You can't just confiscate buildings owned by someone else to house the homeless.
- The HRC is owned by the Province. Georgian College won't be empty until 2026 and owned by the Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities.
- The Dollar Tree at the Orillia Square is probably owned by CT Real Estate Investment Trust.
- Orillia Central school is a heritage building, and I don't know if Orillia ever bought it back from Horizon General Contractors after they purchased it.
There's very little empty buildings in town that the City of Orillia actually owns. Even empty stores on the main street are not owned by the city.
If the city is proposing this, they need to use city-owned property. And whatever they do decide to use/build, we eat the cost in additional taxes.
Can we do that and can we afford it? Maybe some can. But depending on the cost of the tax increase, some will lose their homes, creating even more homeless issues. Some families are hanging on by their teeth at this point.
And if tax increases apply to multi-unit residences as well ... then you know that rents will increase to keep up with the tax increase. Rents are already too high in Orillia. So, perhaps some people won't be able to continue rent and also end up ... homeless. The same problem we're trying (unsuccessfully) to fix.
I am all for helping people. That's what we do when we love God's children ... all of them. But stop-gap changes are not going to fix the problem, and just might make it even worse.
Unless the city owns land that it can put to use to house or help the homeless, people proposing buildings the city doesn't own isn't a fix.
If they own land, it's time to come up with an efficient way to use that land, without putting it on tax payer's backs. We can help some, but it needs to be a choice for the tax payer so that we don't push struggling families into the streets, and we don't create further rent increases for people already in precarious situations.
Seems to me, this would be a perfect time to create a tiny-home community, one built with donations - whether cash, or building supplies, or time to construct these. And they need to be more than just a single room with a microwave, toilet and bed. And the city currently has no building code for tiny homes. They can't be built the same way a standard house is, nor have the exterior spaces as a regular home.
But ... and there is always going to be a but ... when you have other towns and cities driving out the homeless, a lot of them may end up here. That can't take precedence over those who have lived in this town for years.
Even with a purpose built community plot, there will need to be some sort of qualifications to get a place, as well as the requirement to (a) either look for a job to stay there long-term; go to school to learn a trade; or, donate their time (daily) to the city to either clean up, or collect garbage or ... do something other than just take a tiny home and expect everything free. Teach them to grow some of their own food ... give them something to be proud of. Getting out of their current situation and even making small achievements deserves recognition and love.
There also needs to be requirements to get counselling, and addiction help where applicable and to keep the home and surroundings clean.
None of this can happen quickly, because there isn't a quick solution to a situation like this. It would take serious effort, and a City that is willing to do better.
Do I think this would work? Probably not. Too many people will have too many rules and too many complaints and it's unlikely the city would rubber stamp it.
Do I wish it would work? Absolutely.
FB Post