There’s viable criticism against the development of Energy Court to centralize services for the city’s homeless community, city CAO Shari Lichterman said, but the crisis has necessitated it.
“We’re now into more of a crisis mode where we need to pivot and at least come up with an interim solution that helps address some of the most immediate problems we’re seeing,” she said. “We need a stop-gap measure to deal with the crisis, and that’s really what this is.”
On Tuesday night, Lichterman delivered a presentation to city council members on the city’s plan to centralize services for the city’s homeless population at Energy Court.
Located behind Chris’ Your Independent grocery store downtown, Energy Court houses the old supervised consumption site building, whose operations ceased last year due to a lack of provincial funding.
The building has served as a warming/cooling centre since that time, and beginning Nov. 1 will serve as a 24/7 warming centre, per a unanimous vote of city council on Tuesday.
Other encampments will be dismantled and people will be encouraged to set up at Energy Court, where tents and camping will be allowed and the city will ramp up associated services in the coming months.
In the Greater Sudbury Encampment Response Guide, published by OrgCode Consulting Inc. on Oct. 1, 2021, the city was warned about some potential pitfalls with developing a safe camping zone such as that proposed to take shape behind Energy Court.
Under the headline, “Avoid the Allure of What are Seen as Quick Fixes,” the homelessness systems experts at OrgCode Consulting caution the following:
- There are no legal mechanisms to force people to use the safe camping zone, and “considerable money and social capital may be expended to find that there are still encampments throughout the community that are not in the safe camping zone.”
- Safe camping zones are “exceptionally more expensive to operate than most people think,” and municipally funded rent supplements to house the homeless are less costly.
- Communal living may be difficult, leading to staffing and police costs due to interpersonal conflicts.
- Municipalities to set up sanctioned encampments have struggled to bring safe camping zones to an end due to a lack of clear exit strategy.
“I agree with everything that was in that report and the criticisms of going with this strategy,” Lichterman told Sudbury.com. “It’s just that right now, the urgency of the day is outweighing those potential pitfalls."
The valid points within the 2021 report are likely the reason why the city has not proceeded with a centralized hub until now, she said, adding, “Unfortunately, we’re not seeing a lot of results.”
By the city’s latest-published account there were 199 people living in encampments at 34 sites through Greater Sudbury in June, which was a jump from the 46 people at 36 sites counted in June 2023.
The development of Energy Court “is not the perfect solution,” Lichterman said, but is a city-owned property somewhat separated from businesses and residences, and will allow better city control “than having issues scattered throughout our downtown.”
Meanwhile, she said, the city is not slowing down advocacy efforts to add to the city’s housing supply so there are enough roofs to go over people's heads.
Funding from senior levels of government will be needed, she said, the likes of which made the recently opened 40-unit transitional housing complex at Lorraine Street a reality.
The city needs at least two similar such facilities, Lichterman said, alongside more affordable housing, including subsidized housing. The city’s current waitlist for subsidized housing is almost 2,000 households, and it’s currently taking people “years” to move into housing.
On this front, Lichterman noted that although the 2021 report clarified that municipally funded rent supplements are less expensive than setting up safe camping zones, there aren’t enough housing units available.
Between government, private-sector efforts and landlords willing to join the rent supplement program, she said there simply aren’t enough affordable housing units available to move people into, meaning encampments remain a reality.
As for concerns that the dismantling of encampments downtown and promotion of Energy Court also runs the risk of pushing encampments to other areas of the city, as the 2021 report cautions could take place, Lichterman said that existing efforts to deal with encampments would continue alongside the new promotion of Energy Court.
“We want to make sure that it’s welcoming and safe for people,” she said, with services nearby making it more appealing than situating themselves elsewhere.
Despite proceeding with Energy Court as a “stop-gap measure,” Lictherman clarified that the city is “not slowing down our advocacy efforts to add housing to the city. … The longer-term goal is still to get people supports so they can live independently in affordable housing, so we’re pursuing both streams at the same time.”
Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.