, as well as its own data respecting the tickets it had defended on behalf of its homeless clients.

The TDP presented the following summary data for 2002 - 2004 as set out below:

Tickets Issued Under the SSA*
		2002	2003	2004	2005
Dispose used condom / Needle / Glass public	SSA 4(2)	0	6	1	2
Section not entered		13	13	6	2
Solicit in aggressive manner	SSA 2(2)	106	167	317	258
Solicit near ATM	SSA 3(2)(a)	22	39	55	62
Solicit near public toilet	SSA 3(2)(b)	3	9	2	6
Solicit near transit stop	SSA 3(2)(c)	57	96	117	131
Solicit near transit vehicle*	SSA 3(2)(d)	1	9	4	13
Solicit near vehicle**	SSA 3(2)(e)	73	163	149	154
Solicit person in vehicle on roadway	SSA 3(2)(f)	115	259	412	485
Dispose used condom / Needle / Glass public	SSA 4(2)	0	6	1	2
		390	755	1,062	1,115
Source: Ottawa Police Service, PON Activity – Safe Streets Act *Minor discrepancies in total PON activities relates to minor differences in registering PONs by statute section.

The Task Force proposes that the Police Services Board undertake a review of the Provincial Offence Notices (PONs) issued to date including their disposition through the court system (i.e., an analysis of tickets setting out numbers of convictions as well as tickets acquitted, dismissed, withdrawn or quashed) with a report to be made public respecting findings and conclusions.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) cannot track the disposition of PONs throught he court system but offers the following analysis of tickets issued.

The OPS provided the Task Force with statistical data with respect to the number of tickets issued for the year 2002 (390), 2003 (764) and for 2004 (1063). For the year 2005, a total of 1120 tickets were issued, the majority in the central core of the city. The intersection of King Edward and Murray Street remain problematic where panhandlers routinely enter on the roadway and approach vehicles, disrupting the flow of traffic and jeopardizing their safety.

The Task Force proposes that the Police Services Board undertake a review of the enforcement of the SSA for consistent application since its inception. The statistical data clearly indicates the problem of panhandling remains an urban issue and enforcement of the SSA in suburban and rural areas is minimal. The OPS Support Services does not track or enter dispositions for the Provincial Offences into our Records Management System (RMS). The city and the Courts Management System is not capable of browsing for statistical data on PON dispositions.

Two additional information sheets on the Safe Streets Acts (Documents 3 and 4) and its enforcement have been included for this report. The PON Activity for 01/01/2005 to 31/12/2005 indicates the “location of issue” and the “statute section.” The second statistical information piece on PON Activity indicates where enforcement occurred. Central Division representing Central East and Central West is the largest enforcement area due to population and traffic density issues.

Employment Opportunities

Recommendation 17 - Distribution of Newspapers by the Homeless without a License

On the specific issue of the distribution of not-for-profit newspapers focused on the homeless being offered for donation on sidewalks and/or private property – the Task Force was advised that the activity constitutes vending. The Task Force was advised that the activity would normally require purchase of an itinerant’s license and designated space permit if carried out on streets and sidewalks within the downtown core of the City of Ottawa. The Task Force was further advised that although no specific exemption exists in Ottawa vending regulations, the By-law Services Branch has adopted a "non enforcement" standard with respect to offering newspapers focused on the homeless for donations.

Recommendation 17 proposes that Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow the on-sidewalk distribution of not-for-profit newspapers that focus on the homeless, without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person does not remain at a particular location while distributing the newspaper.

Staff supports the recommendation which essentially formalizes the status-quo. For clarification purposes, staff proposes that persons distributing the not-for-profit newspapers not be allowed to remain in a particular location longer than 10 minutes which is a standard presently used for mobile refreshment vehicles. It is proposed that this standard will only be enforced on a request-for-service basis.

Recommendation 18 – Homeless Persons Selling Original Arts & Crafts Without a License

The Task Force recommends that Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow homeless persons to sell original arts, crafts and jewelry on the sidewalk without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person selling the original arts, crafts and jewelry does not remain at a particular location while selling the articles.

The Task Force further resolved that: the terms “distributing” and “selling” shall mean seeking donations, selling or giving away the not-for-profit newspaper or original arts, crafts and jewelry, and; “sidewalk” shall not include sidewalks abutting areas zoned “residential”.

Staff notes that the City’s present vending regulations, including the designated space program within the downtown core, were developed and approved following comprehensive consultation with the public including Business Improvement Areas, Merchant Associations, and Community Associations. The Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force focused on consultation with the homeless community. Accordingly, staff would propose that this recommendation be referred to staff with a report back to Committee and Council subject to consultation with the wider community.

Recommendation 19 – Permanent Street Markets

The Task Force recommends that City land be used to create several permanent sites for street markets to be operated by a mix of local artists and artisans and street people (for example the area under the Terry Fox underpass known as the “Bridge”).

Staff supports the intent of this recommendation. Further to Recommendation 18, staff would propose taking away this recommendation to review prospective sites subject to consultation with internal and external stakeholders with a report back to Committee and Council.

Recommendation 20 - Rideau Viking Square

The Task Force recommends that the City draft a letter to Rideau Viking Corporation advocating and supporting the use of the land also known as the “square” as a designated area for the homeless to vend their arts, crafts and to busk freely.

Staff supports this recommendation and proposes to take away the recommendation to review the proposal, consult with internal and external stakeholders with a report back to Committee and Council.

Recommendation 21 – Letter to Landlords Advocating Vending on Private Property

The Task Force recommends that the City draft a letter to be provided to any Private Landlord advocating and supporting the use of their own empty land as a designated area for the homeless to vend their arts, crafts and to busk freely.

Staff supports this recommendation.

Recommendation 22 – Allocation of City Jobs to Homeless Persons

The Task Force recommends that City jobs such as poster removal and hand snow shovelling be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage homeless people or those at risk of becoming homeless.

The Department of Public Works and Services, Surface Operations Branch has utilized the services street youth through the Rideau Street Youth Enterprise and the Ys Owls organizations both in direct hire circumstances as well as through 3rd party arrangements.

Both RSYE and Y's Owls have been contracted directly by the Branch to provide supplementary shoveling services in those areas mechanical equipment cannot access such as stairs or behind light poles and in high pedestrian areas with significant pedestrian facilities such as the ByWard Market. Their services have also been used to provide supplementary janitorial services at Public Works maintenance facilities. In addition to direct contractual relationships, for several years RSYE had been engaged in litter and recycling container servicing on behalf of the City’s contracted service provider.

The Public Works Department is supportive of this recommendation subject to meeting its operational requirements (i.e. meeting its quality standards for snow removal).

Recommendation 23 - Contracting of City work (non unionized) to the Homeless

The Task Force recommends that there be a separate process for establishing the contracting of additional City work (non unionized) and that the additional work be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage the homeless with funding for the additional work to be allocated in the budget annually for this purpose.

Recommendation 24 – Purchasing Services from Social Purpose Enterprises

The Task Force recommends that the City continue to support organizations such as Rideau Street Youth Enterprises; pursue an integrated approach across the City to explore additional possibilities for purchasing services from social purpose enterprises—thus ensuring cost-effective delivery while supporting street-involved and at-risk persons to pursue income-earning opportunities and greater self-sufficiency.

Staff supports this recommendation consistent with recommendation 23 above.

Recommendation 25 - Support Capacity Building of Local Enterprises

The Task Force recommends that the City support local enterprises, such as Roasted Cherry and Centre 507, to build capacity for the employment of street involved youth.

Although businesses such as the Roasted Cherry (Ottawa) continue to employ single parents, youth and high school students, the company has found challenges working with street-involved youth. Similarly, Centre 507 has coordinated completion of odd jobs by street-involved persons, but found this activity challenging and costly to organize. The City could work with a network of service providers and business to assess what supports are needed to further employment related activity.

Recommendation 26 - Social Purchasing Portal

The Task Force recommends that the City engage in discussions with interested stakeholders on Social Purchasing Portal, modelled after the portal in place in Vancouver, which is collaboration between community economic development organizations and private sector business partners.

The Social Purchasing Portal model can be accessed on the internet at http://www.ftebusiness.org/

Social purchasing occurs when business procurement or purchasing includes a social consideration as well as the business considerations. A social value is generated when the business transaction creates targeted economic development or creates employment opportunities for hard to employ persons.

All businesses examine the economic elements when purchasing: price, quality, and product value. There is a growing consideration by many companies to add consideration of environmental impact of their purchasing decisions. A third element of consideration is the social impact of the purchasing decisions.

Every business uses office supplies, couriers, catering, promotional materials, and similar goods and services in their daily activities. The SPP directs these business purchases to participating suppliers in order to generate economic growth that leverages employment opportunities for community members.

The SPP, launched in June of 2003, is an on-line database of goods and services that facilitates the potential business-to-business transactions. There are now over 125 participating businesses of all sizes and a full array of sectors engaged. As a result of the SPP facilitated business activity in the last six months we are able to document 35 job placements and over $500,000 in new business activity brought to Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside.

Staff supports the recommendations and proposes to engage in discussions with interested stakeholders on Social Purchasing Portal, as outlined in the recommendation and report back to Committee and Council with findings and recommendations.

Recommendation 27 - Change OW/ODSP Regulations Re Earned Income

The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the Provincial Government to change the OW/ODSP regulations relative to "earned income" to enable the homeless or those at risk of homelessness to retain work related earnings without having their OW/ODSP financial assistance reduced.

City staff supports this recommendation. Municipalities have been lobbying the province for many years to simplify the prescribed formula for determining what portion of a person’s earnings must be applied against their social assistance payments. The Provincial Government announced several changes to the OW program that became effective August 1, 2005. One of the changes was related to the amount of earnings that would be deducted from participants’ social assistance payments. In addition, there were other changes that were intended to enhance supports to OW recipients as they transition to employment. The following is a brief overview of the changes:

· Adoption of a 50% earnings exemption rate for employed OW recipients.

Prior to August 2005, the prescribed complex formula that was difficult to explain and administer included a fixed and a declining variable exemption that was based on family size. As of August, a new 50% earnings exemption calculation process is simpler for both clients and staff and allows participants to retain a greater percentage of their payments as their earnings increase. A fixed and variable exemption rate model remains in effect for ODSP recipients however ODSP recipients may further reduce their net earnings by up to $140 monthly for disability related expenses.

· Provision of a new full-time employment start-up benefit of $500 for OW clients

This is a new benefit available annually to OW clients who secure full time (30+ hours) employment to assist them with work-related expenses, especially important during the first 2 to 4 weeks of employment while pending a pay cheque. (N.B. The Provincial Government has not made this benefit available to ODSP clients. The Employment and Financial Assistance Branch of the City of Ottawa has raised this as an issue to the Ministry of Community and Social Services).

· Increase in the maximum deduction for informal child care expenses to $600 per month for employed OW clients

Prior to August 2005, parents who were employed and who required informal (unlicensed) child care for their children, could reduce their net earned income by up to $390 per child aged 0-5, and $346 per child aged 6-12 years, per month to cover child care expenses. OW parents may now claim up to $600 per child as a deduction from their net income to cover actual expenses. The childcare deduction for informal care for ODSP recipients has remained at $390 and $346 respectively.

· Extension of health benefits for people exiting OW

The new Extended Employment Health Benefit allows participants, who exit OW due to employment, to maintain health benefits for 6 months or until participants receive health benefits from an employer plan. Benefits will include prescription drugs, dental and vision care, the cost of transportation needed for medical reasons, batteries and repairs for mobility devices, etc. (N.B. An Extended Health Benefits program has always been available to ODSP recipients with high health costs to reduce the impact of losing health benefits as a result of having income which exceeds their ODSP entitlement levels.)

Recommendation 28 - Change OW/ODSP Regulations Re Child Tax Benefit

The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the Provincial Government to change the OW/ODSP regulations relative to the Canadian Child Tax Benefit to enable the homeless or those at risk of homelessness to retain the CTB without having their OW/ODSP financial assistance reduced.

Staff supports this recommendation. Municipalities and staff from the City of Ottawa have been lobbying the Province through OMSSA and the Social Assistance Task Force (AMO) to end the claw-back and to absorb the resulting budget pressure that would be created by the loss of revenue to the Reinvestment Fund.

Recommendation 29 – Maintenance of Current City Funding if “Claw Back” Is Ended

The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa maintain the current funding level for Social Services programs in the event the Provincial Government discontinues the claw-back of National Child Benefits, and allows OW/ODSP individuals to retain their Child Tax Credit.

The National Child Benefit (NCB) is a Federal / Provincial initiative launched in 1998 with the objective of reducing child poverty while reducing overlap and duplication between the two levels of government. The long term goal is for the federal government to assume full responsibility for the provision of children’s basic benefits. Accordingly, the program is structured in such a way that the federal government has been increasing income support provided to low-income families with children while the provinces have been decreasing (clawing back) its social assistance contributions by a corresponding amount.

The clawback has been reinvested in new or enhanced services and benefits in support of low income families as part of an NCBS reinvestment fund. Because social assistance is cost shared 80/20 between the Province and City, the City, in effect, saves 20% of the amount the province claws back in social assistance. That 20% constitutes the City’s portion of the NCBS reinvestment fund (i.e., the claw-back). Per the direction of the former Regional Municipality of Ottawa Carleton (RMOC) dating from October 1998 – the City invests its 20% savings (which is presently $4.15M) in Child Care, Employment Supports and Building Community capacity.

In 2004 and 2005, the federal government has continued to increase its contributions to the NCB in the total amount of $21.58 for the first child; $20.66 for the second child; and $20.33 for each additional child. However, as of June 2004, the Province has elected to not remove the corresponding increase from low-income families (with children) who are in receipt of OW/ODSP. Adversely, the impact is that the NCB reinvestment fund is frozen at the current level.

Recommendation 30 – Increase of OW Rates to Pre-1995 Levels

The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa and the Police Services Board of the City of Ottawa lobby the Ontario Government to increase OW rates to pre-1995 levels.

At its meeting of April 13, 2005 Council considered a report respecting the Reinstatement of Social Assistance Rates to pre-1995 Levels (ACS2005-CPS-EFA-0001) and approved that a letter be written to the Province of Ontario advocating a re-instatement of social assistance rates to pre-1995 levels.

Inclusion of the Police Services Board in this recommendation is an effort to reinforce the message to Queen’s Park of the implications of poverty to policing as well as all City activities.

Out of Scope

Recommendation 31 - Foster Children and Youth and Homelessness

A recommendation from Foster Care Canada was presented to the Task Force at its meeting of May 9. The recommendation proposed that the City of Ottawa create a “Task Force on Foster Care Outcomes” that would investigate the issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population.

It was noted that an alarming high rate of foster children become ODSP or OW recipients and emergency shelter users and, accordingly, it was important to explore what could be done to prevent and address these serious and potentially long-term negative outcomes.

CONSULTATION

The Homelessness and the Safe Street Act Task Force consulted with the homeless and other impacted stakeholders through a series of monthly public meetings held throughout 2005. Monthly meetings were held from January to June 2005 with recommendations discussed at the September and November meetings of the Task Force. Recommendations were themed around Housing \ Shelter; The Safe Streets Act, and; Employment Opportunities. All recommendations received from public delegations, including comment respecting their disposition, are attached in Document 2.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Subject to Council approval, Recommendation 6, respecting establishment of an ombudsman would entail compensation and associated administrative costs that would have to be detailed in a future report to Committee and Council. Recommendation 29, which proposes that the City continue to fund the Reinvestment Fund if the “clawback” of Child Tax Benefits is ended, would create a budget pressure of $4.15 Million for the City. There are no direct financial implications associated with the other recommendations of this report. Any prospective financial implications identified during the development of initiatives approved as part of this report will be detailed in future reports to Committee and Council.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 – Safe Streets Act Legislation

Document 2 – Full Inventory of Recommendations Received from Public Delegations

Document 3 – Safe Streets Act – Provincial Offense Activity – By Location

Document 4 – Safe Streets Act – Provincial Offense Activity – By Year

DISPOSITION

Recommendations 1 – 5 Housing Branch

Recommendations 6 and 7 CPS Deputy City Manager’s Office

Recommendation 8 and 9 Housing Branch

Recommendation 10 Housing Branch and By-law Services Branch

Recommendation 11 and 12 Housing Branch

Recommendation 13 Ottawa Police Service

Recommendaiton 14 Police Services Board and Ottawa Police Service

Recommendation 15 Ottawa Police Service

Recommendaiton 16 Police Services Board and Ottawa Police Service

Recommendation 17 – 21 By-law Services Branch

Recommendation 22 Surface Operations Branch

Recommendation 23 CPS Deputy City Manager’s Office and Supply Management

Division

Recommendation 24 – 26 CPS Deputy City Manager’s Office to coordinate

Recommendation 27 – 29 Employment and Financial Assistance Branch

Recommendation 30 Police Services Board

Document 1

Safe Streets Act, 1999 (Consolidation)

Amended by: 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table; 2005, c. 32, s. 1.

Definition

1. In sections 2 and 3,

“solicit” means to request, in person, the immediate provision of money or another thing of value, regardless of whether consideration is offered or provided in return, using the spoken, written or printed word, a gesture or other means. 1999, c. 8, s. 1.

Definition

2. (1) In this section,

“aggressive manner” means a manner that is likely to cause a reasonable person to be concerned for his or her safety or security. 1999, c. 8, s. 2 (1).

Solicitation in aggressive manner prohibited

(2) No person shall solicit in an aggressive manner. 1999, c. 8, s. 2 (2).

Examples

(3) Without limiting subsection (1) or (2), a person who engages in one or more of the following activities shall be deemed to be soliciting in an aggressive manner for the purpose of this section:

1. Threatening the person solicited with physical harm, by word, gesture or other means, during the solicitation or after the person solicited responds or fails to respond to the solicitation.

2. Obstructing the path of the person solicited during the solicitation or after the person solicited responds or fails to respond to the solicitation.

3. Using abusive language during the solicitation or after the person solicited responds or fails to respond to the solicitation.

4. Proceeding behind, alongside or ahead of the person solicited during the solicitation or after the person solicited responds or fails to respond to the solicitation.

5. Soliciting while intoxicated by alcohol or drugs.

6. Continuing to solicit a person in a persistent manner after the person has responded negatively to the solicitation. 1999, c. 8, s. 2 (3).

Definitions

3. (1) In this section,

“public transit vehicle” means a vehicle operated by, for or on behalf of the Government of Ontario, a municipality in Ontario or a transit commission or authority in Ontario, as part of a regular passenger transportation service; (“véhicule de transport en commun”)

“roadway” has the same meaning as in the

Highway Traffic Act; (“chaussée”)

“vehicle” includes automobile, motorcycle, van, truck, trailer, bus, mobile home, traction engine, farm tractor, road-building machine, bicycle, motor-assisted bicycle, motorized snow vehicle, streetcar and any other vehicle drawn, propelled or driven by any kind of power, including muscular power. (“véhicule”) 1999, c. 8, s. 3 (1); 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table.

Solicitation of captive audience prohibited

(2) No person shall,

(a) solicit a person who is using, waiting to use, or departing from an automated teller machine;

(b) solicit a person who is using or waiting to use a pay telephone or a public toilet facility;

(d) solicit a person who is in or on a public transit vehicle;

(e) solicit a person who is in the process of getting in, out of, on or off a vehicle or who is in a parking lot; or

(f) while on a roadway, solicit a person who is in or on a stopped, standing or parked vehicle. 1999, c. 8, s. 3 (2).

Permitted fund-raising by charities

(3) Subsection (2) does not apply to fund-raising activities that meet the following conditions:

1. They are conducted by a charitable organization registered under the

Income Tax Act (Canada) on a roadway where the maximum speed limit is 50 kilometres per hour.

2. They are permitted by a by-law of the municipality in which the activities are conducted. 2005, c. 32, s. 1.

Definition

4. (1) In this section,

“outdoor public place” means,

(a) a place outdoors to which the public is ordinarily invited or permitted access and, for greater certainty, includes but is not limited to a sidewalk, street, parking lot, swimming pool, beach, conservation area, park and playground, and

(b) school grounds. 1999, c. 8, s. 4 (1).

Disposal of certain dangerous things prohibited

(2) No person shall dispose of any of the following things in an outdoor public place:

1. A used condom.

2. A new or used hypodermic needle or syringe.

3. Broken glass. 1999, c. 8, s. 4 (2).

Defence

(3) It is a defence to a charge under subsection (2) for the person who disposed of the condom, the needle or syringe or the broken glass to establish that he or she took reasonable precautions to dispose of it in a manner that would not endanger the health or safety of any person. 1999, c. 8, s. 4 (3).

Offence

5. (1) Every person who contravenes section 2, 3 or 4 is guilty of an offence and is liable,

(a) on a first conviction, to a fine of not more than $500; and

(b) on each subsequent conviction, to a fine of not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both. 1999, c. 8, s. 5 (1).

Subsequent conviction

(2) For the purpose of determining the penalty to which a person is liable under subsection (1),

(a) a conviction of the person of a contravention of section 2 is a subsequent conviction only if the person has previously been convicted of a contravention of section 2 or 3;

(b) a conviction of the person of a contravention of section 3 is a subsequent conviction only if the person has previously been convicted of a contravention of section 2 or 3; and

(c) a conviction of the person of a contravention of section 4 is a subsequent conviction only if the person has previously been convicted of a contravention of section 4. 1999, c. 8, s. 5 (2).

Arrest without warrant

6. A police officer who believes on reasonable and probable grounds that a person has contravened section 2, 3 or 4 may arrest the person without warrant if,

(a) before the alleged contravention of section 2, 3 or 4, the police officer directed the person not to engage in activity that contravenes that section; or

(b) the police officer believes on reasonable and probable grounds that it is necessary to arrest the person without warrant in order to establish the identity of the person or to prevent the person from continuing or repeating the contravention. 1999, c. 8, s. 6.

7. Omitted (amends or repeals other Acts). 1999, c. 8, s. 7.

8. Omitted (provides for coming into force of provisions of this Act). 1999, c. 8, s. 8.

9. Omitted (enacts short title of this Act). 1999, c. 8, s. 9.

Document 2

Task Force on Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act

Full Inventory of Recommendations Received from Public Delegations

#	Recommendation	Comment

Housing/Shelters
A	The Task Force should recommend alternatives to the current expensive subsidization of shelter space for the homeless. This should include reallocation of funds to the building of social housing units, and the development of policies that require abandoned liveable space in Ottawa to be used or expropriated for social housing. [Ottawa Witness Group]	The mandate for the Provincial per diem funding for shelter operations does not allow redirection to affordable housing. This funding is limited to payment for beds, meals and personal support in emergency shelters for individual clients. The Task Force agrees in general with the intent of this recommendation, that long-term affordable housing is how to solve homelessness, not more shelters. The Community Action Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness, which was initially developed in 1999 and is updated regularly, fully supports this intent. The City and our partners in the community are actively working on ways to improve the supply of affordable housing. However, shelters are a necessary part of the services continuum in Ottawa: we will always need a way to respond to crisis, and shelters are much more than just places to sleep, they are an essential part of the system of supports and services that citizens of Ottawa continue to need access to. The City identified the need for enhanced powers to deal with abandoned property in the submission to the Province for the City of Ottawa Act. Specifically, the City referred to the legislative changes secured in the City of Winnipeg Charter that allows the City of Winnipeg to take more forceful action on derelict properties, whereby owners that remain out of compliance with the Property Standards bylaws may ultimately lose their property under expropriation, subject to court orders. Note however that this legislation does not address the intent of this recommendation to in effect allow “squatting”, rather it only provides for the expropriation of unoccupied properties, when such properties are causing danger to the public due to lack of upkeep. Reference to American models of “use it or lose it” legislation will be reviewed further, but initial review suggests that such legislation is highly contentious even in US cities, and that no jurisdiction in Canada has allowed similar action, primarily due to regard for the rights of property owners to determine how their property is used, within relevant legislation such as zoning or, as above, property standards.
B	That the Social Housing Registry be directed to review the priorities for homeless status, to include, that 2 out of 10 applications goes to an applicant with the homeless status, remove barriers for the people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness when applying to the registry, redefine the term homelessness to include all those who are without a permanent address, the housing Corporation appoint an applicant or applicants to sit on the Registry board for a balanced perspective. [Public Delegation]	The Task Force supports the recommendation, which has been separated into two distinct recommendations. See recommendations 11 and 12.
C	That the City of Ottawa allocate, 1-2% of municipal funding (shelter budget) to build new or renovate existing City owned properties for subsidized housing. [Public Delegation]	Similar to comment provided with respect to Public Delegation Recommendation 1, the mandate for the Provincial per diem funding for shelter operations does not allow redirection to affordable housing. This funding is limited to payment for beds, meals and personal support in emergency shelters for individual clients.
D	That the City of Ottawa be directed to review the conditions of all rooming houses within the City, to address the unsafe conditions, safety and dangerous factors that have an impact on people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, by implementing strict By Laws to adhere to. [Public Delegation]	Supported by Task Force. See Recommendation 10 of the Task Force.
E	Establish a peer support system; peers who were homeless are more able to assist and intervene with current homeless individuals has they know what it is like to be on the streets. [Public Delegation]	Supported by the Task Force. See Recommendation 8.
Safe Streets Act
F	That the Ottawa Police Services draft strict guidelines with respect to enforcement of the Act so that all citizens will know where they stand regarding their rights to public space. [Ottawa Witness Group]	Supported by the Task Force. See Recommendation 14.
G	The Task Force should recommend that the City of Ottawa, at the appropriate time, lobby the province to improve the civilian complaints system as recommended by Justice LeSage. [Ottawa Witness Group]	The Task Force did not support the recommendation to lobby the province. The Review of the System for Complaints by the Public Regarding the Police was established by the Government of Ontario. The Honourable Patrick J. LeSage, Q.C., former Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Ontario, was appointed to lead the review. Mr. LeSage's report to the Attorney General, following the completion of his Review, was made available to the public on April 25, 2005. Mr. LeSage’s main recommendation was to propose establishment of an independent civilian body to administer the public complaints system in Ontario. Mr. LeSage recommended that the body should not be related to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (OCCOPS) and that a civilian who has not been a police officer should lead this new organization. Civilian administrators should be responsible for the administration of the complaints system for each region of the Province. Although the Task Force did not support lobbying the province to establish an independent body to administer the public complaints system, the Task Force did recommend: lobbying the Province to change or repeal the Safe Streets Act (SSA); that the Ottawa Police Services draft strict guidelines with respect to enforcement of the Safe Streets Act; formalization and expansion of a training program to promote consistent enforcement including public education, and; that the Ottawa Police Services Board review enforcement of the Safe Streets Act since its inception. See Recommendations 13, 14, 15 and 16.
H	The Task Force should review the Safe Streets Act and, if it deems it appropriate, recommend that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal it. [Ottawa Witness Group]	Supported by the Task Force. See Recommendation 13.
I	That the Task Force speak directly to the Crown Attorney to speak to the unconstitutionality of SSA as defined. [Ticket Defense Program – Civil Liberty Lawyer]	The Task Force was unsuccessful in its attempts to have a representative of the Crown Attorney’s Office speak to Safe Streets Act.
J	That the Task Force speak to the Ottawa Police Board to voice an opinion / suggestion as to how to deal with SSA enforcement. [Ticket Defense Program – Civil Liberty Lawyer]	This proposal is supported by Task Force recommendations 14 and 15.
K	That the Task Force request that the Police and Crown prosecution cease enforcement of the SSA until such time as the constitutionality of the Act, currently before the Ontario Court of appeal, is resolved. [Ticket Defense Program – Civil Liberty Lawyer]	A similar motion requesting a moratorium on local enforcement of the SSA pending appeal was considered by Council at its meeting of October 13, 2005. Corporate Legal Services advised that such a motion could not legal proceed and the motion was withdrawn.
L	That the City of Ottawa establish a mechanism, such as an ombudsman, so that people who are homeless can address concerns that they have about the enforcement of the Safe Streets Act. [Public Delegation]	Supported by the Task Force pursuant to Recommendation 5. Recommendation 5 recommends that the ombudsman address complaints respecting City funded services as well as experiences under the Safe Streets Act.
M	That the city and police make a public statement assuring that there will be no further interference in peaceful protests such as happened at the seven-year squat, the Terry Fox bridge protest, tent city and the recent squeegee action at the Elgin Police station. [Homeless Action Strike]
Employment Opportunities
N	Use City land to create several permanent sites for a street markets to be operated by a mix o local artists and artisans and street people selling whatever is available to them. [Professor Allan Moscovitch - School of Social Work, Carleton University]	Supported by the Task Force. See Recommendations 19, 20 and 21.
O	Establish a range of sidewalk sites that could be used by street people. These sites could be accessed with a nominal fee for a permit. The people using the sites could be assisted by an NGO with the capacity to find them products that they could sell on the street simply and easily. The goal is to have people assist themselves, earn income, and learn skills in simply ways. [Professor Allan Moscovitch - School of Social Work, Carleton University]	Supported by the Task Force pursuant to Recommendation 18. It is noted that Recommendation 18 does not permit the activity on sidewalks abutting residential zones, and, requires that the person selling or distributing not remain at a particular location while selling or distributing the articles.
P	Support a social service agency with the funds to purchase a simple uniform. In uniform these people would sell as they walk through the streets of the central core area. They could sell a variety of goods carried on their backs. For example vending drinks during the summer. [Professor Allan Moscovitch - School of Social Work, Carleton University]	Not supported by the Task Force. Task Force members expressed concern that this recommendation would stigmatize homeless persons.
Q	That the City not prosecute street involved persons for selling arts and crafts and busking on the streets without a license in respect to City Bylaw L99 that provides an exemption from a business license for these ventures. [Homeless Action Strike ~Street Ventures Ottawa]	Corporate Legal Services confirmed that By-law L99 provides such an exemption on private property, with permission of the private property owner, within the geographic boundaries of the former City of Ottawa, to Canadian Craftspeople and Visual Artists exhibiting or offering for sale goods, wares or merchandise which they themselves have produced.
R	That the City allow the area under the Terry Fox Bridge and the area to the East of the Rideau Centre known as “the square” to be used for all types of street ventures (not just arts, crafts and busking) for donations. [Homeless Action Strike ~Street Ventures Ottawa]	Supported by Recommendations 19 and 20 of the Task Force. Note that neither Recommendation 19 nor 20 explicitly prohibit any particular type of street venture. Permitted uses would have to be elaborated subject to approval of the recommendations. Street venture activity in the area known as the square can only be effected subject to approval of the landowner.
S	The Task Force should NOT propose a “designated area” or “permitting” system to resolve perceived problems with the use of public space. [Ottawa Witness Group]	The Ottawa Witness Group had objected to the designation of spaces or permits for activity that should be allowed as a right. Recommendations 17 and 18 of the Task Force do provide for the selling and distributing of certain goods without a business license or designated space permit provided the person selling does not remain in one place. The Task Force is of the position that some form of regulation is required where persons propose to distribute or sell from fixed locations as set out in Recommendations 19 and 20.
T	That the City implement a “token” system in conjunction with the local business community whereby tokens would be purchased by the public to be handed out to the homeless / panhandlers for redemption at local businesses. [Public Delegation]	Not supported by the Task Force. The Task Force was of the opinion that this proposal would not help individuals gain any valuable work experience. Task Force members expressed concern that this recommendation would also stigmatize homeless persons and would not foster independence or self-reliance.
U	Continue to support organizations such as Rideau Street Youth Enterprises; pursue an integrated approach across the City to explore additional possibilities for purchasing services from social purpose enterprises—thus ensuring cost-effective delivery while supporting street-involved and at-risk persons to pursue income-earning opportunities and greater self-sufficiency. [Representative of Health and Social Services Advisory Committee]	Supported by Task Force. See Recommendation 24 of the Task Force.
V	Pursue mechanisms to facilitate that money received from employment through these initiatives does not impact transfer of social assistance. [Representative of Health and Social Services Advisory Committee]	Supported by Task Force. See Recommendation 27 of the Task Force.
W	Support local enterprises with support for capacity building. For example, while the Roasted Cherry (Ottawa) continues to employ single parents, youth and high school students, the company has found challenges working with street-involved youth. Similarly, Centre 507 has coordinated completion of odd jobs by street-involved persons, but found this activity challenging and costly to organize. The City could work with a network of service providers and business to assess what supports are needed to further employment related activity. [Representative of Health and Social Services Advisory Committee]	Supported by Task Force. See Recommendation 25of the Task Force.
X	Engage in discussions with interested stakeholders on Social Purchasing Portal. [Representative of Health and Social Services Advisory Committee]	Supported by the Task Force. See Recommendation 26 of the Task Force.
Y	That there be a public statement made by the city and the police that it is legal to panhandle, distribute property such as newspapers, arts, crafts and to play music or perform street theatre for donations. [Homeless Action Strike]	Not supported by the Task Force. Corporate Legal Services has advised that the cited activities constitute vending. By-law Services Branch has adopted a "non enforcement" standard with respect to offering newspapers focused on the homeless for donations.
Outside of Scope
Z	Foster Care Council of Canada That the City of Ottawa, create a “Task Force on Foster Care Outcomes” or a sub-committee of the Task Force on Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act which would investigate the issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population, alarmingly high rates of O.D.S.P. or O.W. recipients and emergency shelter users and what could be done to prevent and address these serious and potentially long-term negative outcomes of Ottawa’s vulnerable youth.	The Task Force was supportive of the intent of the recommendation

HOMELESSNESS AND THE SAFE STREETS ACT – TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

LES SANS-ABRI ET LA LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ DANS LES RUES – RAPPORT DU GROUPE DE TRAVAIL

ACS2006-CCS-HRS-0001 CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE

Sean McKenny provided an overview of the work done to date by the Task Force since it’s inception in 2004. He explained that the work of the Task Force was not to find fault, but based on the opinion and experience, determine how it could move towards recommendations that would create something better for everyone, without losing the focus on people who are homeless, those who are at risk of becoming homeless, those who distribute newspapers on the street, who sell crafts, panhandlers, et cetera. He advised that theirs was not an easy process, but as a Task Force, they were able to bring everyone together to communicate. The Task Force went about its work with mutual respect and sensitivity for it’s mandate, recognizing that they could not change the way people think or the make-up of the city. He emphasized that homelessness should not be allowed to happen in the Nation’s capital and the recommendations before committee are a start to making some improvements in this regard. A copy of his briefing notes is held on file.

When asked where the Task Force wanted to go from here, Mr. McKenny advised that the committee and Council should move towards implementing those areas of the report that they can. Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager, Community and Protective Services explained that staff have provided comments on each of the recommendations in the report. Those that are supported, staff intend to build into the Departmental work plan and report back to committee with regards to implementation, financial impact and timeline considerations.

Councillor Bédard inquired whether any of the City’s Advisory Committees had been consulted on the report prior to its submission. Mr. McKenny advised that they had made a presentation to the Poverty Issues Advisory Committee. Also, staff had informed them which advisory committees were doing similar work. He advised that there were individuals on the Task Force who represented the business community and their views on that particular market was provided. Also, a number of individuals who attended their meetings provided input in this particular area.

Based on the fact that staff intend to report back with an implementation plan, Councillor Bédard asked whether it was more appropriate for the committee to approve the report in principle at this time. Mr. Kanellakos explained that approval in principle would be appropriate and would allow the Department to take the leadership with the other City departments and bring back a plan which identifies any issues or concerns that might not have been contemplated when the report recommendations were initially put together. He further confirmed that additional consultation is required with the business community and with other advisory committees.

Councillor Cullen noted that staff supports 20 of the 31 recommendations and therefore believed the committee could approve the majority of the recommendations. Mr. Kanellakos stated that while they do support those recommendations and recommend moving on them, he agreed that approval in principle would be on the understanding there would be a work plan brought back, integrating all the recommendations into the various departments and bringing back to committee some sense of the time continuum on how and when Council can expect those things to happen. He confirmed they did not oppose any of the recommendations.

The committee received the following public delegations:

Jane Scharf referred specifically to Recommendations 17 and 18 and accused the Task Force of allowing City staff to drive these two recommendations, as they had not been proposed by nor were they in the interest of the public. She believed these two recommendations would only serve the interests of a small group of business people. The two recommendations were inappropriate because the person has to be homeless and that stipulation is a problem because it stigmatizes and if it’s a useful enterprise the individual is engaged in, as soon as they find a home, these recommendations imply that they would have to stop engaging in that enterprise. Further, to ask them to keep moving and not stay in one place longer than 10 minutes is unreasonable because they cannot be expected to produce artwork or crafts if they have to keep moving.

Ms. Scharf went on to state that while Recommendation 31 was deemed to be beyond the scope of the mandate of the Task Force, she believed there was a need to find out why many people that have come through foster care end up on the street in order to prevent it from happening. She did note that the decision that the recommendation was beyond the scope of the Task Force was not made at a Task Force meeting. On this topic, she indicated that studies from the University of Ottawa showed 50% of youth on the street were from group homes and approximately 20% more were from foster care. She believed there was a need to look at why that percentage is so high.

Ms. Scharf also submitted a report card on the treatment of the homeless, detailing the demands at Tent City Homeless Action Strike, and the responses by the Mayor and City Council and the Ottawa Police Service. Copies of her submissions are held on file.

At this point, the Chair advised the delegation she had gone past her 5 minutes and, after seeking input from committee members, ruled that she would not be given additional speaking time.

With regards to her concerns about Recommendations 17 and 18, Councillor Cullen asked whether the real issue is the time limit and asked whether there might be a middle ground acceptable to everyone. Ms. Scharf explained that they had proposed to participate in a process of negotiation where complaints could be made either by the street vendor about the way they were being treated by police, or by the local business people if there was some issues of obstruction. The councillor asked whether the delegation would be more receptive if vending was allowed to occur during off-peak business hours and Ms. Scharf believed that would not be sufficient and reminded the councillor about the many places where vending does not occur in front of businesses, such as on Wellington Street in front of Parliament Hill or at the pedestrian underpass at Sussex Drive and Rideau Street.

Councillor Cullen understood the 10-minute rule would be enforced on a complaint basis and Susan Jones, Director of By-law Services, confirmed this fact. The Director further mentioned that staff examined other regulations the City has in place for mobile canteens, for example, in order to balance the competing priorities with neighbouring businesses, balance the issue around safety, flow of traffic and pedestrians and ensuring that congregations of people or other activities are not going to impede or compromise the safety of those types of issues. Staff believed that a 10-minute period would allow for an activity to take place and then move on. She added that it does not mean staff could not be directed to consult further or to implement this as a pilot project, which could be monitored.

Kayla Welch indicated that over the summers since the Homeless Action Strike she has met many people, including teens and young adults that are affected by the SSA. She explained that these individuals do not have loving families, or stable housing and jobs and even if they have artistic talent the Designated Spaces Policy affects them. She believed the City should review the by-laws because these individuals need a second chance and if they have artistic ability they should be able to be making bracelets and necklaces to earn extra income.

Jessie McIver indicated that he was raised in foster care after being removed from his parent’s home as a young boy. He recalled circumstances of his life where he was treated badly. However, he managed to put himself through college to get off the streets. He recognized there were to be improvements made to the foster care system, and yet children are still at risk in such care and he asked how it is in the best interest of the child to take them away from their parents.

John Dunn, Foster Care Council of Canada explained that Recommendation 31 was put forward because once these young adults come out of foster care, there is no going back. He hoped there would be some kind of reach-back program similar to the Employment Insurance program, that when a person has received it and after a few years they can go back to that income support. He hoped the City could establish a program that might be funded by the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, to help these people who have been in foster care. In turn, these individuals could help their friends on the street who may not be in care, through the peer support recommendation (#8). Mr. Dunn noted that of the 45 people interviewed and whose depositions all councillors received, 32.6% of them had involvement with the Children’s Aid Society (CAS).

Councillor Feltmate indicated she would be putting forward a Motion to refer Recommendation 31 to the CAS and to the Ministry of Youth and Children’s Services. Mr. Dunn wanted assurance that the City would be involved in some way.

Stew Poulin, Community Start Me Project explained that to earn an income, he spends time drawing on the street. He questioned why Ontario Works does not recognize art as a vocation and he was concerned that street artists, like him, are being persecuted alongside panhandlers. He distributed samples of his work, which were artistic renderings of Ottawa’s architectural history and culture. He believed the community could only benefit from this kind of thing because street artists attract and direct tourism to local business. He urged the committee to recognize and support street advocates such as those here today. A copy of his handout is held on file.

Rob MacDonald supported Recommendation 10, which dealt with reviewing the conditions of rooming houses, but he was concerned that the recommendation does not take into account the behavioural management practices of landlords who try to evict tenants who bring up concerns about their rooms. With regards to Recommendation 11 and the review of the priorities for homeless status, he explained that the way these priorities are being administered inaccurately reflects those who are truly homeless, weeding out many who are on the street and who are in the most need of housing. He noted that the local housing priorities are coming up for reassessment this year and suggested it would be good to have the Task Force get the same public input then and have it reconvene to get some input about the housing priorities so the voices of the homeless are heard in this process. He supported Recommendation 28, but with regards to Recommendation 29, noted that when the claw back ends there will be a shortfall of about $4.5M and 113 different programs, which currently receive the claw back money, are going to be at risk. Therefore, while the recommendations had merit, recognition should also be given to maintaining the funding for those programs. A copy of his submission is held on file.

Karen Dawe, Member, Task Force on Homelessness played a CD recording of sworn depositions from eight individuals who had been ticketed under the Safe Streets Act. A summary of their comments follows:

· Many were ticketed for passive panhandling; if they were just sitting there they should be left alone

· Some felt harassed and humiliated by police

· Changes that could be suggested to the police to improve the situation is treating them with respect; they did recognize there were some aggressive panhandlers

· If they are not panhandling in an aggressive manner, the police should not be able to bother them at all

Ms. Dawe noted that of the information gathered, 34% were female and 32.6% were former wards of the CAS. A copy of the questionnaire used for the sworn depositions for legal affidavits was circulated and is held on file.

The Chair acknowledged receipt of 275 pages of depositions from street people that were sent electronically to all members of Council. A copy is held on file.

Councillor Cullen recognized there is a concern about the unevenness of the application of the law and that people were being targeted. Ms. Dawe explained that the SSA is unconstitutional and the Task Force recommends that the City lobby to repeal the Act because it criminalizes poor people; if a panhandler is at or near one of the places listed in the Act that they are not supposed to be at, they are ticketed.

Some discussion ensued on the definition of near and how the police was interpreting it. The committee was advised by one of the previous speakers that people were being ticketed by the police for soliciting a person “near” a location and in some instances, it was as far away as two blocks.

Councillor Bédard believed that when there is aggressiveness on the part of the panhandler, action should be taken, but if the panhandler is not acting aggressively, then he believed they should be left alone. Ms. Dawe indicated there are two messages coming from what is written in the SSA and she agreed ticketing passive panhandlers is a serious restriction of freedom. She believed that for the small population being criminalized by this Act, it is simply not fair and is unreasonable. The issue of human rights are not being addressed.

Catherine Boucher, Executive Coordinator, Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corporation (CCOC) proposed an amendment to Recommendation 11 to address her concerns. She recognized that the Housing Branch has committed to a review of all the local housing priorities this year and as part of that review, she requested that it also include the review of the supports that are needed for people to have successful tenancies when they are moving from the shelters or the street. She understood that the Housing Branch is committed to a discussion around what happens when people who have supports decide they no longer want or need them. A copy of her submission is held on file.

In order to have a balanced review of all those needs, Councillor Cullen inquired how staff propose to engage representatives of the homeless community. The Director of Housing, Russell Mawby indicated that there is an advisory group that will be the main agency for conducting the review, which includes both housing and service providers, as well as organizations who work directly with people who are homeless. This group would be relied on to identify individuals who could bring forward their perspective on the issues around local priority and access to housing. He confirmed that such representation could include members of the Task Force.

Councillor Bédard noted that one of the recommendations speaks to transitory housing and he wondered if it would deal with some of the issues in order to accommodate some of these people. Mr. Mawby explained that the increased integration of all the functions of government in society focuses on where people live and recognizes that the role of housing is being more than just a social program but also fundamental to how the City provides decent places for all people and the supportive environments to help make that happen. He went on to state that one of the primary functions of transitory housing is to ensure people have access to a higher level of support to maintain their independence. The councillor suggested that to ensure there is integration into the community, groups such as Option Bytown should be encouraged further to ensure there is a smooth transition. Mr. Mawby agreed this organization has been successful, but recognized that a fundamental problem is there are not enough resources.

Andrew Nellis, Panhandlers Union of Ottawa suggested the question that should be asked is what it would cost not to implement the recommendations of the Task Force. He recognized that police are expensive and it costs more than $50/day in a per diem to keep people homeless; this is not an affordable solution. He did not think street vendors would abide by the 10-minute rule for selling items. They are prepared to self-police in order to take care of the panhandlers, adding that by-laws have very little effect on the street. They are willing to work with the City if it is reasonable, however, if it does not recognize fundamental human rights, he indicated they would fight for them. A copy of his submission is held on file.

Proshanto Smith, Panhandlers Union of Ottawa indicated that the police have intimated him and have been aggressive towards him. He has been ticketed under the SSA and as a result, he is unable to get a phone so he cannot contact schools or try and do anything for himself. His ODSP allowance does not cover his rent and so he panhandles to earn more money. He believed that having to move from one spot after 10 minutes is ridiculous. He stated that harassment has intensified and is getting worse.

John Hollingsworth and Paul Smith, Ticket Defence Program indicated they are involved in fighting the SSA through the court system. There has been an increase in the number of tickets being issued and they expect these numbers to continue to rise. They are currently at 18.1% of all intake of these tickets. While their organization handles more than tickets issued under the SSA, 60% of the tickets they received last year were issued under the SSA. Mr. Hollingsworth believed this is important because it is significant to taxpayers, noting that upholding the rights of people to have representation in court (a population that was, more or less, never in court before), is not insignificant and is quite a burden on the justice system. He encouraged the committee to amend Recommendation 13 to simply “repeal” the Act and given the serious backlash against the SSA in the community, suggested that aggressiveness could be handled under other statutes under law.

Mr. Hollingsworth added that if Recommendation 14 is implemented, the last point in the recommendation, “…that these guidelines be widely circulated and debated by the public before being put into effect.” is contradictory to Recommendation 15 whereby training officers on the SSA would include “…a public education component that includes visiting shelters…” He suggested committee members might want to read the 275-page deposition to determine whether policing reflects accurate enforcement of the Act and then decide if this is an appropriate recommendation.

Mr. Smith indicated that it has been their experience that the police use the Act over and over again to move people along or to ticket them wrongly, simply because they are in the “proximity” of where they are not supposed to be. With respect to Recommendation 15, and based on their experiences, he was of the opinion that the police should not be going into the shelters as liaison to pass information on about the SSA. When asked to clarify this concern, he explained that there is a huge level of distrust between the homeless and the Police Service and there are some police officers who use the Act aggressively; therefore he did not think it would be best to have them go into shelters as part of a public education program. When asked who it should be to educate as per Recommendation 14, Mr. Hollingsworth suggested there could be a role for the police to meet with people in shelters in an attempt to humanize the relationship on the streets, but legal education work, which is what that recommendation appears to speak to, should involve a more independent voice or advocates who visit the shelters. Such an option should also be made known to other agencies that currently do this in their population.

Paul Durber, Laundry Co-op and First United Church spoke to the problems underlying the affordability issue. He recognized that people with inadequate incomes have difficulty with housing; they do not understand why the province has ended the exemption from claw back of earnings under OW and is now proposing to do the same with the ODSP payments. They are very concerned about the impact this would have on people whose income is already extraordinarily marginal. This would also pose an additional burden on the City as it tries to deal with the problems of homelessness in terms of understanding the problems people have in meeting the economic aspects of shelter. Mr. Durber urged the City to lobby the provincial government to stop the practice of claw backs. A copy of his submission is held on file.

Linda Lalonde made some comments on the following recommendations:

§ Recommendations 4 and 6 – a residents council would be more effective because it would allow people to participate at an earlier stage to influence their circumstances and resolve problems before they escalate to an ombudsman level; it would also allow people to come forward in a safer, more hospitable and non-adversarial way; the ombudsman should be clearly seen as a third party and not as a City body

§ Recommendation 11 - people who are staying with a friend or relative while they wait to get on the housing list, should still be recognized as being homeless

§ Recommendation 28 - since the City has already lobbied the province to change the ODSP/OW regulations with little or no difference being made, the City should pursue returning their 20% to families as a first step

§ Recommendation 29 - these services are vital and the City should identify in 2007 and subsequent budgets, steps to move these programs from NCB dollars to other City funding streams

§ Recommendation 30 – suggested the City change their tactic and ask the province to let the City give their 20% back to families; the province should be requested to change the legislation which currently forbids the municipality from giving back that percent.

At this point in the meeting, Chair Holmes advised that Debbie Barton of the Ottawa Social Housing Network was scheduled to speak but was unable to stay. The Network supported the amendment to Recommendation 11 voiced previously by the Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corporation Centretown. The Network’s submission was circulated and a copy is held on file.

Ken MacLaren, Executive Director, Ottawa Inner City Ministries mentioned how his organization has been reaching out to the poor and the homeless since 1988. He spoke to Recommendations 17 and 18, noting that reference to the homeless should also include those who are risk of becoming homeless. He also believed the 10-minute rule is very unusual and is a very unreasonable amount of time for those trying to earn extra income.

Chair Holmes understood that the definition of “homeless” includes those who are also at risk of becoming homeless. The Director of Housing concurred with this assessment.

When asked what he would prefer rather than a 10-minute period, Mr. MacLaren explained that while he understood the concerns of a business owner who has someone sitting out front of their business for hours at a time, he noted that there are areas of the city that could be utilized specifically for street people who are in need of earning income. He suggested having some designated spaces for that purpose and some leniency on the part of the business community because there is nowhere to go. The streets are where the people are and there needs to be a place for them. Chair Holmes advised that she had suggested the Designated Spaces Policy with the Task Force and people were strongly opposed to that concept because they want to be able to vend anywhere at anytime.

Peggy Ducharme, Executive Director, Rideau Street Business Improvement Area made the following points:

- the Task Force lacks a balance of community representation outside the homelessness and social service agencies; the BIA’s were not aware of the business representative on the Task Force and no information was exchanged by that person to the business community regarding discussions of the Task Force;

- the report does not differentiate between the many categories of homelessness, nor does it clearly state which category’s challenges it is addressing and how the recommendations would result in those individuals no longer being homeless; it also does not put an emphasis on monitoring the effectiveness of its recommendations in achieving the desired results;

- despite what others have said, there was a good rapport in the community between police and panhandlers; last summer, there was a decrease of 76% in complaints to police for panhandling;

- the BIA supports the SSA because it has provided support to communities that were target areas and overburdened with panhandling and soliciting; it has created a more tolerable and less aggressive climate on the streets and less complaints by the public, customers, businesses and vehicle drivers;

- the area served by the Rideau BIA is the density of all social service agencies and the location of the ByWard Market for all shelters; this is a primary problem because the City does not have a strategy that is looking at this in the “big picture” sense and trying to ascertain how this burden can be shared; much of what is coming out of the report is going to further place an imbalance on this community;

- the BIA has serious concerns about the recommendations regarding employment opportunities being targeted at this area, especially with some of the sites mentioned that have been known target locations for street vending in the past; she suggested that if the City is going to consider designated areas, the ByWard and Parkdale Markets should be considered;

- recognized that the voice of the arts community has not been consulted and the City must be sensitive to those members of the community as well.

In summary, Ms. Ducharme indicated that while the intention of the Task Force is supportable, there is a huge voice missing with input into this process and she strongly urged committee to go back and invite that voice into the process. A copy of the Rideau BIA submission is held on file.

When questioned by Councillor Bédard about whether the present law has been used correctly, Ms. Ducharme stated that when the SSA was first implemented, there was a radius placed on bank machines, transit stops, et cetera, but in an area like Rideau Street where that is high density and is a transit priority route, there could be a transit stop that is half a block long, as well as a bank machine on either end. Therefore, a police officer issuing tickets to panhandlers under the SSA would consider areas of Rideau Street to be within the proximity of locations panhandlers are not supposed to be. She noted that complaints about aggressive panhandling on Rideau Street are constant and it is difficult to blanket this kind of statement with regards to proximity when they know their community and know how to respond and address issues. The BIA had invested thousands of dollars last summer to engage these individuals on the street and the result illustrated the need for outreach services to these people because of their transient nature and their need to know what services are available for them.

In response to a question posed by Councillor Stavinga about representation of the business community on the Task Force, the Deputy City Manager advised that the meetings of the Task Force were meant to permit a wide stakeholder group in the community to come and make presentations about the issues. He reiterated his earlier comments about further consultation with the business community and advisory committees and confirmed that the opportunity for the Rideau BIA to voice it’s concerns would be provided in the next steps of that consultation.

Councillor Cullen understood that the Rideau BIA do not want panhandlers in their area, but he recognized that what is seen as an unfair concentration of social services in this area, is a reflection of their accessibility. He asked what members of the Rideau BIA are doing to lobby the senior levels of government to move this responsibility back to where it belongs. Ms. Ducharme explained the BIA would be happy to meet with anyone who wants to discuss it. She clarified that representatives of the Rideau Centre were in attendance earlier but could not remain, but asked her to advise the committee that the land referred to in Recommendation 20, is under development and is not available for use.

Based on the latter statement, the committee agreed to delete Recommendation 20 from the report.

Councillor Bédard asked whether the delegation felt the entire report should go back to the business community or just Recommendations 17-19. Ms. Ducharme suggested the full report should go back because there is a wealth of comment she has on the entire report, which she was unable to go into any great detail on.

Daniel Hall indicated he has been an ODSP recipient since 2001. He advised that ODSP recently conducted a review of the special diet supplement and the total amount allowable, until two months ago, was $250/month. He had a medical appointment earlier in the year and he brought the forms to his doctor, submitted them to ODSP and within the last two weeks, received a letter telling him his monthly allowance would be reduced by $220/month, effective 1 March. He noted that the special diet supplement application has been completely rewritten so it is now condition-specific and the scheduled amount for those conditions are incredible low.

Chair Holmes advised that a report on this matter is expected to come to the committee at an upcoming meeting and she advised the delegation he would be welcome to speak specifically to that item at that time.

In considering the report, Councillor Bédard proposed that the report be referred to the Business Advisory Committee (BAC) for comment. He stated that there has not been much discussion and consultation with the business community and yet many of the recommendations relate to employment opportunities. Also, many of the other recommendations touch business concerns and it is important to get advice from them and engage further dialogue, which would be beneficial to the business community and to those groups representing homeless people. He went on to state that if any improvements are to be made, there has to be discussion and dialogue at both levels through which some solutions can be found. There would also be a better understanding as a result of negotiations and discussion.

Councillor Cullen noted that 17 of the recommendations are supported by staff and did not believe that many of those would have to be referred to the BAC. Also, there are seven recommendations, which staff recommend being referred back for review. He was not prepared to refer the whole report to the BAC, but was prepared to refer those seven items that staff have indicated, which would include more than just consulting with the BAC, but with other stakeholders as well. He also noted that the existence of the Task Force had been well advertised and there were many open public meetings, so he did not accept the argument that the business community did not know this process was taking place.

Chair Holmes was also not in support of referral. She recognized that the businesses that would be affected by some of the recommendations in this report are the downtown BIA’s and that those would be notified of any kind of changes that happen on the street. She agreed that if the City is going to allow selling on the street, there is a need to talk to the business community and she was confident there would be consultation with the appropriate groups on any of those recommendations. With regards to the recommendation about selling crafts on the street, she hoped there would be some kind of recommendation, which would apply to those creating art on the street. She suggested the Mackenzie King Bridge as an example where artists should be encouraged to draw from, especially noting the vistas afforded this location.

Councillor Bédard believed it would not be appropriate to cut off the business community from this process, especially when most of the recommendations are important to them. He emphasized that if the City is going to develop partnerships, it must do so at the beginning. He also noted that there is no particular rush to deal with the report recommendations because for the most part, they would be long-term.

When asked by Councillor Stavinga to comment on referral, the Deputy City Manager reiterated his previous comments about staff taking many of those recommendations back and consulting with many stakeholders on the various issues. He added that while the decision to refer the entire report is up to the committee, there is no hesitancy on the part of the Department to deal with the recommendations today. Councillor Stavinga accepted the assurances there will be further consultation and was concerned about referral at this point, when there has been such broad discussion already. She preferred to endorse the report today and make a commitment to the business community that there would be further engagement.

Moved by G. Bédard

That the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force report be referred to the Business Advisory Committee for comment.

LOST

YEAS (3): G. Bédard, R. Chiarelli, D. Deans

NAYS (6): A. Cullen, G. Brooks, C. Doucet, P. Feltmate, J. Stavinga, D. Holmes

In considering the report recommendations, Chair Holmes suggested the word “supportive” be inserted into Recommendation 1 after the words “second stage” to read as follows:

1. That the Provincial and Federal governments be requested to provide funding for additional second stage/supportive housing to meet the needs of the population of shelter users who require supportive housing.

The committee concurred with this amendment. Prior to voting on the recommendation, as amended, however, Councillor Deans questioned how staff interpret the recommendation since it refers to all three levels of government providing funding. The Director of Housing indicated that under the current approach, it involves a sharing of capital costs (1/3 each for municipal, provincial and federal). He acknowledged that second stage housing and supportive housing are provincial responsibilities, but the province does not appear to be providing the necessary operating funds, even after the units are built. The Chair requested Mr. Mawby to reword Recommendation 1 to make it clear that supportive housing is provincial dollars. *

* The Director later provided amended wording to Recommendation 1 as well as additional clarification in the “staff comment” portion of the report. The recommendation to be submitted to Council therefore, would read as follows:

On a point of order, Councillor Bédard advised that he was not prepared to “approve” the report recommendations unless such approval is subject to the staff comments and recommendations contained in the report. He proposed therefore, that the committee receive the report from the Task Force and approve the staff recommendations/comments contained in the report.

Councillor Cullen indicated he had prepared the following Motion to deal with the recommendations:

1. That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend that Council approve the following Recommendations from the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force report: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30;

2. That Recommendations 4, 6, 11, 12, 17, 18, and 19 be referred to staff for review and report to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee;

3. And that the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend that Council approve Recommendation 13 (amended to repeal the Safe Streets Act), 14, 15 and 16.

The councillor believed it was important for the committee to approve some of the Task Force recommendations as brought forward and refer those things back to staff that the committee is not prepared to approve immediately.

Chair Holmes reminded committee that the Task Force had seen and accepted the staff comments on their recommendations, recognizing that some would be referred to staff for report back to the committee. She therefore believed both Motions were essentially saying the same thing. Councillor Cullen agreed to withdraw his Motion, but asked that the Recommendations 13 – 16, pertaining to the SSA, be voted on individually since it will be the police providing comments on those recommendations.

With respect to Recommendation 4, Chair Holmes asked if it was staff’s interpretation that an advisory committee for each shelter would be made up of residents. Mr. Mawby indicated that the intent is the same. He added that staff do not object to the establishment of such advisory committees, but the comment has been made that it is the shelters and that is why he tried to draw attention to the other recommendations that point to an improved system that allows people who are using shelters to have a voice and he believed there were a number of recommendations that enable that.

Before proceeding, Councillor Brooks requested a staff comment with regards to the costs associated with implementation of the Task Force recommendations. Mr. Kanellakos explained that most of the recommendations would require staff reporting back and most of those have some cost implications, which would have to be either part of a budget submission for 2007 or staff would bring forward reports giving advance notice that there is a budget pressure. He confirmed that unless the programs are mandated, the City has the option whether or not to provide funding.

Chair Holmes recalled an amendment proposed to Recommendation 11 by the Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corporation, to ensure that supports are available to people, et cetera. With regards to the same recommendation, the Director of Housing reminded committee that there was also a request to include a representative of the homeless community in that review.

Moved by A. Cullen

That Recommendation 11 be amended to read as follows:

i. Involvement of the HSAG (Housing Stakeholders Advisory Group);

ii. An assessment of supports required;

iii. An assessment process to ensure that applicants have the ability to live independently or the supports required;

iv. The issue of required supports includes help with housekeeping;

v. A discussion around the issue of tenants refusing supports and the impact on social housing landlords and tenants;

vi. Involvement of representatives of the homeless community.

CARRIED

Moved by P. Feltmate

Whereas the Task Force on Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act recognized that Recommendation 31, with regard to the establishment of a “Task Force on Foster Care Outcomes” to “investigate the issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population” was not within their jurisdiction to address;

And Whereas the issue of foster care is a significant matter for other public agencies or provincial ministries to address, including the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa and the Ministry of Children and Youth Services;

And Whereas the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa with the Ottawa Area office of the Ministry is about to embark on a community planning exercise with the intent to improve the safety, permanence and well being of child welfare clients by expanding the capacity of the broader children’s service system;

Therefore Be It Resolved that Recommendation 31 be referred to the Minister of Children and Youth Services and to the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa for their consideration;

Be It Further Resolved that the Community and Protective Services Department continue to represent the City’s interests with respect to Recommendation 31 including, if feasible, being on any future task force regarding this issue;

Be It Further Resolved that staff report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee by September 2006 regarding this exercise and the resulting investigation of issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population.

CARRIED

Moved by G. Bédard

That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee receive the report from the Task Force, as amended and approve the staff recommendations/comments contained in the report, with the exception of Recommendations 13 –16, pertaining to the Safe Streets Act.

CARRIED

The committee then considered Recommendations 13 – 16.

Councillor Cullen asked the committee to consider an amendment to Recommendation 13 to delete the words “change or”. He noted that the SSA is a bad law and there are other means of dealing with assault and harassment, such as the Criminal Code of Canada, and unlicensed activities can be dealt with by City by-laws. He argued that the SSA has become entirely tainted by its misuse and abuse and therefore should not be part of the City’s legal system because it discriminates against the homeless. He did not believe this was the right way to deal with this social issue.

When asked what tools the police would use if they did not have the SSA, Superintendent Gilles Larochelle of the Ottawa Police Service advised that nothing would exist to deal with situations of panhandling. He advised that based on the behaviour or the complainants allegations, they might refer to the Criminal Code which, if convicted, the individual would have a criminal record.

Councillor Doucet appreciated how it would be difficult for the police to distinguish between levels of aggressiveness. Given the reduction of services as a result of downloading from the senior levels of government, he was not prepared to penalize people by reducing the money they get from the province and reducing their ability to ask for money on a public street.

Councillor Deans made note of the perception that the SSA is not being fairly applied and with respect to Recommendation 14, asked if there were guidelines with respect to enforcement. The Superintendent indicated that the guidelines are found in the Act itself and there is a process involved for the education of the officers regarding the SSA. Therefore, the recommendation would be redundant. With regards to Recommendation 16, the Superintendent stated that while they could analyze the statistical data, the OPS does not have a system in place to track the disposition of all charges under the Act. The councillor asked whether there was an opportunity for a “go forward plan” in order to track enforcement from hereon in if Council were to recommend it. The Superintendent advised that the records management system that the Police have does not have that capability.

Councillor Cullen referred to the comments made by individuals who had been ticketed for panhandling, even though they were not being aggressive, i.e., they were sitting on the curb or sidewalk and not approaching people. The Superintendent indicated there are processes in place to deal with people who are not pleased with the ticket (court system) or the behaviour of the officer (professional standards). The councillor believed there has to be some accountability for inappropriate ticketing, including those who were not “near” the locations they were not supposed to be near. He did not believe that ticketing unfairly should not be condoned by the OPS and was looking for assurance that the police were not abusing vulnerable individuals. Superintendent Larochelle emphasized that they do not abuse the law. Each time an officer issues a ticket they have to articulate that through the court process and that is where it is determined whether or not things are inappropriate. Further, this is a social issue and the OPS do not always turn to the SSA as a first response; they try to work with the community social agencies and to try and mediate certain situations. He did not believe that those that feel frustrated represent the homeless or panhandlers in general. The councillor recognized there is common ground and no one wants to see aggressive panhandlers.

With regards to Recommendation 13, Councillor Feltmate noted that the police comments appear to be about not repealing the SSA, but she wondered whether there would be some changes or amendments the police could support or suggest, such as a clearer definition of ‘near’. Superintendent Larochelle explained that the definition of that term is not in the SSA, but is a legal warning that is sent out by the Ministry for the police to use in writing out tickets. The councillor asked whether there was a way to mediate between the panhandler and the police officer rather than having the matter escalated. She believed that the Task Force was looking for strategies that would reduce that kind of escalation and needless ticketing. Superintendent Larochelle reiterated that they work closely with the downtown agencies, such as the Union Mission, Operation Go-Home, et cetera, to try to divert many individuals from becoming aggressive panhandlers.

Councillor Stavinga acknowledged that the police do not support repealing the SSA, but felt that as a member of the Task Force, the Superintendent had been exposed to various experiences that would enable him to suggest changes if something is not quite happening. The Superintendent advised that the OPS would not see any changes being made to the Act, but preferred to see an increase in outreach workers to deal with the homeless and panhandlers. In response to further questions posed by the councillor regarding an acknowledgement by the OPS that there is a need for fine-tuning of the existing Act, he indicated that the SSA is a legislative tool the police use as a last resort. When asked to what extent the definition of ‘near’ needs to be refined or amended, the Superintendent explained that when the ticket is issued this is the short form they use as recommended by the Ministry so when this matter goes before the courts, the officer has to articulate under that section the offence committed. He added that officers are trained and educated on what ‘near’ means and the officer’s discretion would come into effect and would have to explain to the courts what occurred. It would be up to the court therefore to determine if ‘near’ or ‘at’ met the guidelines.

Councillor Bédard acknowledged that there were aggressive people on the streets and the way the police deal with those individuals is through the SSA. He supported using this Act, but preferred the police work with the community groups and outreach programs. He noted that even the Task Force could not come up with any modifications to the SSA.

Councillor Deans noted that the police do not want Council to recommend repealing the SSA because they need it and yet people on the street are telling councillors that there is misapplication of this Act. She believed Recommendation 16 might address these concerns because if there is a perception in the community that this is not being applied fairly, that there be some way of evaluating that. However, based on the comments from the Superintendent that the police do not the ability to track the tickets, she felt Council should be writing to the Police Services Board about this perception and suggested that instead of Recommendation 16, that committee consider a Motion to have Council write a letter to the Police Services Board asking them to consider how they would assess how this is being applied.

Regarding Recommendation 13, Councillor Cullen referred to the 275-page document of deputations provided by people who were getting tickets when they were nowhere near locations where they were not supposed to be. He reminded committee that the SSA was brought in to address the issue of squeegee kids and since that is no longer a problem, the SSA criminalizes panhandlers because they would have to go to jail if they are unable to pay the fine, which in most cases, they are unable to do. He believed a better law could only be obtained if Council asks for a repeal.

Chair Holmes indicated this item was very contentious at the Task Force. She recognized that panhandlers are on the street because they need money. And, the police are acting as social service agents because there is very little money to provide services to the people who need assistance of one kind or another. The police are called upon by businesses to control aggressive panhandlers and they respond using the SSA to get them to move along. However, she maintained that the SSA should not be enforced on panhandlers who are sitting quietly on the curb. She encouraged committee members to vote in favour of the amendment to Recommendation 13.

Moved by A. Cullen

That the phrase “change or” be deleted from Recommendation #13.

LOST

YEAS (3): A. Cullen, C. Doucet, D. Holmes

NAYS (6): G. Bédard, G. Brooks, R. Chiarelli, D. Deans, P. Feltmate, J. Stavinga

The committee then considered Recommendations 13 – 16 as follows:

13. The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal the Safe Streets Act.

CARRIED

YEAS (6): A. Cullen, R. Chiarelli, C. Doucet, P. Feltmate, J. Stavinga, D. Holmes

NAYS (s): G. Bédard, G. Brooks, D. Deans

CARRIED

YEAS (5): A. Cullen, C. Doucet, P. Feltmate, J. Stavinga, D. Holmes

NAYS (4): G. Bédard, G. Brooks, R. Chiarelli, D. Deans

Recommendation 15 was approved unanimously.

16. That the City of Ottawa recommend to the Polices Services Board to review the enforcement of the Safe Streets Act for consistent application since its inception and that the review be made available to the public.

CARRIED

YEAS (7): A. Cullen, R. Chiarelli, C. Doucet, D. Deans, P. Feltmate, J. Stavinga, D. Holmes

NAYS (2): G. Bédard, G. Brooks

Based on the foregoing, the following recommendations, as amended, would be submitted to Council on 8 March:

That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend that Council receive the report from the Task Force, as amended, and approve the staff recommendations/comments contained in the report:

Housing/Shelters

3. That the City’s Housing Branch be directed to review the safety of Shelters and address the impact of high occupancy levels in the Adult Shelter system.

i. Involvement of the HSAG (Housing Stakeholders Advisory Group);

ii. An assessment of supports required;

iii. An assessment process to ensure that applicants have the ability to live independently or the supports required;

iv. The issue of required supports includes help with housekeeping;

v. A discussion around the issue of tenants refusing supports and the impact on social housing landlords and tenants;

vi. Involvement of representatives of the homeless community.

12. That the Housing Branch appoint a tenant to sit on the Registry board to provide a balanced perspective.

Safe Streets Act (SSA)

13. The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal the Safe Streets Act.

Employment Opportunities

18. That Council amend or enact all appropriate and applicable By-laws to allow homeless persons to sell original arts, crafts and jewellery on the sidewalk without a business license or designated space permit provided that the person selling the original arts, crafts and jewellery does not remain at a particular location while selling the articles.

21. That City jobs such as poster removal and hand snow shovelling be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage homeless people or those at risk of becoming homeless.

22. That there be a separate process for establishing the contracting of additional City work (non unionized) and that the additional work be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage the homeless, with funding for the additional work to be allocated in the budget annually for this purpose.

24. Support local enterprises, such as Roasted Cherry and Centre 507, to build capacity for the employment of street involved youth.

29. That the City of Ottawa lobby the Ontario government and that the Police Services Board be recommended to lobby the Ontario Government to increase OW rates to pre-1995 levels.

CARRIED, as amended

Supported but out of Scope

Whereas the Task Force on Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act recognized that the recommendation with regard to the establishment of a “Task Force on Foster Care Outcomes” to “investigate the issues of foster children and youth becoming part of the homeless population” was not within their jurisdiction to address;

Therefore Be It Resolved that the following recommendation be referred to the Minister of Children and Youth Services and to the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa for their consideration;

Be It Further Resolved that the Community and Protective Services Department continue to represent the City’s interests with respect to the recommendation, including, if feasible, being on any future task force regarding this issue;

CARRIED

HOMELESSNESS AND THE SAFE STREETS ACT – TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

LES SANS-ABRI ET LA LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ DANS LES RUES – RAPPORT DU GROUPE DE TRAVAIL

ACS2006-CCS-HRS-0001 CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE

The committee received the following correspondence which is held on file:

a. L. Eyamie dated 3 May 2006 in support of the report from the Task Force

b. Joint submission from Cornerstone, The Mission, Shepherds of Good Hope and the Salvation Army specifically addressing Recommendation 6

Chair Holmes provided a brief summary of the process that had taken place with the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force. Following Council’s referral of the Task Force report to the Business Advisory Committee (BAC), the Committee had before them the BAC recommendations. The committee received the following delegations:

Gerry LePage, Bank Street Promanade BIA felt that City policies must be consistent with process and direction given by Council. He believed that implementing recommendations regarding the sale of arts and crafts without permits or designated spaces would be counter-productive to the bigger objective of the City to create a dynamic, vibrant and liveable city. He spoke to reports of aggressive panhandlers and believed that the Task Force recommendations would create animosity between businesses and the homeless. Mr. LePage commended the Committee on what the recommendations were trying to achieve, but felt that further discussions with all levels of government and stakeholders were necessary to develop a solution that is comprehensive in nature and which supports and complements the policies of the City.

Councillor Cullen referred to Recommendations 17 to 25 regarding employment opportunities and said he had hoped to have a dialogue with the business community about how to reconcile these issues. In response to a question posed by Councillor Bédard, Mr. LePage advised that although there was a representative from the ByWard Market BIA on the Task Force, he did not solicit feedback from the business community and therefore he did not feel that community was sufficiently involved in the process.

Christine Leadman, Westboro BIA spoke in support of the BAC recommendations and echoed the previous comment that there had not been adequate consultation with the business community in the preparation of the report. She questioned what the removal of the Safe Streets Act (SSA) would accomplish and felt that the past problems with the homeless and panhandlers would resurface. A survey of her area found that residents were not in support of repealing the Act. She noted that the SSA does not target panhandlers who conduct themselves in a quiet fashion and provides an opportunity for the issue to be dealt with at the street level. She asked the Committee to support the BAC recommendations and those recommendations of the Task Force which were supported by that advisory committee.

Lori Mellor, Preston Street BIA supported the BAC recommendations and reiterated previous comments made that the business community was not adequately consulted during this process; she posited that one BIA member from the entire city was not sufficient to have significant voice. She also felt residents should have been consulted in the process.

Frank Martin, Health and Social Services Advisory Committee advised that they had made a number of recommendations to the Task Force with specific attention to income earning opportunities that enable people to earn income and begin to develop financial independence and he was concerned that many of the BAC recommendations related to that issue. Mr. Martin believed that to go beyond the symptoms of homelessness, the homeless need to be enabled to engage with constructive living in the community and participate in activities that allow them to become self-employed or a member of the employment market. The HSSAC strongly encouraged that the employment related recommendations of the Task Force be approved. Mr. Martin further maintained that the advisory committee is representative of the community and their residents and was involved in the process.

Marilla Lo, Somerset Street Chinatown BIA felt that the majority of the recommendations in the Task Force report were skewed to panhandlers. She spoke in support of the SSA and maintained that homelessness is the responsibility of the federal and provincial governments. Ms. Lo identified both short term and long term problems with the recommendations of the Task Force:

· Short term – residents would feel threatened and intimidated with panhandlers on the street; it will become a “free for all” to sell goods on the street without a licence;

· Long term – homeless and panhandlers from other cities will move to Ottawa to get their share of the market causing increaseing demand on shelters; there would be more garbage and debris left behind by street vendors; and increased crime rates as a result of non-regulated money-making opportunities

In closing, Ms. Lo asked the Committee to suspend or reject the Task Force report in its entirety and open consultation to all stakeholders. A copy of her presentation is held on file.

At this point in the meeting, Councillor Bédard advised of his intention to put forward a Motion recommending that the Task Force Report Recommndations 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22 be referred to the BAC to work with the Task Force and City staff and other levels of government to find solutions.

When asked to provide clarification on the legality of panhandling, Susan Jones, Director of Bylaw Services advised that panhandling is legal, provided it is not done aggressively. She confirmed there are no by-law regulations that prohibit panhandling. She added that under the SSA, panhandling is not permitted when it is considered aggressive or when the individual being approached is captive at an ATM or bus stop, for example.

Gareth Webb, The Ottawa Mission identified that his main concern was regarding the establishment of an ombudsman (Recommendation 6). Chair Holmes indicated that it was her understanding that a report would be submitted to the Committee regarding this particular recommendation and staff would would consult with all the agencies. The delegation advised that the agencies already have mechanisms in place to answer questions from the residents who are at risk or who have complaints. Further, standards are set across the shelters that treat all comments and complaints in a respectful manner. The agencies do not believe an ombudsman is necessary and would like the recommendation revisited or removed.

In response to Chair Holmes, Russell Mawby, Director of Housing advised that a Shelter Standards Review process had recently been implemented and would be reflected in the signed contracts with the shelters. The City acknowledges the work that the shelters are doing, but requires a clear definition of a response mechanism for community complaints. He felt that a response to Recommendation 6 was necessary and at that point, a recommendation that includes the views of the partners affected would be brought back to Committee.

Mark Zarecki and Pete Cassidy, Jewish Family Services expressed their support for the Task Force report. Mr. Zarecki felt the report went a long way in meeting the needs of the homeless and believed that removal of any of the recommendations that are deemed controversial would diminish their effectiveness. He spoke to the discussion of equality and emphasized that the recommendations would be supportive in giving the homeless a voice and an understanding of what their legal rights are. Mr. Zarecki maintained that the vision behind the recommendations would be helpful not only to the homeless but also to business community by creating a much more positive image of Ottawa to tourists. He asked the Committee to accept the report in its entirety.

Mr. Cassidy spoke as an outreach worker on the streets of Ottawa. He felt there was a contradiction in fining individuals for panhandling and fining them for selling arts and crafts as an alternative. He identified Recommendation 28, in which the staff comment speaks to a budget pressure of $4.15 million for the City of Ottawa. He believed this budget pressure could be avoided by enabling the homeless to work.

Councillor Bédard recalled that in previous discussions, Mr. Zarecki had identified that there was considerable violence on the street and that the homeless and panhandlers need to be protected. If they supported repealing the SSA, he asked the delegation how aggressive panhandlers would be dealt with. Mr. Zarecki responded by stating that anyone who violates someone else’s rights could be charged. He believed that there was a greater need for more street workers to meet and work with the homeless.

The councillor noted that the report recognized the need to work with the homeless and supported the establishment of more outreach programs in this regard. And, the intent of his Motion is that the business community would work with the Task Force and other levels of government to find a workable solution. Mr. Zarecki responded by stating that part of the problem is that the business community has a vested interest in being monopolistic and not having competition. He felt the employment recommendations were an opportunity to enhance business. And, while he agreed with the councillor that the two sides should work together to develop a new approach, he felt the business community needed to see these recommendations as an opportunity, not as a threat.

Kevin Jackson , Giant Tiger, 98 George Street felt that police officers must have strong guidelines to protect citizens from aggressive panhandlers. He maintained that the idea that street vendors would be able to sell products to customers as they enter a business defies common sense. Mr. Jackson argued that business owners have an obligation to protect their customers and employees from harassment by panhandlers and asked the City of Ottawa not to lobby the Province to change or repeal the SSA.

Ken MacLaren, Ottawa Inner City Ministries spoke as a representative of 1200 constituents of approximately 47 different churches who supported Ottawa Inner City Ministries in 2005. The organization has approximately 80 volunteers and 9 to 11 street outreach teams a week. He indicated that those helping the homeless object to the BAC recommendations and spoke to the numerous letters and emails that voice people’s concerns about homelessness. He expressed his support for the recommendations of the Task Force as originally presented. A copy of his e-mailed letter to all City Councillors is held on file.

Councillor Bédard acknowledged receipt of the letter but indicated that a lot of people are concerned about aggressive panhandlers, especially those who live with it on a constant basis. He noted that he had heard from both BIA members and residents who are concerned and maintained that both sides need to be considered when a decision is made. The delegation responded by stating that volunteers on the street often receive reports about the inappropriate action on the part of some police officers.

Sharon McKenna, Sparks Street Mall Authority believed the issue is not just about homelessness, but also about panhandling and she remarked that not all panhandlers are homeless. She recognized that the SSA was established to protect against aggressive panhandlers and is one of the few tools the police have to do their jobs efficiently. She did not believe business owners should be forced to pay for permits and taxes when panhandlers are exempted from the same regulations. She referred to the business community’s previous efforts with the “Change Program” which was developed to assist people in need. In conclusion, she asked for fairness and suggested street vendors should be given designated spaces, instead of allowing them to panhandle or vend in front of businesses.

Sabina Sauter, Gasthouse Switzerland Inn, Daly Avenue spoke about the problems with drug users, prostitutes and homeless people on her property and the efforts she has made to work with the Mission to address some of these issues. She noted that there are a lot of homeless people living on the street and residents and tourists do not feel safe. She commented on how her guests have been stopped many times by panhandlers when they make their way back to the Inn from shopping in the Market. She emphasized the importance of maintaining the SSA because it gives the police the power to deal with panhandlers.

Sean McKenny, Ottawa and District Labour Council indicated that during the 14 months the Task Force spent listening to all those who chose to participate in the process, the business community was consulted and representatives from the ByWard Market BIA attended most of the meetings. He reminded committee members that when the Task Force was originally struck, the BAC had not yet been formed and when it was, its’ members had every opportunity to be involved in the process. He emphasized that Task Force members were comprised of a broad selection of the community and their recommendations were provided through discussion, debate and input by literally hundreds of individuals and organizations across the city. Mr. McKenny acknowledged that the majority of the business community are caring, and they contribute to the social well-being of the community. In closing, he maintained that the recommendations before committee continue to have the support of the majority of Task Force members.

Councillor Bédard noted that in February, the committee had approved the majority of the recommendations, but explained it was Council’s decision to refer the report to the BAC. Mr. McKenny acknowledged that while it is important for people to provide input, the remark had been made that the business community had not been consulted and in his view, they had been and had every opportunity to get involved. He noted the frustrations of the Task Force members to see their report go back and forth between various committees and Council. The councillor explained that consultation is a part of the process and the BAC do not feel that what the Task Force is recommending with respect to employment opportunities and the SSA are the solutions. Mr. McKenny indicated that the committee is making the assumption that representatives on the Task Force will continue to want to be involved with the process when they see the results are not there. He emphasized that no one sector of the community should be given preference over another.

Councillor Cullen believed there was a need to dialogue with the business community and he wondered if the delegation felt the Motion proposed by Councillor Bédard would require mediation or what resources would be required to bring the business community and the homeless community together to find common ground. Mr. McKenny reminded committee that the homeless are a group of people who do not have a lot of trust for anyone; whether it is the police, the business community or others, he remarked that the process has not worked for them, despite their efforts. He reminded committee that he spent considerable time trying to convince them that this process would work and he wanted to know what would make this process now, any different from what they just went through, from their perspective. The councillor explained that a mediation process might assist the dialogue between the business and the homeless community, and might help them resolve the dispute over the recommendations in the report on employment opportunities.

In response to the Motion proposed by Councillor Bédard, he indicated that the Ottawa and District Labour Council would be prepared to be involved in that process.

When asked whether staff have a profile of panhandlers, Councillor Doucet was advised they did not; however, they are working with the shelters to build a profile of the homeless population.

Councillor Feltmate inquired whether approval of Recommendation 18 would provide an opportunity for discussion to take place between businesses and the homeless community to address their concerns. Susan Jones, Director of By-law Services explained that it was always staff’s intention to consult with the business community as well as any other stakeholders if Council provides that direction, and staff would report back on solutions to some of the recommendations being proposed upon completion of that consultation. It was hoped this direction would have been included as part of the Department’s consultation in 2007 with the business community and other stakeholders as part of the Designated Spaces Policy. She confirmed that staff would be reporting back on how the recommendations could be implemented in any case.

The councillor expressed disappointment that both sides of this issue presented to committee on two separate occasions (the majority of the homeless spoke in February) as opposed to presenting the full picture to committee at the same time. She recognized the goal to initiate a dialogue between the two to start to resolve the issues and wondered if a reference group could be developed, rather than strictly isolated consultations. Ms. Jones advised that with the Designated Spaces Policy staff were going to be putting together a sub-group including representatives from the BIAs as well as vendors who are currently permitted to sell on the street and staff could mirror the same process in this regard.

Councillor Bédard noted that some of the recommendations do not appear to involve staff reporting back and so he maintained there needs to be wider discussion with the business community on the items they do not support. Chair Holmes remarked however, that most of the recommendations are coming back after staff review them, and in fact, several of those are already being carried out, i.e., those involving snow shoveling and poster removal, while others need to be referred to specific agencies for comment. She indicated her intention to propose amendments to Recommendations 6 and 7 to address that specific issue.

David Coffey spoke against the Safe Streets Act and suggested it be removed from use.

Brian Kennedy, Hudson’s Bay Company recognized that there is a problem with poverty and homelessness in Ottawa and he indicated their willingness to work with the City and other businesses to help find a solution. He explained that they deal with aggressive panhandlers in front of their store on Rideau Street on a daily basis and a lot of time and resources are put into dealing with customer complaints as well as cleaning the grafitti and garbage that panhandlers leave behind. He believed businesses in the area need to operate and customers and tourists need to feel safe and enjoy the area where they shop and the recommendations to change or repeal the SSA would eliminate a useful tool that the police have and would adversely affect business and safety in the city.

Janis King spoke as a resident of Sandy Hill and referred to her experience living in Toronto where street people and vendors have to apply for a license to sell their wares and homeless people can do the same thing. They are even given a certain location from which to operate. She suggested that if homeless people are given free reign to vend, legitimate vendors who go through the process of obtaining a license would probably stop doing so if they discover they can sell their goods without having to buy a license or permit. In response to two of the recommendations that pertain to safety issues of shelters for the homeless, she remarked that many homeless people do not want to be housed. She was concerned about the concentration of homeless people in the downtown/lowertown areas and recognized that something has to be done to assist those in need.

Stephen Monuk, ByWard Safety and Security Committee, Lowertown West Community Association agreed with a previous comment that the issue around the SSA and homelessness are two different issues and he did not believe panhandling is the solution to the homeless problem. He maintained that it would be better to give social service agencies the money rather than giving it to people on the street; this way it could be used better and more effectively. He followed on that comment by stating that some aggressive panhandlers make hundreds of dollars a day and they fight for territory. He mentioned that the SSA is a law that is not supposed to make people criminals or to punish them, but laws are made to protect everyone and not necessarily to prosecute people. He was particularly worried about having the SSA taken away. He made note of the support they provide to homeless people each year, as well as the work the police do for businesses, residents and tourists. He suggested the money put into parking meters should be provided to social service agencies and he suggested this example of providing assistance should be explored.

Peggy Ducharme, Downtown Rideau BIA provided committee members with a package of correspondence from area businesses, BIAs, community associations and others, in support of the recommendations of the Business Advisory Committee. A copy of this documentation is held on file.

Ms. Ducharme indicated that this correspondence has been gathered since she last attended the meeting in February and provides a better representation of the business, residential and tourism community. She recognized that the concentration of social services are in the dowtown/lowertown community and of the 1120 tickets issued under the SSA, nearly all of them (998) were handed out in the Rideau Street area. She indicated that the BIA has consulted with their lawyer who is of the opinion that until something is done from the City’s perspective in more strategically looking at the density of where social services are being encouraged to expand, it is a burden placed on any one community and as such, the BIA is seeking an Interim Control By-law and study of land use impacts from social services land uses. Through this process, they will be consulting with staff in the Planning and Growth Management Department, and legal staff, specifically on the recommendations pertaining to employment opportunities. Their lawyer believes there are serious issues that staff should be consulted on, including liability of allowing anyone to do whatever they want in the public space.

In response to a question posed by the Chair with respect to what Departments were consulted on the recommendations, Ms. Jones confirmed legal and staff from Planning and Growth Management were, with the exception of vending by the latter (since it was not a requirement). She also confirmed that the recommendations pertaining to housing were reviewed by the Housing Branch and Mr. Mawby confirmed that that issue is an ongoing conversation staff in CPS have with the Planning and Growth Management Department, particularly as they are in the process of harmonizing the zoning by-law which addresses many of these issues.

In response to a question posed by Councillor Cullen, the following BIAs indicated their willingness to participate in a process to promote dialogue between the business and the homeless community: Bank Street BIA; Westboro BIA (with the proviso that their willingness to do so does not imply support for repealing the SSA); Preston Street BIA; Somerset Street Chinatown BIA; Sparks Street Mall Authority; and, the Rideau Street BIA, with the suggestion that other stakeholders, such as the arts community, should also be involved.

Chair Holmes read the following Motion put forward by Councillor Bédard:

That Recommendations 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22 be referred to the Business Advisory Committee to work with the authors of the report, City staff and other levels of government to find solutions that the business community will support to meet the needs of the homeless community and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee.

Councillor Bédard explained that there is a need to consult the business community because they are the ones that know and understand employment and jobs and how to get people into the workforce and it made sense to discuss these and other issues with them. He hoped that from his Motion would come a process for them to sit down and make recommendations on what they think will work.

Councillor Feltmate wondered whether it would not be easier if committee and Council moved ahead with the recommendations. She felt it would bring the homeless people back to the table in terms of talking about concrete solutions and would focus the discussions more productively. She proposed the following:

That Recommendations 17, 18, 19, 21 and 22 be approved in principle and that staff convene a reference group of stakeholders to advise on the feasibility of an implementation plan for these recommendations and that staff report back to the HRSS before implementation occurs.

When asked what the difference is between her Motion and Councillor Bédard’s, she explained that approval of her Motion would mean the committee would be giving support to looking at the implementation of the recommendations. She reiterated the fact that the Task Force spent over a year discussing the issues and she believed there could be very productive discussions when the City is moving forward on very concrete and specific issues.

Councillor Cullen recognized the business community’s willingness to participate in that dialogue, and the challenges associated with engaging the homeless community. When asked whether or not the Department has the resources to do this, or whether it was necessary to suggest a mediated process, Mr. Kanellakos confirmed that staff made a commitment to bring back an implementation plan which would include costs, timeframe, et cetera. He agreed that staff could do further consultation, but was not sure if mediation was the answer to deal with some of these Task Force recommendations. He commented on the significant difference of opinion on whether these types of activities should be allowed. However, what it comes down to is a much greater labour-intensive consultation process on these particular recommendations and the others and he was concerned on what kind of timelines the committee would be willing to accept to make that happen. There is a lot of consultation to be carried out on many of these recommendations and staff would not be reporting back in the short-term.

Councillor Doucet recognized the difficulty of choosing sides and he believed Councillor Feltmate’s Motion offers the chance to staff to apply some statistical and analytical reality to the problem. He also recognized the issue of what are the rights of those who need or want to panhandle vs. those of the business owners.

Councillor Bédard was reluctant to support the Feltmate Motion because he did not think the business community would participate in a dialogue around how to implement recommendations that have already been “approved in principle”. Instead, he suggested that the way to get people to work together is to indicate the City’s desire to work with them, which is a reflection of his Motion. He would support the Motion if the words ‘approval in principle’ were removed.

Councillor Feltmate strongly felt the committee has to move forward and not to leave it in limbo as to how the City implements the recommendations because the committee has to decide on whether or not to implement the recommendations as well as the feasibility of such implementation.

Chair Holmes recognized that the City is already involved in the work reflected in Recommendations 21 and 22.

Chair Holmes asked that committee approve an amendment to Recommendation 17. The committee subsequently approved the following Motion by Chair Holmes:

That Recommendation 17 be amended to include: “That staff will work with agencies to develop a model for the implementation of this recommendation and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee and Council.”

CARRIED

Based on the previous discussion, Councillors Bédard and Feltmate combined their Motions and with suggested amendments, proposed the following revised Bédard Motion:

Moved by G. Bédard

CARRIED

Moved by C. Doucet

And that the process will include an analysis of the panhandling/homeless population in order to distinguish between the poverty, begging and addiction issues.

CARRIED

Chair Holmes referred to Recommendation 6 and suggested an amendment to request that they meet with staff and report back. Councillor Cullen supported a Motion to that effect, as amended, as follows:

Moved by A. Cullen

That Recommendation 6 be amended to include: “That staff will meet with the appropriate agencies and representatives from the homeless community and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee.”

CARRIED

With regards to Recommendation 13, Councillor Bédard reiterated the fact that the majority of social services are located in his ward and therefore, so are the people that use those services. In response to arguments that have been made to repeal the SSA, he believed this Act is a positive tool to deal with aggressive panhandlers. The suggestion to use the Criminal Code of Canada instead if the Act is repealed is not acceptable and he did not want homeless people to become criminals because of some incident that occurs where they are deemed to be aggressive. He recognized that people shopping in the area need protection from aggressive panhandlers and maintained that the only way to deal with such incidents is through the SSA because the Criminal Code does not apply to someone who passively panhandles in front of or near a bank machine, for example. He implored with committee members not to take away the only tool left to deal with these people in his community. On a closing note, he stated that the impact of having the majority of social service agencies in his ward is that the community has to deal with the social repercussions and he asked committee not to take away the tools they need to address these issues.

Councillor Cullen believed the SSA is bad law and noted that only the federal government can declare what is and is not a crime. He indicated it is already a crime to confine, intimidate and harass and that these are covered under the Criminal Code of Canada. Also, the SSA is being abused and people are getting ticketed when they are more than a block away from an ATM, phone booth or transit stop. He did not deny that aggressive panhandling is bad, but the issue is there are tools available to deal with it. He asked the committee to reinforce the message already sent by Council asking for a repeal of the SSA.

Chair Holmes also did not believe the SSA works, because people who are ticketed have no money to pay the fine and then they cannot be found when it comes time to go to court; or they are put in jail for a couple of days and then are released. She questioned the point of spending the time and effort enforcing the Act and then not being able to collect the fines.

The committee then approved, as amended by the foregoing, the following original amended recommendations of 16 February 2006:

That Council receive the report from the Task Force and approve the staff comments on each of the recommendations contained in the report, as amended, as follows:

Housing/Shelters

Staff supports this recommendation.

3. That the City’s Housing Branch be directed to review the safety of Shelters and address the impact of high occupancy levels in the Adult Shelter system.

Staff supports this recommendation.

That staff will meet with the appropriate agencies and representatives from the homeless community and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee.

Staff notes that establishment of an Ombudsman would require staffing and associated administrative costs.

Staff supports this recommendation.

Staff supports the intent of this recommendation, which relates to the staffing of service and support agencies in the community.

Staff supports this recommendation and will continue to facilitate the coordination of these important services.

Staff supports this recommendation.

i. Involvement of the HSAG (Housing Stakeholders Advisory Group);

ii. An assessment of supports required;

iii. An assessment process to ensure that applicants have the ability to live independently or the supports required;

iv. The issue of required supports includes help with housekeeping;

v. A discussion around the issue of tenants refusing supports and the impact on social housing landlords and tenants;

vi. Involvement of representatives of the homeless community.

12. That the Housing Branch appoint a tenant to sit on the Registry board to provide a balanced perspective.

The Registry is a community-based agency, and this recommendation will be forwarded to the Board for their consideration.

Safe Streets Act (SSA)

13. The Task Force recommends that the City of Ottawa lobby the province to change or repeal the Safe Streets Act.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) supports this recommendation.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) cannot track the disposition of PONs through the court system.

Employment Opportunities

That staff will work with agencies to develop a model for the implementation of this recommendation and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee and Council.

Staff propose that this recommendation be referred to staff with a direction to report back to Committee and Council subject to consultation with the wider community.

Staff supports this recommendation.

21. That City jobs such as poster removal and hand snow shovelling be allocated to not-for-profit groups that engage homeless people or those at risk of becoming homeless.

The Public Works and Services Department is supportive of this recommendation subject to meeting its operational requirements (i.e. meeting its quality standards for snow removal).

Staff supports this recommendation consistent with recommendation 23 above.

24. Support local enterprises, such as Roasted Cherry and Centre 507, to build capacity for the employment of street involved youth.

The City could work with a network of service providers and businesses to assess what supports are needed to further employment related activity.

City staff supports this recommendation.

Staff supports this recommendation.

29. That the City of Ottawa lobby the Ontario government and that the Police Services Board be recommended to lobby the Ontario Government to increase OW rates to pre-1995 levels.

Inclusion of the Police Services Board in this recommendation is an effort to reinforce the message to Queen’s Park of the implications of poverty to policing as well as all City activities.

Supported but out of Scope

That the following recommendation be referred to the Minister of Children and Youth Services and to the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa for their consideration;

31. That Recommendations 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22 be referred to staff to work with the Business Advisory Committee and the Homelessness and the Safe Streets Act Task Force, City staff and other levels of government to find solutions that the business community and the homeless community will support to meet the needs of the homeless community and report back to the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee.

And that the process will include an analysis of the panhandling/homeless population in order to distinguish between the poverty, begging, and addiction issues.

CARRIED, with G. Bédard dissenting on Recommendations 13 and 14.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

LES SANS-ABRI ET LA LOI SUR LA SÉCURITÉ DANS LES RUES – RAPPORT DU GROUPE DE TRAVAIL

Employment Opportunities

Occasions d’emploi

Meetings of the Task Force

Meeting Themes

Task Force Recommendations

Housing\Shelters

Recommendation 1 – Funding for Additional Second-Stage and Supportive Housing

Recommendation 5 – Federal and Provincial Funding for Day Programs

Recommendation 7 – Ongoing Working Group to Review Recommendations

Recommendation 11 – Review of Homeless Status

Recommendation 13 – Repeal \ Change the SSA

Recommendation 14 – Police Guidelines Re: Enforcement of the SSA

Recommendation 15 – Police Training and Public Education Program Re., the SSA

Recommendation 16 – Review Enforcement of the SSA Since Inception

Tickets Issued Under the SSA*

Employment Opportunities

Recommendation 17 - Distribution of Newspapers by the Homeless without a License

Recommendation 18 – Homeless Persons Selling Original Arts & Crafts Without a License

Recommendation 19 – Permanent Street Markets

Recommendation 20 - Rideau Viking Square

Recommendation 21 – Letter to Landlords Advocating Vending on Private Property

Recommendation 22 – Allocation of City Jobs to Homeless Persons

Recommendation 23 - Contracting of City work (non unionized) to the Homeless

Recommendation 24 – Purchasing Services from Social Purpose Enterprises

Recommendation 26 - Social Purchasing Portal

Recommendation 27 - Change OW/ODSP Regulations Re Earned Income

Recommendation 28 - Change OW/ODSP Regulations Re Child Tax Benefit

Recommendation 29 – Maintenance of Current City Funding if “Claw Back” Is Ended

Recommendation 30 – Increase of OW Rates to Pre-1995 Levels

Recommendation 31 - Foster Children and Youth and Homelessness

Document 1

Definition

Definition

Solicitation in aggressive manner prohibited

Examples

Definitions

Solicitation of captive audience prohibited

Permitted fund-raising by charities

Definition

Disposal of certain dangerous things prohibited

Defence

Offence

Subsequent conviction

Arrest without warrant

Document 2

Employment Opportunities

CARRIED