It was a battle of users versus use at a recent Woodlands County Council meeting about a supportive housing facility planned for Fort Assiniboine.

• 

On April 15, Praise Abraham, the founder and director of Bridge to Care, and two other organization members presented to Woodlands County Council about their plans to open a multi-unit, supportive housing facility at 19 State Avenue (the old Trident building) in Fort Assiniboine. Back in late 2020, the Municipal Planning Commission (MPC) approved the development, but a recent newspaper interview with Mr. Abraham confused some members of the council, resulting in the request for a meeting.

Bridge to Care is accredited through the Canadian Accreditation Council and is a non-profit healthcare organization. It provides support services to people of all ages, including seniors, children with disabilities, and individuals with developmental disabilities. They also offer transportation services to help clients reach care and work alongside Child and Family Services to help support children and their families and caregivers.

All professionals working at their facilities are licensed, hold active permits and experience. The facility in Fort Assiniboine will likely focus on children aged 10-17. Mr. Abraham stated that clients would come from around Alberta and that the children would stay onsite for six months to a year, depending on their needs. Roughly 16 clients would be at the 24/7 supervised facility at a time, employing 20-30 people.

Councillor Rennie wanted clarification on the kinds of children that would be staying. “I just want to be clear that these are people that have developmental disabilities. They are not people that have, I’m not even sure what the correct wording is, people that would have been in trouble with the law or who might have issues? I think everybody’s for helping people become stronger with any challenges they have, but I think some people are worried that we’re going to get kids that have maybe been in jail or have been in some kind of programs for discipline issues.” Diane Pyne with Bridge to Care responded that children who have had legal experiences could be part of their clientele but emphasized they were very low risk.

That seemed to be supported by Councillor McQueen and Mayor Burrows, who said that they had each spoken with RCMP members in communities with similar facilities. Both relayed that there were not issues. Councillor Kluin noted that he didn’t understand the fear. “Right now, we’ve got people running around this community spreading rumours of worry that you’re bringing out drug addicts or people that are basically going to come out and rape and pillage everybody in town, and it bothers me that we have that in this community. All they have to do is go to the town of Barrhead. It’s already there, and they’re not having any problems. It baffles me as to where this is coming from.” Mr. Abraham agreed that it was an unfortunate misunderstanding. “This is not going to bring any problems to the community. This is only going to benefit the community.”

Councillor Govenlock then stated that the application received by the Municipal Planning Commission said the facility would be for seniors and not youth. Mr. Abraham responded that the development permit was for a supportive living facility and that it did not specifically mean for seniors, calling it general terminology. Councillor Govenlock pushed forward, cutting into Mr. Abraham’s answer, insisting that the information implied the facility would be for seniors. Councillor Govenlock stated that the information was “modified.” He continued pushing the topic resulting in his microphone being temporarily muted at Mayor Burrows’ request.

Joan Slootweg, Manager of Community & Planning Services, seemed to come to Mr. Abraham’s defence, stating an email attached to the permit clearly outlined permanent supportive housing for residents of all ages. She explained that Fort Assiniboine residents did not receive the added email but that the details provided to them did include the other uses of Bridge to Care facilities, including the part about all ages. She said that residents in Fort Assiniboine could and still can provide comments about the project to the municipality.

Councillor McQueen said he received numerous phone calls from residents in and around Fort Assiniboine. “Everyone of them was in favour of this facility, and every one of the phone calls came from women. They were women with children, they were grandmothers, and some were involved with the school. Anytime that I see that females seem to feel comfortable about something like this, it makes me feel a little better.”

Councillor Rennie then asked if the council could see a similar site in person, which dealt with “disabled people” and “people who have had some disciplinary actions against them.” He asked if they could talk to the staff and children, stating that “I think there is a lot of unknowns, and the unknowns are making me uncomfortable.” Pyne said that part of his request was not possible. Council could see a similar facility sometime in June, but they could not talk to clients due to confidentiality.

Following more questions concerning the types of clients at the facility, Slootweg shared a legal opinion they had received on the matter. “You can’t discriminate when you’re making a decision as far as any board goes. So, when the Municipal Planning Commission approved this, it was quite clear that the purpose of it was for a multi-unit institutional public use of permanent supportive housing. It didn’t say whether it was for seniors. It didn’t say whether it was for youth. I think it needs to be recognized that the county cannot regulate the users of the facility. They can regulate the use, and I think that we’ve clearly set out what that use or purpose of that building was.”

Mark Johnson, with Bridge to Care, spoke to some of the anxiousness. “We’ve never had issues within any given community. These are children with developmental issues. We are very passionate about not only helping these children thrive and grow, but we’re passionate about reintegrating them with their families and giving them a chance to be a contributing member of society.”

Kluin made a motion to accept the presentation as information and thanked the delegation. “I want to thank these three people for coming in and opening our eyes and hopefully opening the eyes of some other members of the community as to what exactly is going to happen here.” The motion passed with Mayor Burrows stating, “you judge a society on how you look after the most vulnerable and some of the youths are definitely among those as well.”

After the motion, the conversation continued. Councillor Rennie then asked if the facility would look like a jail. Pyne said that due to the nature of the people they want to attract, it could not look like a jail. She noted that many youths had experienced trauma in their lives, so having a warm and welcoming environment is a must. Councillor McQueen asked what the facility would look like adding that “there’s all kinds of garbage floating on social media tonight that this thing’s going to have brick walls all the way around it.” Mr. Abraham said the building’s exterior would not change but that they might add a five-foot fence.

In the end, Councillor Rennie said he felt that the Municipal Planning Commission misunderstood the application, even with the Administration’s explanations. He then made a motion to communicate with the Provincial Government, find the regulator of these facilities, and get them to “give us a better update.” The motion passed with Councillors Govenlock, Rennie, Kluin, and McQueen voting in favour and Councillors Prestidge, Kusch, and Mayor Burrows voting against it.