At the City of Duncan Committee of the Whole meeting on 1 October 2018, a Motion was put on the Agenda by Councillor Roger Bruce which advocated spending up to $10,000 to purchase or rent a second hand shipping container which had been converted into temporary emergency shelter for the City of Campbell River and transport this unit to Duncan. The conversion of this shipping container was done by a Langley based company called Shadow Lines. This converted shipping container is owned by the City of Campbell River and was used by the City of Campbell River as a temporary emergency shelter for the homeless during the winters of 2013-14 and 2014-15.
That staff be directed to contact Municipality of North Cowichan, Cowichan Valley Regional District and Cowichan Tribes with an invitation to help acquire a Mobile Shelter to help those most vulnerable;
And That staff be directed to contact Campbell River and buy, rent or borrow their extra mobile shelter and have it transported to the Valley immediately;
And That, if funds are needed, the City will allocate up to $10,000 at this time;
And That, with the permission of the United Church, the mobile shelter will be located in the Duncan United Church parking lot and run by the United Church until a suitable location can be determined.”
The photo below shows what this converted shipping container looked like in Campbell River in 2013.
Discussion of this Motion at the Duncan Committee of the Whole meeting on 1 October 2018 included the following:
City of Duncan CAO Peter de Verteuil advised the Committee that this converted container unit was in disrepair and would require an estimated $30,000 worth of repairs to be put into serviceable condition.;
Councillor Roger Bruce said this container would only be a temporary solution and that these containers are used to house loggers and miners in B.C. logging and mining camps [Note: I don’t think Councillor Bruce has been anywhere near a logging or mining camp recently if he thinks this converted shipping container is typical of camp accommodation for BC loggers and miners.]
Mayor Phil Kent said this unit was definitely not typical of accommodation used in BC Logging and mining camps, as Councillor Bruce had stated. {note: Mayor Kent is correct is saying that]. Mayor Kent also wanted to know more about the history of Campbell River’s experiences with this unit, noting that the City of Campbell River is not using the unit as shelter at this time;
Duncan United Church Minister Keith Simmonds addressed the meeting saying that Duncan United Church is not able to accommodate this container being placed on its grounds. Rev. Simmonds said the Duncan United Church does not have shower facilities or sufficient washrooms facilities to accommodate this unit being placed on its grounds and that Duncan United Church Community Outreach facilities are already stretched to their limit and Duncan United Church does not have the resources to handle this unit being placed on its grounds. Rev. Simmonds also highlighted the current condition of this converted container, saying the towing hitch was broken and the interior was contaminated with mould. Rev. Simmonds was also concerned that residents living near Duncan United Church would not react favourably to this proposal, which would negatively affect the good relationship Duncan United Church has with its neighbours.
Duncan United Church Minister Keith Simmonds also noted that BC Housing is not happy with the idea of housing people in converted shipping containers.
Three other members of the public, including one person who is currently homeless, addressed the meeting; their comments were unanimously against this Motion.
This Motion was defeated on a vote by the Committee of the Whole. I agree with the Committee’s decision.
My comments: this Motion was not adequately researched before being presented.
The Campbell River Mirror has stated in various prior articles that this unit cost $10,000 per month in staffing costs. There is nothing in the Motion which addresses the costs of staffing this unit;
City of Duncan staff reported that the unit was currently inoperable and required approximately $30,000 worth of work to make it serviceable. Could this fact not have been determined by a simple phone call to the City of Campbell River prior to the Notice of Motion being presented on 7 September 2018, let alone prior to the Committee of the Whole meeting on 1 October 2018.
In short, I think this Motion was ill considered and inadequately researched prior to being presented. The need for a temporary emergency shelter is well known. This Motion did nothing to address this pressing problem; instead it presented a completely unviable and unworkable proposal which simply diverted resources and attention away from other potentially viable and workable solutions.
Mark Anderson – candidate for City of Duncan Council – 3 October 2018
As I have campaigned door to door around Duncan, voters have told me about a number of issues I was completely unaware of.
One such issue has been brought to my attention by a number of seniors and by several people who use wheelchairs. This particular issue involves the difficulties and potential safety issues posed to seniors and those with disabilities by several sidewalks in downtown Duncan which have a pronounced slope toward the curb and road. The sidewalks most often mentioned as examples of this are on Jubilee Street between Government Street and Ingram Street.
The photo below shows a senior whom I asked about this problem. He told me the slope on the Jubilee Street sidewalk between Government Street and Kenneth Street was definitely noticeable and presented very real problems for people like himself who use canes to walk. He agreed to demonstrate the problem; in the photo below note how his right foot has a pronounced downward angle sloping toward the curb.
Sloped sidewalk on the west side of Jubilee Street in downtown Duncan. Note the downward sloping angle of this senior’s right foot. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
I have to admit that as an able bodied person I have never noticed this problem before. I often walk my dogs along this section of Jubilee Street and have never noticed the sloping sidewalks but they are very real problems for seniors who are unsteady on their feet or people with mobility issues.
Here are some other examples of sloping sidewalks on Jubilee Street.
Sloped sidewalk on the east side of Jubilee Street in downtown Duncan. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)Sloped sidewalk on the west side of Jubilee Street, between Kenneth Street and Ingram Street, in downtown Duncan. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)Sloped sidewalk on the west side of Jubilee Street near Duncan United Church, between Kenneth Street and Ingram Street, in downtown Duncan. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Jubilee Street is used by many seniors. There is an apartment building catering to seniors at the corner of Jubilee Street and Kenneth Street. There are also two seniors’ residences, Wedgwood and Sherwood, a few blocks east on the opposite side of Government Street, and for Wedgwood and Sherwood residents the first pedestrian controlled crosswalk across Government Street into downtown Duncan is at Jubilee Street and these sloped sidewalks begin immediately after the Government Street crosswalk.
The pedestrian controlled crosswalk across Government Street at Jubilee Street. This is the primary crosswalk into downtown Duncan for the seniors residences at Sherwood House and Wedgwood House, visible in center of this photo (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
With the large number of seniors residing in Duncan, as well as for the disabled residents of Duncan, this is definitely a problem the new Duncan Council should be looking at.
Mark Anderson – 2 October 2018
Would you like to leave a comment or question about anything on this post?
As I campaign door to door for Duncan City Council, one of the questions I am most frequently asked is, “How would you have voted on the temporary Emergecy Women’s Shelter if you had been on Duncan City Council?”
540 Cairnsmore Street. This former school building was the proposed site of a temporary Emergency Women’s Shelter until City of Duncan Council voted against that plan on 17 September 2018 (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
My answer is that I would have voted against the proposal, as the majority of Duncan City Council did on 17 September. My reasons are explained below, but first, some background information about this issue:
I completely understand the need for an Emergency Women’s Shelter. I spent my childhood in a home with an alcoholic father who had no hesitation in using his fists on my mother. So I have first hand experience with this issue and with the need for an Emergency Women’s Shelter.
But while there is a definite need for an Emergency Women’s Shelter in the Cowichan Valley, I think that 540 Cairnsmore Street is simply the wrong location for this kind of facility.
First, there is a day care on the adjacent property to the east. I do not believe that an Emergency Shelter should be located immediately adjacent to an established day care facility.
To illustrate the proximity of this day care facility to 540 Cairnsmore Street, here is a Google Street view image of 540 Cairnsmore Street and the adjacent daycare facility:
Here are two photos showing the proximity of the adjacent day care facility to 540 Cairnsmore Street.
540 Cairnsmore Street. This former school building was the proposed site of a temporary Emergency Women’s Shelter until City of Duncan Council voted against that plan on 17 September 2018. This photo shows the proximity of a day care center in the adjacent building (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)540 Cairnsmore Street. This former school building was the proposed site of a temporary Emergency Women’s Shelter until City of Duncan Council voted against that plan on 17 September 2018. This photo shows the proximity of a day care center in the adjacent building (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Directly across Cairnsmore Street from 540 Cairnsmore Street is Duncan Elementary School and two buildings on the Duncan Elementary School grounds which are currently being used to deliver adult education programs. Duncan Elementary School is currently being used as School Board offices but the clientele for these adult education programs on the Duncan Elementary School grounds are often people with young children, who are typically sent to day care in the day care facility immediately adjacent to 540 Cairnsmore Street while their parents are attending adult education courses.
The people using these adult education programs are frequently people who are trying to get themselves out of difficult, often addiction related, situations and they need a safe environment and all the support they can get to accomplish their education courses and goals. i don’t believe we should be placing an Emergency Women’s Shelter in their midst given the high probability of the Emergency Women’s Shelter attracting people actively involved in the same issues and situations many of these adult education clients are actively trying to get themselves, and their families, out of.
Here are some photos of Duncan Elementary School and the adult education buildings on its grounds:
Duncan Elementary School is directly across Cairnsmore Street from 540 Cairnsmore Street, which was the proposed site of a temporary Emergency Women’s Shelter until City of Duncan Council voted against that plan on 17 September 2018. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)This building on the Duncan Elementary School grounds is directly across Cairnsmore Street from 540 Cairnsmore Street, which was the proposed site of a temporary Emergency Women’s Shelter until City of Duncan Council voted against that plan on 17 September 2018. This building is used for adult education programs. Many users of this facility have young children, as indicated by the playground adjacent to the building (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
So while there is a definite need for an Emergency Women’s Shelter in the Cowichan Valley, this building at 540 Cairnsmore Street is simply the wrong location for it.
Perhaps a better solution would be for the City of Duncan, the Municipality of North Cowichan, Cowichan Tribes and the CVRD to work collaboratively on finding a location for an Emergency Women’s Shelter in the Cowichan Valley that all parties can live with.
If elected I will be advocating doing that as soon as possible.
Mark Anderson – 24 September 2018
Would you like to leave a comment or question about anything on this post?
A secure Sharps Disposal box in Duncan’s Centennial Park (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
But while this program undoubtedly has beneficial effects in preventing or reducing diseases and infections which can be transmitted among intravenous drug users through sharing or re-using needles, the fact remains that many of the needles (commonly known as “sharps”) distributed locally to intravenous drug users through this program are not returned to VIHA or to the Needle Exchange for safe disposal.
Instead they are far too often being discarded on public streets and in public spaces where they present a public health hazard.
I think the City of Duncan needs to contact VIHA to discuss solutions to this problem or, at the very least, ways to reduce the number of used needles and syringes discarded on Duncan streets and public spaces. Any contact with VIHA would necessarily need to be done in cooperation with the CVRD and the Municipality of North Cowichan.
There are already efforts to collect these used needles and syringes. The Needle Exchange on Trunk Road is one part of these efforts.
Another example involves secure Sharps Disposal boxes, like the one on the photo at left taken in Duncan’s Centennial Park, into which used needles can be safely deposited.
The Needle Exchange in Duncan hands out these “Contaminated Sharps” containers free of charge. The containers are made of sturdy plastic and hold 10 used sharps. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
The Needle Exchange also hands out portable sharps disposal containers, made of heavy duty plastic, which hold 10 used needles/syringes. A photo of a “Contaminated Sharps” container appears on the left.
The Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team recovered over 4400 sharps from local streets and public spaces in the month of August 2018 alone. While I commend the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team for removing these 4400 used sharps from public spaces, the very fact that it did so illustrates the nature and extent of the problem.
One of the first stops was the park at the rear of the Cowichan Aquatic Center at 2653 James Street. Alongside an outdoor skate park immediately north of, and adjacent to, the Cowichan Aquatic Center parking lot we came across a site with discarded needles and other drug related refuse. The photo below shows the location of the site in relation to the Cowichan Aquatic Center and its parking lot.
During a walk with the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team, we came across this drug use refuse left outdoors in a local park next to the Cowichan Aquatic Centre (photo by Duncan Taxpayers)
We then went a few blocks west to a site on Duncan Street between James Street and Beverley Street. The three photos below show this site., which is near, and across Duncan Street from, the North Cowichan Fire Department South End Fire Hall at 5851 Duncan Street.
A Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member at a drug activity site off Duncan Street between James Street and Beverley Street (photo by Duncan Taxpayers)
Note that the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member shown in the photo is going into this site equipped with limited safety equipment; basically a pair of steel toed boots with a metal shank in the sole, a pair of gloves and a device with a long handle for picking up discarded needles and other items. He was working on his own and he told me that sites like this one are considered Hazardous Waste sites.
I was quite surprised to see a Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member, working on his own, going into Hazardous Waste sites with very limited safety equipment. During my time working for a Crown corporation I served as an elected union rep and was involved in WorkSafeBC issues and a variety of workplace safety incidents and concerns. I know from personal involvement in unions and WorkSafeBC issues that a union would not tolerate workers going into Hazardous Waste sites, alone and without adequate protective equipment. Nor would WorkSafeBC. But that is what is happening here with workers under contract to VIHA.
A Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member at a drug activity site off Duncan Street between James Street and Beverley Street (photo by Duncan Taxpayers)
The photo below shows some of the drug related refuse at this site. The blue plastic vials contained distilled water used to mix a heroin solution. The orange wrappers contained powdered Vitamin C which is mixed with the heroin solution as an anti-coagulant. These items are handed out to intravenous drug users by the Needle Exchange in Duncan.
Some of the refuse encountered by the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member at a drug activity site off Duncan Street between James Street and Beverley Street (photo by Duncan Taxpayers)
After spending some time patrolling various sites in Duncan, we went onto Cowichan Tribes land and walked along the E&N Railway track between Trunk Road and Allenby Road. There are several encampments along this section of the E&N Railway track like the ones shown in the photos below.
A site on Cowichan Tribes land patrolled regularly by the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)A site on Cowichan Tribes land patrolled regularly by the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)A site on Cowichan Tribes land patrolled regularly by the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
The photo below shows the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member I was accompanying investigating another site on Cowichan Tribes land near the E&N railway track.
A Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team member checks a site on Cowichan Tribes land patrolled regularly by the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
It seems to me that there are some definite problems with this. The Vancouver Island Health Authority (VIHA) has a program to distribute sterile needles free of charge to intravenous drug users as a way of harm reduction. This makes sense.
But there doesn’t not seem to be an adequate plan to get these needles back again. Instead these needles are ending up being discarded on public streets and in public spaces.
The Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team picked up 4400 discarded sharps from local streets and public spaces in August 2018 alone. But while that is a commendable effort the fact that there were at least 4400 discarded sharps on public streets and public spaces illustrates the fact that there is a serious problem with discarded needles in public spaces.
VIHA provides financial support for the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team. The Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team members are going out to collect these discarded needles with little in the way of protective equipment. They are going into places which would typically be considered HazMat sites without any HazMat protective gear.
I asked the member of the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team whom I accompanied what he thought some solutions might be. His first response was that the most effective solution might be to start a program similar to a bottle depot which pays the intravenous drug users a small fee, say 5 cents, for each sharp they turn in to the Needle Exchange.
That makes some sense to me. People collect bottles and cans to return to the Bottle Depot for 5 cents per bottle or can so there could be a similar kind of program for sharps. But then what would happen if children started going out to look for sharps in order to collect cash for their return? That would create some unwanted public health and safety concerns.
But the bottom line is that the current VIHA harm reduction program is handing out free syringes to intravenous drug users and many of those needles are not being returned to VIHA for disposal. Instead they are winding up discarded on city streets where they pose the potential for causing harm to others. In August 2018 the Warmland Sharps Pick Up Team picked up over 4400 discarded sharps from local streets.
I think Duncan and other municipalities really need to have some serious discussions with VIHA about the problem of discarded sharps on local streets and how to reduce the problem.
Mark Anderson – Candidate for Duncan Council – 22 September 2018
Update – 5 October 2018:
Since writing the above post, I contacted the City of Duncan about this issue and received the following answers. My questions and the City of Duncan staff answers appear below:
Q. Has the City of Duncan had contact with Vancouver Island Health Authority (VIHA) regarding their practice of providing free syringes to intravenous drug users and VIHA’s programs to collect those syringes for disposal after use? If so, when? Has VIHA made presentations, reports or correspondence to the City of Duncan regarding the issue of discarded used syringes? If so, when?
A. Yes, representatives from VIHA, Dr. Hasselback, has presented to the Committee of the Whole on the
overdose crisis, which included mention of the harm reduction practice of providing free needles, on April 4,
2016 (link to minutes; link to presentation ) On May 1, 2016, Dr. Hasselback also attended a closed
Committee of the Whole meeting. On June 5, 2017, Mayor Kent provided a verbal update on the Overdose
Prevention Site and Sharps (link to minutes).
Q. Has the City of Duncan made representations, recommendations or suggests to VIHA on the issue of discarded syringes, collection of discarded/used syringes or related matters? Are any such communications between VIHA and the City of Duncan available to the public?
A. Yes, on June 6 correspondence was sent to VIHA, the following is an excerpt regarding discarded syringes:
“On behalf of Council, staff, and our community, I am writing this letter to apprise you of a situation, that
over the past year, has become a huge problem for the City of Duncan and surrounding area. I am
speaking of the proliferation of needles being discarded throughout our area. It is felt that part of the
cause is the manner in which needles are being distributed to drug users by the Vancouver Island health
Authority. These needles are being handed out in large numbers by the Margaret Moss Health Unit,
Duncan-Drug & Alcohol Counselling Services Clinic, Warmland Shelter, the Central Vancouver Island Harm
Reduction Services (CVIHRS – NARSF), the Duncan – MHSU Office, the Duncan ACT office, and Ts’ewulhtun
Health Centre, with no programs to encourage the self return of needles by users.
We understand from speaking with the various agencies that collectively approximately 10,000 needles
are being distributed each month in our area alone. Many of those used needles are being discarded in
the City’s parks, tossed into public washroom feminine hygiene products receptacles, eaves troughs river
banks, and on property owned by businesses and residents. Council is extremely concerned for the safety
of its employees, citizens, and particularly the children. ”
The City received a response from VIHA on June 27, which included the following:
“Reducing the number of inappropriately discarded sharps, and collecting and safely disposing of sharps is
a shared responsibility between health care services, community agencies, local government and
substance users. Island Health has been working, and continues to work with, all of these stakeholders to
strengthen sharps disposal processes. This includes a new contract with the Cowichan Valley Branch of
the Canadian Mental Health Association for sharps collection seven days per week for an initial period of
six months. This service will be in place before the end of June and is in addition to other sharps collection
activities in the Cowichan Valley, including designated drop-off locations, the installation of disposal units in targeted areas, and sweeps around the Warmlands facility.
These collection activities complement ongoing programs and awareness activities that encourage users
to collect and return sharps. This includes the provision of purpose-designed sharps disposal containers
that are supplied with new sharps when they are distributed, and awareness information for users on
how to responsibly handle and dispose of used sharps. As a result of these actions, Island Health is
confident the vast majority of sharps that are handed out are collected and returned for safe disposal.”
Note: I do not share the confidence VIHA has expressed in the last sentence of this response. I think Cowichan Valley municipalities will have take a collaborative approach to VIHA about this situation.
Mark Anderson – Candidate for Duncan Council – 5 October 2018
Would you like to leave a comment or question about anything on this post?
Since November 2017 there have been two houses in Duncan on which the RCMP has executed search warrants for drug related offences and which have been found to have significant drug related refuse inside the houses and outside on the surrounding property. These houses are: 454 Garden Street, on which a search warrant was executed on November 2017, and a house in the 1000 block of Trunk Road, on which a search warrant was executed on 5 September 2018.
Finally, on 29 March 2018, four months after the RCMP search warrant was executed on 454 Garden Street in November 2017, the City of Duncan retained a hazardous materials remediation contractor, Lakeside Property Maintenance, to clean up the exterior of 454 Garden Street.
I spoke with the owner of Lakeside Property Maintenance who told me that the company had employed a crew of five people wearing full hazardous material protective equipment to carry out the work on the exterior and grounds of 454 Garden Street. Lakeside Property Maintenance removed 5 five gallon pails full of used syringes from 454 Garden Street along with 30-40 cubic yards of other drug related refuse.
The $12,000 cost of the clean up has been charged to the property owner through the City of Duncan property taxes on the property. As of 18 September 2018 the City of Duncan has not been reimbursed for the clean up costs.
But the important issue here is about public health and safety. A hazardous waste site at 454 Garden Street near downtown Duncan, containing enough discarded used syringes to fill 5 five gallon pails, along with 30-40 cubic yards of other drug related refuse, was left unremediated for four months before the City of Duncan was able to retain a private contractor to clean it up.
Current City of Duncan Bylaws did not give the City of Duncan the authority to immediately clean up the site if the owner was unable, reluctant or unwilling to do so.
Clearly the City of Duncan needs a new Bylaw, or Bylaws, to allow the City to immediately clean up properties which have become drug related hazardous waste site. Allowing a hazardous waste site, like 454 Garden Street, to go unremediated for four months is simply unacceptable.
As you can see, many of these Bylaws were enacted in the period 2005-2007, when the problems were typically meth labs and marijuana grow ops. Many of these these Bylaws have been updated, or are in the process of being updated, to include fetanyl and opioids.
Paige McWilliam has told me that the City of Duncan has instructed its lawyers to research Controlled Substance Property Bylaws. But the City of Duncan does not currently have a Controlled Substances Property Bylaw.
If elected to City of Duncan Council, I will make it a priority of enact an effective City of Duncan Controlled Substance Property Bylaw as quickly as possible.
Note: Some sources have suggested that WorkSafeBC regulations cover these situations. They don’t!
I contacted WorkSafeBC about its procedure for designating a property as a Hazardous waste site and received the following response from Terence Little, the Director, of Corporate Communications.
Here is the WorkSafeBC response in its entirety:
“Hello Mr. Anderson,
Thank you for your request for information regarding sites that potentially contain hazardous materials. I have been in contact with our Prevention Division and received the following response to your question:
WorkSafeBC does not designate sites as HAZMAT sites. WorkSafeBC’s mandate is to enforce the Workers Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation (OHSR). Within those provisions are requirements for employers to ensure the health and safety of their workers by assessing the risks at worksites and employing appropriate measures to ensure workers are protected from those risks.
The OHSR requires employers to have a documented Exposure Control Plan, which includes procedures for assessing hazards, including the presence of hazardous substances, at a worksite. This may include requirements for testing materials or environments for hazardous substances. When worksites are contaminated with a hazardous material of substance, the employer is required to ensure that workers have the appropriate training, equipment, and procedures to protect them from that risk.
In terms of limiting access to a work location, this may be done by WorkSafeBC, police agencies, or other regulators, based on their authority and mandate. In situations where work processes present a risk of serious injury, illness, or death to workers, The Workers Compensation Act gives WorkSafeBC the authority to stop work and prohibit worker access to that work location. WorkSafeBC may do this if testing has revealed the presence of hazardous substance but the employer has not taken the necessary steps to protect workers from that hazard. WorkSafeBC would cordon off the location and place a placard at the location with the details and time limit of the order. Limiting worker access to a worksite in this manner is not equivalent to declaring the location a HAZMAT site.
I hope that answers your questions. Please let me know if I can assist further.
Regards, Terence.
Terence Little Director, Corporate Communications | 604.279.7666
6951 Westminster Hwy, Richmond, BC worksafebc.com”
CVRD logo on the front of the CVRD building on Ingram Street in downtown Duncan (photo by Duncan Taxpayers)Mark Anderson, (photo: Lexi Bainas, Cowichan Valley Citizen)
These questions are, specifically, whether to pass or reject CVRD Bylaw No. 4201and/or CVRD Bylaw No. 4202. There will be one Referendum question on each of these two questions.
I will be voting “No” on both these CVRD Referendum questions and my reasons are shown below.
“CVRD Bylaw No. 4202 – Drinking Water and Watershed Protection Service Establishment Bylaw, 2018“, will allow the CVRD to annually requisition up to the greater of $750,000 or an amount equal to the amount that could be raised by a property value tax of $0.045050 per $1,000 of net taxable value of land and improvements within the service area to establish a service for the purpose of drinking water and watershed protection within the Cowichan Valley Regional District.
Here is why I am against these two CVRD Referendum questions:
The CVRD Referendum question on housing (CVRD Bylaw No. 4201 – Service Establishment) is about raising $765,000, or possibly more, to give the Cowichan Housing Association for more studies and reports.
I don’t believe Bylaw 4201 will get a single unit of new housing built or get a single unit of new housing in existing structures.
The CVRD justifies this proposed tax, in part, by saying the Cowichan Housing Association will lobby senior levels of government for housing funds. But this can be accomplished for far less money.
One presenter at the CVRD Board meeting on this issue suggested that creating a CVRD staff position on housing issues could be created for far less money, approximately $125,00 as opposed to the $765,000 proposed in Bylaw No. 4201. That proposal made far more sense to me than what is being proposed in this CVRD Referendum question. A CVRD staff position would mean that the occupant of that position would be directly accountable to the CVRD Board, while the Cowichan Housing Association would be a non profit organization outside the CVRD administration.
Handling housing through a CVRD staff position would also mean that any funds collected by this proposed tax would remain on this CVRD books and under CVRD control. Turning these funds over the Cowichan Housing Association, as stated in the proposed Bylaw 4201, means the taxpayer funds collected are off the CVRD books and under the control of an non-profit organization outside the CVRD.
And lobbying the provincial government on housing could be accomplished by simply picking up a phone and calling our local M.L.A., Sonya Furstenau, who has the ear of government and who is very interested in housing issues. Lobbying the federal government could be done through our local M.P., Alistair MacGregor, who is also very interested in housing issues.
It would cost the CVRD nothing to pick up a phone to contact our local M.P. or M.L.A.
A common argument made in favour of Bylaw 4201 is that the CVRD needs to have a Housing Trust Fund similar to those maintained by other municipalities, such as the City of Victoria.
So I see no need for a new CVRD tax to raise $765,000 to simply give to the Cowichan Housing Association to create more studies and reports or to lobby the federal or provincial governments.
Apart from that, the CVRD is referring to this proposed new tax as a “financial contribution service.” Never trust any politician or bureaucrat who refers to proposed new taxes as a “financial contribution service.”
In short, this proposed new tax for housing will just produce more studies and reports; it will not produce any new housing. So I will be voting No on that Referendum question.
The water issue in proposed Bylaw No. 4202 is a bit different than the proposed housing Bylaw No. 4201. The CVRD currently has over 30 small water authorities running the water systems in small areas of the CVRD; Arbutus Ridge and Mill Bay are two examples among many.
A recent consultants’ report (the Innova Report) to the CVRD was quite scathing in its criticism of the current system of water governance in the CVRD.
Here is what the Innova Report had to say about current CVRD water governance:
“1.2. Governance
The current CVRD utility governance model and subdivision approving authorities do not support the
goals and objectives of elected officials, staff, and, most importantly, the utility users. It has become
extremely difficult to effectively manage the expectations of utility users through the current disjointed
model that essentially provides authority and leadership through the Electoral Area Services Committee.
It is also a challenge to manage growth without jurisdiction. There are two recommendations for changes
to governance in the CVRD:
Establish a Utility Commission – There should be strong consideration given to the creation of a commission candidate profile supporting professional industry experts, not specific community advocates. This would support the long-term goals of amalgamating water and wastewater utilities and ensuring that all new utilities are acceptable to overarching plans and objectives…..”
So the CVRD understandably wants to centralize control of CVRD water systems and resources under a centralized CVRD water governance authority. That actually makes some sense.
But the CVRD is trying to sell this proposed new authority to the public on the idea of combating the effects of climate change and global warming, safeguarding drinking water and protecting the watershed.
The CVRD Referendum question on Bylaw 4202 also proposes to tax the City of Duncan and Municipality of North Cowichan residents for this new water authority as well as CVRD residents. Duncan and the Municipality of North Cowichan already have their own water systems in place and have had those systems in place for decades.
So my reaction to this CVRD Referendum question is, “Why should Duncan and Municipality of North Cowichan residents be taxed by the CVRD to fund a new CVRD water authority for CVRD areas?”
I will be voting No on both the CVRD Referendum questions.
Update: 11 October 2018 – on City of Duncan Enforcement Efforts and Costs In Connection With 454 Garden Street.
454 Garden Street, Duncan on 31 July 2018, looking north east (photo: DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
The City of Duncan is having some serious issues with a property at 454 Garden Street. This house and property has been declared a “hazardous waste site” due to rampant drug use having taken place on the property.
In March and April 2018 the City of Duncan spent over $12,000 to have a local private hazardous waste contractor, Lakeside Property Maintenance, based in Lake Cowichan, remove used syringes and other drug related material from the house and yard at 454 Garden Street.
I spoke with the owner of Lakeside Property Maintenance, who told me that the work at 454 Garden Street was carried out over four days, 29 March 2018 and 2-4 April 2018, and involved a crew of five people wearing full hazardous material protective equipment. Lakeside Property Maintenance removed 5 five gallon pails full of used syringes from the property along with 30-40 cubic yards of other drug related refuse.
The $12,000 cost of the clean up has been charged to the property owner through the City of Duncan property taxes on the property. As of 5 September 2018 the City of Duncan has not been reimbursed for the clean up costs.
Here is a Google Street View image showing how this house at 454 Garden Street appeared in 2015:
I have asked the City of Duncan for information on the situation regarding 454 Garden Street but Paige McWilliam has told me I will need to submit a Freedom of Information request to get that information. I have submitted a Freedom of Information request for this information but the City of Duncan has until October 2018 to respond to the request. I will post the information released by the City of Duncan when I receive it.
In the meantime, here is some background to the current situation:
454 Garden Street was purchased by a Victoria based investor for $182,000 on 30 June 2015. It was then rented to tenants.
I do not know how many tenants rented 454 Garden Street after July 2015 but by the fall of 2017 the house had acquired a reputation in the surrounding neighbourhood as a “flop house” and what might commonly be referred to as a “crack house” where constant and rampant drug related activity was taking place. The City of Duncan and the local RCMP received numerous complaints from neighbours about the illegal activities taking place at 454 Garden Street.
On 26 November 2017 the Duncan/North Cowichan RCMP executed a search warrant at 454 Garden Street which resulted in the arrest of 15 people. I contacted the Duncan?North Cowichan RCMP to ask for details of the case but the RCMP advised me they cannot comment or release any information about the case due to privacy legislation.
But a Times-Colonist article about the search warrant execution, published 29 November 2017, quoted RCMP officers as saying the property “was littered with hundreds of needles and contaminated with fentanyl” and quoting City of Duncan Bylaw Enforcement Officer Garry Kerr as saying “the conditions of the house were the worst he’s seen since his time with the municipality.
“Nobody from the City of Duncan would enter that residence due to fear of contamination,” he said.”
The presence of fentanyl, used syringes and other drug refuse in the house and on the property meant it was a hazardous waste site and unfit for habitation. That required that WorksafeBC become involved in regulating the clean up of the site.
Between November 2017 and April 2018, the City of Duncan held many discussions with the owner of 454 Garden Street about cleaning up the site. These discussions were unsuccessful and did not lead to a clean up of the site.
In March 2018 the City of Duncan decided to clean up the site and retained Lakeside Property Maintenance, based in Lake Cowichan, to remove used syringes and other drug related material from the house and yard at 454 Garden Street. As noted above Lakeside Property Maintenance spent four days at the site with a crew of five removing five 5 gallon pails full of used syringes from the property along with 30-40 cubic yards of other drug related refuse.
This begs an obvious question: why was this site allowed to sit as an unremediated hazardous waste site between the RCMP raid on 26 November 2017 and 29 March 2018, when Lakeside Property Maintenance began cleaning up the property under contract to the City of Duncan?
The property was obviously a public health hazard during this time and I will be looking into why it was not cleaned up before that time. I will post what I found out about this. But I think the City of Duncan definitely needs a Controlled Substances Property Bylaw, modeled on other such Bylaws enacted by many other municipalities and districts in B.C.
Some Additional Background Information
Here is some additional information on 454 Garden Street [note: I will be adding more to this section in the next few weeks]:
Assessed Value (July 2017): $230,000; Land $175,000; Buildings $55,300
Assessed Value (July 2016): $202,500; Land $152,000; Buildings $50,500
The City of Duncan Bylaw Enforcement dealt with the drug issues on this property under Bylaw 3156, the Good Neighbour Bylaw, enacted in the summer of 2017.
Here are some City of Duncan documents leading up to enacting of the City of Duncan Bylaw 3156, Good Neighbour Bylaw:
Here are the City of Duncan statistics on Bylaw Enforcement efforts and Clean Up costs associated with 545 Garden Street. This information was released in response to my questions on 454 Garden Street:
City of Duncan statistics on costs and enforcement efforts on the property at 454 Garden Street (source: City of Duncan)City of Duncan statistics on costs and enforcement efforts on the property at 454 Garden Street (source: City of Duncan)
Would you like to leave a comment or question about anything on this post?
VIHA currently issues 6 month contracts for organizations to run the Needle Exchange. The current contract with the Canadian Mental Health Association expires in October 2018;
There are an estimated 200 intravenous drug users in Duncan and surrounding Cowichan Valley close to Duncan;
In the week prior to my visit, the Needle Exchange had an average of 69-70 separate visits per day. Note that the Needle Exchange only counts individual visits, not particular individuals. If one individual visited the Needle Exchange twice in one day it would be counted as two separate visits;
The Needle Exchange also functions as a safe injection site but not at the level of a “supervised consumption site” like Insite in Vancouver;
The Needle Exchange does not just exchange needles; it also hands out kits, free of charge, to drug users. Each kits contains supplies for five injections. An example of one of these kits is shown below:
An example of the drug use kits handed out, free of charge, by the Needle Exchange in Duncan. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Here are explanations of the items contained in each kit:
Disposable, Single Use 1 ml Syringes – each kit contains 5 x Disposable, Single Use 1 ml Syringes. typically used for injecting insulin. These syringes are also used for injecting heroin.
The kits handed out by the Duncan Needle Exchange include 5 x 1 ml single use, disposable insulin injection needles. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Vitamin C powder – 5 x 100 mg packets. When added to the heroin solution prior to injection, the Vitamin C apparently prevents the heroin solution from coagulating.
The kits handed out by the Duncan Needle Exchange include Vitamin C powder. When added to the heroin solution prior to injection, Vitamin C apparently prevents the heroin solution from coagulating. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Each kit contains one elastic band, used to wrap around the arm to bring up a vein prior to injecting heroin
An elastic band included in the kits handed out to drug users by the Needle Exchange in Duncan. Drug users wrap these around their arms to bring up veins in which to inject heroin. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Alcohol swabs – each kit contains 10 alcohol swabs, used to clean the skin at the injection site prior to injecting
Alcohol swabs are included in the kits handed out to drug users by the Needle Exchange in Duncan. Drug users use these to clean the skin at the area where they are planning to inject heroin. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Distilled Water – each kit contains five sealed vials of distilled water. Heroin is added to the distilled water and the solution is heated prior to injection
Vials of distilled water are included in the kits handed out to drug users by the Needle Exchange in Duncan. Drug users add heroin to the distilled water and heat up the solution prior to injecting. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Plastic containers for heating heroin solution – each kit contains 5 disposable plastic containers (at the bottom of the photo below) used to hold the heroin solution while it is being heated prior to injection.
Alcohol swabs (left), vials of distilled water (center) and containers to heat up heroin solution (bottom) are included in the kits handed out by the Duncan Needle Exchange (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
The Needle Exchange also hands out these sturdy plastic containers for used needles – Contaminated Sharps. Each container holds ten 1 ml insulin syringes. The containers are incinerated when full.
The Needle Exchange in Duncan hands out these “Contaminated Shhttp://www.duncantaxpayers.ca/wp-admin/edit-comments.phparps) containers free of charge. The containers are made of sturdy plastic. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Note: VIHA does not require drug users to return used syringes in order to get new, clean syringes. As a result there are a lot of used syringes discarded on streets, parks and public areas.
We will do a separate post on the Warmland Sharps Pickup Team which regularly patrols Duncan, Municipality of North Cowichan and Cowichan Tribes land to recover discarded syringes.
An incident in May involving the Cowichan Valley Regional District’s director for Cobble Hill has led to a public statement from the director.
The incident occurred on May 25 when Matteus Clement broke a door while forcing his way into a restricted area of the CVRD offices in Duncan.
Clement said in his statement that he went to the CVRD office after hours to collect a projector and other materials to facilitate a community meeting, but he found the door locked to the area where staff had left it for him.
He said that with an hour left before his meeting, and in his urgency, he shoved the door which broke.
“I immediately called our CAO, Brian Carruthers, to inform him and let him know that I would pay for the repair,” Clement said.
“I am sorry to have broken the door, it was not my intent. CVRD directors used to have access to the building after hours but after a security review a year ago, our CAO restricted the access to directors. The CVRD board is currently re-examining this policy.”
Jon Lefebure, chairman of the CVRD, declined further comment on the issue.
“It was discussed at an in-camera discussion at the CVRD so I’m not able to discuss it any further,” he said.
This story sounded very odd to us. We have seen the interior doors at the C.V.R.D. building on Ingram Street in downtown Duncan and they appear very solid. It seemed very unlikely to us that these doors would break when “shoved.”
Since the Cowichan Valley Citizen did not publish a follow up to its original 20 July article, we decided to follow up this story ourselves.
On 24 July 2018, we went to the CVRD building to ask whether we could see the door which had “broke” when “shoved” by C.V.R.D. Director Matteus Clement. The damage has been repaired but C.V.R.D. staff pointed out the repaired door, which is in a public area to the left of the Planning and Development desk in the main reception area on the first floor of the C.V.R.D. building.
Here are some photos we took at the C.V.R.D. building on 24 July 2018.
First, Director Matteus Clement would have to gain access to the C.V.R.D. building after hours. Here are the front and rear entrances to the C.V.R.D. building. Both are secured by substantial doors and both have electronic key card access. We are guessing that Director Matteus Clement has, or had, a key card which allowed him to enter through one of these doors on 25 May 2018. The Cowichan Valley Ciitizen story says Directors no longer have access to the building “after hours” so how did Director Clement get into the building “after-hours” through these locked doors?
Front Entrance Door to the C.V.R.D Building on Ingram Street (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)Rear Entrance Door to the C.V.R.D Building on Ingram Street (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Here are some photos of the interior door which Director Matteus Clement says “broke” after he “shoved” it. This door was identified to us by C.V.R.D. staff as being the one Director Clement damaged and it is located to the left of the Planning & Development counter in the main public reception area on the first floor of the C.V.R.D. building. In the photo below, the door damaged by Director Matteus Clement is on the left. Note that this is a strong and substantial solid door. We doubt that it could be broken by being “shoved” by one person.
The door damaged by Director Matteus Clement in May 2018 is on the left of the photo. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
The photos below show this door from another angle. Note that the door is controlled by a key card security system visible to the left of the door. Did Director Clement not have access to this door on his key card?
Note also the counter to the left of the door. Could C.V.R.D. staff not have left the projector for Director Clement on the counter. It is in a semi-secure area which cannot be accessed unless a person comes through the security controlled doors at the front or rear of the building.
The door damaged by Director Matteus Clement in May 2018 is in the center of this photo. (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)The door damaged by Director Matteus Clement in May 2018 is on the right. Could the CVRD not have left the projector on the counter to the left of the door? (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
After seeing this door for ourselves, we have some doubts about Director Matteus Clement’s version of events.
Director Matteus Clement is quoted as saying that “in his urgency, he shoved the door which broke.”
But this is a solid substantial door which separates a public reception area from the C.V.R.D. offices. We doubt this door could be “broken” by being “shoved” by one person.
The door is controlled by a programmable card key security system. Are C.V.R.D. Directors’ key cards programmed to deny them access to this area? If so, why would the C.V.R.D. staff be leaving a projector for Director Clements in a secure area to which he did not have access?
We also note that there is a counter to the left of the door. Could C.V.R.D. staff not simply leave the projector for Director Clements on this counter? To access the counter one has to gain access to the building through substantial exterior doors controlled by programmable key card security systems. So it is not as though the C.V.R.D. staff would be leaving the projector in a public access area where it could be readily stolen.
In short, we have some serious concerns about Director Matteus Clement’s version of the events of 25 May 2018. We think the C.V.R.D. owes taxpayers a far more detailed explanation than it is currently giving.
Would you like to leave a comment or question about anything in this post?
In June 2018 the crosswalk on Duncan Street in front of the Duncan Garage was painted with multi-coloured parallel stripes. We were curious about how much this cost the City of Duncan so we contacted Paige McWilliam at Duncan City Hall to find out.
Duncan Garage and “Rainbow Crosswalk” on Duncan Street, 3 July 2018 (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Paige McWilliam told us that “The Duncan Garage paid $5,597.90 [in June 2018] to have the rainbow cross-walk painted, which covered the entire cost of the project. The actual painting was done by an outside company.”
Here is what Paige McWilliam told us about the history of this project:
On 5 May 2017 the City of Duncan received a request from Duncan Garage Cafe and Bakery asking for this crosswalk to be painted. Here is a copy of the 5 May 2017 letter to the City of Duncan from Leela Heyward of the Duncan Garage Cafe and Bakery.
Letter from Duncan Garage to City of Duncan on 5 May 2017 requesting installation of “Rainbow” cross walk on Duncan Street (Courtesy of City of Duncan)
In response to this letter, the City of Duncan Council, at its meeting of 15 May 2017, asked for a staff report on “the costs and maintenance requirements for painting a rainbow crosswalk for Council’s consideration..” Here is the City of Duncan staff report on what City staff refers to as “Decorative Crosswalks”, presented to the Committee of the Whole on 5 June 2017 [note: we have done a separate image for each of the 3 pages in the report]:
City of Duncan, Decorative Crosswalks Report-5 June 2017, page 1City of Duncan, Decorative Crosswalks Report-5 June 2017, page 2City of Duncan, Decorative Crosswalks Report-5 June 2017, page 3
The cross walk on Duncan Street in front of Duncan Garage was painted in June 2018.
Paige McWilliam of the City of Duncan tells us that “The Duncan Garage paid $5,597.90 to have the rainbow cross-walk painted, which covered the entire cost of the project. The actual painting was done by an outside company.”
We will seek clarification from Paige McWilliam about whether the City of Duncan is responsible for future maintenance costs of this crosswalk or whether these costs are to be borne by Duncan Garage.
We are also seeking similar information from the Municipality of North Cowichan about the “Rainbow Crosswalk” installed on 16-17 July 2018 on James Street between Cowichan Secondary School and the Island Savings Centre. We have contacted the Municipality of North Cowichan about this but, as of this date, we have not received any response.
Rainbow crosswalk on James Street during installation, 17 July 2018 (photo by DuncanTaxpayers.ca)
Since we took the above photo on 17 July 2018 this crosswalk has been damaged. We will contact the Municipality of North Cowichan to find out whether the MNC is responsible for repairing this damage and, if so, how much it will cost.
Here are some more articles from the Cowichan Valley Citizen about this crosswalk on James Street:
