Health,
Recreation and Social Services Committee
Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux
Minutes
38/ ProcÈs-verbal 38
Thursday,
16 January 2003, 9:30 a.m.
le jeudi 16 janvier 2003, 9h30
Champlain Room, 110 Laurier Avenue West
Salle
Champlain, 110, avenue Laurier ouest
Present / Présent : Councillors /
Conseillers A. Munter (Chair / Président)
E. Arnold, (Vice Chair/Vice president)
R. Chiarelli, A.
Cullen, D. Deans, C. Doucet, S. Little, P. McNeely.
Regrets: D. Eastman
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
DÉCLARATIONS D’INTÉRÊT
No declarations
of interest were filed.
Notes: 1. Underlining indicates a new
or amended recommendation approved by Committee.
2.
Reports requiring Council consideration
will be presented on 12 February 2003 in Health, Recreation and Social Services
Report No. 38.
Nota: 1. Le
soulignement indique qu’il s’agit d’une nouvelle recommandation ou d’une
recommandation modifiée approuvée par le Comité.
2. Les rapports nécessitant un examen par le Conseil
municipal seront présentés au Conseil le
12 février 2003 dans le rapport No 38 du Comité de la santé, des loisirs et des services sociaux.
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
RATIFICATION
DU PROCÈS-VERBAL
Minutes 36 and Minutes 37, Health,
Recreation and Social Services Committee meetings of December 5 and 11, 2002
were confirmed.
PRESENTATIONS/
PRÉSENTATIONS
- ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES PRESENTATION ON RACCOON
RABIES IN EASTERN ONTARIO
PRÉSENTATION DU MINISTÈRE DES RESSOURCES
NATURELLES DE L’ONTARIO AU SUJET DE LA RAGE DU RATON LAVEUR DANS
L’ESTDE L’ONTARIOTE
The Committee heard from Dr. Chris Davies, Manager, Ministry of
Municipal Affairs (MNR) Wildlife Research and Development Section. Dr. Davies provided an introduction to
raccoon rabies, which arrived in Ontario in 1999 and information about the
establishment of a "trap-vaccinate-release" (TVR) zone around a
de-population zone, followed by aerial vaccine baiting on a broad scale. He noted that, as of January 14, 2003, there
were 111 confirmed cases of raccoon rabies in Ontario, confined to an area
south of Ottawa covering an area of approximately 60 by 40 kms. Dr. Davies said the rationale for
controlling raccoon rabies was to prevent its spread across Ontario at a rate
of approximately 60 kms. per year and to address the public health concern of
citizens being exposed to the disease, as well as the health of their household
pets. Another reason is to prevent the
death of approximately 80% of the 1 million raccoons in southern Ontario by the
spread of the disease through vector species.
Dr. Davies drew the Committee's attention to two maps, one showing
the location of the 111 cases to-date, and he highlighted two cases near Smiths
Falls that occured in December 2001.
The second map shows two separate outbreak "nodes", one
south-west of Smiths Falls and a second one east of Ventnor, east of Hwy. 416
and less than 20 kms from the Ottawa City Boundary. Dr. Davies said the Ventnor node demonstrates the ability of the
disease to move around within an outbreak area. He concluded his presentation by saying there was a 50% reduction
in the number of raccoon rabies cases in 2002, from 45 in 2001 to 19 in 2002,
which he said illustrates that the MNR is "winning the battle"
against the disease. The complete text
of Dr.Davies' presentation is on file with the Committee Coordinator.
The Committee Chair, A. Munter, asked whether Dr. Davies would
comment on whether there are still opportunities for the MNR, the City and
other stakeholders to work collaboratively to resolve this issue, as requested
of the Ministry through a unanimously-approved Council Resolution.
Dr. Davies indicated he had received no direction to respond to the
Council Motion, nor would he comment on matters before the courts, such as the
Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Centre (OCWC).
He stressed the need to work collaboratively, noting that the MNR has
tried to work with rehabilitators, that there have been discussions but there
has been no resolution to date.
Councillor D. Deans asked what identifying Ottawa as a "high
risk area" would do. Dr. Davies
replied that baiting has begun in the Ottawa area and that the rules have been
changed for all rehabilitators in all areas.
Responding to a further question from the Councillor, Dr. Davies reiterated
that no baiting is done in New York State: this represents a problem given that
the U.S. Drugs and Administration Department has invested $12 million U.S. for
baiting and it is compromises the plan to eradicate raccoon rabies in North
America.
Councillor W. Stewart commented that, while the MNR is trying to do
its job, the situation is that a local rehabilitator, the Ottawa-Carleton
Wildlife Centre, is closed, no one is there to answer calls from the public and
no plans are in place for the birthing season.
She posited that all this has killed humane rehabilitation in the Ottawa
area. Dr. Davies replied there was no
intent to shut down the OCWC. He
reiterated that there needs to be a balance between rehabilitation and human
health. He added that some discussion
has taken place involving the MNR and technical staff from the City to devise a
plan. Councillor Stewart asked that it
be clarified whose mandate "nuisance wildlife" was. Dr. Davies said he understood this was a
municipal responsibility.
Councillor A. Cullen stated that many residents would like
rehabilitation back in Ottawa without all the problems and he averred that the
Minister needs to address this issue.
He expressed his concern about the de-population of raccoons, skunks and
foxes, the vector species. Dr. Davies
indicated that up to 60% are trapped and kept up to six months, the incubation
period for the disease. Asked to
comment on what is done in other jurisdictions, Dr. Davies indicated that the
Ontario model is used elsewhere because it is considered very effective.
At this point, a number of delegations were heard and their comments
are summarized as follows:
Mr. Ross Owens, Business and Telecommunications Consultant spoke about the evolution of raccoon rabies and the risk to human
health, commented on and questioned the MNR’s need to expand the high risk area
to include the City of Ottawa, and the breach of public trust resulting from
the Ministry’s actions.
Bob Van
Tongerloo, Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Federation of Humane Societies posited
that a more exact comparison to make would be between Ontario and the State of
Ohio, where the incidence of raccoon rabies was reduced by over one-half in one
year of implementation and virtually eliminated within two years. The Ontario program continues to report
raccoon rabies in double digits. The
Ohio program consists of aerial, and to a lesser extent, ground baiting of an
oral vaccine, at a cost of $200 per kilometer: the Ontario program of TVR and
de-population (read killing) costs between $400 to $500 per kilometer. He
suggested that Ontario would do well to adopt a similar model and cease killing
generally healthy animals (only 0.2% were found positive for rabies).
Debbie Lawes, Journalist, Board Member, Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife
Centre highlighted
two concerns, the declaration by the MNR as a high-risk zone for raccoon rabies
and the imposition of the “one kilometer rule” for the release of animals. She spoke about the effect of these
decisions, namely the OCWC’s decision to close its doors and the loss of its
trained, vaccinated and experienced staff; the loss of the OCWC experience
working closely with the veterinary community; its role of protecting human
health with respect to rabies through public education campaigns and helpful
assistance for people with wildlife problems. Ms. Lawes said the crisis would
begin this spring, with the birthing season, when wildlife rehabilitation will
be driven underground and residents will risk breaking the law to provide
humane care for orphaned animals. All
this will result in increased costs for the City by having to euthanize
animals, by-law enforcement intervention with backyard rehabilitation and
public health and safety risks, including expensive costs for post-exposure treatments.
Dr. Dan Rogers, Veterinarian and Partner, Alta Vista Animal Hospital has worked with the OCWC for the past ten years. He said he could not understand with the MNR
chose to return to a bad situation. Dr.
Rogers did not believe that the general population should, nor does it have the
expertise, to handle wild animals, and most veterinarians don’t have the time,
or the expertise, to deal with the problem.
Many do not want to euthanise animals.
He called the current impasse in Ontario a lose-lose situation that will
have a very negative impact.
In response to a question from Councillor Stewart, Dr. Rogers
indicated the cost of euthanasia is approximately $100 to $125 dollars.
Bruce Roney, Executive Director, Ottawa Humane Society said that many people question the actions of the MNR, and what is
happening is a downloading of responsibility for wildlife care to the humane
societies. He averred that the
Ministry’s telephone line was ineffective and because of this, the public will
call the Humane Society for assistance.
Mr. Roney said there were no cases of raccoon rabies in humans in
Ontario and the Ministry is recommending that people “pick up” vector species
such as skunks and foxes which are dangerous animals. He concluded by stating that the humane societies would be unable
to replicate or generate the resources and the expertise of the OCWC.
Selena Walker, Volunteer Wildlife Network, Licensed Rehabilitator in Ontario spoke about the impact of the MNR’s decisions on home-based,
independent rehabilitators, who are unanimously opposed to the 1 km rule. She said this restriction would result in
dangerous situations.
Councillor Stewart asked Dr. Davies whether the Ministry’s hotline
advice to call a pest control company to take care of wildlife means certain
death for the animals. He responded by
saying that the same rule applies to private companies.
Councillor A. Cullen pointed out that, in his ward, a found animal
would still be in an urban area if released within the 1 km zone. He asked whether there was still an
opportunity for the MNR to review the purpose behind the regulation, to
accommodate his situation and to facilitate residents obeying the
regulation. Dr. Davies said that the
Ministry had asked for input from the Veterinary College in Guelph and from
other stakeholders before imposing the 1 km zone.
Richard Patten, Member of the Provincial Parliament for
Ottawa-Centre said there exists a wide gulf between
the MNR and concerned citizens in Ontario.
He questioned why other Ministry bureaucrats had not accompanied Dr.
Davies to respond to concerns. Mr.
Patten suggested that the Medical Officer of Health be asked to review the
situation. He said the Ministry’s
decisions were based on dubious and shaky research assumptions and the MNR
should be asked to review its findings.
Mr. Patten called the entire situation an abomination, something
embarrassing to be associated with and he indicated he would call for an
inquiry into the matter if there is a change in the provincial government.
Leslie James, Rural Landowner and Community Volunteer said that some urban residents look to the rural areas to “dump”
unwanted domestic animals, and the same would now apply to wildlife. This manufactured risk will result in
increased costs to residents and to the City.
Donna Dubreuil, President, Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Centre began by stating that the MNR’s unrealistic and inhumane changes to
regulations about wildlife rehabilitation threaten all such programs in the
province. She recalled the Ministry’s
tactics of seizing healthy animals from the OCWC and from a volunteer family in
the summer of 2002, and doing this in a manner where the Centre’s volunteers
felt they were under siege: the pretext for the Ministry’s actions was that the
animals could be rabid. Ms. Dubreuil
contended that the facts do not support this idea. She spoke about the impact of these changes to the City of
Ottawa, namely increased costs while creating more public health and safety
risks and public dissatisfaction.
Another impact is the loss of a highly regarded and cost-effective
public-private partnership. Ms.
Dubreuil pointed out that almost 75% of the OCWC’s annual $590,000 budget came
from volunteers and private donations.
She asked that the City continue to pressure the Ontario government to
make the changes necessary to ensure a progressive wildlife response in Eastern
Ontario, as approved by City Council on September 25, 2002. She posited that, unless the seized animals
are returned, it is unlikely there would ever be another rehabilitation program
for wildlife mammals in the City, because of a lack of public trust.
The Committee Chair, A. Munter, thanked Ms. Dubreuil and all those
involved with the OCWC for all their work on behalf of wildlife and for the
residents of Ottawa over the past fifteen years.
Councillor D. Deans concurred with the sentiments expressed by Chair
Munter. She asked that it be publicly
stated that the decision to close the OCWC was made by the operator, and was
not caused by lack of support from the City.
Ms. Dubreuil confirmed this was the case, adding that the Centre had
asked for more proactive, prevention support but that the Emergency and
Protective Services Department had not been supportive. She pointed out that the current MNR restrictions
would not allow the Centre to operate adequately.
Councillor Deans presented a Motion calling for the MNR to work
collaboratively with the City and with community partners in an effort to
resolve this issue.
Councillor W.
Stewart, said that, while many of the problems highlighted are outside the
City’s control and jurisdiction, she did not want to live in a city that reacts
to conflicts with wildlife by killing it.
She felt that humane rehabilitation services are needed and that all the
parties should do whatever it takes to reestablish the services that existed
prior to September 2002.
Councillor A. Cullen spoke about this as being an important issue,
since humans do live and come into contact with other species: the resolution
of these conflicts must therefore be humane.
He pointed out that, while the MNR may be well intentioned, its
interventions have confounded and frustrated many people and the community
feels betrayed by the Ministry. The
Councillor averred that allegations of betrayal and deception were not a good
way to start a partnership. He also
felt there should be no eradication of a species innocent of illness if the
MNR’s goals are well-intentioned.
Councillor R. Chiarelli put forward the view that the Ministry is
trying to address a problem by proposing a cure that is worse than the
disease. The Councillor did not feel it
was the role of by-law enforcement officers to be invasive and to chase after
wildlife.
Councillor D. Deans said that, while the Municipal Act does not give
the City the responsibility to deal with wildlife issues, there is a need for
the City to deal with the gap in service in this area. She pointed out that the OCWC provided an
invaluable service and this needs to be reinstated. She suggested that the local Members of the Provincial Parliament
should be asked to assist in moving this matter forward.
Councillor P. McNeely noted that, while he was sympathetic to the
MNR’s objectives, he was hopeful that the new process would result in
successful outcomes for all the concerned parties.
Chair Munter thanked all those who participated in the debate. He expressed the hope that Dr. Davies
would convey the message he heard to Ministry officials, that the Ottawa
community feels strongly about this issue and wishes for a suitable resolution
to be found. Chair Munter thanked
Councillor W. Stewart for her participation in the debate and for all the work
she has done to bring the matter forward.
He concluded by saying that the OCWC grew because there was a need for its
services and the City and the Province will face serious problems if the
absence of wildlife rehabilitation services is allowed to continue.
The Committee then considered the following Motion:
Moved by D. Deans
That, given the information presented, that the
Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) did not have a goal of shutting the
Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Centre and that the MNR is in fact interested in
ensuring that residents have access to the information and services they
require;
That City Staff be
directed to work with the MNR and the Wildlife Centre with the goal of
re-establishing the Centre’s services, with city financial support as
previously the case, if required; and
Further that all
local government MPPs be solicited for their support in resolving this issue.
CARRIED
POVERTY
ISSUES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
COMITÉ CONSULTATIF SUR LES QUESTIONS LIÉES
À LA PAUVRETÉ
2.
TETWO
YEAR RENT FREEZE
GEL DES LOYERS POUR DEUX ANS
The Committee heard from Judy Halla, a member of
the Poverty Issues Advisory Committee, who outlined PIAC’s Motion calling
for the City to petition the Province for a two-year rent freeze until a review
of the Tenant Protection Act is completed and to lobby the Province to adopt a
rent control program.
Mr. Daniel Hull, a resident of Ottawa, and an
Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) recipient, spoke in support of the
Motion. He described his situation,
noting he has rent arrears he is unable to pay and has been given notice of a
rent increase for 2003. There is a lack
of affordable housing in Ottawa while the Province is sitting on money provided
for this purpose by the federal government.
Sean Fordyce, a practitioner with Justice
Matters, an organization that helps tenants fight some of the above-guideline
increases (“aggies”), said the agency is swamped with pro bono work for people
with little or no resources who can’t be turned away and the agency has no
resources other than what it can bill its clients. He posited that the current Rent Control Act is skewed in favour
of approving rental increases and badly adjudicated by individuals who are
political appointees. The speaker gave
a number of examples illustrating that the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal (the
Tribunal) is working directly with landlords and he indicated he would be
pleased to provide additional information to support this contention. In response to a question from Councillor A.
Cullen, Mr. Fordyce said that his services cost between $500 and $800 dollars
depending on the complexity of the problem.
Bonnie Keef, President of a tenant’s
association, said that many low to middle income persons and
families on assistance, disability and other pensions who do not live in
subsidized units use up to 90% of their pensions to pay their rents. She said the city needs more affordable
housing and more shelters. She said
that rent increases are spreading through the Province like a disease that must
be stopped.
Colin Chalk, representing the Ottawa Food Bank, said
that the Ontario Association of Food Banks undertook a survey to determine why
there was a 10% increase in food bank usage.
The main point he wanted to highlight is that rent was the biggest
challenge to persons on fixed incomes or pensions. Every year as costs increase these individuals get left further
and further behind and this is why food bank usage will continue to increase
over the years. Mr. Chalk posited that
the proposed rent freeze would maintain people in the same situation. Another survey finding was that the average
food bank recipient has an average of five dollars per day to cover all other
expenses after he/she has paid their rent.
Bob MacDonald, Housing Help, said the
Tribunal asked Housing Help if it was prepared to assist tenants who want to
appeal above guideline increases.
Housing Help responded by saying that in 2002, it received 25,000
requests for assistance from people who are homeless or at risk of becoming
homeless: it does not have the resources to organize tenants or help them in
this manner. Mr. McDonald alluded to
the fact that the City of Toronto has a $300,000 Tenant Defence Fund to help
tenants organize around “aggies” and to ensure they have adequate
representation at Tribunal hearings. He
made a comparison between the help provided to landlords by the Tribunal to
that provided to tenants and he posited the latter are not getting much
assistance. He added that,
consequently, many tenants are making submissions that are not related to the
application and many applications are dismissed because of this fact. In 1999, more than 40% of tenants were
defined as having an affordability problem and this is not a small segment of
people. Mr. McDonald said tenants need
help. Resources should be allocated to
help them get organized and to help redress the imbalance in the system. He concluded his presentation by saying that
support for the proposed Motion would be consistent with approaches taken by
the City of Ottawa in the past.
Mr. John Dickie, Chair, Eastern Ontario
Landlord Organization, made a submission
on behalf of the owners and managers of more than 20,000 rental units in Ottawa
and Eastern Ontario, including most of the largest landlords and
multi-residential developers and many medium and small landlords in
Ottawa. He presented information on past
rent increase rates, housing availability and current and future vacancy
rates. Mr. Dickie called a rent freeze
a draconian measure that would, in the long term, hurt tenants by discouraging
investment by raising the rate of return required to make properties attractive
thus interfering with the increasing supply of housing. The speaker averred
that the problem is income, not rents and that the proposed remedy is badly
targeted and unfair. He felt the
solution would be for the City to recommend that the Province raise the shelter
allowance portion of social assistance. Mr. Dickie also posited that funding
tenants to oppose “aggies” would be a waste of taxpayer money, since the
Tribunal carefully checks files to determine the correct utility and capital expenditure
calculations of the landlords and the latter are frequently asked to clarify
the figures they provide: frequently many landlords do not receive as high an
increase as they requested.
Chair Munter pointed out that the City has already
requested that the Province increase the shelter allowance portion for benefit
recipients. He noted that the City also
has a subsidy to top-up income for people who are not on assistance so they can
afford to pay their rent but, at the moment, three hundred and fifty of these
subsidies have not been taken up. Chair
Munter asked why the City would expand a program that is not working to full
capacity.
Ms. G. Horn, representing the Ottawa Regional
Landlords Association, said she had never heard of this program and she
assured the Committee she could find the required number of “takers” if she had
the information. The Chair asked staff
from the Housing Branch to provide this information to the speaker.
Replying to a question from Councillor R. Chiarelli,
Mr. Dickie indicated that his association focuses its lobbying efforts at the
Province. He said there are concerns
when the public voice of the Ottawa community recommends something to the
Province that interest groups believe would not be good policy. Ms. Horn said her association got the
impression that the Province wants to pass on more responsibility for these
issues to municipalities and if this happens, local solutions will need to be
found.
Councillor Chiarelli asked for a comment on what
impact the proposed rent freeze would have on an application to build a modest
income, multi-residential nine-storey rental building in the Centrepointe
area. Mr. Dickie posited that builders
and developers might think they are going back into rent controls that will
affect their bottom line and lending institutions would be seriously impacted:
the people the Committee is trying to help would also be affected.
Councillor A. Cullen pointed out that, from 1993 to
2002, rents increased by 29% whereas the current guidelines allow for a 20%
increase: this shows that, from a tenant’s perspective, there are problems with
the current system. The Councillor also
referred to the City’s Annual Development Report for 2001, which shows that the
rental stock has decreased and he asked whether the speaker would comment on
these two points. Mr. Dickie brought
forward a third point, namely that, according to Canada Mortgage and Housing,
the number of tenants is decreasing because many are taking advantage of
favourable mortgage rates and purchasing homes. Councillor Cullen indicated that, for some of the low-income
tenants he represents, this is not a possibility
Councillor P. McNeely alluded to the Annual Housing
Starts referred to in the presentation, and he asked what impact the proposed
freeze could have on multiple housing starts.
Mr. Dickie said he thought there would be no impact on the 2002
numbers but the 2004 and 2005 starts might be negatively impacted should the
Province approve a rent freeze.
Councillor E. Arnold asked whether Mr. Dickie could
estimate the cost of a province-wide shelter allowance program. She clarified that she was looking for
information on what it would cost to make sure that the affordability goals
stated in public policy, i.e., to that nobody pays more than 30% of their
income in rent, continue to be met year after year. Mr. Dickie advanced
the view it would cost one-fifth as much to do this through a shelter allowance
as opposed to doing it through building new units. He said he did not know the cost but undertook to report back
with a reasonably up-to-date figure.
Sherrie Tingley, Centre for Equality Rights in
Accommodation (CERA), Manager of Eviction Prevention Program, said the
quickest way for landlords to increase rents on units is to evict existing
tenants. Given this fact, she was
shocked and dismayed when the Housing Branch did not see CERA’s Eviction
Prevention Early Intervention Program as a priority in the homelessness
prevention system under provincial funding.
Ms. Tingley said she is bracing for an increase in evictions in June,
July and August, when landlords take advantage of the housing crunch created by
the “double cohort” effect. For these
reasons, she would like to see the Eviction Prevention Program brought back
into the provincial funding and she presented three recommendations for the
Committee’s consideration.
Ms. Tingley concluded by stating that almost all the applications
for rental increases are lawful under the law; the adjudicators are operating
fairly and under the law; the law is the problem and it has to be changed.
Maura Volante, Alliance to End Homelessness, said she
is in daily contact with people experiencing homelessness and the risk of
homelessness and frustration is mounting.
People are stuck in shelters, trying to find somewhere affordable to
live, paying more and more for rent and suffering enormous stress. The speaker highlighted the situation of
families, the fastest growing segment of the homeless population. She said the Committee is aware of the
long-term cost implications of the lack of affordable housing. She stressed the need for a national housing
strategy that works, and investment by all levels of governments in housing,
adequate shelter allowances for people on ODSP and Ontario Works. Ms. Volante expressed her support for the
Motion calling for a two year rent freeze.
Chrystal Desilets, Youth Advisory Council for
the Youth Services Bureau, said the proposed rent freeze would really
benefit low-income earners and people struggling with financial obstacles. She spoke about the high rent increases of
the past few years, noting these would be slightly more acceptable if the money
went to improve rental units, however this is not the case. Ms. Desilets averred that people should not
have to choose between paying their rent or feeding their families. She said youth are also struggling to find
affordable housing, and the available supports are not as well publicized as
they should be.
Mr. Al Sullivan, a resident of Ottawa, said he
did not believe a rent freeze was the solution. He pointed out that some rents have dropped and some landlords
are offering free rent periods to attract tenants. He posited that the freeze would protect the wrong kind of
tenant, citing himself as example and stating that he doesn’t require
help. Another consequence is that it
might deter people from buying homes.
Mr. Sullivan indicated that small property owners and managers of small
buildings are not making money.
Committee Discussion
Speaking to the PIAC Motion, Councillor A. Cullen
said it calls for a “time out” to begin to address Ottawa’s six-year crisis in
affordable housing. Another issue to be
addressed is the establishment of a tenant assistance fund, to help those
tenants who come before the Tribunal: the Councillor put forward a Motion
asking for staff to examine the Toronto program and report back to Committee in
April. There are federal funds to
support the prevention of evictions and staff should ascertain whether the City
could access the second round of this funding to create a level playing field
for tenants. Councillor Cullen averred
that many of the 327,000 residents of Ottawa who pay rent are struggling and
the City cannot stand idly by.
Councillor E. Arnold expressed the belief that a
tenant assistance fund is absolutely required and CERA’s point about the law
needing to be changed is correct. The
current Tenant Protection Act has instituted vacancy de-control and other
measures that have worked in the interest of landlords and to the detriment of
tenants and this needs to be turned around.
The Councillor said she did not think the PIAC Motion would result in a
rent freeze, but it is one tactic: it is also a way to draw attention to the
issue as the Province moves towards the next election. The Motion flags the fact that in Ottawa, as
in other cities across the Province, the rents are out of control and
unreachable and Province needs to make it a priority. Councillor Arnold looked forward to receiving the information
about how much it would cost the provincial government to implement a program
that would bring every household to a maximum of 30% expenditure of their
income for housing. She posited the
annual cost of such a program would go way beyond the investment by the
Province of a $2000 per door P.S.T. rebate in the federal-provincial
program. Councillor Arnold noted that,
in the absence of aggressively building long lasting, affordable housing, the
PIAC Motion asks what the Province is prepared to do to ensure people don’t
have to chose between paying their rent and buying food for their families.
Councillor D. Deans agreed that the issue needs to
be flagged but she did not believe this was the correct way to address it. She said she agreed with Mr, Dickie when he
said the burden was being shifted from the tenant to the landlord and some of
them might not be able to absorb it either.
The Councillor felt the burden should be shifted to the Province,
because it has not been dealing with the issue of affordable housing.
She pointed out that the Province absorbs rent
increases adjudged by the Tribunal as being unjustified, because people in the
communities can no longer afford runaway rents. Councillor Deans called housing a basic human need and it is the
responsibility of all levels of government to ensure everyone has a home.
Councillor C. Doucet pointed out that de-regulating
the rental market has not worked and he asked whether society would have to
wait until there is no more affordable housing before acting. He noted that while the PIAC Motion is not
perfect, and will cause some inequities, it is a wonderful lever to get the
Province’s attention. The Councillor
added that forcing the Province to go back to the old model would cause
hardships for landlords, and if the landlords start to scream, the Province
will pay attention.
Councillor P. McNeely said he believed there should
be a level playing field for tenants and that the number of multi-residential
units being built should be maximized.
Calling for a rent freeze will put the burden on landlords and this
should not be done. The Councillor felt
that rent supplements were a more honest and fair way of reaching the
goal. He stressed the importance of
keeping construction going, because the more vacancies there are, the more rent
levels will be kept manageable.
Councillor R. Chiarelli said he could not support
the PIAC Motion. He felt that City
Council should only be telling the Province what to do in an area that is its
responsibility firstly if it is an exception and secondly if its intervention
will have any persuasive value at all.
In the area of housing, virtually all the policy making, infrastructure
and resources are vested at the provincial level and it is unlikely that any
intervention will be persuasive.
Councillor Chiarelli said it has been well over ten years that the
former City of Nepean, and now the new City, have been trying to get a builder
to put something in and he did not want anything to jeopardize proposed new
housing geared towards renters of modest means in the Centrepointe community,
as this Motion would do.
The Committee Chair, A. Munter, thanked everybody
for participating in the debate. He
said the presentations and the discussion would send an important message to
the development industry, and that is that you reap what you sow. The industry was successful in getting rid
of rent control, of restricting development charges, getting lower property
taxation in terms of the education mil rate.
Society was told this would generate a lot of affordable housing development
but this has not been the case. Chair
Munter said there is less rental housing and certainly less affordable
housing. While the rent freeze is not a
solution, it addresses the fact that public policy over the last eight years
has dramatically and catastrophically failed and that something else needs to
be done.
The Committee then considered the following Motions:
Moved by A. Cullen
Whereas 42% of Ottawa’s population (some 327,000 people) live in
rental housing;
Whereas since 1998 Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal rent increase
guidelines have allowed rents to increase by nearly 20%;
Whereas there are currently 12,910 apartment units in Ottawa (over
10%) before the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal for above-guideline rent
increases;
Whereas most tenants are unfamiliar with the Ontario Rental Tribunal
procedures, and lack both resources and expertise to effectively use their
rights to contest above-guideline rent increase applications;
Whereas the City of Toronto provides assistance to tenants to help
them through the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal procedures in order to
exercise their rights in dealing with above-guideline rent increase
applications;
Therefore be it resolved that staff examine the City of Toronto
tenant assistance model and appropriate sources of funding to assist Ottawa
tenants in exercising their rights at the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal, and
report back to HRSS Committee with recommendations by April 2003.
CARRIED
(S.
Little dissented)
Moved by C. Doucet
That staff review the need for continued funding for the Centre for
Equality Rights in Accommodation’s existing program.
CARRIED
Moved by A. Cullen
That the Health Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend
Council approve the following:
Whereas
between 1995 and 2001 the average rent for all units in the City of Ottawa has
increased by 25%: and
Whereas
little or no affordable rental housing has been built in the City of Ottawa
since the implementation of the Tenant Protection Act in 1998: and
Whereas
there are nearly 300 landlords in the City of Ottawa who have applied for Above
Guideline Increases: and
Whereas
there are more than 13,000 applications on the Registry list for social
housing, leaving families, seniors and the disabled facing waiting lists of
several years or more: and
Whereas
Ottawa has one of the lowest vacancy rates in the country and tenants have
faced some of the highest rent increases in Ontario: and
Whereas
people on social assistance have either had their income reduced by 22% or
frozen while rents have escalated beyond their ability to pay: and
Whereas
the majority of tenants especially low income earners low income earners are
spending up to and over 50% of their income on rent and consequently are forced
to maintain an inadequate diet that will result in bad health and an increase
of cost in health care. In additions
cut education for their children which will leave the New City of Ottawa and
the Province with uneducated minds and consequently an increase in poverty and
Whereas
83% of the evictions at the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal involve families
and individuals who are forced to choose between rent and food: and
Whereas
tenants cannot afford to wait for the restoration of rent control while rents
spiral out of control and beyond their ability to pay leaving our citizens,
including children in shelters or on the street:
Now
therefore be it resolved that the City of Ottawa on behalf of its citizens
petition the Provincial Government to freeze rents for two years until there
has been a fair review of the Tenant Protection Act and the fall out on tenants
and
Be
it further resolved that the City of Ottawa continue to lobby the Provincial
Government and opposition parties to adopt and endorse a two-year freeze
immediately and
Be it further resolved that the City of Ottawa acting with concern
for its citizens demand that the Provincial Government give a projected date as
to the commencement of work towards the adoption of a rent control program that
will relieve stress and give hope to the citizens of Ottawa, who are also
people of Ontario, and are burdened by paying rents that are not affordable or
for accommodations that are inappropriate and also put a stop at the landlords
misuse of the Ontario Tribunal and the Tenant Protection Act as a means to
increase profits.
CARRIED
YEAS (5): A. Cullen, D. Deans, E. Arnold, C. Doucet,
A. Munter
NAYS (3): R. Chiarelli, S. Little, P. McNeely
People Services/
services
aux citoyens
PUBLIC HEALTH AND LONG TERM CARE
SANTÉ PUBLIQUE ET SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE
3.
HEALTH DANGERS OF THE URBAN USE OF
PESTICIDES ADVISORY GROUP: PESTICIDE REDUCTION STRATEGY- PUBLIC EDUCATION
CAMPAIGN
GROUPE CONSULTATIF SUR LES DANGERS DE l’USAGE DES PESTICIDES À DES FINS
ESTHÉTIQUES EN MILIEU URBAIN – STRATÉGIE DE RÉDUCTION DES PESTICIDES – CAMPAGNE
DE SENSIBILISATION PUBLIQUE
Committee
discussion focused on procedural issues, including a point of order from
Councillor S. Little about this item being on the agenda when the public
education campaign has already been approved by City Council and a Motion to
refer the item back to staff from Councillor D. Deans.
The
Committee Chair, A. Munter ruled that the Committee could discuss the item and
asked for input from three public delegations on process.
Frances McInnes, representing the Health Dangers of the Urban Use of
Pesticides (HDUUP) asked that the matter be
considered at this time, to ensure the Health Department gets funding and there
are no more delays.
Don MacLean, representing the Health Dangers of the Urban of
Pesticides Group, asked that the matter be dealt
with presently. He gave a written
submission which is on file with the Coordinator.
Thom Bourne, representing Nutri-Lawn,
expressed interest in dealing with the item at this time. He also inquired about the status of HDUUP.
After
further deliberations, the Committee considered the following:
Moved
by D. Deans
That this item be referred to staff with a report back as part of
the workplan strategy.
CARRIED, as amended
4.
TEACCREDITATION
POLICIES – PUBLIC HEALTH
RÈGLEMENTS
D’ACCRÉDITATION – SANTÉ PUBLIQUE
ACS2003-PEO-HEA-0001
That the Health, Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend
Council approved the policies attached.
CARRIED
INFORMATION PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED
INFORMATION DISTRIBUÉE ANTÉRIEUREMENT
A.
aPPOINTMENT OF RESERVE MEMBERS
NOMINATIONS DE
MEMBRES SUPPLÉANTS
ADJOURNMENT
LEVÉE DE LA SEANCE
The meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m.
Original signed by M. J. Beauregard Original
signed by Councillor A. Munter
_____________________________ ________________________________
Coordinator Chair
