Writing a response (see below) to Mayor Peary’s recent statements concerning the status of the $33,750,000 (capital plus operational funding) the province had put on the table to develop affordable housing on Emerson left me feeling unsettled.

As a practitioner of good mental hygiene this unsettled feeling meant I needed to take some quiet/meditation time to gain understanding of what it was about my response that was unsettling my inner balance, my inner peace.

I determined that taking the convenient, safe, easy way out on the status of the Emerson project, by appearing to accept the Mayor’s statements about the project as if I had no doubts as to their accuracy, my response lacked integrity.

No wonder I felt unsettled – when you feel very deeply about something, it’s not possible to sacrifice your integrity about that. Integrity is not a conditional word. It doesn’t blow in the wind or change with the weather.

Being an advocate for affordable housing means I have been following the fate of the Emerson project and its status.

A variety of sources have told and continue to tell me that the Emerson project was/is dead despite Council’s claims otherwise; that the actions of Abbotsford’s City Council had resulted in the loss of the $33,750,000 funding for this project. One such source was BC Housing itself which stated that BC Housing had only one project in Abbotsford – the housing project on Clearbrook.

I have no doubt that Mayor and Council will insist that this is not the case, that they have not ‘blown off’ the province and its $33,750,000. Even by Council’s standards, walking away from $33,750,000 is intolerably wasteful and costly behaviour.

Making Council’s desire to avoid responsibility for the multi-million dollar cost of their actions and the Mayor’s recent statements at least understandable, even if unacceptable.

How many times have taxpayers been told that Council cannot provide any solid information, for a variety of reasons, when Council wants to avoid providing facts and figures in response to inquiries from taxpayers?

One can state/imply that $millions$ will need to be taken out of capital reserves to purchase the property and hope that taxpayers scream against this so it can be claimed the $33,750,000 project was rejected by taxpayers, that Council was only listening to taxpayers in losing these millions.

As a point of fact: have not all the cost overruns of Plan A reduced the capital reserves to Zero?

Or one could state one had chosen a location “further away from residential areas and would not generate “a public backlash.”” and when such a site, as must any site meeting such conditions, fails to meet the location criteria set out by BC Housing as part of the original agreement between the City and BC Housing for funding the two affordable housing projects – well then it is BC Housing’s fault.

I expect that my words on the status/fate of the Emerson affordable housing project to be … displeasing.

It was the potential for conflict to arise from the difference between the Mayor’s recent statements on this matter and information I have received on this matter, which tempted me to respond to the Mayor’s statements taking the easy path by ignoring the differences.

A betrayal of those in need of affordable housing – and an advocate; a betrayal of my own integrity; little wonder my actions unsettled me internally.

You are in integrity when the life you are living on the outside matches who you are on the inside. Alan Cohen

Sigh, as Admiral David Farragut is purported to have said: “Damn the Torpedoes! Full Speed Ahead.”

Reading Mayor Peary’s comments concerning the province’s second offer of $11 million plus $650,000 per year for support services for affordable housing brought to mind George Orwell’s 1984 and ‘Newspeak’.

“The snag … is that the city would have to buy the land.” That is not the snag. The snag to addressing the overwhelming, even desperate need in Abbotsford for affordable housing was and is that City Council has demonstrated neither the desire nor the will to address this pressing issue.

Indeed, the City’s behaviour on this issue supports the observation of a homeless friend that City Council must be happy with the social and criminal problems that arise from a lack of affordable housing since they have failed to act in a manner to effectively address the need for affordable housing.

It is Council’s lack of will that has Abbotsford facing purchasing land or blowing off the $11 million and $650,000 a year for 35 years of support services.

“The Emerson proposal collapsed … amid strong public opposition.” The Emerson proposal collapsed because Council lacks the desire and the Will to begin dealing with affordable housing issues. It was this lack of desire and Will that had Council fold when faced with fear mongering and screaming NIMBYism.

Since nobody knew or knows who was proposing to develop the Emerson site and what they proposed for the Emerson site there was no rational reason for the opposition. In turning tail and running council behaved as irrationally as the panicky public.

Personally I would be very interested in knowing who and what proposal was chosen for the Emerson site by BC Housing in conjunction with the City? Exactly what housing was lost as a result of Council’s lack of intestinal fortitude?

It is exactly this kind of lack of planning and acting for the future that led to “… the city owns very little vacant land suitable … the result of a decision made by [previous] council … in which the city sold much of its acreage to private developers in order to collect tax dollars.”

Rather than paying for its spending as it should have through tax revenue Council unwisely chose to sell assets to enable its addiction to spending beyond its income.

Note: selling off land assets is not collecting tax dollars.

I suppose nobody should be surprised that Abbotsford is mired in debt, financial woes and social problems when Mayor and Council think along the lines of “… that would likely make more sense than turning down $11 million.”

As if turning down $11 million made any sense. Especially in light of the fact that it is Council’s lack of Will and rational behaviour that makes it necessary to purchase land at all.

Note: it was/is not just $11 million but $11 million plus $22, 750,000 ($650,000 for 35 years) for a total of $33,750,000.