![](\"https:\/\/i.postimg.cc\/BbRhmwN9\/IMG-9537-res.jpg\")
<\/center>\n Under light drizzle, a cable TV reporter stood at the corner of Burdett Avenue and Quadra Street, leaning onto her camera like a pilgrim resting on her staff, alert for signs of movement. \u201cThey have a spokesperson, but so far I haven\u2019t gotten her to talk with me,\u201d she whispered. When a police cruiser whipped around the corner, she tore down the street, hoping to capture video footage of police interactions with Tent City residents.
\n Directly across Quadra, I stopped at Anglican Christ Church Cathedral, where a parishioner who gave tours told me, \u201cI\u2019m sympathetic, of course. I know those people need a place to live, but not there<\/em>. I wish they\u2019d go. The city needs to come up with a better plan.\u201d
\n Daily, I walked by the tent city occupying the greenspace that adjoined Victoria, British Columbia\u2019s provincial court buildings. Whenever I passed, residents were raking and bagging leaves, then storing them behind manicured shrubbery backing on the greenspace. The first day I observed 12 tents. By week\u2019s end, 24 tents in various colors, both singletons and multi-person, formed a crescent around an open space.
\n Every morning, warmly-dressed residents sat in a circle talking. By week\u2019s end, about 40 people\u2014more women and young people than I earlier saw\u2014engaged in circle conversations.
\n One morning, a young woman pirouetted from the greenspace and stood staring into oncoming traffic as if star gazing. I yelled, \u201cLook at me,\u201d reached out my hand, she grabbed it, I yanked her to the sidewalk, released, and she walked on.
\n\t I asked around and pieced together that for over a decade Victoria\u2019s homeless had intermittently formed tent cities on public ground and battled with courts and police for the right to pitch tents. They scored a major victory in 2008 when B.C.\u2019s Supreme Court determined that, if sufficient shelter space was unavailable, the homeless may erect shelter. The rationale rested on Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms related to \u201clife, liberty and security of person\u201d because denying homeless people the right to camp would deprive them of sleep, something necessary \u201cto any kind of security, liberty or human flourishing.\u201d The decision was bolstered by Section 15, guaranteeing equality before the law, because disallowing camping disproportionately affects the homeless. In response, the City created Parks Bylaws that allowed camping on Victoria\u2019s public lands between 7 p.m. (8 p.m. DST) and 7 a.m.
\n \tVictoria\u2019s police and bylaw officers often jostled homeless from slumber and yanked tents from their moorings so campers would be up and out pronto<\/em>. Being evicted every morning exposed the homeless to inclement weather, wrought hardship on night workers who had no daytime sleeping place, and impeded formation of \u201chome\u201d that comes with staying put.
\n \tIn summer 2015, Victoria\u2019s city government began exploring the feasibility of creating a permanent<\/em>, sanctioned Tent City for the homeless in Topaz City Park, where homeless would not be required to remove tents during daylight hours. NIMBYs quickly opposed the proposal. After the Topaz proposal withered, the Tent City abutting the provincial courthouse began gathering. Because it occupied B.C. provincial<\/em> land rather than Victoria city<\/em> land, it didn\u2019t fall under Victoria\u2019s bylaws. Homeless could legally tent 24\/7. However, this speck of land could offer home to only a tiny portion of Victoria\u2019s homeless. <\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
![](\"https:\/\/i.postimg.cc\/PJkGxJs8\/IMG-9578-res.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
After a week of walking by, I wandered into the center of Tent City. That seemed to operate like a key. All around, people emerged, talked with neighbors, cooked and shared food, raked leaves, re-staked tents, folded bedrolls, talked on cells, tied down bikes, or readied to leave to work, pray, play, or wander into town. Residents were more diverse than I first thought: roughly 40% female, 20% First Nations, half under 35. ***<\/p>\n Media reported B.C.\u2019s government planned to open two temporary shelters (My Place and the Youth Custody Centre) and transitional housing (Mount Edwards Court) to eliminate Tent City. However, because Tent City tended to attract the most marginalized and criminalized, its residents stood at competitive disadvantage in securing admission. Some wondered whether moving to Tent City would up their priority. Margaret, among the first My Place applicants, was instantly denied. Ashley Mollison, a self-styled rogue activist, told me, \u201cThe easier to house get housed first. When Mount Edwards opened as a 38-bed facility, only four people from Super In-Tent City [SIC] got in.\u201d \u201cThe current offerings confuse housing with home. A house may or may not be a home, where you feel safe and welcome and experience a sense of belonging. Many residents have found a home and community on the courthouse lawn and should not be displaced until there are permanent solutions and a process for respectfully and meaningfully engaging people living in poverty in the process of developing and delivering those solutions.\u201d<\/p>\n After campers refused to budge, B.C.\u2019s government applied for an injunction on February 29, claiming campers were trespassing, defied orders to leave despite offers of other housing, and compromised health and safety by creating fire hazards, defecating in and around the camp, leaving used needles and syringes in the area, and engaging in criminal activity. \u201cRather than use the coercive power of the courts and police to displace this tent city, we are calling for the province to see this moment as an opportunity to reverse policies and political processes that have caused displacement and homelessness. B.C.\u2019s government again sought an injunction. It announced purchase of a 147-bed facility, touted as permanent housing. An article by Ashley in The Volcano<\/em> anticipated the tricky process of \u201cnegotiating service provider rules and working toward greater resident control.\u201d On July 5, Hinkson ruled, \u201cthe encampment is unsafe for those living\u00a0there and for the neighboring residents\u00a0and businesses and cannot be permitted to\u00a0continue.\u201d He said SIC\u2019s residents had to leave as soon as alternative housing was offered and SIC must irrevocably close by August 8. Commented Logan, \u201cPeople were given only three days to register for housing. Now, there\u2019s a metal fence around Tent City. Nobody new can move in, only out.\u201d That 12-foot-high fence reinforced othering and criminalization of homeless people. Using the fence as a bulletin board, residents decorated it with posters. ***<\/p>\n In April 2017, the JS Resident Council (RC)\u2019s eight-month status report claimed living conditions were worse than at SIC and issued four demands for rectification: \u201cWe found home, community, safety, and security at [SIC]. The end of daily displacement was good for all. We had a home base where we could keep our belongings, take the time to start accessing other social supports and health services and get to know each other, learn to respect one another, and look after one another. *** <\/p>\n After SIC emptied, new tent cities intermittently popped elsewhere around Victoria. One of the latest in Nanaimo to Victoria\u2019s north is DisconTent City. The 70 plus tent cities emerging throughout BC, including rural areas, have experienced similar histories. New ones emerge when existing ones are shut down and residents seek alternative sites; when residents lacking basic amenities feel stigmatized; and, when governments try to hide homelessness rather work with people living in poverty to create sustainable solutions. ***<\/p>\n \tA January 2, 2018 article in The Guardian<\/em> by Leilani Fahra, the UN rapporteur on housing, argues that housing is a human rights issue: \u201cInstead of viewing them as needy beneficiaries, objects of charity, or, worse, as criminals, [governments] must instead recognize that people who are homeless also have rights and are active citizens who should be involved in decisions affecting their lives.\u201d SIC Society responds, \u201cShelter mats will not solve the issue of encampments in parks because shelter mats are not housing. A shelter mat does not allow a person to improve their health, complicates rather than simplifies day to day functioning, and does not provide space for socializing, safety, or comfort. Shelter mats are the opposite of rights-based housing.\u201d Claiming Home Under light drizzle, a cable TV reporter stood at the corner of Burdett Avenue and Quadra Street, leaning onto her camera like a pilgrim resting on her staff, alert for signs of movement. \u201cThey have a spokesperson, but so far I haven\u2019t gotten her to talk with me,\u201d she whispered. When a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":324,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":[]},"categories":[379,382],"tags":[388],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\n As I reached the epicenter, it struck me: I carry a medium-sized backpack between my shoulders. I\u2019m dressed in layers. My running shoes\u2019 heels have been worn to nubs. I look no different from them because they look no single way. Would they think I wanted to move in?
\n I nearly stumbled over a woman in her late 20s, wearing a blue parka and jeans, whose \u201cHi there!\u201d woke me up. I introduced myself, \u201cI\u2019m an old guy who sometimes writes.\u201d Seeing no objections, I asked, \u201cWhy\u2019s Tent City here<\/em>? Who chooses<\/em> to live here and why?\u201d
\n \u201cLots of people hate shelters. So many rules!\u201d she shook her head. \u201cIt\u2019s about control. The worst is, after you\u2019re settled, they kick you back onto the street. It doesn\u2019t matter what your needs are, even if you\u2019re medically fragile or mentally ill. Here, we set the rules. It\u2019s safer, especially for women. And it\u2019s ours. I\u2019m Jane, by the way.\u201d
\n I asked, \u201cWhat d\u2019you<\/em> want?\u201d
\n \u201cA place I can call my own, where the sun streams in, and a dog I can take on walks.\u201d
\n \u201cDoes Tent City have a defined leadership structure?\u201d
\n \u201cThere\u2019s someone who handles PR. Somebody else handles the protest.\u201d
\n \u201cWho\u2019s handling the protest?\u201d
\n \u201cThat\u2019s Margaret,\u201d she said, pointing to the rear of the greenspace. When Jane\u2019s cell rang, she said, \u201cI have to take this.\u201d I gave her space.
\n A man around 45, in jeans and denim jacket, was tying down a tent in the rear left. I walked over, caught his eye, \u201cWhere I can find Margaret?\u201d
\n \u201cShe just left for an hour. You\u2019re welcome to hang around. I\u2019m Mark.\u201d We shook hands.
\n After introducing myself, I asked, \u201cWhat kind of support\u2019re you getting from the community?\u201d
\n \u201cSome sympathetic people spend a night. Law students\u2019re helping out. And donations, we get all sorts. We threw a block party to meet the neighbors too.\u201d
\n \u201cWhat\u2019s going on when people\u2019re sitting in a circle?\u201d
\n \u201cWe have an all-hands-meeting, talking circles, every morning at 10, rain or shine. If people have a dispute, that\u2019s where things get worked out.\u201d
\n \u201cWould you say you\u2019re self-governing?\u201d
\n \u201cI\u2019d call it self-management. You\u2019re welcome to join our talking circles. Or just observe. You can pitch a tent too.\u201d
\n A tall woman around 30 was handing out green flyers from the poverty center, telling residents, \u201cDrop by any Thursday about possible jobs.\u201d She had a nosebleed and was doing a poor job stanching the flow with toilet paper. Five feet away, a blissed-out 30-year-old in a lumberjack jacket smiled, \u201cHi, I\u2019m John.\u201d
\n Mark\u2019s personal campsite was littered with parts of every size, shape, and material. \u201cLooks like you\u2019re running a repair shop,\u201d I laughed.
\n \u201cI sort of am.\u201d
\n I noticed two wheelchairs bordering his campsite. \u201cDoes one of the residents use a wheelchair?\u201d
\n \u201cNo. Those\u2019re discards. I\u2019m harvesting parts.\u201d
\n \u201cWhat kind of work d\u2019you do?\u201d
\n \u201cI did condo rehabs. Things slowed down after the crash in 2008. You learn to make do.\u201d
\n Mark said he\u2019d take me to Margaret in the law library. En route, he picked up a used syringe from behind the shrubbery buffering courthouse from campground.
\n \u201cYou\u2019re picking that up without gloves?\u201d
\n \u201cYou think I need gloves with these callouses?\u201d showing his palms. Then he called over another resident, handed her the syringe, \u201cPlease dispose of this safely.\u201d
\n \u201cD\u2019you know whose that was?\u201d
\n \u201cNo idea. People jump to the conclusion it must\u2019ve been a resident\u2019s. But people in those fancy houses,\u201d pointing across the street, \u201care just as likely to be using.\u201d
\n \u201cI saw a young woman exit onto Quadra, dazed like a deer in the headlights.\u201d
\n \u201cProbably somebody passing through. This is still a public thoroughfare.\u201d
\n At the courthouse, nobody requested ID. When we couldn\u2019t find Margaret, Mark suggested, \u201cMaybe she\u2019s back at her tent.\u201d
\n \u201cHow d\u2019you describe what you have here?\u201d I asked.
\n \u201cAn experiment in cooperative living.\u201d
\n After we exited the service entrance, Margaret spied us and flew a flight down. Her stark visage reminded me of a Katherine Kollwitz etching.
\n \u201cI\u2019m the mayor of Tent City and interface with the law. There\u2019s supposed to be a hearing tonight at the request of the landlord but we\u2019re not invited. I\u2019m trying to prepare for the hearing, find out who asked for it, and get myself invited.\u201d
\n \u201cBut how can there be a landlord? Isn\u2019t this provincial land?\u201d
\n \u201cThat\u2019s why what we\u2019ve heard makes no sense.\u201d
\n \u201cWhat\u2019re you trying to accomplish through the protest?\u201d
\n \u201cI don\u2019t think of it as a protest.\u201d
\n \u201cThen, what\u2019re you trying to accomplish?\u201d
\n \u201cIt should be legal for us to pitch tents 24\/7 on any<\/em> public land. We should be allowed to stay put wherever we wish, including city property, without fear of being thrown out.\u201d
\n Across the street, a man around 35 headed toward us from her rear. I wondered what laws we were violating. Margaret turned when he said, \u201cHi, Mom. I thought you might want something to eat.\u201d He handed her a sandwich and a 7-Up. After they exchanged words about talking later, he returned to his truck.
\n \u201cThat was my son, one of three. Between them, they pay $10,000 a month in taxes. They say to me, \u2018The apple doesn\u2019t fall far from the tree. So, Mom, what\u2019s happened to the tree?\u2019 I tell them, I\u2019m doing this is for my grandkids, so their generation has the right and choice.\u201d
\n \u201cHow d\u2019you react to people saying Tent City looks like a refugee camp?\u201d
\n \u201cDo people really believe that? Have they ever seen a real one? As a child, I came to Canada as a refugee. I don\u2019t see anyone welcoming new residents here except ourselves. Nobody\u2019s managing us; we manage ourselves. When conflicts arise, we deal with them democratically. We keep the park area clean. We even look out for passers through.\u201d
\n \u201cSome people call you socioeconomic<\/em> refugees.\u201d
\n \u201cMany of us\u2019re here because of economic displacement, disastrous social support systems, lack of affordable housing. Here\u2019s the truth: we haven\u2019t come to grips with the reality that climate change, poverty, and war make massive displacement the new normal. We haven\u2019t come to grips with the factors creating homelessness either.\u201d
\n \u201cWhat exactly d\u2019you<\/em> want?\u201d I asked.
\n \u201cSome of us choose to live as nomads. The law should bless our choice. For the others, there should be appropriate housing, where people are allowed to create homes without somebody running their lives.\u201d
\n I asked, \u201cWhat if you said that all of us, housed and homeless, are on a pilgrimage. We\u2019re traveling in a strange place. We own only what we carry on our backs. We\u2019re all moving toward the same elusive destination.\u201d
\n \u201cI\u2019ll have to research the word \u2018pilgrim\u2019 to see if that helps our case. I\u2019ve got to go prepare for tonight\u2019s hearing. Stop by any time to talk more. You know my tent. I\u2019ve got heat so we\u2019ll be warm and I always have hot coffee.\u201d <\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/i.postimg.cc\/GhxZzbGb\/IMG-9732-res.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n \tBy Christmas, with 120 residents, SIC continued operating on principles of inclusive diversity, mutual support, and nomadic fluidity. Lean-tos became interspersed among tents. Reps of social service agencies visited daily. The Cathedral offered a warm place to escape winter\u2019s coldest days, recharge cell phones, wash up, and use restrooms. For months, two deacons participated in talking circles. One editorialized, \u201cJesus would have been at home in Tent City, listening, laughing and gently teaching. He embraced non-traditional sources of wisdom. We too must meet wisdom in doorways, on park benches and in Tent Cities.\u201d The Anglican Bishop of B.C., Logan McMenemie, told me, \u201cIt was the last place I visited before starting my 300-mile-walk-of-reconciliation the length of Vancouver Island, and the first on my return.\u201d
\n \tOn January 8, 2016, B.C. government asked campers to move to temporary shelters. At a January 12 press conference, residents and allies rejected temporary shelters as a solution to homelessness and invited B.C.\u2019s government to meet to discuss \u201clasting, sustainable, meaningful\u201d ones. Campers claimed shelters created health and safety concerns, especially for women, but SIC fostered mutual support, offered protection, and promoted belonging. The prevailing view was, \u201cEverybody needs a home.\u201d Said Ashley, \u201cAs people put forth their demands, they engaged in the political act of creating that world in their everyday.\u201d
\n SIC leadership called rent supplements, institutional housing, and shelters \u201cfalse solutions\u201d and said that, by attempting to displace SIC, the government sought to hide homelessness rather than create long-term solutions. The Alliance Against Displacement (AAD)\u2019s The Volcano<\/em> said, SIC leadership was, \u201cbuilding a movement for<\/em> housing and against<\/em> displacement as a site of people\u2019s power.\u201d SIC came to symbolize \u201cthe power of homeless people to manage their own lives and homes.\u201d
\n Meanwhile, NIMBYs wanted SIC\u2019s occupants removed from the neighborhood to what amounted to internment camps outside the city. Appreciating Victoria\u2019s homeless want to stay in the city where they can tap fluid networks of associates, social service agencies, potential employers, and other sources of consolation, Logan said, \u201cThe diocese evaluated unoccupied properties it owns to offer them as prospective sites on which appropriate housing might be built. However, none were suitable because all available sites were outside Victoria.\u201d
\n Campers were given a February 25 deadline to vacate premises. On eviction day, AAD bussed in campers from other B.C. tent cities to support SIC residents in standing ground. University of Victoria professor Bernie Pauly editorialized:<\/p>\n
\n On April 5, B.C\u2019s Supreme Court Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson denied the injunction request: \u201cAny harms caused to tent city residents by displacement far outweighed the inconvenience caused by the existence of the tent city.\u201d Hinkson said displacing SIC would only exacerbate harms of homelessness by negatively impacting the health, safety and well-being of residents. He specified SIC\u2019s benefits: physical and mental health improvements (e.g., better sleep, reduction of drug-related harm, access to regular meals); greater access to social services; improved physical safety due to the strong community and resulting on-site conflict resolution and crisis de-escalation; and, safe storage for belongings. Cries of \u201cwe won\u201d erupted in the courtroom and overflowed into SIC.
\n NIMBYs like Mad As Hell Victoria<\/em> and Stop the Tent City<\/em> encouraged neighborhood house-dwellers to call police about unwanted persons. Carrying \u201cHomes Not Hate\u201d placards, allies handed donuts to passersby while engaging them in conversation. The government hired Portland Hotel Society (PHS) to manage SIC and, in May, clean drinking water, flush toilets and showers were installed. Residents claimed bringing in PHS undermined their ability to run their own homes and lives. PHS insisted it was different.
\n Opposition coalesced in May. Unsupported allegations were made that gang elements entered SIC and that two criminal activities\u2014drug dealing and a bicycle chop shop\u2014used SIC as their base. In reaction to media reports of increased crime and complaints from parents that children enrolled at the Cathedral\u2019s school were at heightened risk, a deacon formally reneged the Cathedral\u2019s support of SIC.
\n On May 27, the fire commissioner claimed SIC failed to comply with his May 11 safety order: “Structures are larger and flow together due to the flammable tarpaulins with little or no separation between the tents. Overall the danger to life created by the fire hazards is increasing and is considered to be only a matter of time before a serious fire incident occurs.” The B.C. government announced plans to request another injunction. The same day, a letter signed by over 100 B.C. academics said:<\/p>\n
\n\u201cThe critical question:\u00a0\u00a0Will your government continue a legacy of criminalization and displacement of homeless people or will you have the courage to see tent cities as a clarion call to action to change policies and invest in the housing units needed . . . and access to essential health and social services?<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n
\n On August 8, SIC residents and allies celebrated their \u201chard won victory\u201d of securing commitments of $60 million from the province and $30 million from the region to address the housing needs of the homeless, including 147 beds of \u201cpermanent, supportive housing\u201d on Johnson Street (JS). They released \u201ccollective demands for housing,\u201d which stressed resident self-determination and control; permanent homes rather than temporary shelters; processes of accountability for housing providers; absence of policing or surveillance in housing; sufficient privacy and living space; proper building maintenance; being allowed to have visitors and companion animals; and being treated with respect by housing staff.
\n After two months at JS, residents reported, \u201cIt is everything we hoped it wouldn\u2019t be and much worse. We continue to be criminalized. Instead of dealing with us directly, staff use the cops. Things are dire, but we are resilient!\u201d <\/p>\n
\n -Recognize our rights as renters\u00a0under the Residential Tenancy Act. This is not a medical facility and we are NOT sick people who need your help. We need our rights!
\n -Stop criminalizing us! (e.g., remove surveillance cameras and recording devices; stop calling police for mental health issues)
\n -Recognize our rights to freedom\u00a0of expression, association, and peaceful assembly (e.g., ensure access to common rooms; recognize the RC\u2019s legitimacy)
\n -Ensure our rights to life, liberty and security of the person! (e.g., provide areas to cook\/store food and securely store belongings)
\n In October, PHS announced plans to close JS\u2019s resident-run community room. Residents argued the \u201ccommon room is essential for building tenant power, decreasing isolation, and promoting health. Since moving, there have been 10 deaths [at JS] compared to 1 [at SIC].\u00a0Common spaces where we can watch over each other, help each other out, talk through our issues and vision for the future, are essential to our survival.\u201d Residents temporarily regained common room access.
\n In November, SIC Society (SIC residents, others in temporary\/precarious\/supportive housing, plus housed allies) reported:<\/p>\n
\n\u201cOur previous sense of a supportive community has been taken away. Restrictive guest policies contribute to isolation, further the harms of poverty and substance use, and put people at increasing risk of poor health and overdose deaths. Supportive housing does not live up to its commitment of support in an environment that puts surveillance and control ahead of social inclusion and collaboration.”<\/p>\n
\n SIC Society celebrated 2017\u2019s end by re-issuing \u201ccollective demands for just<\/em> housing.\u201d<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/i.postimg.cc\/7Y52nZp2\/IMG-9775-res.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n \tAfter the SIC experience of self-determination, belonging, mutual protection, and drawing on each other\u2019s strengths, former SIC residents entered JS motivated to perpetuate that experience. In almost all respects, SIC residents were disappointed: surveillance cameras in common areas generating records shared with police; tight partnerships with police; and barriers to inviting guests, using common rooms, and even maintaining the RC.
\n Hardly any former SIC residents still lived at JS in early 2018. The rest died, were evicted, or left \u201cvoluntarily.\u201d Some received their first criminal charges while living there. Margaret, Jane and Mark desperately wanted JS to work, but also fought for bigger societal changes. Margaret squeaked in and, the last I heard, still hangs on. Jane became heavily involved in the RC, was evicted with criminal mischief charges for taking action when she saw residents\u2019 rights violated, and now inhabits a forest outside Victoria. Mark, too, is again homeless. <\/p>\n
\n \tBernie confides, \u201cWhen I look back, if I\u2019d done one thing differently, I wish I\u2019d screamed louder when I saw people thoroughly stigmatizing the residents of Tent City, who lacked life\u2019s most basic amenities and resources for health. How can we stigmatize and call for the displacement of people who are incredibly resourceful but excluded from basic rights?\u201d
\n Ashley confides, \u201cWhen most people seeking end-of-life care ask for drugs to manage pain, they\u2019re given them, and provided with a bed and supportive care so they can die in peace. When people who are homeless ask for drugs to manage pain, such requests are labeled drug-seeking behavior, and they\u2019re told, \u2018Die on the street where you belong.\u2019
\n Logan too confides, \u201cWe\u2019re trying to build healthier societies. That means we need to offer a range of housing alternatives to people who don\u2019t have a place to live. It\u2019s all part of creating a healthier Victoria and a healthier world. There\u2019s a tendency to think the homeless are on a pilgrimage and, because they\u2019re pilgrims, we need to offer them food, housing, solace. The thing is, it\u2019s really about our own pilgrimage as human beings.\u201d <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"