2009 Legislative Session: Fifth Session, 38th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Morning Sitting

Volume 38, Number 9

[ Page 13921 ]

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2009

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, I call Committee of Supply — supplementary estimates, starting with Housing this morning.

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES:
MINISTRY OF HOUSING
and social development

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply; K. Whittred in the chair.

The committee met at 10:05 a.m.

On Vote 36(S): housing and construction standards, $30,000,000 (continued).

C. Wyse: Madam Speaker, to the minister: I extend greetings and acknowledge his efforts. Through his ministry, he has been working on the housing issue in my part of the province.

I have some questions. My first one would be of the nature of the general process that was used to come up with the site locations. For example, Williams Lake has the need for social housing, but then so do other communities in my riding. If he could explain to me how his ministry came up with the sites, that would assist me back in my constituency.

Hon. R. Coleman: I think I understand the question, so if I meander away from it, I'm sure you'll bring me back and tell me what it is, or the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast has guaranteed me that he will. If I understand your question, it is how sites are selected and how these come across.

There are a variety of selection processes and types of things that Housing does. If it's Independent Living B.C., there's one criterion. If it's a site for social housing, depending on whether it's first nations or not, there's another criterion.

In your community, for instance, there's a site for first nations that went through a public process. Basically, it went out for expressions of interest on $50 million that the federal government had put up for off-reserve housing. So one of the sites was…. Basically, the first nations came into that bid with their site and their society for strength, and they're all measured on the basis of the strength of the proposal, etc.

For other social housing sites, if there's something, it would come through either of two veins. We would be doing a call where we have some funds we want to invest in social housing. In some cases, it would be that if a municipality is prepared to come up with some land and forgive all the development cost charges and actually make it more streamlined to accelerate a project, we would look at that very favourably.

Then we would sign an MOU with that municipality, and then we would start the process to design the building and what have you in partnership with them and then go out for a proposal call to select the operating society. If a society has land and they want to do something, then they would come to us as well.

We sort of keep our eyes and ears open all the time, but those are the types of processes. Then we score these against other projects in other communities by need and those sorts of things with regards to it.

On the first nations one, which is in process in Williams Lake, we're the only jurisdiction that has actually approved all the projects in the $50 million we got from the federal government. No other jurisdiction in Canada has even got a project out the door yet, so our guys have done a very good job on that one.

In addition to that, we will hear from communities that they have a specific, immediate need that they'd like us to address. Those are the cases where, when we're in the marketplace, we would look at a community like Williams Lake, for instance, where we bought the Jamboree Motel, which is vacant. We said: "Here's an opportunity. If we renovated this, we could happen to do something quicker for this community, because they're asking for it."

We did the same thing with the Wheel Inn in Quesnel with regards to some of their issues for supportive housing in that community. We've done it elsewhere across the province. So there are a variety of processes that we go through with regards to this.

C. Wyse: I'm very appreciative of how the minister has meandered around and provided me with very helpful information.

[1010]

I'm assuming that this is a combined push. There's a push from the local communities as well as how it fits in down here in Victoria for the items to move along, regardless of what the various ministry is that is involved.

So with Jamboree, which is specifically involved in the estimates, I would ask some questions of the minister. When does he anticipate this particular project will come on stream? How many units are expected? And the management operations for this particular facility. I've given him three components. I know that the minister
[ Page 13922 ]
likely has that information and could give it to me all at once.

Hon. R. Coleman: This particular project is going to require a fair amount of renovation. I'm sure the member's aware of that. We expect the outside date would be December of 2009 that we would be able to occupy it, because we have to go in and do an extensive renovation.

It's 33 units. All of them are currently vacant. It's located at 845 Carson — which I'm sure the member knows without me telling him, but that's in my notes — and is currently undergoing a rezoning. Once that's complete, a non-profit organization will be engaged to manage the development.

Just so the member knows, we don't run any of our facilities that we buy. We enter into a long-term arrangement with a non-profit, and we subsidize them to run their facilities. So we will go into what basically will be the Williams Lake non-profit marketplace and look for an expression of interest from someone to have the opportunity to make us a proposal on running the facility and what client base they want to address.

As the member knows, there's a significant pressure with alcohol and mental health and addictions in Williams Lake, both in the non-aboriginal and the aboriginal community. When I phoned the mayor of Williams Lake and some of the councillors up there and told them what we've done, they were pretty ecstatic about the fact that we'd stepped up to the plate for them.

C. Wyse: There is no question of the need for this type of service across the province, and assuredly, that applies also to my riding. To have one of its communities moving along with having these things addressed is a step in the right direction. There is no question. There are other communities in my riding that likewise are in need of services.

However, staying immediately on what we have here in the estimates and where we're at, I think my last question to the minister on this item is further elaboration upon the actual needs of the people in the area that are anticipated to be met by this project.

Homelessness is one issue. We do recognize that with homelessness, often we have the combined, added issues of mental health and addictions, but we do know in this particular community there are 85 people identified from a homeless count that was done in October. I'm attempting, through my question to the minister, to have him narrow down the range of services that he is hopeful this housing project is going to address for this community area.

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, this is basically the strategy for mental health, homelessness and addictions together. What you'll find with some of the population we'll deal with is that if we just stabilize them in some housing, give them some support with their addictions and some meals to stabilize their nutrition and get them connected to the right health supports, they'll have good outcomes.

There will be other folks that may not actually be able to function in this environment that we will at least identify by doing it and identify what other facilities may be available for them — whether it be Baldy Hughes outside of Prince George or the one that we've got down on Logan Lake or the things we're doing across the Interior. There's one down in Keremeos, as well, for youth.

[1015]

This allows us to have some facilities in the community, but we also recognize that some folks will need a different residential component and a different environment to be successful with their addictions and mental illness.

Then there will be those that, quite frankly, haven't hit the spot where they're ready to make that decision, because as everybody knows around addictions, there has to be a decision by the individual that they want to do something. Otherwise, if that recognition isn't there for them, we don't find that the treatment programs work particularly well for that cohort.

When you look at the first nations project and the project at the Jamboree Motel in Williams Lake, I think it's a pretty good package coming together for that community.

C. Wyse: I hadn't intended to mislead the minister. That was my last question on this item.

A key item, I think, in getting these services up and running is going to be the establishment of the non-profit organization and how they're going to dovetail into this. So my question to the minister is: when is he anticipating that the call for proposals is going to go out and the definition of the criteria for that call for proposals?

Hon. R. Coleman: We expect to close on this property in the next 30 days or so. Once we have closed on the property, then we would go out for proposals to the non-profit sector.

Just for the member's edification — and it's been a longstanding thing in governments over the last 25 years — the part about the non-profit isn't new. I've always believed that if you get a strong non-profit, they can put the actual heart in the building and deliver for the client base. I think governments can actually come up with the facilities, but they can't make them run the same way as the people who have two things going for them.

One is that they have a huge commitment to the clientele they're dealing with and can also draw on a volunteer base within a community, which a normal facility like any other facility where there's no non-profit involved wouldn't be able to.

You've got some very good non-profit operators in Williams Lake that I'm familiar with, so I think there will be interest from all of them. But it will come down to
[ Page 13923 ]
those that want to deal with the addiction and mental illness and homelessness issue. That's the cohort that we're trying to help here.

C. Wyse: Once more, to the minister: I thank him for his answers around that project. To make sure that my feet are still staying on the right side of the fence today, I now would like to talk to the minister about an item that I would like to see in this particular housing project.

He's made reference to the Cariboo Friendship Society proposal. I have written the minister on this item, and I believe I have also spoken, albeit briefly, with the minister. The Cariboo friendship affordable housing society has a funding shortfall in the neighbourhood of about $2 million to meet the standards that originally went out for tender. The effect on that shortfall adds approximately $444 per unit to deal with that funding shortfall over a 35-year amortization.

That takes the project the minister had referred to from being an affordable housing project and moves it out of that particular category. The minister, often gracious about it, had indicated approximately a year ago that the funding would be found for this particular project to proceed.

My question is: can the funding shortfall be found here in the supplementary estimates? And if it cannot be found here in the supplementary estimates, what other pockets of money would the minister have in order to address this funding shortfall?

Hon. R. Coleman: Through to the member opposite: this is not within this envelope. This was in the first nations envelope that the federal government put up for off-reserve housing, and that was a proposal call.

The project started out with a $5.4 million budget. We have added another $2 million to the budget. We're presently in discussions with the society on design and what have you to make sure the budget can work and how we would do that. We work through that, but we're committed to getting this thing in the ground as soon as possible.

So we're working through the issues that the non-profit group has with regards to their design. Our folks are working with them, and we expect we would begin construction in the next few months.

[1020]

It's going to be a pretty excellent addition to the housing stock there and a pretty valuable asset to the community, so we're committed to the project. There are times when people have, as they come through these things, maybe a little bit higher expectations than they need to actually deliver the project in a way that's good for the community. That's why our team will sit down with them, which we're doing now, to work out what those costs are so we can get this thing done.

C. Wyse: I do have some empathy, and I have some understanding of the challenges that face the minister in coming up with all the needed and necessary funding for various projects. I've already mentioned that as good a start as this is — and I do want to emphasize as good a start as it is — it is a start on the needs for housing that run across the Interior and, in particular, my riding.

I don't want to underplay the significance of that aspect of it, but at the same time, the group was indicated to go to a standard in their development, in which they have invested their time and their money in order to get to this point in time. Those are the standards that were set by other levels of government.

The point is that, albeit getting it up and running, there was an indication of the level and the standards that would be reached. I repeat myself, but the standards that it now rests at move a project that was meant to be affordable housing out of that particular level of availability for affording.

I leave that statement with the minister, if he has comment to make on it in addition. In reading some body language from the minister…. Clearly, I'm encouraging the minister to have his staff work diligently to find the funding shortfall so that we move from the LEED silver level to the LEED gold level. That would put us in line with what the standards were to be and in line with one of the great goals set here within the province.

That finishes any questions I have. I've appreciated the opportunity for my comments. In closing, I would like to acknowledge the minister and his efforts on these items in my particular riding.

Hon. R. Coleman: In fairness to our folks at B.C. Housing, that due diligence is taking place. They're working with the society very aggressively to find the dollars.

The other thing is that when the budgets of these things took place, even six months ago…. The numbers are changing dramatically. The costs are coming down, so we think that we can meet the costs within our budget.

Like I said earlier, we've increased the budget for this project by $2 million — from $5.4 million to $7.4 million. So we've already made a significant upgrade to the project itself, but we also think that in design we can meet a lot of those criteria. It's just a case now of getting down to the nuts and bolts of what the construction cost is and how the design can work without having to say that we're just going to do this. I don't think the member would want us carte blanche to spend another $2 million if we didn't have to, if we can put that into other projects in B.C.

They're pretty fiscally responsible at B.C. Housing. I don't design the buildings, but I do know that they're very, very diligent in making sure that the best dollar for the buck is got when we build these things. I know it's the difference between LEED silver and LEED gold and
[ Page 13924 ]
how we can get there. They're going to work through that problem.

N. Macdonald: The question that I have for the minister relates to, in particular, the community of Revelstoke, and I see that that's not on the list of projects. As the minister would be well aware, there are particular pressures coming from Alberta on a number of communities that I represent — Kimberley in particular, Invermere and Golden.

[1025]

But the community that has faced the greatest challenge because of the rapid change in housing price and that has subsequently suffered from issues of homelessness, which historically it never has, is Revelstoke.

The question I have for the minister is this. I see that it's not part of the project list, but my expectation would be that the minister would be dealing with the issues there in Revelstoke in some way. I would ask the minister to provide an explanation of why it is not on the project list, and of more use would be the plans that the minister has upcoming. While not included here, nevertheless some expectations could be met in Revelstoke by future plans from the minister.

With that, if he could comment on his ministry's plans specifically for Revelstoke and if there are broader issues within the communities of Golden, Invermere and Kimberley that he would like to comment on as well, that would be much appreciated.

Hon. R. Coleman: I've asked for the community scan for each of those communities to be sent in to me. I thought I had it in my desk from yesterday, but I must have walked out with that file when I left yesterday. It's down in my office. They'll get it up here shortly. That will tell you what each community has and how much is spent each year in each community and how many units are there for RAP and SAFER and that sort of thing. I'll pass that on to you.

At the same time, at the UBCM convention when municipalities come through, I always give them basically the same message — that if they have a need from their community for a particular form of housing, our concentration is mainly today on people with mental health, addictions and homelessness, because we have a rent assistance program for families under $35,000 a year so that they can have their rent offset wherever they live in a community. There are 8,000 families on that now in B.C. We have the rent assistance program for seniors. So we're concentrating on the hard-to-house.

Then I ask them to come back, if they're interested, with whether they have land available or they have a non-profit in their community that has land available. It could be to do what they would do to accelerate processes to speed up rezonings or forgive development cost charges or hookups and that sort of thing so that we can lower the cost to deliver the affordable housing. Then if they come back with that, we will sign a memorandum of understanding with them to try and work on sites to do that.

We haven't had any MOUs proposed by any of those communities to us at this time. There's been nothing in front of us with regards to it, but I certainly will give the member the scan on the communities.

[1030]

D. Thorne: I have a couple of questions from my community to ask the minister and the representatives from B.C. Housing for my riding. Specifically, the project that's been underway now for a year or two, the shelter and supported transitional housing project on Gordon Avenue in Coquitlam — I see that it is not on the list of projects that we're talking about funding today. I have to say that I'm very surprised and concerned at that. I think the community will be as well when they realize that it's not on the list.

We've been running a mat program in five local churches, three of which are in my riding, for the past couple of winters and have had a lot of community input. We finally got the communities to agree to the mat program for two winters. We were fully expecting that if we weren't able to move into the shelter by next winter, surely it would be shortly afterwards.

Now, I'm assuming that the money has not been released from the budget yet for this project. I would like an explanation from the B.C. Minister of Housing as to what exactly is going on with this longstanding project in Coquitlam.

Hon. R. Coleman: This funding that we are talking about today is for units that were readily available for us to purchase to put into homelessness, mental health and addictions now. The Gordon Avenue project in Coquitlam hasn't been zoned yet.

Its zoning needs to be done. Its development permit needs to be done. Its building permit needs to be issued. This community has decided not to forgive the development cost charges on this particular project, where I'm getting other communities across B.C. that are forgiving the development cost charges.

Our estimation is that it could be as much as a year away, given the zoning, etc., that we have to go through. So it wouldn't be in a budget until such time…. I wouldn't go get the capital to get it until such time as the project was close to being ready to go. That's why it wouldn't be reflected in a budget today.

You don't say something that you are going to build in late 2009 or 2010 goes into a capital budget. What we do with housing now, because we centralize capital, is when projects are ready, we go to the capital fund and request the money. At this stage of the game there's no need to request the money for the Gordon Avenue site, because it's not ready to go.
[ Page 13925 ]

D. Thorne: I thank the minister for that. I gather what he is saying is that it is council's fault, basically. This seems to be the answer I always get from the minister whenever I bring up any little transgressions or questions about Coquitlam. However, I can only assume that this is indeed holding it up.

I'm wondering why the zoning hasn't been done after two years, why there is no development permit and if there are any issues with B.C. Housing that could be speeded up. Or is this strictly a stall at city hall?

I guess that's my main question. I mean, my understanding and the understanding, I know, of most of the city councillors that I've spoken with is that this process is well along and that all the criteria have been met, pretty much. They're just waiting for the money, and that has not been released. So I would just like to know if there is some issue that I should know about, that we should know about.

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, there is an issue or two. First of all, we only received the final version of the MOU last week with the last set of changes from Coquitlam. We don't go in and start to spend money to design a site and take it through rezoning until we actually have an agreement from the municipality on the land.

We haven't had that until the last week. The city took longer than any other MOU we've negotiated. This city took longer than any other municipality in the province. They still would not agree to waive the development cost charges. There is only one site that we're talking to them on the MOU, and that's the one on Gordon Avenue, which is 30 shelter beds and 25 to 40 transition housing units.

[1035]

We're funding the YWCA site on Como Lake road, which they did give us a free city site on after they took a society through a lengthy process and turned them down at third reading — after they'd spent a lot of money to get a site rezoned that they had pointed to by that community a few years back, and then it was turned down.

Then they finally came back with a site for the YWCA. That's 28 units for women and children. They've actually removed this from the MOU to allay any fears of it not being funded. They didn't put that in the MOU, because I guess they didn't want it delayed. We've been committed to that site for a long time.

My understanding is that now the site needs to be rezoned. We've agreed to pay all the upfront costs to do that. They're telling us it's about a year. If they want to speed that up, great, but that's up to the municipality.

We're going to do the work that we need to do. We're going to fund the project development to get the site rezoned, select a sponsor and take it through to where we can get it to where we can ask for the capital for it.

Quite frankly, it hasn't been particularly quick in Coquitlam. Our guys have been pretty diligent at trying to get it done. But when we only get the agreement with the final changes a week ago…. At a meeting yesterday with the president and CEO of B.C. Housing, he was asked if the funding for this particular project was in the capital budget at this time. He was honest. He said no, and the reason he said that — and he explained it to the mayor afterwards — was because it's not ready to go.

In the past we would take projects and have a borrowing formula within B.C. Housing. We still do that, to some degree, on some of our projects. At the same time, government, to its credit — to the person's credit who did the capital for government — actually got our capital in pretty good shape as far as how we manage capital. We now have a capital division of government that we work with when we need capital for specific projects. They're aware of what's in the pipeline all the time, but we don't commit the capital now until we actually have the project.

D. Thorne: I thank the minister for his obvious ongoing cooperation with the city of Coquitlam. It's quite alarming what I'm hearing.

I did have one question, actually, about the Como Lake site. I'm assuming that that building, as all the other buildings that will be built in the future for transitional and supportive housing, will be wood frame — up to six storeys. As we heard in the budget, all new projects will be that.

I would like to ask the minister if there will be any special consideration given in those buildings, in terms of construction, for supported and transitional housing — the kind of housing we're talking about — as there are so many physical health and mental health issues of the people who will be living in those buildings.

As we know, there is a fair bit of concern, from some fire people around the province and some other people, about these six-storey buildings made of wood frame that have not been ironed out yet and questions that have not been answered about them. I'm wondering if we will be taking extra precautions when we use this type of construction for mental health and physical health buildings.

Hon. R. Coleman: We've been building health care facilities for seniors in British Columbia in wood frame for years.

Interjection.

Hon. R. Coleman: Well, you didn't ask if it…. I don't know how many storeys the one on Como Lake road is. I don't have the designs in front of me.

I can tell the member opposite that I have a letter from the fire commissioner of British Columbia that
[ Page 13926 ]
clearly states that there is no concern with regards to six-storey wood-frame construction. There was actually one fire chief quoted in a recent article that wrote me and said he was misquoted — or he called and said he was misquoted — because it's not his belief either that there's a risk.

They believe that with the proper fire separations that we have with regards to how we do the building code and the sprinkler systems that are there today for these particular facilities, there's not a risk. They're not concerned about that.

From the standpoint of wood frame in British Columbia, we've had three-storey wood-frame construction in British Columbia for generations without sprinklers and without smoke detectors. Smoke detectors were added to some of them a number of years ago. They were built under what was called part 9 of the building code. That would mean that within a building of a certain size, there were fire separation walls and fireproof doors between portions of the building that were allowed to do this.

[1040]

We've done a pretty extensive thing. With regards to wood frame, for the member's information, yeah, wherever possible we're going to build with wood. We believe that's important for a number of reasons.

We know that structurally it is sound, that structurally it can be done. We've seen other jurisdictions that have gone higher than four storeys and done it well. We know that to sequester carbon, the best sequestration of carbon is…. Even the member's desk in front of her, where the wood in the desk is sequestered carbon, is sequestered forever until it was actually to deteriorate.

When you talk about the environment and things, it's important to deal with wood. We have a very important sector in British Columbia called the forest industry. If we can get other jurisdictions and ours to start to recognize six-storey wood frame, it will actually increase the amount of wood being used in construction across our country.

In addition to that, from a standpoint of smart use of environmentally sensitive products, it's the best. Will all our facilities necessarily be wood frame in the future? Not in some of our major cities necessarily, because there may be facilities that have to go higher for density use to be able to build the facility. Then after a certain level, you have to go to concrete and steel. But our priority is wood.

D. Thorne: I guess I just caution the minister and the housing people in the ministry that when you are moving to construct these kinds of buildings, it might not be enough to have an elevator in case of fire. There may need to be extra precautions taken when you're dealing with that kind of clientele — special consideration. I thank you for the answer.

My last question. As the Housing critic, I have received about four phone calls — which is quite a number on one project — from people who live at Logan Lake. They are very worried about the facility that's being recommended for Logan Lake in the old correctional centre. They're afraid that fairly troublesome, perhaps even dangerous people are going to be shipped into Logan Lake from Vancouver and the suburbs to get them more or less out of sight, out of mind.

They're very worried, and a lot of them are asking if anybody knows what kind of consultation took place before that site was decided on. I'm just asking the minister for an answer so that I can phone these people and let them know.

Hon. R. Coleman: You're right. At one time it was a non-gated open camp for criminals, who could walk away from the site at any time. I think that would be a higher risk to the community than someone who is there voluntarily, asking to be helped with their mental health and addiction issues in a residential setting.

We know there are a number of types of facilities that are required for people with addictions in B.C. Some longer residential stays are being done at Baldy Hughes outside of Prince George without any difficulty.

We know that this particular property has the allowable use already. That's why our interest was piqued on this particular site. It also allows us to actually run it as a working ranch at some point in time, to be able to do job training and those sorts of things for people who would come to that facility.

I think we will actually talk to the people in the Logan Lake area as this project evolves, once we pick a society and close on the land and that sort of thing.

[1045]

I don't think anybody should get parochial around mental health and addictions in this province. I think people should understand that it doesn't exist just in the Lower Mainland of B.C. or in any centre of any community. It actually exists across the broad spectrum of society, and we all have a role to play. All of our communities have a role to play.

You know, there are two ways you can approach a project like this. You can actually celebrate the fact that a community is stepping up to the plate to help people with their health needs, or you can decide to be negative and oppose it all the way down the line. I've seen both as a minister.

I've seen massive public hearings opposing shelters or places from communities where there is a significant need for mental health and addiction help — and then the complaint afterwards that we're not doing anything, because it was turned down because of public discourse.

At the same time, I've seen communities like Langley, where I live, when they decide to build a shelter with
[ Page 13927 ]
supportive housing and mental health and addictions — and tying it into Trinity Western University for job creation, those sorts of things — that instead of turning on the project, deciding they would hold a celebration and raise money for the project in the community.

There's no doubt, once we close, that I will have a visit with the particular local governments where these sites are. I didn't get a negative response from Logan Lake when I spoke to them about the fact that we were taking on this site — from them or the regional district.

I think we have to recognize that there's always going to be someone that's opposed to a certain cohort of people because they're different than they are, because they have difficulties. But we're all about humanity, all of us. So I think that all our communities need to understand that if there are facilities that could do this, whether it's the old Outward Bound site outside of Keremeos, where there's a project going to open…. I think it's for youth with mental health and addictions.

It's not about transporting people anywhere. Nobody is told they have to go to these facilities. They can do it by choice. It could be someone from Logan Lake, and it could be someone from Kamloops. It could be someone from Merritt. It could be someone from the Lower Mainland that feels if they were originally from that area that it would be better for them to be closer to the community.

Having toured some of the facilities where we have a number of people and a mix of people, like Baldy Hughes, for instance, outside of Prince George…. We have a number of citizens from Prince George, we have people from the Cariboo, we have a couple of people from the north, and we certainly have some people from the Lower Mainland who decide that that might be the best opportunity for them to change their lives, turn their lives around.

I think we need to have these opportunities for people to make choices. Where we can, we should do it. And this one here actually I think is…. The reason I liked it as a minister was the opportunity to have a large enough tract of land that we would have the ability to do something interesting and innovative there and do the job creation stuff as well — not job creation so much, but there's a job-training side, which I find attractive.

I think that as we bring people through the changes they make in their lives — to stabilize them with their medications, if it's mental health, or if it's addictions, to stabilize them off their addictions — we need to take the next step for them. Many of these people probably need some life skills and some help — whether that's an education program combined with some job training. I think Logan Lake is one of those facilities that might give us that opportunity.

J. Kwan: Thank you to the minister for answering the questions for my colleagues.

I'm going to go back now to the mainstay of the estimates, if you will, and ask the minister some questions from yesterday in terms of some of the areas that we covered. Then I'll move forward on some new questions.

The minister yesterday advised the House that in some cases the ministry did use realtors and that what the ministry did was use commercial realtors that the government had relationships with in the past for these projects. Could the minister please advise who the realtor is that the ministry might have had relationships with that was used for these projects?

[1050]

Hon. R. Coleman: So on all these properties, we didn't pay any commission. The commissions were all paid by the vendors. There was a vendor's realtor that we dealt with because they had the listing. There were three properties that we negotiated directly without a realtor. Those were the Astoria hotel in Prince George, the Cordova Residence and the Backpackers Inn.

On the other four. In Penticton we used Coldwell Banker, in Williams Lake it was LandQuest, in Mission it was Barrigon, and in Vancouver it was Corbeau Commercial Real Estate Services on the Dominion Hotel and the Hazelwood Hotel.

J. Kwan: The ones that weren't listed. How did they come onto the government's radar screen in terms of potential hotels for purchase?

Hon. R. Coleman: I don't know for sure, but I suspect it came from the community. Probably either through someone…. In Vancouver it might have actually been something said by someone in the social housing department of Vancouver city. More than likely, though, it also would have come from the non-profit sector itself, which would have made mention to our staff that they thought there was an opportunity, that we should look at some properties in the area that they had some information on.

Or it could have been just simply…. We have a pretty good guy on property acquisition who is always sniffing around, I guess, to see what's out there and asking people what's out there. That's how those probably would have come to us.

J. Kwan: Who is the person, then, leading the acquisition side of sites or projects on behalf of the government?

Hon. R. Coleman: That would be Craig Crawford, who is our vice-president of development at B.C. Housing.

J. Kwan: Moving on to another area, just for clarification. The minister also said yesterday that, not for these
[ Page 13928 ]
sites but for other sites that were purchased — the first round of SROs that were purchased — the government used a numbered company. Was that a numbered company that was created by the government for the purpose of those SRO purchases?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, it was a numbered company set up through B.C. Housing that was wound down at the end of that fiscal year. It was only in existence for a few months for the purpose of doing those purchases.

We had concerns that with the amount of real estate that we were looking at and expended capital…. We didn't want — if somebody thought it was government buying — them deciding to jack up the price. We wanted to deal with the marketplace in a way that they wouldn't know who the end vendor was from that standpoint.

J. Kwan: Could we also get the cost breakdown of those SRO purchases from the government? I presume that those have been completed — the purchases of those.

I don't have to have it right now, but if the minister could send it to me — the SRO purchases, the cost on the individual hotels. That would be the ten hotels, I believe it was, that were purchased prior to this set.

[1055]

Hon. R. Coleman: I'll read them all out for the member. The Marble Arch at 518 Richards Street, which was 145 units, was purchased for $8 million. The St. Helen's Hotel, which is 1161 Granville Street, 98 units, was $7.5 million. The Walton Hotel at 265 Hastings was 51 units for $2.3 million. The Orange Hall, which was 329 Gore Avenue, 27 units, was $4.1 million. The Carl Rooms, which is at 355 Princess, 47 units, was $2.05 million.

The Molson's Bank Building at 166 East Hastings was 45 units for $2.35 million. The Park Hotel, which was 429 West Pender, is 56 units for $3.5 million. The Orwell Hotel at 465 East Hastings, 55 units, was $2.95 million. The Savoy Hotel, which was 28 units, at 258 to 260 East Hastings was $1.79 million. The Rice Block at 404 Hawks Street, which is 43 units, was $2.59 million. Those were the April 2000 to 2008 purchases.

Then in February 2008 we made some additional purchases, which were the Gastown Hotel on Water Street, 97 units for $5.2 million. The Shaldon Hotel, 55 units, on East Hastings was $3.1 million. The Arco Hotel at 81 to 83 West Pender was $3.6 million. The Pender Hotel at 31 West Pender, 40 units, was $2.6 million. The Marr Hotel at 401 Powell Street, 29 units, was $2.3 million, and the Rainier Hotel at 307 Carrall, 46 units, was $6.9 million.

In March 2008 there was another acquisition at 398 Powell Street, which is the Tamara House, and that was $2.4 million.

Then we have the purchases we just made, and further to yesterday's discussion, we have closed on two of them. So I'll read those into the record. That's the Astoria hotel in Prince George, which is 18 units. Our purchase price was $585,000. The Dominion Hotel on Abbott Street was $8.1 million.

I believe that's mainly the Vancouver ones, because there were some other purchases that I don't have on this list, but those are the ones I have in front of me at the moment.

J. Kwan: That's very helpful. I expect that once the completion dates are achieved, then the minister would be in the position to release the purchase prices for the other projects. So I'll wait for those when they're available.

Interjection.

J. Kwan: Oh, you have them? Oh, okay.

Hon. R. Coleman: I also have them now. I've got one list from here, one list from there, but we're getting there.

The Pandora Hotel in Victoria, which was 28 units, was $1.2 million. The College Place Hotel, 59 units, in New Westminster was $4.9 million. The Whistler Inn in Kamloops at 506 Paul Street was 28 units for $1.2 million. The Magdelaine Court in Victoria at 1172 Yates Street was $2 million for 20 units. The Queens Court in Victoria, which was at 1134 Queen Street, 28 units for $2.7 million.

The Alpha townhouses in Burnaby was 18 units for $2.8 million. The Beta townhouses in Burnaby was just 20 units for $3.1 million. The Wheel Inn in Quesnel was 20 units for $1.4 million, and I think we got more units out of it at the end of the day. The Redford Lodge in Port Alberni was 42 units for $1.6 million.

In Surrey there was a property at 13630-32 110a Street, 12 units for $660,000, and the Howard Johnson Motel in Surrey was 54 units for 4.75 million.

There's more. The Gorge Waterway Apartments was 51 units for $5.8 million. There was a rooming house at 1729 Oak Bay Avenue in Victoria for $818,000. That was 13 units.

I have one transition house that's in Abbotsford for $460,000, but I can't disclose the address for obvious reasons.

Now we're into the other ones that are about to close, so I can't disclose their numbers yet.

[1100]

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

J. Kwan: Thank you to the minister for that.

Yesterday we also covered the project out in Mission, and the minister talked about that project in the context
[ Page 13929 ]
that it's a former care facility. He was anticipating that it would potentially be housing for people with mental health and addictions, following their treatment from the Willingdon centre.

On that basis, would that project be long-term housing, then, for the clients who are exiting Willingdon?

Hon. R. Coleman: We think it has two values to the system. One is that it might be someone coming out of Willingdon or out of a shelter. Basically, it's to provide second-stage supportive housing not just in that area, to complement the new emergency shelter that is being developed in Mission, but also to have second-stage housing for folks that would come out of a variety of facilities.

It's not geared to just Willingdon. It is actually to have second-stage housing — which, by definition, would mean a longer-term stay — that they'd be able to put down some roots with regards to that. Hopefully, some of them, once they get stabilized and are settled, can now move into another form of housing as well. Certainly, the intent is to have this as second-stage housing so that people coming from these different facilities will have something that's more stable for them, going forward.

J. Kwan: Presumably, too, for the second-stage housing concept, there would be the necessary supports that go with it. I would assume that one could not expect the individual to succeed in their independent living if they didn't have some sort of support initiatives or programs in place in their second-stage housing.

Hon. R. Coleman: There's no question about that. All of this is being geared to where the housing has supports in it. The supports can be individual, because a person has individual issues where we bring in support for an individual.

In some cases, for someone that has a developmental disability as well as some other issues, that could come through Community Living B.C. It could be from Health, where we bring in care workers to work with people with mental health or addictions. The societies will work with us with regards to the clientele.

What we find is that we need to stabilize them in a secure environment, provide them with some nutrition that helps them actually stabilize themselves and then connect them to the supports. The member would know, from her riding, that supports can be so varied. It can be somebody that's homeless that really has an issue with literacy to start with and can't find even where social services are or look for a job or those sorts of things. It can be someone that has mental illness or addictions or one or the other.

We have to make sure that the supports from the building are for a variety of clientele, and that's why the integration project is taking place within this ministry. It's taking place to say: "Who's providing services? Where are they being provided? Can we target them better to get a better outcome for all the folks we're trying to deal with, whether it be from Health, Housing and Social Development, Community Living B.C., Children and Families or anything else within government, like employment income assistance."

The whole plan, when we started this, was that we needed housing with supports. The growth has been to the supports, to make sure that we're looking at all our budgets within government, to make sure that we're identifying where those supports can be in these facilities so people have the outcomes we're looking for.

J. Kwan: Is the minister, then, the go-to person to ensure that the funding is in place for the support services?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yes.

J. Kwan: Would it be reasonable to expect, then, the minister to provide information on what funding has been secured and what programs are in place for the support services for these initiatives?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, and if we get to the global budget for next year's discussion, that will all become apparent. I don't have the blue book in front of me. I don't think we want to go into that debate today.

[1105]

But, yeah, the whole intent is to not just have funding like we have, because we've invested a significant amount of dollars in funding, but to look at our contract service providers — how they're delivering service and making sure they're coordinated with each other so they're not duplicating effort.

We think that's an important piece — that we can identify outcomes and measurements so that we can make the case, whether it be to a regional health authority or the Ministry of Health or another ministry, that by doing something a little bit different, they can get better outcomes for the same money invested.

I think all of that is pretty critical to this piece, and that's the work that's going on now.

J. Kwan: Yes. Indeed, I would expect that those would be questions for the main estimates. But perhaps before we get to the main estimates — for one never knows when the main estimates might surface in this session, or not — we could set up briefings. I could set up briefings with the minister's staff, somebody from B.C. Housing, in order to get some of that information, and other questions related to it.

So I'll ask that of the minister. Then, if he agrees, we can work to coordinate schedules accordingly. I'll wait for that answer, and then I'll move on to renovations and relocation plans.
[ Page 13930 ]

Hon. R. Coleman: We should be in a position to give you that in a couple of weeks. We've actually identified the person who we think can run this project, and we've done the coordination within government. We should be in a position to roll that plan out shortly, at least in its infancy stage, and we'd be happy to sit down with the member and give her a briefing on it.

J. Kwan: Could the minister please advise, in terms of the non-profits that have been identified…? Some of them, I believe, have been identified to operate the projects, and some of them are still waiting for an operator to be identified. Is the process that the ministry is undergoing a tendered process? Or how did the government come about allocating these initiatives and projects to various non-profits?

[1110]

Hon. R. Coleman: We've done it two ways. One is where we go out for an expression of interest to the non-profit sector, and they tell us what they think they can do with a particular facility. If there's a particular client group we see specifically for a building in an area where we have a very good non-profit, we will approach them first to see if there's interest and see if they want to do it.

I can give the member, if she wishes, the names of the non-profits that are going to operate some of the buildings. I could go through those if the member would like.

The Marble Arch is a City Centre Care Society. St. Helen's Hotel is a Coast Foundation. Walton Hotel is a Lookout Emergency Aid Society. The Orange Hall is SUCCESS. Carl Rooms is Union Gospel. The Molson's Bank Building is a PHS Community Services Society. The Park Hotel is the City Care Society. Vancouver Native Housing Society has the Orwell. The MPA Society has the Savoy, The Atira Women's Resource Society has the Rice Block. The Gastown is to be determined yet. So we don't have an operator yet.

The Sheldon Hotel is the Raincity Housing and Support Society. The Arca Hotel is to be determined. The Pender Hotel is the Vancouver Native Housing Society. Atira is the Women's Resource Society and has the Mar Hotel. The Portland Hotel Society is the Rainier Hotel. The Tamara House on Powell is the Lookout Emergency Aid Society. We're in negotiations with some of them, but I think the Cordova Residence on Cordova is going to be the Lookout Emergency Aid. The other ones haven't been determined for sure.

On the ones that aren't in Vancouver. The Pandora Hotel is the Cool Aid Society. The College Place Hotel in New Westminster is the Lookout Emergency Aid Society. The Whistler Inn in Kamloops is the AIDS Society of Kamloops. The Magdelaine Court in Victoria is the Cridge Centre for the Family. The Queens Court in Victoria is the Pacifica Housing Advisory Association. The Alpha townhouse in Burnaby is the New Chelsea Society, as well as the Beta townhouses in Burnaby. The Wheel Inn in Quesnel is the Quesnel Shelter and Support Society.

In Port Alberni it's the Canadian Mental Health Association. In Surrey — I will probably pronounce this wrong —it's the Cwenengitel Aboriginal Society. The Fraserside Community Services Society will do the Howard Johnson motel in Surrey. The Gorge Waterway Apartments are Pacifica again. The rooming house on Oak and the one in Mission on Grand are to be determined, as are a number of others.

In the Okanagan the Hansel and Gretel Motel in Penticton was actually…. The old restaurant was part of the offices for the Canadian Mental Health Association, Okanagan-Similkameen division, and they had operated a few of the rooms for supportive housing in the off-season, but of course they were all taken away in-season. So now they will be operated year-round for mental health and addictions and people that are at risk of homelessness. That society is going to take over the operation of the property, and we will make an agreement with them.

J. Kwan: Of those operators, for the last one, the minister identified that it would just be the society that would sort of carry on with the operation. For the other projects, could the minister identify which ones were tendered out and which ones were put through a process of selection for the operators?

Hon. R. Coleman: I know that all the first ones were tendered out to a process. Other ones were identified by organizations. Some were tendered, and other ones were groups that we would like to operate this, because we have a particular client group. I don't have that detailed information here today, but I'm happy to get it for the member.

J. Kwan: I'll just receive that from the minister at a later time, and that's fine.

On to the relocation question. For these eight projects, some of the projects were vacant, and I think there were a couple that were not. Certainly, for the ten projects that were purchased, most of them, I think, were occupied.

[1115]

Could the minister please outline for me what the relocation plan was and the process that the ministry embarked on for those units that were occupied?

Hon. R. Coleman: First of all, the current tenancy arrangements will remain unchanged for the tenants in the buildings. Oftentimes these buildings have people who actually need our services or are actually accessing our services. But the living conditions will improve as we make renovations to bring life, health and safety systems up to standard — which a lot of these buildings were not — as well as the support from experienced community-
[ Page 13931 ]
based non-profit, as well as the support services brought into the building.

So those, when they became vacant, would then be tied into the other processes around outreach workers and what have you.

Some of them are vacant, so I'll read those out for the member. The 18 units in Prince George. The Dominion Hotel. Penticton is partially vacant. Vancouver Backpackers is vacant. The Jamboree, the hotel in Williams Lake, is vacant, as is the Mission one on Grand St. The Grand Street Lodge is vacant.

J. Kwan: Just to clarify, did I hear correctly the minister say that of those that were occupied, then, those tenants would not have to move out of those existing hotel units? Did I hear the minister correctly?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, that's correct. The tenancies remain unchanged for those people who are occupying the units. Now, in some cases, if the renovation is extensive, we'll do it floor by floor. We may move people within the building. Or if somebody thinks that they're being disrupted unnecessarily, we'll move them to another building, but they do not lose a tenancy with us.

J. Kwan: And for these projects, is it based on a month-to-month tenancy?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yes, they are. I think all of our social housing stock is month-to-month tenancies in B.C.

J. Kwan: Are the operators of the hotels, the non-profits, given an administrative fee for the operation?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, they do. We basically set up budgets for the building, including the operating cost of administration, and then we flow that subsidy to the building.

Obviously, the tenancy costs — the rent that is paid by the tenants — are part of the equation, like it is under any other project we do. We cover enough of the…. I don't have the actual budgets in front of me, but if they're being run the same as all the other buildings I'm familiar with, there would be enough there to cover some administration for the society to be able to run the project, and the supports and what have you would be subsidized in with the building so that the society is kept whole.

J. Kwan: The renovation costs. Does that include new furniture and the like, if that's necessary? I assume that many of them would actually need new furniture and so on for those units. Does the government pay for that?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yes, it does. We're putting in basic furniture, when we do the renovations, to get rid of the old stuff and bring in something that's obviously new. We're doing that as we do the renovations so that we can make that changeover.

J. Kwan: Is there a budget for things like bedbugs and the like? That tends to be an ongoing problem and continues to be a problem for many of these hotels and for the non-profit sector alike.

It's not just the slumlord who runs the SROs but the non-profits who really struggle to try and deal with this in an effective way. Sometimes some non-profits are struggling really hard, because it costs a lot of money to keep on doing it, and there's just no way of getting around it. Is there a budget allocated to deal with this effectively for these SRO purchases?

[1120]

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, we do, in their budgets. If they have an extermining problem, we'll step up with additional money to help with bedbugs. We actually have today, because we're…. As the member knows, bedbugs are a significant challenge not just in the properties that the government has but even in the private sector buildings. We actually now have bedbug-sniffing dogs that can go into facilities and tell us where the bedbugs are so we can target our remediation to get them early. That's a new innovation that we're trying with bedbugs, because we're trying to find a long-term solution for it. It was a new one for me, too.

It's about trying to find and locate where they are and then attack them before they expand to the rest of the facility, because in some cases, when they get out of control, it's a real tough thing for a building, and it's very expensive, as you know. But in our buildings, we try and keep ahead and fight these things. We do know that we always have a little bit of contingency because we know that sometime we may have to spend some extra dollars on a particular facility.

J. Kwan: I assume, then, that I could get the details on the budget allocation for this aspect of the non-profits that are running projects at the briefing. Would that be reasonable to expect? I would be interested in finding out exactly how much money is allocated and where it is targeted. How does one go about getting those dollars, and is it an ongoing stream of operational dollars?

As the minister well understands, once you deal with the bedbug situation, it's not like it will go away. It comes back. It's like that cat with nine lives, except these bedbugs have many, many more than nine lives. They just keep coming back, and the cost is very expensive, let alone the human cost, of course, in terms of the discomfort and the illnesses and diseases that it causes for the people who live in those units.

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, no problem with that — dealing with that at a briefing level. It is an ongoing
[ Page 13932 ]
challenge for us, as the member would know, because when she was the minister, I'm sure it was a challenge for them at that time, as well, with regards to this particular little vermin.

If somebody had a solution for them…. We'd love to hear if anybody has a new innovative solution for these things, because they can be an absolute pain in the neck for our operators and for us. We don't want them in our buildings, so it's a constant battle to make sure that we don't.

J. Kwan: I'm very pleased to hear this, I have to say, because one of the issues that we learned in terms of how, for example, income assistance recipients are being dealt with, with the bedbug problems in their units, where the operator is not sort of changing the furniture and so on…. They go to welfare to ask for some supports for a new bed or whatever the case may be. They often don't get it. What they get is a plastic cover, at best. At best they get a plastic cover. As we know, a plastic cover actually doesn't do the trick.

It's really quite sad, to be honest with you, for people to have to live in those conditions and really have no choice. They have no other alternative. So now that I know of these operating dollars that are allocated to fight bedbugs to assist the societies, I think that's good news. I'll be very interested to learn more about it to see how much is allocated and to make sure the societies have access to that for the betterment of the people who are living in these already, frankly, deplorable housing conditions.

The other question I have for the minister, of course, is that I see on this list of projects, there are…. Well, let me ask more specifically for these projects. We know what the Mission project is for. It's for a former care facility. The Hansel and Gretel project is for people with mental illness.

The Astoria hotel and the Jamboree — are those just regular housing, if you will, in terms of the clientele that it targets, or is there a specific group which those two hotels would be targeting?

[1125]

Hon. R. Coleman: Well, none of these would be classified as ordinary housing. They're all from mental health and addictions. They're all for people that are at risk of homelessness. They're people who are the most difficult and hard-to-house. That's what the whole plan is.

Although it's the Canadian Mental Health Association in the South Okanagan, which is the name on it, they will actually have housing for both people with mental health and addictions at that location. A lot of times, the two go together. You can't separate out an addiction, many times, from mental illness. Sometimes you need to stabilize the person with the addiction so you can actually identify how you can treat the mental illness long term and then turn their lives around. Each one of them is basically geared to that clientele on each one of the projects.

J. Kwan: I think I heard from the minister that there are two aboriginal operators running the list of projects that the minister read out earlier. Can I assume correctly that those are aboriginal-targeted projects — or projects that are targeted for aboriginal communities?

Hon. R. Coleman: Not specifically targeted, no. As the member knows, the first nations community in British Columbia is overrepresented in the mental health, addictions and homelessness issues, particularly on the homeless side.

With the intent, when we get first nations operators, we've been trying to build capacity with them to be able to run facilities. We think it's important, whether it be Williams Lake or another community where the friendship society or someone else is running it, that some of the cultural sensitivities for people who come into that housing would be there for first nations.

I think the tendency would be that there would be a larger percentage in those facilities, but they're not precluded from having non-aboriginals in them.

J. Kwan: Did the minister consider running aboriginal-specific projects to target the aboriginal community, given the disproportionate number of people from the aboriginal community who are homeless relative to their population base?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, we did that — not in this package. But there was a $50 million fund that came through from the federal government for first nations off-reserve housing. We specifically went out to a proposal calling for expressions of interest with first nations.

I have to give the first nations community in British Columbia credit on this, because they did step up to the plate in relationship with the Aboriginal Housing Management Association and their friendship centres to come into the proposal call and start to get these built.

We are the only jurisdiction in the country that has actually got the money and the proposals out the door to satisfy the federal funding — which is a credit, frankly, to AHMA, which is the Aboriginal Housing Management Association, and B.C. Housing working together to do that.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember how many units that is, but it's in the hundreds that are being delivered for that particular group through that particular program, in addition to this other stuff.

J. Kwan: I would certainly advocate that while those initiatives are welcomed, more certainly needs to be done.
[ Page 13933 ]
I meet with the aboriginal community regularly, and I see it in my community regularly — the disproportionate number of people from the aboriginal sector who are in desperate need for safe, secure affordable housing and supportive programs.

I don't need to go into, of course, the historical issues related to that and the traumas which many aboriginal people experienced through the residential school experience and so on.

I would simply say that while those initiatives are welcome, an ongoing permanent program needs to be in place, frankly, not just for the aboriginal community but all throughout British Columbia by way of safe, secure affordable housing.

I want to ask the minister this question. It was brought to my attention just prior to Christmas actually — a project in Burnaby called Aunt Leah's. It is a wonderful little project where they provide support and housing for young teen moms. It was minuscule in terms of the cost to operate that project out in Burnaby.

[1130]

They were slated to close, unfortunately, because the funding dried up. I believe some of that is federal funding that just dried up for them. I know that they were in the process of engaging with the minister or hoping to have a meeting with the minister.

So for the Aunt Leah project, which I don't see on this list here — on the eight initiatives under this $30 million supplemental estimates — I'm wondering why not. Did the minister get the chance to meet with folks from Aunt Leah?

Hon. R. Coleman: I've heard of the name. I haven't had a meeting with regards to it that I can recall. If it was for teens, it may be with Children and Families, and that's why it wouldn't have come to this particular ministry. We don't do youth housing. But what I'll do…. We'll send a note to get some details for the member, and we'll try and get back to you as soon as possible with the details.

J. Kwan: I would appreciate that. The reason why I raise it is because in that discussion the hope and expectation at that time was that there would be some sort of scheduled meeting with the minister directly on it. So if the minister could check on that to let me know, that would be great.

I also see that this $30 million estimates does not include any of the funding for the city's 12 sites. The city's 12 sites, the minister will recall, were announced more than a year ago now. The minister was on record to say that it was a bold move and that it was to be fast-tracked and so on.

I suspect that the government was hoping that there would be some federal dollars allocated for the 12 sites. The federal government came through with an announcement saying that the priorities are seniors and families, so that really precluded the priorities the province has in terms of addressing the homelessness crisis for people with mental health issues and addiction challenges and so on.

Could the minister please enlighten me? Where will the funds come from to address these 12 sites, and when can we see construction actually taking place? When can we see the shovel in the ground? What is the time line for the development of these 12 sites?

Hon. R. Coleman: You have a variety of questions there, so I will try and answer them all. I think the earliest site available to start would be April 1, 2009, with one of the Vancouver sites.

We've been taking them all through process. We actually have start dates that we think are the dates that they will be available to start, both on the MOUs in Vancouver and the MOUs outside of Vancouver. We have them in Surrey and in Victoria and what have you.

You know, even though it has taken a year-plus in Vancouver to get to this stage, where we could probably now know that we're going to have the site and could go to tender…. That's fast for Vancouver, as the member knows. The Vancouver sites. We think that we could probably get into the ground on six of them in 2009.

The capital. If the member looks at the budget in various areas like "Other" under "Capital," there is $800-and-some-odd million in capital. That's the funds that we would go to access as the projects became available. So for each one, we would deal with the central capital now — go and say that this site is ready and we need the capital for it, etc. We will get the commitment on the capital as we bring them forward, we're told.

The challenge is to get them ready to go in the ground, so we can say that this is the price and we know what we've got to spend and now this is the allocation we're looking for from the capital funds.

There is no resistance to any of the sites in government. That's just the process, and the reality is that they just haven't been ready to go up to now. Capital is not usually reflected in the operating budget of a ministry. So it's not reflected in the operating budget. It's in the capital program of government, which…. Government has identified the significant amount of capital it's going to invest.

There's another process going on at the same time, even though it doesn't affect this. Obviously, we would love to have the federal government change some of its priorities with regards to its funding that they've announced for housing in Canada. Right now its priorities would centre around…. The member is correct. One piece of it is disability and seniors, which we agree with. We think that there are some great opportunities on matching of funds there.

[1135]
[ Page 13934 ]

They do have another program or position that's been expressed by CMHC, where they want to concentrate on renovations of social housing in Canada. As the member knows, we've had a pretty good record in B.C. of maintaining our sites.

So there are two parameters that we have to deal with. I have written to the minister, and I've had the conversation with the federal minister, and I think we'll get past this. One of them is that renovations to be done have to be on sites that were jointly done by both provincial and federal government together. That precludes any renovations to anything the province has built or bought unilaterally in the last 15 or 20 years.

As the member knows, in B.C. since about 1990 we've been the only ones unilaterally doing housing in B.C., because there have been no programs federally. So then we're going back past 1990 to look for renovations.

We think it would be better if they partnered up to accelerate some additional projects on the ground, to allow us to actually be more aggressive on additional MOUs with cities. Our overtures have been that we would like them to match up with us.

That isn't a precursor to us doing the sites, but we think it would just allow us to leverage more to do more. So we have that discussion going on federally right now, and the outcome of that isn't going to affect us going and asking for the capital as each site comes available.

I don't have it right in front of me, but I did see a briefing a few days ago about the status of each one of the MOU sites. I'd be glad to share that with the member — the briefing.

J. Kwan: Great. I would appreciate that very much — to get an update on those 12 sites in terms of where things are at.

Did I understand the minister clearly then, too, that on the capital cost side of things, within the government's approved budget for capital infrastructure, the 12 sites…? When they're ready to go from the city of Vancouver, the minister will be able to access those capital dollars from that envelope? And that a commitment has been already made, Treasury Board approvals have gone through, and they're just waiting for the final go-ahead here from the city of Vancouver on their process?

Hon. R. Coleman: I wish it was that simple. We will bring forward the site when it's ready to go and ask for the appropriate capital for the building.

This isn't just about the 12. Like I said earlier, capital is now centrally managed in government. There's a department within government that has its hands on the capital. It used to be the capital envelopes. Where it said, "You have an envelope or a borrowing envelope," in the past, now it's managed differently. But I think it has been very good, because it actually has identified for us how capital can be managed better.

On the other side of it, you come in with a project, and you get your approvals. You still have to make the case that it's value for dollar and that tenders make sense. You can't come in with something that makes absolutely no dollars-to-cents sense, so you're going to have to do that.

I am comfortable that the commitment exists, as I've stated it, that as we get the projects done, we'll be able to fund them.

J. Kwan: So the funding has not yet been allocated, but there's an envelope of funding under the capital initiatives, for lack of a better word, to which the minister can go and apply.

Which ministry is responsible for all of that capital funding? Where is it housed in? Is it Premier, or is it Finance? Where is that housed in?

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah, it's under Finance.

J. Kwan: So it's under Finance. Who, then, will give the nod on the allocation of those dollars?

Within that capital envelope, is it allocated, for example, that a portion of moneys goes to transportation infrastructure, a portion goes to health infrastructure, a portion goes to housing infrastructure, a portion goes to education infrastructure, etc? Is it allocated in that way, or is this just a global fund and a free-for-all, and everybody can just come and ask to see whether or not you are lucky in getting the approval from Finance?

Hon. R. Coleman: There are some envelopes under the capital funding that talk about post-secondary and public transit and those. But there's also one called "Other," which is about $560 million or something, if I remember correctly.

[1140]

That envelope would be…. Well, frankly, we wouldn't need that envelope for what we have in the pipeline to accomplish. We will come into that capital fund when we're ready, but the challenge is to be ready.

We have some projects that I think will come forward sooner than others, simply because they'll get ready and be rezoned. The development permit will be ready to go, and the building permit. We can tender it and go out and find what the real numbers are. Then at that point we go and access those funds by making our request.

All things being equal, given the cooperation we've had on capital the last few years with regards to housing, I think we'll be fine.

J. Kwan: The capital dollars for those initiatives, then…. Is it expected that all of it will come from the government? Or is the minister expecting some of those dollars will come from…? Maybe the federal government, so we noted that. But might some of those dollars come from, let's say, the private sector or other sources?
[ Page 13935 ]

Hon. R. Coleman: Oh, we welcome any partnership. I mean, if somebody comes to us and says, "We'll do this particular building, and we'll put up a million dollars of capital to match up with whatever you're putting into it," we welcome that. Anytime we can leverage dollars, it means we can do more. That's why the relationship with municipalities has actually been one of the good-news stories in B.C.

It's not just Vancouver — which, frankly, is one of the municipalities that have come forward. The sites that we have in Vancouver are spread out over…. The dates, if I recall, on our expectations of the 12 sites go anywhere from April 1, 2009, to April 2011 as start dates, depending how fast they get the zoning and the development permit and all that done. So we have the ability to manage our capital over two or three fiscal cycles, as well, with regards to these projects.

But yeah, if Streetohome, for instance, wanted to match up funds with us on a particular project, we welcome that. If a non-profit, because that has happened in the past…. Someone like Salvation Army or another group has come forward and said, "We have some capital we'd like to match with you" — or Covenant House, which has also been a good partner with regards to some of these things.

We welcome any of that and will work with partnerships because we think that's just a good relationship, quite frankly, to have. If we can build those relationships, so much the better for all of us.

J. Kwan: Yes, no doubt government will welcome any dollars from other sectors — charitable, non-profit, the religious community, faith community and so on. So I would have no doubt about that.

More specifically, is the minister expecting some dollars to come in from these other sectors? Or is it just that the minister is hoping that there might be other dollars coming in from other sectors?

Hon. R. Coleman: They're not necessary for the projects to go ahead. What it is, though, is welcome. I mean, the biggest benefit we're getting from this thing that started a couple of years ago when we started talking to municipalities with MOUs was: "If you can get free land and then you can get the development cost charges forgiven" — in some cases they do, and in some cases they don't — "then some of your off-site services are taken into account."

We've had communities…. The member would know this, because I think there was a project back in the '90s where we built a project in B.C. for people with disabilities. One of the requirements was a $50,000 wash bay for the cars in the facility, and all the clients were going to be either paraplegics or quadriplegics. That was an unnecessary cost.

Other costs, like planting larger trees on boulevards and all those things, are just costs that come down to the cost of the project for being able to make it affordable for the people that live in it and for government's investment.

We built our business case on these around a relationship on the land with municipalities, but nothing else precludes us from moving forward.

J. Kwan: Yeah, I certainly appreciate that. When we were in government, for example, we committed on an ongoing basis to a permanent housing program — 600 units of affordable housing each and every year.

[1145]

As time evolved, actually, local governments sometimes came up with free land. The charitable organizations sometimes came up with some moneys of their own. The faith community often participated in partnership, as well, and even the private sector, in terms of developers ponying up some dollars.

We were able to stretch 600 units to 1,200 units a year, which was a proud record for British Columbia and a record I'm very proud of on the NDP side — a record which I hope the government will beat on their side. If the Liberals could actually meet and beat the NDP record of building 1,200 units of affordable housing each and every year as a permanent housing program, that is something to celebrate for all of us.

I'll await that in the next few months and see what happens before the election is called.

Now, on these sites, the minister mentioned six projects that he hopes to get underway. Could he identify for us which six?

Hon. R. Coleman: I'll do that for the member, but I don't have it here. I reviewed it in my office a couple of days ago, because I was looking at all the projects in B.C. I don't have it here, so maybe I can share it with her at the briefing or get it to her later today.

J. Kwan: I appreciate that. I think, to my recollection, the minister said that the time frame to get these projects off the ground is sometime around April 2009 — between April 2009 to 2011. Am I right?

Interjection.

J. Kwan: In terms of the time frame, I was just asking the minister about the time frame for these projects once again. I think I heard the minister say earlier that April 2009 would be when the minister expects the projects to get off the ground — that is to say, shovel-in-the-ground construction beginning.

Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah. My understanding from the schedule I've been given, all things being equal, is that some of the projects will be in a position to start in April 2009. Others are scheduled for May, others July. Some of them, because of the length of time for rezoning and
[ Page 13936 ]
the design or whatever, could be another year from now or even 18 months, depending on the municipality, depending on them getting their end done and the approvals in place to actually build them.

Like I mentioned earlier with the one in Coquitlam, with the member from Coquitlam, we finally got the MOU to us last week. The property isn't zoned. They aren't forgiving DCCs. So they have a zoning process to go through to take another year. Even though MOUs are in place, it doesn't mean these guys have actually got them zoned and ready to go for us.

We're paying the money to do all that process. We're paying for the rezoning, the development permit process and all of that to get these things ready to go in the ground — you know, from government. But we get to a point where the next thing is, "Can you give us the final approval so that we know that we can actually build this with working drawings and go out to tender to see how much it's going to cost us to build it?" — and then go get the money.

It's all part of the process. But we do have a couple, if I remember the list correctly, that are ready to go, we think, by April. That would be the earliest for any of them. I think one or two of those are in Vancouver, and then the rest go out throughout the rest of the year.

J. Kwan: I think that information would be embedded in the MOUs with the city of Vancouver, in terms of the start — or the MOUs not just with the city of Vancouver but the MOUs signed with the municipalities on the start time, which the minister had committed to sharing with me.

Hon. R. Coleman: No. The MOU is just an MOU on the land. The start date is governed by how fast the municipality and the design takes place during the period of time of trying to get the zoning done, which sometimes is extensive neighbourhood consultation, and then to a development permit process and to building permit processes.

In the MOU it identifies the land and the number of the project. But then we go from there to the number of units designed, who the client group would be and all that stuff and bring that through the zoning process. That's not detailed in the MOUs.

J. Kwan: I'll be interested in getting the information from the minister, too, on…. Specifically, which are the problematic projects that are slowing this down, and what is the problem? Is it a zoning question? Is it a planning process, development process from the city, or what is it? So that we can get on with it, frankly — get on with it.

[1150]

In the meantime we have a homelessness crisis. People are in need of housing, and people have made commitments. The city of Vancouver already said that they would fast-track these projects. Yes, it is a little bit faster, I guess, than a normal project, but if that's what's holding it up, then there needs to be a talk with the city of Vancouver to get on with things. If the funding is not in place, then there needs to be a talk with the minister to get on with things.

But in either case, my interest is to find out and identify where the problems are so that we can get on with it and get these units developed. I believe that's what we all want to see, Minister.

Hon. R. Coleman: Thanks to the member. But I do just caution that we're not…. I know the member is from Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, but we're focusing on the whole province with these MOUs. I can tell the member that it's not just Vancouver that may have some difficulties with particular sites.

Sometimes we get a site, like we've had in one community, that the municipality wanted to put up, and it was a huge public outcry about "No way that housing can go there" — right? So the community came back after we spent a number of months on it and said: "Do you think we could find you a different site?" Each one of these sites, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, has different challenges as far as the public process is concerned.

Then there is the issue of what you're going to allow for density or design. There's no question that Vancouver is probably the most complex jurisdiction in the province to do this in, but given the time frame in which they've moved some of these forward, I don't have any complaints about what they're doing. If there's something, when I sit down with my guys, that I think you could help us with and speed something up in Vancouver, I'm glad to give you that information.

But I do think the message is clear in most of these municipalities that this partnership needs to work, and I don't think that we have staff deliberately at any level trying to slow anything down. I think it's probably just a case that there are some complexities on an individual site. It could be site servicing. It could be environmental. It could be density that we have to work through as well as trying to design a building. Sometimes we have to work all those things up before we get to design.

It is a challenge, but I'd be happy to share any challenges we're facing with the member with regards to Vancouver and any other members opposite whose community has MOUs with us.

J. Kwan: Then perhaps in that briefing I'll be looking forward to sitting down with the minister's staff to go through all of these MOUs, not just for Vancouver but rather for the province, as the critic for homelessness. The reason why I say that…. Again, we know that there are 10,000 to 15,000 people across the province of British
[ Page 13937 ]
Columbia who are in need of housing, who are sleeping on the streets of our communities today.

I have, particularly, an interest in Vancouver. Why? I'm from Vancouver–Mount Pleasant. In the Downtown Eastside community I honestly have to say that I don't think I've seen my community this desperate since my days as an advocate.

I've got to tell you, I didn't have white hair then. Now I do, and I look at my community and I really see the challenges that are there. I don't think I've experienced it where I literally…. There are mornings that I go walk the community. I have to step over bodies. I have never done that before, and I used to be a housing advocate. I used to do the homelessness count in my community and in the downtown core.

Things are quite desperate. So my interest is to see how we can expedite getting these projects up and running. I suspect that the minister is right that perhaps the municipalities are not trying to slow it down, that they're not trying to put up roadblocks.

The flip side of that, of course, is: can they do something more? Can they do more to expedite, to move this forward? And that question is, of course, always top of mind for me and no doubt for the minister as well. I'd be happy to sit down and to go through those initiatives with the minister.

I am noting the time, and I'm getting the nod from the Chair. On that note, I'm going to move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:54 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The Committee of Supply, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. J. McIntyre moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:55 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

Copyright © 2009: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

ISSN 1499-2175