Letters, May 29

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 29/05/2024 (724 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Correction: In John Wiens’ May 24 op-ed “School funding formula a monumental challenge,” it was incorrectly indicated that the Reading Recovery program is a for-profit company. It is, in fact, a non-profit charitable organization. We regret the error.

Support for store staff

Re: Food Fare family’s vehicles torched (May 28)

This ongoing crime spree is nothing short of terrorism — call it what it is.

First, it was the assaults on employees and family. Now, emboldened by not getting caught, these individuals have resorted to arson.

It’s unnerving that the police have been unable to stop them. No wonder people in this city don’t feel safe anymore.

Al Yakimchuk

Winnipeg

I would like to encourage our community to rally around and support the Zeid family and their Food Fare store by making a point of shopping there, in view of the shoplifting they are dealing with at their store, and, particularly in view of the recent torching of their vehicles.

It would be a great loss in the community if they had to close their store because of these criminal acts.

Penny Douglas

Winnipeg

Resolve needed on church repair

In the May 25 Free Press, there is a perfect example of double standards in our city. On the same page we have two articles, the first about a historic church built in 1883, and the second one about a historic department store. The former building, Holy Trinity Church, needs $7 million in repairs, while the latter, the old downtown Bay, is to receive more than $90 million in federal government grants to refurbish it.

Anybody remember the phrase, “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander”? Should not Holy Trinity Church get the same treatment as the Bay? It is my opinion that these two buildings should be treated the same — not in getting the same amount of money, but both being treated as part of Winnipeg’s historic past.

In Europe, many buildings are centuries old and are being preserved because of their historical significance. I lived in a small market town in rural England which had a church built in the 1600s; a few miles to the south was the city of York with its magnificent York Minster (Cathedral) built in the 7th century. Both of these historic buildings have existed on grants because of their respective historical significance.

As stated in the Free Press, the architecture of Holy Trinity Church, both inside and out, is unique to Winnipeg, if not to the west. This fine example of 19th century church architecture should not be allowed to fall under the wrecker’s ball. If the parishioners can no longer afford to maintain it, the city should step up to the plate.

Many historic buildings downtown have been converted to city or provincial departments. For example, in 1971 the old Civic Auditorium became the Provincial Archives Building. Many other older buildings on the city and provincial historical list have been repurposed. Why not this one? With money from the city it could be a museum of downtown artifacts, or a department of the library, or…

All it needs is resolve on the part of the city (or province) not to let this valuable downtown addition disappear.

Richard Ditchburn

Winnipeg

The right thing to do

Re: Co-ordinated homeless camp cleanup project too little, too late for neighbour (May 24)

As a resident of the East Exchange District, I am bewildered by the comments of Michael Jack, the city’s chief administrative officer. He admits that “encampments are not a safe and healthy way for our population to be living,” yet as we begin the fifth summer of riverbank encampments in Fort Douglas Park, he calls the latest cleanup pilot project the city’s “last resort.”

Does a last resort not usually refer to a new or different solution for a problem? The city is offering nothing but a continuation of the five-year status quo of leaving the most vulnerable of all Winnipeg citizens, in desperate need of medical, mental health and drug addiction treatments, to live in squalor, exposed to the weather with no access to running water or showers or toilets. More frequent garbage collection does nothing to improve their living conditions or meet their basic human needs.

Over the last year and a half, we residents have pleaded with city officials to follow the lead of other Canadian cities that have fast-tracked (in months, not years) proven solutions to significantly reducing homelessness: “housing first” as in various transitional housing models, all accompanied by supervision and supports. In the absence of any apparent progress to date in this regard here in Winnipeg, surely a last resort should be, at the very least, a supervised encampment on a designated site in the city where water and electricity services are available and 24 hour support can be provided? The cost to the city would likely be less than leaving these vulnerable folks on the riverbank.

The disproportionate use of emergency services by homeless people — hospital emergencies, hospital stays (twice as long as the average), paramedics, firefighters, and police — is the explanation given for why a housing-first policy saves so much money. But apart from considerations of cost, it is the right thing to do for fellow human beings who are suffering and in need.

Colleen French

Winnipeg

A new strategy

Re: ‘We need to repair and build’ (May 23)

To avoid the repeat of the Lions Place social housing fiasco, where a building that was designed and used for social housing and would be self-sustaining through its accumulated equity, could be sold to private interests once the financing was satisfied and paid off, it is critical to do things differently moving forward.

For example, all private/public operating agreements for each project must clearly state at a minimum that: the purpose of the project is solely for social housing; that it is the intent of the operating agreement that the tenant rentals pay for the financing and any programs determined by the tenants of the social housing project; that the obligations of the designated title-holder of the property or its named non-profit successor organization are to continue past the satisfaction and retirement of the financing; and that all renovations and improvements be payable from the equity of the social housing project.

And these operating agreements must be registered as caveats/liens on the titles of all future public/private funded social housing projects.

Plus, the government must pass legislation grandfathering these terms for all existing social housing projects in the province that are the product of what are multi-government, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp.-backed, private/public partnerships, like Lions Place had been before it was sold to the private Main Street Equity.

There is still no word from the Lions Club regarding the intended disposition by them of the $22-million windfall they received from the sale. This was entirely the result of the retirement of the financing by residents’ rentals over almost 40 years, plus the market appreciation on the property.

This is truly a multimillion-dollar scandal, especially as non-profits are not allowed to accumulate profits under the Canada Revenue Agency and non-share, non-profit corporate legislation. The CMHC continues to have social housing program funding opportunities available. Non-profit is non-profit, and social housing must be maintained as non-profit for the good of our communities, not directed to the benefit of contractors and developers.

Victoria Lehman

Winnipeg