1 / 25

GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND, BC

GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND, BC. David W. Edgington Department of Geography University of British Columbia. Research Objectives Literature Review The Group Homes Task Force Conclusions. Ethnoburbs.

donnica
Download Presentation

GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND, BC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND, BC David W. Edgington Department of Geography University of British Columbia

  2. Research Objectives • Literature Review • The Group Homes Task Force • Conclusions

  3. Ethnoburbs • Immigrants residents are more actively involved in mainstream politics and community affairs than the residents of ghettos and enclaves • The `ethnoburb’ model challenges the dominant view that suburban assimilation is inevitable and the best solution for ethnic minorities [Wei Li, 2006 “From Enclave to Ethnoburb”, forthcoming]

  4. Multicultural Planning: • “For planners, the practical imperative is no longer whether planning ought to be culturally sensitive, but how? • How do planners accommodate one group’s view of the physical environment when it conflicts with that of another group? • More importantly, the question remains whether….planning can be sensitive to diverse cultures and yet maintain a unified public realm? [Michael Burayidi, “Urban Planning in a Multicultural Society”, 2000]

  5. Group Homes: • Offer an important service to substance dependent individuals and others needing special care • Chinese traditional attitudes to “drug addicts” • Canadian society and inclusiveness

  6. Maps of Richmond

  7. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: I “Turning Point” >>>>>> Setting up the Task Force • 1990-91 “Adam’s Place”, a group home for male recovery from drug and alcohol addiction • 1999 forced to relocate; chose a 6,000 sq ft house in up-scale Odlin Road, Richmond; “Turning Point Recovery Home” (10 beds) • seeks approval from Vancouver/Richmond Health Board and Richmond City Council • pickets and public protests by local residents, mainly members of the Chinese community

  8. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: I • March 2001. Planning Committee of Councl considers a “made-in-Richmond” by-law to allow 7-10 person group homes without a public hearing process • 2-day hearing: ’00 of residents turn out; of those who spoke, the overwhelming majority felt they wanted a say on where the group homes should be allowed to set up (preferably outside residential neighbourhoods) and how they should be run • by-law or not?? (drug rehabilitation vs battered womens’ shelters, hospice homes, etc)

  9. “INCLUSION OR EXCLUSION” • Against: • “It is unfair to the children of Richmond since they will be exposed to foreseeable danger”, said Philip Tang, one of the speakers on Tuesday. • “We’re concerned about the drug dealers coming into our area”, said Julie Lin. “How can we protect our children? Our families?” • “They should move out of residential areas”, said Julie’s father, Simon Lin. “They can be set up in restricted areas where they are not harmful” (quotes from the Richmond News, 11 March 2001)

  10. “INCLUSION OR EXCLUSION” • For: • “I can tell you, people with mental handicaps, physical handicaps, people who suffer from drug and alcohol addiction or mental illness, will not hurt you or your family, I can say that from my own experience,” said Brian Wardley, a member of the Richmond community health committee. • “If those concerned with group homes spent some time visiting or volunteering in one, you’ll find the (residents) are good human beings, just like you and me”, Wardley said. (quotes from the Richmond News, 11 March 2001)

  11. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: II The Task Force • March 2001: Group Homes Task Force Appointed • Composition: • 3 members, Association of Richmond Homeowners • 2 members, Richmond Community Services Advisory Council • 1 member, Vancouver/Richmond Health Board • 4 members, chosen at random from the ratepayers list

  12. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: II • 14 x meetings held between May – October, 2001 • consultants appointed by city planning staff (including Chinese media PR consultant) • $100,000 budget

  13. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: II • Task Force heard presentations from Group Home operators and residents, social planners, neighbours of “Turning Point” • it found that 32 residential groups were already set up in the City (but that only 1 involved drug/alcohol recovery) • found out that HK and China still have a punitive model of addressing drug addiction, rather than one focused on rehabilitation and education

  14. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: III Politics • June 2001. Betrayal!!! • John Wong [Association of Richmond Homeowners] quits the Task Force in frustration that the group was operating on a “city-driven agenda” • 2 weeks later he is back on the Task Force after the City’s Policy Planner [T. Crowe] is “re-assigned” and the City’s Urban Development Manager [D. McCllelan] steps down as Task Force Chair.

  15. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: III • October 2001. City By-election (issues are: Group Homes; Traffic; and Gambling) • eight Chinese Canadians out of 29 hopefuls on the election ballot • three run under a new “Richmond Canadian Voters (RCV) Party • none with a Chinese name or background was successful in landing a seat on council • 33.39% of Chinese-Canadian voters cast a ballot in the by-election, • c.f. 32.07% for the population-at-large [Civic Education Society]

  16. 2001 Civic By-election

  17. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: IV The End? • September 2001. Information brochure produced by Task Force/City Staff/Consultant - bilingual version too • 6 x community meetings

  18. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: IV • October 2001. Final Report and Recommendations given to Council • Group Homes (7-10 bed facility) be allowed `as of right’ in residential areas, but with notification for new applications to neighbours within five-house radius • Overall process managed by the City and Richmond Health Services • Recommends establishment of a Cultural Relations Advisory Committee • John Wong refuses to “sign-off”

  19. GROUP HOMES IN RICHMOND: IV • November 2001. Council wants more control over drug/alcohol recovery homes and seeks legal advice • December 2001. BC Provincial Government changes “Community Care Act” to withdraw licensing requirement from 7-10 bed facilities • Therefore no longer any requirement for Group Homes (7-10 bed facility) to be provincially (or municipally) licensed ……..“stalemate”

  20. CONCLUSIONS • Richmond City Council took a leadership role • Increasing Chinese/HK political participation • What prospects for municipal `learning’?

  21. Thank You!

More Related