BUMBLING COSTS REHAB BEDS

There is no doubt council will recommend the controversial housing
project for drug addicted mentally ill people at 39th and Fraser
should go ahead. That will happen on Tuesday.

But what was also clear from speakers addressing council on the issue
last week was how poorly handled the whole process has been. There was
little of the explosive rhetoric that was everywhere during two
massive public meetings in October. But there was still a sense the
development will be approved without paying much attention to folks in
the neighbourhood who complain the project will aggravate an already
high crime rate.

Even neighbours who support the project, like Louise Seto, said they
were "appalled" by the lack of information provided to the community
and the apparent lack of respect for neighbourhood concerns.

If council concludes from this exercise that, as Mayor Larry Campbell
says repeatedly, the resistance to the project is a severe case of a
Not-In-My-Backyard syndrome, they have missed the point.

Vancouver's crime rate is not as severe as the opponents make out and
there is ample evidence that, in the long run, this development will
have little negative impact, if any, on the neighbourhood.

But the lack of planning by both the city and the Vancouver Coastal
Health Authority, which is funding the project along with the federal
government, was apparent from the outset.

If this project is an important treatment model of the city's Four
Pillars drug policy, the mayor was mute on the issue for far too long.

It was only when the neighbourhood erupted that the city and the
health authority finally reacted by providing more
information.

When that didn't seem to cool things down enough, the health authority
decided to cut the number of units from 39 to 30.

It was a gesture that angered all sides of the debate. Mark Smith, the
executive director of Triage, the organization that will operate the
project, says he prefers 39 units. He believes the health authority
was just throwing the community a bone because of the heat.
Christopher McHardy, an opponent of the project, agreed. He said
dropping nine units was just a PR move, one that wouldn't satisfy him
or other opponents.

If you doubt that decent, secure housing is an essential part of any
recovery program from mentally ill addicts, you only had to listen to
the eloquent and moving presentations by two young women Wednesday
night.

Donna Christensen is diagnosed with addiction and mental illness and
is now working on her masters degree in criminology at SFU. She also
owns her own home on the East Side. She made two points: people like
her are falsely portrayed as violent; and no one can succeed at
recovery without support. "Projects like this can save lives," she
said.

Lesley (who prefers her last name not be used) met Donna in a recovery
program. She suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, Type 2
bipolar disorder and is addicted to codeine and morphine. She pointed
out that people with problems like hers already live in the
neighbourhood. "But right now they are suffering in isolation and
silence, trapped in the horror of illness and addiction, untreated and
unable to access resources," she said. She sees recovery as an
opportunity, one that would be provided by the new housing
development.

Council and the health authority can learn from this exercise about
what not to do in the future and how to involve neighbourhoods in
these projects. Council should also realize that it would be
unfortunate if, because of the bumbling approach taken this time, nine
housing units are lost. The funding is there for 39, the need is
obvious and getting rid of them satisfies no one.