Skip to content

Keeping the “community” in Toronto Community Housing

July 12, 2011

In last Friday’s Globe, Toronto Community Housing’s outgoing Managing Director Case Ootes said,

“Fundamentally, TCHC should be a landlord. That’s it. The social services should be provided by the province . . . In fact, I have a problem with the name Toronto Community Housing Corporation. It should be Toronto Housing. Creating communities is an organic process – it can’t be mandated by government.”

I know what Ootes means. I have seen enough sad-sack Christmas parties in dowdy church basements, and strained to look merry at enough sidewalk barbecues, to know that community can’t be manufactured by so called “community building events.”

Instead, community is the by-product of our daily round. I may go to work to earn money, send my kids to school to get an education, go to church to worship God and join my neighbours every spring to pick up litter. I’m not seeking community. But that is what I receive, in the form of colleagues, friends, and a sense of belonging.

Many people who live in social housing find community the same way I do. They don’t need community developers or health promotion officers.

But what about neighbourhoods where the natural building blocks of community are nowhere to be found:  where nobody is hiring local talent; the local school is weak and underfunded; parks are barren; places of worship ingrown; and the only coffee shop is known as the “Sip & Stab?”

What then? It is a bit ingenuous for Mr. Ootes to say, “it’s up to the Province.” He has already said – accurately I believe – that we can’t expect the province to rescue TCHC from its capital backlog. The current Liberal Government has not showered poor neighbourhoods with benefits; a Conservative government is even less likely to do so. And, if City Council’s service review is any sign, we can expect city-funded institutions to shrink rather than grow.

This is where social housing can step forward – not as social services, but as tenant champions.

I’m not suggesting social housing should provide one-on-one services to tenants. Ootes is right to suggest that home care and case management should be funded through our health system – not our housing system.

Being a tenant champion is quite different.

It means sounding the alarm when tenants’ needs go unmet.  I myself was involved in such an exercise, demonstrating that TCHC housed twice as many tenants with a mental illness as all Toronto’s supportive housing providers combined – but with none of the supports.

It means connecting the dots, recognizing that the 17 different home care workers running in and out of the building could be better deployed as a single, 24/7 service.

It means opening up common rooms to foot clinics, exercise classes and youth programs. It means offering up your grounds for markets and community gardens. It means ensuring your building gets a polling station for every election.

It means making your budget do double-duty – hiring tenants to do renovations and making sure major contractors do the same.

It means using your muscle to attract business investment, as TCHC did when it brought RBC, Sobeys and Tim Horton’s to Regent Park and made sure they hired locally.

TCHC has been doing this work for years. So have other social housing providers. In Toronto’s east end where I live, the common rooms in Vincent Paul’s Gower Park Place are programmed by Toronto’s Parks and Rec Department.  The Sisters of St. Joseph’s Fontbonne Place is the home of the Mustard Seed. Innstead Co-op painted a mural on one of its houses facing a rail line, and took over the scrap of land next door for a wildflower garden.

Making the most of social housing’s assets

These activities don’t undermine social housing’s role as a landlord and property manager. They enhance it.

When TCHC started hiring tenant animators in 2005 to educate tenants to conserve energy, it saw utility bills drop by 17 per cent.  By 2010, tenant-to-tenant education efforts were helping to cut water bills by $2.25 million a year.

In fact, it would be hard to imagine a community development initiative that did not bring property management benefits. Employed tenants pay higher rents; engaged communities keep security costs down.

These initiatives also build on the assets already embedded in housing: common rooms, vacant units, grounds, on-site staff, and an operating budget that is both larger and more stable than most agencies.

That doesn’t mean this work comes free.  It requires staff who can step back from the day-to-day to look for trends and patterns. It takes time to seek out and nurture partnerships, to consult tenants, to co-ordinate services or to re-think practices.

But at a time when every level of government is taking money out of the public realm – and the natural building blocks of community are shrinking, not growing — it’s work we can’t afford to do without.

2 Comments leave one →
  1. July 12, 2011 4:56 pm

    Please tell me you sent this article to the G&M! Vintage response to Mr. Oates.
    Personally I just don’t get his point about dropping ‘community’ from Toronto Housing. It is the commitment in name to mandate community involvement in the housing the City provides.
    Community is the business of government as are other social and civic imperatives such as respecting the diversity of persons regardless of race or socio-economic status. Even in business, community is the business of those who run companies, otherwise their company lifespan is short, their people deprived of the one thing that makes any enterprise fulfilling – community dynamic and the creativity it spawns for all engaged in its activity.

  2. Gordon Mack Scott permalink
    July 19, 2011 12:04 pm

    I don’t think the average landlord knows how to, or particularly wants to, for example, involve helping agencies to combat hoarding and support maintaining a tenancy. More regular inspections than annually, dialogue with neighbours to monitor concerns, crafting special tenancy agreements, these are all part of successfully housing maginalized folks, which done well, becomes a success for the entire city.
    TCH as just another landlord, or “privatizing” assisted housing; if those approaches save any money, they will just add costs in other sectors, police, healthcare, courts and so on. Costs that do not produce platforms for success, as properly managed community housing is able to.

Leave a Reply to John Deacon Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: