Following up - Tenancy, Uncertainty, Fear and Social Cleansing
Friday, 14. November 2008, 01:11:52
It was roughly a year ago that with much haste a building a block away from mine was closed and the tenants marched out without even a chance to collect belongings. Why? Well apparently the building was not up to health and safety (leaks and mold). That of course describes a great many of the lower rental units in East Vancouver and probably much of the rest of Vancouver as well. It isn't hard to rent a sub standard unit when people are desperate for a dry place to spend their days and nights, in some safety and with some privacy.
Along with many of my fellow renters spend some time in terror of having the same done to us. Our landlord spent a little more time making sure it was at least cosmetically acceptable. Our landlord also tried what he could to get illegal rent increases out of us. I've lived here ten years and I am paying less than new renters. Mind you, the landlord did not need to spend much on paint or carpeting compared to units turning over annually with plenty of damages. Our neighbours complained we were a haven for drugs and prostitution. I am sure they'd rather have us gentrified and stratified.
The building which was closed, we were told would be repaired and reopened, someone even said the former tenants would be able to move right back in. Not a thing has been done. I took my camera there today and snapped these photos, the building a whole year later. Uninhabited except by one lone security guard, and, according to the sign, his dog. More than eighty units, where once over 100 people with low incomes, including disabled and elderly uprooted from their home, their community. Taken away was their shelter, their sense of security, their privacy. So much for reasonable enjoyment and security where you pay your rent. No notice had been given. How do you regain your feeling of security after a life event such as that?
*as it silently sits - no sign of progress - 2100 block Pandora Street Vancouver BC*
How hard could it have been to repair the damage and move everyone back in? Our building had it's roof repaired without anyone having to move out. Ironically across the alley from this building today as I was taking these photos was another building of about the same age but even shabbier, still occupied, covered by a blue tarped and partially gutted to make repairs. NO big hoopla moving everyone out and into the streets, Instead the building has a temporary fence around it and one security guard, the lights still work, so utilities re still being paid. More than eighty units enough to house at least 100 people and pets. Correct me if I am wrong, but we need the housing space.
*this building still occupied, despite being in same shape, if not worse - 2100 block Triumph Street Vancouver BC*
Instead of repairing this building everyone is being led down the path of considering that SROs are the answer. Probably because the city owns so many of them. Are SROs housing? Not in my mind. Shared bathrooms among people many of whom are quite seriously ill with communicable diseases (Hepatitis, Tuberculosis, Pneumonia, etc.), the lack of privacy, lack of space, lack of being able to furnish and personalise, lack of security, unable to cook, entertain - this is not living. Those with addictions need proper services, first deal with the addiction then housing, but while dealing with the addiction they too need to be housed. I just wonder what wisdom decided moving may of the city's poorer senior population into a neighbourhood where they make ideal victims for mugging and other small crimes.
Until people are given some dignity and privacy they cannot recover and become once again part of a functioning community SROs are not the answer. We need more rental units at lower cost build rental housing, good housing have part at market value and the rest at market value but subsidised, no one need know who is paying what so all dignity is preserved. SROs are a step back to the time of forced labour and poorhouses. This is a wealthy country, we can do better than that. Get rid of homelessness, stop the terror among the vulnerable, one step away from homelessness, especially among those with low incomes or small pensions such as seniors and the disabled. We need more liveable units, not SROs.
So when you vote this coming Saturday consider if this is likely to change in a way that favours not just the few who can afford to party all during the Olympics but also the common many who is under uncommon pressure to hang onto a safe decent little life.
It is simplistic to assume people with little money would be more troublesome as neighbours. It is also shortsighted if we would not recognize that living in poverty where there is no comfort no feeling of "enough" - enough food, security, health, love, respect - without the help of one's neighbours how can that ever be overcome? There can be no era of peace without the elimination of crushing poverty, so if one wants to keep all the goodies without finding a way to help one's neighbours you have sealed your own fate.
As for the specifics, I don't own a home, never have. I don't own a car, I have no dishwasher, washer, dryer. Until I was disabled I worked, frequently at more than one job, I did volunteer work, I ran for public office, raised kids, kids who not once were in trouble with the law. I have never been arrested. I don't get drunk, don't smoke - anything, but I do live in the poor neighbourhood and my neighbors own their house, but I haven't caused them grief. The attitudes toward "us" who live in these low rent building, has hurt me, and doubtless all of us on the lower rungs, very much.
Most of the people causing all the grief are not poor, but for them the poor make a good shield, easier to terrorize the poor, after all who will listen and help them fight back? Among the poor count the disabled, the widowed, elderly, single parent, couples just starting out and students.
So tell me, where should these people be allowed to live in your world? Poor houses with barbed wire to keep them away from your precious housing? If people commit crimes your taxes and mine go to pay for police. Call them, get the criminals off the street, but just yet it is not against the law to be poor, destitute. Mind you all sorts of laws have been put on the books to make life as miserable as possible for those who've lost everything and ended up homeless, vagrancy, street vending.
It is against the law to be vagrant, but yet no suitable homes are being built nor is there a way to assure they can ever afford it. Fines are levied for begging, but welfare cheques need to be mailed to an address, and if you haven't got one...? Is it humane to allow a person a bed but shoo them out early in the morning. Dogs at the SPCA are treated with more kindness.
That infernal NIMBY (not in my back yard) attitude must change. Poverty is not a crime and not a disease, it is not catching. That empty building is an eyesore and getting worse by the day and is a monument to what does not get done when it comes to creating actual homes for those who need it. For the love of all that is good and kind do not again vote for the same lame lot that have let this all go on for far too long. If you want a city to truly be proud of find someone with courage to make changes, take a chance on someone other than the usual big boys club. Take and interest and don't vote out of habit, vote because you truly give a damn.
Along with many of my fellow renters spend some time in terror of having the same done to us. Our landlord spent a little more time making sure it was at least cosmetically acceptable. Our landlord also tried what he could to get illegal rent increases out of us. I've lived here ten years and I am paying less than new renters. Mind you, the landlord did not need to spend much on paint or carpeting compared to units turning over annually with plenty of damages. Our neighbours complained we were a haven for drugs and prostitution. I am sure they'd rather have us gentrified and stratified.
The building which was closed, we were told would be repaired and reopened, someone even said the former tenants would be able to move right back in. Not a thing has been done. I took my camera there today and snapped these photos, the building a whole year later. Uninhabited except by one lone security guard, and, according to the sign, his dog. More than eighty units, where once over 100 people with low incomes, including disabled and elderly uprooted from their home, their community. Taken away was their shelter, their sense of security, their privacy. So much for reasonable enjoyment and security where you pay your rent. No notice had been given. How do you regain your feeling of security after a life event such as that?
*as it silently sits - no sign of progress - 2100 block Pandora Street Vancouver BC*
How hard could it have been to repair the damage and move everyone back in? Our building had it's roof repaired without anyone having to move out. Ironically across the alley from this building today as I was taking these photos was another building of about the same age but even shabbier, still occupied, covered by a blue tarped and partially gutted to make repairs. NO big hoopla moving everyone out and into the streets, Instead the building has a temporary fence around it and one security guard, the lights still work, so utilities re still being paid. More than eighty units enough to house at least 100 people and pets. Correct me if I am wrong, but we need the housing space.
*this building still occupied, despite being in same shape, if not worse - 2100 block Triumph Street Vancouver BC*
Instead of repairing this building everyone is being led down the path of considering that SROs are the answer. Probably because the city owns so many of them. Are SROs housing? Not in my mind. Shared bathrooms among people many of whom are quite seriously ill with communicable diseases (Hepatitis, Tuberculosis, Pneumonia, etc.), the lack of privacy, lack of space, lack of being able to furnish and personalise, lack of security, unable to cook, entertain - this is not living. Those with addictions need proper services, first deal with the addiction then housing, but while dealing with the addiction they too need to be housed. I just wonder what wisdom decided moving may of the city's poorer senior population into a neighbourhood where they make ideal victims for mugging and other small crimes.
Until people are given some dignity and privacy they cannot recover and become once again part of a functioning community SROs are not the answer. We need more rental units at lower cost build rental housing, good housing have part at market value and the rest at market value but subsidised, no one need know who is paying what so all dignity is preserved. SROs are a step back to the time of forced labour and poorhouses. This is a wealthy country, we can do better than that. Get rid of homelessness, stop the terror among the vulnerable, one step away from homelessness, especially among those with low incomes or small pensions such as seniors and the disabled. We need more liveable units, not SROs.
So when you vote this coming Saturday consider if this is likely to change in a way that favours not just the few who can afford to party all during the Olympics but also the common many who is under uncommon pressure to hang onto a safe decent little life.
It is simplistic to assume people with little money would be more troublesome as neighbours. It is also shortsighted if we would not recognize that living in poverty where there is no comfort no feeling of "enough" - enough food, security, health, love, respect - without the help of one's neighbours how can that ever be overcome? There can be no era of peace without the elimination of crushing poverty, so if one wants to keep all the goodies without finding a way to help one's neighbours you have sealed your own fate.
As for the specifics, I don't own a home, never have. I don't own a car, I have no dishwasher, washer, dryer. Until I was disabled I worked, frequently at more than one job, I did volunteer work, I ran for public office, raised kids, kids who not once were in trouble with the law. I have never been arrested. I don't get drunk, don't smoke - anything, but I do live in the poor neighbourhood and my neighbors own their house, but I haven't caused them grief. The attitudes toward "us" who live in these low rent building, has hurt me, and doubtless all of us on the lower rungs, very much.
Most of the people causing all the grief are not poor, but for them the poor make a good shield, easier to terrorize the poor, after all who will listen and help them fight back? Among the poor count the disabled, the widowed, elderly, single parent, couples just starting out and students.
So tell me, where should these people be allowed to live in your world? Poor houses with barbed wire to keep them away from your precious housing? If people commit crimes your taxes and mine go to pay for police. Call them, get the criminals off the street, but just yet it is not against the law to be poor, destitute. Mind you all sorts of laws have been put on the books to make life as miserable as possible for those who've lost everything and ended up homeless, vagrancy, street vending.
It is against the law to be vagrant, but yet no suitable homes are being built nor is there a way to assure they can ever afford it. Fines are levied for begging, but welfare cheques need to be mailed to an address, and if you haven't got one...? Is it humane to allow a person a bed but shoo them out early in the morning. Dogs at the SPCA are treated with more kindness.
That infernal NIMBY (not in my back yard) attitude must change. Poverty is not a crime and not a disease, it is not catching. That empty building is an eyesore and getting worse by the day and is a monument to what does not get done when it comes to creating actual homes for those who need it. For the love of all that is good and kind do not again vote for the same lame lot that have let this all go on for far too long. If you want a city to truly be proud of find someone with courage to make changes, take a chance on someone other than the usual big boys club. Take and interest and don't vote out of habit, vote because you truly give a damn.
(0%)
WIDGETIZE