Tiny homes project to help homelessness in Blood Tribe
By Tim Kalinowski on July 2, 2021.
Submitted photo
Changing Horses NFP Society vice-president and innovation lead Katie Rabbit-Young Pine was thrilled to see her group's tiny home supportive housing complex receive a site blessing in Moses Lake this weekLETHBRIDGE HERALDtkalinowski@lethbridgeherald.com
One Blood Tribe not-for-profit society feels tiny homes might be part of the solution to homelessness on the reserve, and other First Nations across Canada, and is hoping to prove the concept works by constructing a new supportive housing complex at Moses Lake.
The Changing Horses NFP Society received an Indigenous Services Canada Indigenous Housing Innovative Initiative (IHII) grant, (one of only 24 projects chosen across Canada), in 2019 which was supposed to provide seed money to begin construction on its four unit tiny house supportive housing complex in 2020. The project was ultimately delayed by COVID-19, but is beginning to gear up again this summer.
The Changing Horses NFP Society was finally able to hold a blessing ceremony performed by local Elder Alice Wolf Child for the construction site on Wednesday morning, and will enter the final pre-planning stages for a groundbreaking in August, says the Society’s vice-president and lead innovator Katie Rabbit-Young Pine.
“We are going to have four separate homes, but all of them are going to be duplexes,” Rabbit-Young Pine explains. “One small (tiny home) and a larger one attached. We are just going to call them units. We are going to have four units but we are probably going to be able to house between 12 and 14 homeless individuals.
“To others looking out at us, it’s a small project. But, for us, it’s a big project. It is not going to house everyone that needs to be housed, but we have got to start somewhere.”
Tiny homes are becoming a trend worldwide as homeowners seek to build and live in affordable, compact spaces, or “tiny homes” as the name suggests. Generally the homes are made of sustainable materials, and seek to be self-sustaining and self-sufficient.
Rabbit Young-Pine is hopeful if her group can complete its project and show it works to help address the issue of homelessness on the Blood Tribe reserve, and will catch on at other First Nations across Canada.
“Changing Horses is probably the first group ever on the Blood reserve that has gotten together not under the umbrella of chief and council that has started something like this to provide the housing for some of our homeless,” she says. “We are looking to prove ourselves. I believe if we are able to do that, we could do a lot more on the Blood reserve and other First Nation communities.
“We want to get out there and be able to do things with other communities in Alberta and all across Canada. I think there is a potential for these homes.”
The group has received its first donated tiny home to kick off the project, and will receive funding from the IHII grant for other parts of the project, but Rabbit-Young Pine says the Changing Horses NFP Society will still need more support to fully get the tiny house supportive housing complex to where they envision it.
“We need more support,” she states. “So any foundations out there that are running out of places to contribute; well, give me a call.”
Follow @TimKalHerald on Twitter
4-3
This is a brilliant idea! Congratulations to The Changing Horses NFP Society. This idea/concept could be adapted and utilized for homeless in urban centres (Vancouver is doing it I think) Who knows could even be an effective solution for places like Lethbridge for homeless (probably would need money from Federal and provincial governments) but they seem to feel real estate construction, environmental retro fits to homes are a good idea. The reality certainly had a beneficial impact on homeless Veterans (of which there are too many .. even in Canada)
The idea could be turned into a project to bring new life to to the empty warehouse like buildings in Lethbridge sitting empty deteriorating and depreciating. Building like these could be filled with tiny homes for senior citizens and or homeless people. They could have the potential to become beautiful self sufficient indoor communities with community services, with solar power, commercial services, small tiny stores, restaurants right could be place in. roads/paths could be made inside and electric scooters, golf carts could be used to get around. Gardens could possibly be planted on the roofs or inside somewhere. Could be areas set aside for farmers markets.
Buildings like the old Sears store in the mall, Safeways and Save on Foods on the Northside. Sobeys on the Southside. I wish these buildings could be retrofitted for something useful. They could possibly become buildings of the future with a little bit of love and luck. Just like the tiny houses on the reserve could be.
Anyways just a thought… perhaps a dream. Congratulations again on your project. It’s a great idea! Best of luck to you. I hope your project grows and becomes very successful.
Respectfully.
Giving housing, with addict support or not, isn’t going to stop addicts from being addicts, nor is it going to mitigate addict crime. The addicts are still going to go out on the street, meet their dealer, and continue to commit crimes to get their next hit. All the while, the housing will become a drug/dealer den, and will be destroyed along with the surrounding community.
The only method that has a semblance of success for addicts is court ordered confinement into a long term rehabilitation facility. It’s the only method that properly addresses the addict’s psychological problems, because they are in a controlled environment. A house or apartment with the a counselor talking to them once in a while is not a controlled environment. It’s profoundly insufficient, and doesn’t stop the addict from accessing drugs and alcohol. If the addict is not in a professionally controlled environment, then they’ll just continue to be addicts.
In addition, transitional housing is not meant for addicts. Transitional housing is meant to “transition” RECOVERING addicts back into society AFTER they have gone to a rehabilitation centre.
Yes indeed, addicts should be housed, but that housing should be an inpatient rehabilitation centre. It shouldn’t be an apartment or house for the reasons stated.
Yes Seth you are right, your point is well taken. Ideally rehabilitation should be made easily and readily available to those who could benefit from it. You cannot force someone into rehabilitation programs, and if you could they probably would be ineffective if the person was not willing cooperative, there under their own cognizance.
If we could force those with addictions into treatment we would have long ago done the same for smokers, alcoholics, those with eating addictions, sex addictions and gambling addictions.
It appears with our current UCP and federal government they are way too happy to make money off of others addictions so they have no intention of stopping gambling, drinking smoking etc. (they really were conflicted about shutting down these types of establishments during COVID-19 pandemic, and really (as much as governments would like to think they can “control the citizens”; the pushback governments encountered during the pandemic just verifies you can’t force people into doing something they don’t want. People still have free will and rights (for now).
Many successful rehabilitation programs worldwide for the homeless started with providing some safe place they can call their own home, pride and self esteem then began to build and return for some and some voluntarily choose to move forward with services available; ideally to improve their lives.
It appears this provincial government seems to feel there are more important thing to worry about than the ones in most need, and who they consider invisible anyway (the $30 Million, War Room with $70/barrel oil, — to fight children’s cartoons continued focus on coal mining, stealing peoples pensions and trying to establish a provincial pension plan which allows the government to interfere with AIMCO investment decisions and provincial police force) until unmarked graves begin to appear on residential school property in Alberta. Then the governments will try to be hero’s and throw some money out, but until then the issue just remains “out of site, out of mind”
I believe the Indigenous people sadly had it right, they nailed it when they said ” The white man (“the white leaders speak with forked tongue” Tragically this is continuing to this very day with political leaders starting at the top ” Thank you for your contribution” (Justin Trudeau)
In my previous comment I made reference to putting old abandoned warehouse like buildings to a new use. If they were to be used for the homeless, rehabilitation programs, residential services, mental health, addictions vocational services etc. all could be potentially/theoretically implemented and utilized in these programs. Professional NGO service agencies, like The Mustard Seed (if they would come back to Lethbridge), Streets Alive, The Salvation Army or Indigenous Services or an amalgamation of community services could potentially be brought together under one roof.
Will/Would it work??? I really don’t know. Indigenous input and planning would be necessary. Nobody can really tell the future. Would it be any worse than what currently is in place?? Yes; potentially government money may be required.
The government is offering wage subsidy programs to those unemployed to entice employers to train and possibly hire/rehire the unemployed. These programs were popular government programs 10 -20 years ago, until governments determined they were no longer necessary (right around the time the UI program was changed to EI) and the maximum EI amount was capped at 55% to a maximum of about $500/week and has not been increased since.
Historically these “wage subsidy” were exceptionally ineffective as, once they ran out, suddenly the employee was no longer necessary and was let go. Consequently, many employers, (not all), but many used and abused these programs for their own benefit, not the employees (Much like the ongoing corporate welfare programs we see today i.e. Air Canada (until they were shamed into giving the money back)
Hey; maybe that is the answer; naming and shaming the politicians, and the corporations who use and abuse the average working person.
At the very least if nothing else at least it appears the Indigenous people are making an attempt at addressing the issue and they should be applauded for doing so their way. It appears that is much more than can truly be said about government officials at the present time.
Thanks for the reply Les.
Unfortunately, you didn’t address a major point in my reply. That is, “All the while, the housing will become a drug/dealer den, and will be destroyed along with the surrounding community”.
You said, “You cannot force someone into rehabilitation programs”, and if you could they probably would be ineffective if the person was not willing cooperative, there under their own cognizance”.
Yes, we can mandate forced rehabilitation under The Mental Health Act. I am also under the impression that addicts can be forced into rehab by Alberta’s drug court. Then of course, is the jail option for repeat criminal addicts to which I’ll get to.
Your opinion on the effectiveness of forced rehab is mainly moot, and most likely unproven. With that said, I believe there is at least 1 city in the U.S. that does utilize forced rehabilitation, and has an impressive success rate. However, success rates may be suspect dependent on the methodology and the terminology used in the study. Suspicion would also be raised if the study was conducted by the creators of said program (bias and vested interest). As such, it is likely that just about any study into the success rate of any addict recovery program, can be taken apart and refuted.
With all that said, forced long term rehabilitation would have a much higher success rate than doing nothing, or just giving addicts free housing (to which the success rate would be close to 0). Yes, you can post some evidence from another country, but again, it would be suspect for the reasons I just mentioned, as well as possibly meaningless due to differences in the demographics and characteristics of the type of addicts we have here.
In addition, your success rate point is also almost irrelevant, as it doesn’t negate the point that for at least the long term rehab time, they are not harming themselves, and more importantly, not harming others. This would for the most part also be true if repeat criminal addicts were given progressively longer jail time sentences, instead of the slap on the wrist that they receive now.
I reluctantly am jumping back in to this discussion. The back and forth; whose right whose wrong is the reason I quit Twitter. It was too negative for me.
I think; Seth we can agree the issue is real, it is serious and it would be great if improvements somehow could be implemented.
But then I begin to question “do I have the right to interfere and what I think may be improvements for a person may not really be improvements at all. I am glad to however give positive acknowledgements and congratulations on their new endeavors in their own way.
But I really need to apologize for referring to the development and implementation of this plan is ” by these people” This idea/plan/project has been developed “by people”. People who unfortunately are over represented as being homeless, hopeless, and addicted.
I truly don’t have the right to impose my will on someone else. Perhaps forced treatment may have some effect on some.
However then it becomes a “control issue” and the question becomes; “who get to have control over someone else’s life, circumstance” Yes; if laws are broken or someone is a danger to themselves or others perhaps control is necessary for safety reasons. But in reality we are ” too controlled by authorities currently.” Sadly; there is no government or politician on the planet who does not want to have more control over their citizenry
Frankly; giving more control to government, authorities scares the heck out of me. Hypothetically, what if suddenly anyone over 65 would /could be a “target” and put away under a mental health act or something seriously. History has shown us having people “controlled or forced” has not worked so well for those being controlled (Unmarked grave issue, currently in Canada. I am not quite 65, but do not want to be loaded into a cattle car as happened in the past (no disrespect intended). There are some who believe the world is overpopulated ( Bill Gates) and conspiracy theorist state this may be a way to fix the problem.
There are many white, Caucasian men and women, husbands and housewives who are unfortunately just as “addicted” to opioids and other substances as some of the homeless or Indigenous population whether we want to accept that reality or not.
The point is; action is being taken, which is to be commended. At least attention and potential positive solutions is being identified by individuals significantly affected.
The other point was potentially utilizing empty buildings in a more efficient manner for a number of potential groups who current service structure may benefit in some manner. I don’t know if that would /could work, but may be better than watching them sit idle deteriorating/ depreciating.
Thanks for your opinion/discussion.
Respectfully
Well Les, My points aren’t derived from an emotional, “positive or negative” mindset. My points are derived from objectivity.
You mentioned human rights, and the right of interference. Most regular members on this forum know that I’m passionate about human rights. No one has the right to interfere with what someone does to themselves, unless that action harms others.
My statements are referring to the addicts (regardless of where they reside) that are constantly victimizing others. This is a common complaint among Lethbridge residents, and unfortunately, has become a rampant problem. No compassionate society would allow this behavior, yet we are doing exactly that.
Also, my statements are not just referring to addict housing on the reserve. They also refer to the addict housing initiative in Lethbridge. Addict housing as it’s currently being proposed, is more of a, “Hey look, we’re doing something about this issue!”. The problem with that, is it can be successfully argued that addict housing will cause more harm than good. When I’ve presented those arguments in other forums, most people agree with them, but the addict housing proponents weren’t able to refute those arguments. When I present the arguments, the addict housing proponents typically just end the conversation because they have no refutation, or they just say, “Well we have to try something”. The other problem with this initiative, is that it leads to complacency in pursuing other solutions (like the solution I, and others are presenting). For example, “We tried. It didn’t work. There’s nothing else we can do”.
Just because one can do “something” doesn’t mean it’s a good “something”…no matter how noble the intentions are.
Thank you as well for this interaction.
My friend,… I really really do not want to get back into this, back and forth, as it appears we are going nowhere (real fast) and on polar opposite sides of the issue. You obviously are entitled to your opinion as we all are (thankfully). It appears we may both see a concern. But I am not going to continue this diatribe.
The original story was/is a positive piece regarding a potentially positive response to a serious issue. The people initiating this response simply were/ are to be commended. As “the people involved ” had come up with a potential solution on their own.
No, they just destroy the homes we provide for them. Been to the reserve lately?