Exploring Options for Thunder Bay Shelter Village
Thunder Bay city council has decided to revisit the search for a location for the proposed temporary shelter village after rejecting a recommendation to use the vacant lot at 114 Miles Street East. The recommendation was defeated in an eight-to-five vote during Monday night’s committee of the whole meeting.
The Miles Street property had been identified by city staff as meeting all nine criteria for the shelter village, including municipal ownership, access to support and emergency services, absence of recreational use, and adherence to a $5 million budget cap. Despite this, opposition from local business owners and the Fort William Business Improvement Area (BIA) led to the council’s decision to explore alternative sites.
Rilee Willianen, the city’s drug strategy specialist and lead for the encampment response plan, emphasized the urgency of addressing the city’s housing crisis during a presentation to council. “Delaying action over disagreements about specific sites keeps us in the same position we’ve been in for years,” she said. “We cannot continue with the status quo.”
Business owners and the Fort William BIA expressed concerns about the impact of the shelter village on the downtown south core. The city administration had proposed offering the BIA $40,000 annually to address what were described as “perceived concerns,” but several council members felt this was insufficient.
“I oppose this location,” said at-large Councillor Rajni Agarwal. “This is not a perceived impact; it is a real one. Every single business owner has seen it and felt it.”
Other councillors, including Trevor Giertuga and Mark Bentz, called for a more comprehensive review of potential sites. Bentz criticized the administration for focusing heavily on the Miles Street location, saying, “I wish it was more impartial. Provide us with the information and let us make the decision. That is what we are elected to do.”
However, some councillors argued in favor of moving forward with the Miles Street site to address the city’s housing crisis without delay. Current River Councillor Andrew Foulds warned that rejecting the location would delay the project’s timeline significantly. “If we vote this down, we’re essentially saying yes to the status quo, which we all agree is not working,” he said.
At-large Councillor Shelby Ch’ng supported the site, acknowledging the opposition but emphasizing the potential benefits for local businesses and individuals transitioning to permanent housing. “It’s a parking lot right now, but with the proper security and access to resources, this could make a real difference,” she said.
Following the vote to reject the Miles Street site, council directed city administration to identify alternative locations that meet as many of the original criteria as possible while remaining within budget. A ranked list of potential sites will be presented to the council, even if some do not fully meet all requirements, including the project’s intended scale.
