The Good Samaritan Inn, with a mission “to provide shelter for those who are homeless as well as to provide hope, help and direction so individuals can regain their lives and become productive members of society” has been operating in the Timmins area since 1999.
With service statistics being compiled since 2009, the Good Samaritan Inn shows that they had helped 16 people in 2009, 21 people in 2010, 33 people in 2011, 39 people in 2012 and 52 people in 2013.
With the trend moving in this direction and all signs pointing to an ever increasing cost of living, the Good Samaritan Inn has determined a need to expand their operations.
During this week’s city council meeting, Ed Ligocki, chairman of the Good Samaritan Inn, requested that a zoning by-law amendment be allowed for their property on Bloor Avenue in South Porcupine.
The content of the amendment, if passed, would allow the Good Samaritan Inn to operate both a retail thrift shop and a shelter for homeless women on the property, where currently, they operate only the thrift shop.
The plan includes converting the basement of the building to include ten separate rooms for women and their children who may use the services as well as a common eating and recreational area.
Ligocki’s architect explained to Council that there are no plans to prepare food on site and that all meals would be delivered in a “Meals-on-Wheels” style after being prepared at the other shelter.
Regardless of Ligocki’s intent to help those in need, there were still a number of local residents in attendance at the meeting to voice their opposition.
One neighbour, Penny Charlebois, opposed the plan on the basis of a perceived drop in property values and neighbourhood safety.
Charlebois told city council that she “Bought the house in the fall of 2009. With a church and fire station across the road, she would be in a great location to raise her family.”
“Now this makes me wonder," she said, “With a homeless shelter boarding house going in across the street. How will this affect my taxes? Who will absorb the loss when I sell my house?”
She continued “I have spoken to my realtor and the value of my house will decrease and my house will be very difficult to sell. As a 4+1 bedroom home, it will be sold as a family home. How hard is it going to be to sell a home to a family when it is directly across the street from a shelter?”
Charlebois then explained that “Just last week I had the opportunity of watching three police cruisers park in front of my house to which a man was handcuffed and detained in the cruiser. With shift work and my family, what are my options when I feel insecure coming or leaving my own home?”
She continued “There are children all over the area, whether using the library or the bus stop. I don’t believe that this kind of shelter should be located right in the downtown core. There is so much talk about revitalizing the downtown Timmins area, why not situate the shelter in downtown Timmins where there are plenty of vacant buildings?”
With this statement, local resident, Cindy Lemieux, commented from the audience, “Take it to Timmins! Leave us alone!”
Charlebois explained “Don’t get me wrong, I’m not heartless, but with all the women’s shelters already in the area, I find it hard to understand the need for another.”
She asked that decision makers “Stand in your front yard and look across the street, then come over to my house and look across the street. Then ask yourself, is this where you would like to raise your family?”
Following Charlebois’ comments, a worker from one of the women’s shelters already in the area made comments with regards to the conditions for women needing aid in Ontario along with statistical evidence and anecdotal stories to support her comments.
Local resident and neighbour of the proposed shelter, Steve Fenato, has been a volunteer with the local fire department for the last fourteen years and is “totally against this shelter."
Before continuing his comments to council regarding the rezoning issue, Fenato said to council that “The majority of you are living in Timmins, not Porcupine. This doesn’t affect you, it affects us!”
With the proposed shelter being directly next to the fire station, Fenato claims that “We have to worry about locking our vehicle and closing the fire hall before we leave on a call because somebody in going to break in and steal things from us. They come into the fire hall when we’ve been on a call from the homeless shelter. They’ve walked into the fire hall … it’s not right to impose this on us.”
Cindy Lemieux followed Fenato with what she sees at the current shelter run by the Good Samaritan Inn.
Lemieux claimed “That homeless shelter on Evans is disgusting! It’s a mess, there’s garbage everywhere and they’re going to do the same thing on Bloor.”
She suggested to council that they “Have it in Timmins. You guys take everything from South Porcupine anyways and you give us this homeless shelter. Give us something better than a homeless shelter!”
Following Lemieux’s comments, spectators clapped loudly as she stepped away from the microphone.
Ligocki responded to these concerns and allegations as being disappointed in the comments and referred to them as “Verbal diarrhea … making big exaggerations”.
In his comments to Council, Ligocki responded to the concerns about security by describing that surveillance cameras and installation services had been made available to the shelter and that there were three security guards working at the current shelter and with plans for the new shelter to have at least that many, if not more.
When informed of the comments made during the council meeting and asked about the frequency of visits to the area, Timmins Police Service representatives indicated that “the area surrounding the current and proposed shelters were no more of a concern to police than any other area in town.”
Police also remind us that the number of times police attend a location does not represent criminal activity on site.
Police could attend a location for any number of reasons, including interviewing witnesses or taking statements from victims of crime.
Ligocki continued his comments by addressing Council’s concerns for need, use and future use of the site.
When asked by Councilor J.P. Curley, of “The women’s shelters that we currently have in Timmins, can they not accommodate … can they not go to those centres?” Ligocki replied “I call them all the time and the answer that I get from most of them is, we’re full. There is a need, there really is a need.”
Councilor M. Doody went on record to say that “When you tell someone that you’ll be putting a homeless shelter on their block, you’re changing the landscape of what you thought you were buying a house for in that area.”
Doody suggested that the reason the three women’s shelters already in the area don’t receive these complaints is that they blend in, stating “Maybe that the difference, they blend in. People come and go and nobody knows.”
He acknowledged some of the objections to the zoning change, commenting “When you invest a certain amount of money in a home and in your neighbourhood, you have your visions of what to expect. When (someone) is told there will be a homeless shelter on their block, the response is likely “That’s not what I envisioned””.
By the end of the first hour of the council meeting, Mayor Tom Laughren strongly suggested that Ligocki and the Good Samaritan Inn take responsibility to reach out to neighbours and the community, to hold meetings and to address the concerns and objections to win over the majority.
Prior to departing the meeting, Ligocki commented that “Those who have, shouldn’t deny these same things to those who don’t”
