City of Winnipeg Housing Committee Right to Housing

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received

Shared by: alicejenny

Tags

Stats

views:: 2
posted:: 9/26/2012
language:: English
pages:: 6

Public Domain

Document Sample

City of Winnipeg Housing Committee
Friday Feb. 29, 2008

1. Introduction
Appreciation for the opportunity to present
Reference to our previous submission in July 2007
Appreciation for the support that the City has given to social housing
projects in the past and currently through the WHHI
2. Right to Housing Coalition
-We are made up of 30 supporting organizations and over 120 individual
supporters
- Our position remains as it was in July:
o Housing is an essential tool to help governments attain other public policy
objectives, (e.g. health, safety, education, community capacity)
o An ongoing, meaningful federal role in housing is essential.
o Legacy savings (through paid up mortgages on existing social housing) present an
unprecedented opportunity to identify existing funds that would both finance the
maintenance/repair of existing stock and provide a source of capital for acquiring
and building new stock.
o While a continuum of housing projects and programs is necessary, the need for
300 units per year of social housing (RGI), in Manitoba for the next 5 years is a
modest target that the provincial government must address and achieve, with or
without the aid of Ottawa.1

3. The City of Winnipeg needs to play a more proactive role

o We need a vision. We urge the City of Winnipeg to follow the lead of
cities like Toronto and Montreal in setting targets for the creation of
new units of social housing, outlining policies to ensure that targets are
met, and contributing funds toward reaching these targets.2

o Winnipeg could be doing more to promote the creation of social
housing, for example, offering more capital, land, infrastructure and
other stimuli.

o Winnipeg also has an opportunity through its by-law system to
mandate the creation of a certain quota of social housing in any new
housing development.

o Finally we urge the City to work with the Province to unite the cities
and provinces of this country in pressuring the Federal Government to
resume the leadership in housing policy and funding that is so
painfully missing in our country. We require a strong united political
voice from the cities and provinces. You are being left to deal with the
fallout of the housing shortage without the assistance and leadership
you need and deserve from Ottawa.
4. The problem is multi-faceted:
o Governments at all levels lack clear housing policies with measurable
outcomes
o Programs seem to be measured by how much money is allocated and not
by whether preset objectives have been reached.
o Affordability problems in Manitoba are increasingly serious as housing prices
and rents rise and government spending continues to fall short.
o The Federal Government appears to be getting out of social housing
altogether
o The expiry of mortgages on social housing projects that were built 30-40
years ago, combined with the off-loading of housing responsibility to the
provinces in the mid-nineties has resulted in a situation where social
housing is not being built in sufficient numbers or maintained adequately.
As well the uncertainty about the ongoing source of funding to subsidize
rents is throwing the future of social housing into real question. This
should be a huge concern to every policy maker in the country!
o Canadian Housing and Rehabilitation Association estimates that Manitoba
needs 1500 units of social housing, (RGI), per year for the next 5 years to
catch up to the need.
o Manitoba’s creation of social housing (RGI), units since the start of the
AHI in 2002 has been just over 200 units in total. This number is very
concerning to us.
o In Manitoba we have a policy of encouraging the immigration of large
numbers of new Canadians to our province and city, (The Institute of
Urban Studies estimates that 3,500 new immigrant households will arrive
in Winnipeg in 2008, putting pressure on the already critically tight rental
market.3
o CMHC in 2004 reports that over 30% of all Winnipeg renter households are
considered to be in core housing need.4
o Our city is a magnet for Aboriginal people trying to get off the reserves
and make a better life for themselves.
o We have an aging population, many of whom cannot afford market rent
and stay in their homes as they deteriorate around them.
o We have people with physical, mental and emotional disabilities that
require specialized housing very little of which is available.
o There is a very low vacancy rate in Winnipeg for rental housing of any
kind, (1.5%), fuelled by the mass conversion of rental units to condos and
the lack of financial incentive to build rental housing
o Social Assistance rates have not kept up to the cost of living including the
cost of housing
o The result of all these factors is that families and individuals that cannot
afford the market cost of buying or renting housing are living in
overcrowded and substandard housing, a major factor contributing to the
creation of poor health, high mobility, crime, homelessness and other spin-
offs of poverty. The numbers we are talking about are not insignificant.
MUNHA alone accounted for 2300 on their waiting list in 2007.5 The
Hidden Homeless are hard to count as they are squeezed in with
friends/relatives or simply trying to get together the fee for a night in a
shelter.

Finally, in spite of the progress being made through the programs being
administered by WHHI, we need to acknowledge that neighbourhood
improvement projects, valuable as they are in upgrading aging housing stock,
also increase the cost of housing which displaces people who can no longer
afford to live there. Clearly the more complete solution is to create more of
the kinds of housing that these displaced people need.

What kind of housing do we need and how much will it cost?
The IUS paper makes the point that the cost of providing Supportive Housing
is considerably less that the alternatives of jails, prisons, shelters or hospitals.
It also concludes that the treatment of mental illness and addiction is much
more successful when undertaken from secure and supportive housing.6

Cost per Day per Person Comparison in Three Selected Cities
City Supportive Jail Prison Shelter Psychiatric Hospital
Housing Hospital
Boston $33.45 $91.78 $117.08 $40.28 $541 $1,770
Chicago $20.55 $60.00 $61.99 $20.00 $437 $1,201
Los Angeles $30.10 $63.69 $87.74 $37.50 $607 $1,474.05
Source: The Lewin Group. (2004) Costs of Serving Homeless Individuals in Nine Cities.

We are also defending the efficacy of social housing that has undeservedly received a
major negative image. It continues to be a much sought after resource and if properly
planned, maintained and staffed, adds greatly to the social safety net for our most at
risk citizens. There are many examples of what good planning and services can do to
turn around a housing development; Lord Selkirk Park and Woody Dell in St.Vital
are prime examples where a modest investment in the people services is making a
significant difference to the quality of life for the residents. The Toronto Globe and
Mail on Feb. 16 carried an article about the city of Portland’s 10-year plan to end
homelessness.7 They are having considerable success but it is worth noting that it
comes only with the pooling of municipal, state, federal and foundation money and
the cooperation of the police department, city officials, mental-health experts, leaders
of various missions and downtown businesses.

Conversely, without these inputs, social housing can become a place of substandard,
unsafe and undesirable dwellings; a waste of a community resource. Neglecting the
special housing needs of the low income and disadvantaged will result in more
poverty, more homelessness, more crime, and more social disruption. We have a
choice, build more jails and shelters or attend to the real needs of the people. It has
been said that a country’s worth can be measured by the way in which it deals with its
most vulnerable. Our country, our province and our city deserve better that they are
getting.

1
Right to Housing Coalition continues to advocate for the creation of many more new units of social
housing. In the last provincial election we challenged all parties to commit to the creation of 300 units of
social housing, (RGI), per year for the next five years with or without the assistance of the Federal
government. This would cost less than 1% of the provincial budget. It represents a yearly investment in
our provincial infrastructure of about $60,000,000. 300 units throughout the province is not a lot of new
housing but it is a specific target and a way to start the recovery that is needed.
2
Montreal has an ‘urban plan’ that includes a requirement that a15% of new housing units built within the
City of Montreal are either publicly owned or owned by non-profit community based organizations.
Toronto released 10-year housing strategy in 2007. Among its targets is the creation of 11,000 new
‘affordable’ rental units over 10 years and rent supplements for 60,000 households over 10 years.
Vancouver requires that 20% of downtown housing development dedicates 20% of units to ‘non-market-
housing.

3
Mulligan, Susan, An Examination of Rental and Social Housing in Winnipeg, Manitoba, January 16,
2008
4
CMHC Research Highlights, 2004
5
Ibid.
6
Ibid.
7
Bailey, Ian, “Can Portland’s plan work here?”, The Toronto Globe and Mail, February 16, 2008
Organizational Supporters of Right to Housing
1. The Manitoba Urban Native Housing Association

2. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

3. River Heights Ministerial Housing Action Group

4. Manitoba Interfaith Immigration Council

5. West Broadway Senior’s Resource Council

6. H.O.P: Housing Opportunity Partnership

7. Hospitality House Refugee Ministry

8. Aboriginal Council of Winnipeg

9. Social Planning Council of Winnipeg

10. Institute of Urban Studies

11. Jewish Child and Family Services

12. Micah House

13. Canadian Community Economic Development Network Manitoba