Thunder Bay’s city council has voted to turn down the 114 Miles Street East site and has instead pivoted to a new location to host the city’s Temporary Shelter Village Initiative.
The site was tentatively approved at Committee of the Whole, but the decision required ratification at Monday night’s city council meeting, where it was ultimately rejected.
City Council ultimately decided on the Hillyard Site.
At-Large Councillor Mark Bentz proposed the location, which was also one of the alternative options presented by city administration if Miles was not selected.
The site is located next to 8th Avenue and near Central Avenue.
In a report presented to city council at the July 14 Committee of the Whole, the location was deemed the least viable of the options under consideration by city administration.
The location offers a good distance from high traffic roadways, it isn’t situated near a residential area, the two neighbouring properties are city-owned, and the site is larger than the Miles location.
However, there are also some concerns about the site.
The city has minimal environmental information on the property, creating the potential that unforeseen issues may arise, which could create additional costs.
The site isn’t located near the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre or social services, and it only has one viable access point for emergency services.
There is also a public off-leash dog park adjacent to the property.
The city did not get a chance to receive public or service provider feedback on the site.
“There’s no one around this table talking about what the service providers wanted,” said At-Large Councillor Shelby Ch’ng. “The service providers haven’t had input on this site.”
“They specifically wanted Miles St. and needed Miles St. to service the people. They’re the ones on the frontline with boots on the ground servicing the people.”
While coming to a decision, council had to balance the fact that $2.8 million in grant funding was in jeopardy if no location was selected.
“We are literally out of time for a number of different reasons,” explained City Manager John Collin. “The provincial funding is one of them, but it’s only one of them. Having a site operational for next winter is another consideration.”
“We have RFPs that we have unopened at this point because we’re still waiting for site selection and we put the entire procurement processes at risk as well. There is no more time. But for us to receive a referral, which of course we can do.”
“I think it very much puts the entirety of the project at risk and certainly the funding for the project at risk as well.”
To meet the deadlines to receive the grant, at least 40 units must be ready to start accepting occupants by December 15, 2025, and the remaining units must be fully operational by February 27, 2026.
Because of this, city administration hopes to have construction underway in August.
“To say I feel backed into a corner,” said Ch’ng. “I mean the mover (Bentz) came with four pages typed out ready for this argument, and I had zero clue this was coming.”
“Normally we get a heads up or an amendment that, you know this is coming and talk about moving too fast… I’m now caught off guard and now we’re going to lose funding if we don’t approve this. There’s money on the line.”
“This is moving quite quickly and I find the logic around this table inconsistent at best. I’ll vote in favour, but know that I’m backed in the corner. I don’t want to vote in favour of this, but I don’t see any other option.”
At-Large Councillor Kasey Etreni says she feels similar angst to Councillor Ch’ng.
On July 14, council tentatively approved the Miles site as the host location at Committee of the Whole.
During the first vote at Committee of the Whole, Red River Ward Councillor Michael Zussino and Mayor Ken Boshcoff were not present to participate in the vote.
Councillors Shelby Ch’ng, Kristen Oliver, Brian Hamilton, Greg Johnsen, Kasey Etreni, and Andrew Foulds voted in favour.
Councillors Dominic Pasqualino, Trevor Giertuga, Rajni Agarwal, Albert Aiello, and Mark Bentz voted against.
At Monday night’s city council meeting, both Zussino and the Mayor voted no, while all other votes remained the same.
Mayor Ken Boshcoff had put forward a motion ahead of the meeting to slightly adjust the decision approved at Committee of the Whole.
“This memorandum provides confirmation that I believe that the temporary village is a safer, healthier alternative to unmanaged encampments,” said the mayor in his memo. “The initiative is a short-term measure necessary to manage encampments and act as a bridge until more affordable, accessible housing options are available.”
“The status quo is not working.”
He asked to approve asking city administration to report back in 2027 with a full report of the status of the village.
This would have allowed city council to consider necessary changes and evaluate the success of the project and the associated costs.
The mayor, however, opted to decline his own adjustment and the site altogether.
The village will be temporary, and it is seen as an interim solution that bridges the gap for the unhoused while permanent supportive housing and other homelessness supports are developed.
The hope is that the project will help people living in encampments by providing access to essential services like housing and social supports off-site.
