As previously reported, Cobourg is negotiating with the County to establish what is allowed at the new Transition house location at 310 Division. The idea is to get an agreement similar to what was agreed in Whitby. But there is a “Plan B”. If an agreement cannot be reached, then Council has voted to implement a By-Law that would require “Emergency Care Establishments” to be licensed with requirements similar to that agreed in the “Whitby” agreement. At the Council meeting on 28 February, Council passed the Licensing by-law to be in effect March 28 which is the day after the next Council meeting. The date is a month later than the timeline originally proposed so it can be repealed if an agreement is reached.
Transition house and the County are not happy with this – Transition House say they have not been consulted – see their letter in Resources.
Also, the County is reacting. On Monday morning, March 4, the County announced that it will be calling a special Council meeting on Wednesday, March 6, at 2:30 pm to “review the anticipated impacts to homelessness services of an Emergency Care Establishment Licensing By-law recently adopted by Cobourg Municipal Council, directed to come into force and take effect as of March 28th, 2024”. Some of the meeting will be in closed session.
To be clear, the Licensing bylaw has already been passed so if nothing changes, it will be in effect 28 March 2024. (Download a copy from Resources). Also passed is an amendment to the Nuisance bylaw to add another prohibited “nuisance”, namely:
the unlawful use, sale, furnishing, or distribution of alcoholic beverages or controlled or illegal substances;
The agreement the Town wants with the County would generally be similar to that agreed in Whitby and as proposed by citizens.
Penalties can be significant – the bylaw specifies:
Each director or officer of a corporation who knowingly concurs in the contravention of this By-law is liable to a fine of:
- not less than $500 and not more than $100,000;
- for each day or part of a day that the offence continues, a fine of not less than $500 and not more than $100,000.
Although there are fines specified, it’s not clear how the rules would be enforced although the Fire Department will have access to the premises.
Separately, Mayor Cleveland has made it clear to the County that he wants compensation to the Town from the County for the increased cost of security around Transition House. There is only one “transition house” in the County – you’d think that all costs should be shared.
Presumably, there will eventually be an agreement between the County, Transition House and the Town and it will be made public. Looks like we have a deadline of March 28. Citizens asked for action – looks like it’s happening.
Resources
- Consolidated Nuisance By-Law – incorporates amendments
- Emergency Care Licensing By-Law
- Letter from Transition House
- County announcement of special meeting
Cobourg Blog reports
- Council to Pursue Agreement with Transition House – 4 February 2024
- Move to get agreement on rules for Transition House – 26 January 2024
Addendum
7 March: 1. To keep up with Cobourg news, you need to also look at other news sources. If you did not already see it, Cecilia Nasmith reported on the March 4 County Council meeting (mentioned above) at Northumberland Today here.
2. In addition, you can watch the video of the March 4 County Council meeting. A presentation by Rebecca Carmen from 6:05 to 27:14 explains the extent of homelessness in Northumberland and the subsequent video time shows the interaction of Mayor Cleveland and County Council – particularly CAO Jennifer Moore. https://video.isilive.ca/play/northumberland/New%20Encoder_SCC_2024-03-06-02-33.mp4
Print Article:
Sharing Peterborough article. thoughts? https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/news/anything-we-ask-for-they-staff-go-above-and-beyond-47-people-are-living-in/article_5ea08e52-9d0a-556b-8d94-12c8090a30fa.html
The article comments that the Peterborough Elizabeth Fry Society is funding much of this project. In reality Elizabeth Fry received about $1.3M from Federal/provincial and municipal governments (taxpayers) compared to actual charitable donations of only $30,526.
Peterborough bought the sleeping cabins at a cost of over $1,000,000. 3 of them are being used as temporary offices but all 50 are temporary. In the comments to the article there is information about having them all sold and moved by Oct 2025. Maybe they have plans to build something like 310 Division. There seems to be some success and some failures, as we would expect. They have rules. They allow drug use in the cabins. Will 310 Division allow drug use in the rooms?
The $13M cabin enclave at the Kitchener-Waterloo dump on Erbsville road right next to the paramedic headquarters costs $3M to run. A second one is being considered for $11M. Property taxes are high in KW but politically it seems a smart move. The Working Center provides a shuttle for residents. Where money for drugs comes from is never mentioned, so the results of the social experiment as a whole, rather than anecdotes, will take years to emerge.
I think that if the Mayor is willing to use such a phrase as “fear-mongering” in response to legitimate concerns brought by Professionals and Staff during the debate about the new and improved Transition House he should also be willing to listen to those concerns and try to make them workable instead of pushing a wild and unrealistic bylaw. A bylaw, which is bound to fail because of its overreach.
He readily admits that the intent of the bylaw was to bully the County into submission. He has failed. Now should prove himself to be a politician instead of a demagogue and work to improve both positions of the argument.
The Hot Potato, or Live Grenade, landed on Cobourg and Mayor Cleveland is doing what he can to toss it back, however crudely. In the realm of fear mongering, there is nothing that terrifies me more than “Professionals”.
“Trust the professionals” rivals “Trust the Science” as the joke phrase of the new millennium.
Andre, “science shows …” was very commonly used in education. What was claimed was not based on anything close to real science, more of an opinion or wishful thinking. The “professionals” have allowed public drug use which is a big part of our local problems. Part of the problem is they will never admit to being wrong or even simply saying we made an error in our judgment. Increased drug overdoses in recent years is in part related to enforcement of laws. In BC the government did try to reverse their pilot drug program, at least in part. The court system stopped that. I once listen to an education “professional” explain if changes to instruction methods yield lower test scores we should not go back to what we had, we should continue making changes. Were the test scores still too high? Are not enough people overdosing on drugs?
Just saw this after writing the above comment:
RCMP Seizes Gov’t-Funded ‘Safer Supply’ Drugs in 2 Busts, Says It’s an ‘Alarming Trend’ | The Epoch Times
I’m so thankful to Mayor Cleveland for standing up for the Cobourg taxpayers. Imagine what our town would look like if he wasn’t elected? The previous mayor would have been walked all over by advocates and other council members. I know people haven’t been as happy with him on other issues, but at this point this is the only issue that matters. Everything else is irrelevant until we can get the drugs out of this town. I really really hope he runs again.
You need more sleep Snow White
You really think things would have been better off without the old mayor? No way.
“plus ca change plus c’est la meme chose” time will tell
All this is not local – it is happening everywhere. The Federal laws have brought this state upon everyone. No I don’t believe we will get the drugs out of town what I hope for is there is a way of dealing with people who refuse to respect the rights of the citizens around them. The by-law seems the only answer to some control of the situations the citizens of this Town have been subjected to. As for the former mayor no one has any idea of what his actions would have been. But the County who has decided to open this centre needs to ensure their “baby” does not endanger, disrupt the citizens here ensuring there is a way to deal with people who refuse to respect others. We offer you a centre but with condtions – an opportunity paid for by the tax payer to quit your drug use.
All great for the new bylaws. Standing by and do nothing to enforce them are just new words on paper. Just take a walk downtown during or after hrs. do you see Cobourg as truly a law abiding ‘feel good town.?? Cobourg need serious enforcement of all bylaws not just new words .
Remember this during the next Federal election…our country is broken.
Hi Rob – I remembered it in the last Federal election and the many before that – I have never liked the direction our country was being taken in back to the 80s when the sins of the father were being pressed upon our society. Now we have Junior. I think they achieve their success by bribing with all their grants.
The unlawfullness of today affects the entirety of society and not just the homeless drug addict invasion – daylight shootings even here in Cobourg!
Catherine, the Mayor and members of County Council fully embraced the purchase of 310 Division Street with little or no consultation with taxpayers. Now, after much concern and criticism from residents, he is finally engaged in damage control. I doubt that the provisions of Emergency Care Licensing By-Law will ever be enacted (enforced) and that things will continue on in a continued state of chaos and deterioration.
He clearly does shine when facing outward. Facing inward is more frought.
Real life requires juggling more than one thing at once, and I’m humbled by those who do that well.
i wonder if the county and TH are fighting the proposed bylaw that they don’t have the best interests of those living in the immediate area. They don’t want to be held to account. What exactly does the county do for us? Social Services maybe? Perhaps it’s time to put 310 division on the shelf, and Cobourg consider opting out and we alone.
Your point is quite valid and supported by this article in Todays Northumberland summarizes the open portion of the special Council Meeting held Wednesday on this matter. My take is that the County and TH do not care about Cobourg 20,00 law abiding residents and businesses, but rather care only about its own agenda.
https://todaysnorthumberland.ca/2024/03/06/northumberland-county-session-faces-accusations-of-fear-mongering/
Agree, they have jobs to support and grants to protect. Interesting to me that Cornerstone has been entered into the conversation…a little diversion away from the issue of the Town of Cobourg trying to protect itself by the County raising a relative success that could be endangered. Fear mongering as the Mayor Suggests Let’s keep the focus where it needs to be on preserving our Town
Add to above …the County complaints that they were taken” off guard” by the Town’s introduction of the protective by law at time when they are preparing for a large influx of people into the County at the time of the April solar eclipse. Let’s look after the residents here, paying taxes, before we worry about visitors. Another diversion. I think a pin has been poked into the County bubble of hubris
No welfare without a drug test, in conjunction with treatment: the pendulum is abruptly swinging the other way at the epicenter of progressive enabling, San Francisco.
How many years for the effect to propagate outward and arrive in Northumberland? My optimistic bet is 5.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/progressivism-is-out-san-franciscans-pass-ballot-measures-requiring-drug-testing-for-welfare-expanding-police-surveillance/
Reflects somewhat the response l gave to Malcom below…..free services and financial supports need curbing before we hope for any improvement
I think that strengthening the “nuisance” bylaw is a really smart move on Council’s part and sincerely hope that the revamped bylaw will be strongly used by the Cobourg Police Service EVERYWERE in Cobourg – not just in the downtown area. In my opinion it gives the CPS an alternative to their claims that they can’t do anything about these out of control people in our town (be they drug/alcohol or mentally disturbed individuals). Just have a look at Pete Fisher’s Northumberland Today blog about the out-of-control individual at the corner of Division/University yesterday (Tuesday) afternoon. The man was jumping into traffic, etc. etc. — not only a great danger to himself — but what about some poor unsuspecting motorist who might have hit him? Transition House and now 310 Division were placed in Cobourg by the County – Up until this point, Cobourgers have really had no choice nor control in either situation — the revamped Nuisance bylaw gives Cobourg some semblance of control which has been sorely needed for literally decades.
This fellow has been around for some time. My neighbour had their recycle/ garbage collection left at the curb because he had contaminated their sortation effort as he rooted through their bins. He is a clear example of someone not flourishing without concentrated care and is hostile to approach.Yes he is an adult but needs intervention and could not be independent in an apartment but he is left out there because we don’t admit people into institutional care as once was a practice….the system is failing
This is a town council, county and province that after 7 months can’t get rid of a handful of derelict, violent, drug addicted criminals in an illegal encampment on publicly owned land or enforce any of the laws already in place, let alone bylaws. A handful of reprobates and their enablers holding an entire city of law abiding, tax paying, hard working citizens hostage at our expense. Do you really think the County and Cleveland & Co. can manage a centre for 90+ of them in the centre of town 365 days a year with a new bylaw? Feel good town has a whole new meaning now.
Good morning,
Torbot, many people share your concerns. Where did you get the 90+ number from? There will be 35 bedrooms and a warming room. TH, with 18 beds, is often not full.
Below Malcom comments on people getting worked up before 310 Division even opens. He has a point but 310 is not completely new. TH is just moving around the corner and getting bigger. Why would citizens expect the current problems to suddenly get better? Unless we have rules in place, like private security and new by-law, there is little reason to believe all will be well once 310 is opened. Does TH have a new model on how they will help people staying at the shelter?
Sandpiper pointed out the police and a councilor both suggested hiring private security. This was in response to what seems like trespassing on private condo property. Is this the type of response we are to expect with violations of the Nuisance By-Law? Private security can make citizen’s arrests, I’ve been told. Can the residents of Sandpiper’s Condo complex make citizen’s arrests for trespassing? Or was this a case of attempted robbery?
What You Need to Know About Making a Citizen’s Arrest (justice.gc.ca)
I do not want to make a citizen’s arrest. We need our police and by-law officers to enforce laws.
I read Ike’s letter. It’s my understanding that if TH doesn’t get their way, they will pick up their ball and go home. I was hopeful that the mistakes of past leadership were behind us. Unfortunately I feel we’re on repeat cycle. I really do feel that TH and the county put the cart before the horse in terms of implementation. There MUST be a separation between addicts and other homeless people for everyone’s safety. To pile everyone in together is just asinine. I urge town council, the county, and transition house to sit down and hammer this out, including the Whitby agreement as well as the bylaw, it’s meant to protect everyone.
Two points stand out when reading the comments on this post. 1.) Why is TH/310 Division and County Council so opposed to basic behaviour rules being put in place through enforceable By-Laws and will they actually be enforced?; and 2.) Why has Cobourg been chosen as the Rehab Centre for Northumberland County?.
When the new Council took over in Nov. 2022 is when outside groups (TweakEasy, GWC, Missy McLean) started strongly pushing their agendas i.e. tiny homes, Friday drug tents, Henley Arcade, handling of 3 Encampments. Why? They identified two keys: 1.) weaknesses in Leadership and 2.) the extremely lenient policing policies in effect by CPS – latest example – the Condo Group being told they need to hire outside security by CPS and a Councellor to deal with trespassers.
Northumberland County/Councellors have also picked up on these two keys and as a result determined Cobourg would be the path of least resistance to the County’s agenda. I am sure the other Towns in Northumberland would not stand for this if they were arbitrarily selected.
Don’t really have a lot to add as prior posters have made really good points. All I can say is our society has undergone a really bad change to not enforcing law and order with advocates changing the face of the problem to the point citizens are afraid to walk on in their own neighbourhoods, homes are broken into and the culprits face little to no consequence.
I recall when I was a youth a heavy drug using person was released from jail after his sentence for armed robbery was up. The police kept an eye on him letting him know he was not wanted in the community strongly – move along – we don’t want your kind here. But even then he in the end was the master of his own destruction – washed up on the shores of Lake Ontario but at least he was not pampered with all this idealogic nonsense and no one was made to feel he was their responsibility like today.
Curious if the existing Transition House may also have to abide by the bylaw, if it is enacted, until the move to 310 Division…..or will it not apply to an operation already up and running.
After viewing the video of the County meeting,l have my answer. So if 10 Chapel doesn’t pick up the lady lying on the sidewalk ( as this morning) there could be complications. How about they revisit their operation to include daytime accomodations for the individuals (like this gal) who will clearly not be employable and walk her back to the building and keep her safe as l have seen her tormented by drug users and dealers. Some common sense needs to prevail…not all of these individuals can be handled with a blanket approach.
If the County and Transition House won’t comply with a basic, common sense agreement then we keyboard warriors need to rally.
“Speak softly but carry a big stick” An update on that theory is warranted in today’s dilemma…
The idea is negotiating peacefully but also having strength in case things go wrong…..Will it be necessary……time will tell .
It’s sad to see so many getting all wound up before 310 even opens it’s doors. It sounds like no matter what, many won’t give their efforts a fair shake to be successful.
Why do we need to give it a fair shake? Why is Cobourg now the rehab centre for Northumberland? Show me one of these centres that have positively contributed to the neighbourhood it resides in – I’m happy to eat crow, if you can provide me such examples. All the examples I see have resulted in more petty crime for the neighbourhood and decreased resale values.
“Why is Cobourg now the rehab centre for Northumberland?”
As far as I know 310 is to be a homeless shelter, that I hope may contain a rehab element.
Everyone should have the opportunity for treatment, not just those with money.
“Show me one of these centres that have positively contributed to the neighbourhood it resides in – I’m happy to eat crow, if you can provide me such examples.”
NAI both you and I know that the whole idea of “these centres” is somwhat of a new approach. We’ve been using the stick for so long that using a carrot doesn’t have much of a track record.
What I can tell you is that Supportive Housing with elements of treatment, costs the taxpayer a lot less than the never ending cycle of jails and hospitals.
It’s well past time to drop the old ideas around hitting people with the stick. We’ve been doing the same things for ever and expecting different results.
It takes recognition of one’s problem before treatment is sought. With acceptance of all of the outlandish behaviours we see and support for unhealthy living, recognition is not achieved until total despair is reached. I and many others are not prepared to wait while these troubled “adults” currently being coached, encouraged and indulged decide it is time to seek recovery….l Don’t see “stick” solutions being employed at this time our police service and court system are soft on the various crimes being committed and we are suffering the results front and center every day. Time for a hard choice..accept help or curb of free services….desperation on a rapid path…treatment closer and maybe facilities such as being proposed at 310 Division might have a chance. This only addresses drug addiction ,however, homelessness is something other than this.
“As far as I know 310 is to be a homeless shelter, that I hope may contain a rehab element.
Everyone should have the opportunity for treatment, not just those with money.”
I am wholeheartedly in agreement with your comment that everyone needs to have the opportunity for treatment. And you are correct, I incorrectly mischaracterized what 310 Division is seeking to achieve.
My issue is this though, in the same vein as other shelters which continue to fail miserably WITHOUT a STRONG stick to enforce VERY restrictive policies (like Whitby….I like their approach), it will just become a haven for those who do not want to better themselves and once their welcome is worn out, will become a problem for the residents in the vicinity.
FFS. Small tangent, but I took my kids for a walk the other day and they wanted to play in a play structure at a park nearby. Before I let them go up – I went for a look myself – what did I find? Sharps, a broken crack pipe and aluminum foil with burn marks. Needless to say, they didn’t go play there.
Say what you want, be as ideological and hopeful as you want, but my fear is that the reality will be – the majority of the people who will use the shelter will also make use of other public areas to enjoy their ‘safe supply’ crap. And because of that, I am unable to even let my children run in the grass, lest they get stuck with paraphernalia an impaired person threw away without a second thought.
Nope. NIMBY is gonna become the way I go. This isn’t my problem to solve, nor should it be. Who’s is it? Don’t really care. But I want my children to not have to fear getting a needle in their foot when they go to a park.
Neither Cobourg, nor any small town in Ontario, have the legislative tools to discourage dangerous behaviour, and our woke federal government doesn’t want to pay for deterring such behaviour through incarceration.
Human nature right? Either someone wants to do something themselves, or they realize doing something will result in something worse. Time to bring back the latter, as the former is failing miserably.
Yes – generalization – I get it that there are those that want the help. I just don’t know how to sift them out and actually help them. But I want to stop helping those who don’t care.
That sucks – I had a reply all typed up – went to correct some spelling and now it’s gone.
I argue though your approach to helping has a track record equal, or worse than that of jails and hospitals. Difference with the latter, I didn’t have to check playgrounds for sharps before I let my children play in them. I did that this weekend, and was rewarded with sharps, a broken crack pipe and aluminum foil with burn marks.
But yeah, go right ahead and ‘help’ them.
You nailed it NAI! Couldn’t agree more.
But your minor inconvenience is irrelevant in this argument….the needs of law abiding, tax paying, employed residents are sadly irrelevant.
Naxalone has also contributed to the problem Malcom. Days gone by the addict would simply keel over, end of story. Now we save them time and time again to live another day adding to the population of addicted homeless addicts. The addict has within their scope the decision of whether to quit or not – unfortunately then like now few choose this path.
The area I lived in as a kid was the worst in Toronto, there were few others with the problems it had then however comparing it to what it is today it looked like a wonderful place to live. Addicts and no go areas have multiplied since the “stick” was dropped.
Dave, you have called it.Naxalone has indeed contributed to this problem. Compare it to the increase in sales of the morning after pill. There is an allowance for people to act in an increasingly reckless manor with a quick fix safety net. Either way….no guilt, no grief, no repercussions..pick up and carry on
Add to above …neither of these were developed for repeated use, but for emergency situation but have led to abuse of good intention and availability
It’s called be proactive and watching how other towns have been decimated.
The efforts being proposed have been available all this time.Shelter, job counselling,life counselling, helping to find permanent housing,healthy life/medical , food…all have been available with full freedom to come and go to help one’s self. Most were off site but transportation arranged when required.The efforts by an individual were expected.The only real change is a proposal to bring the off site pieces together under one roof. Good luck finding professionals willing to commit valuable time and effort to look across empty desks as the drug addicts who truly need their help will be out and about buying and using drugs not occupying the increased available(still empty) rooms. The big issue is the campers want full time freedom and the “right” to use illegally procured drugs where and when they want under provided roofs with all amenities at their disposal…all donated.The reason there are no professionals involved on site now, is no one is seeking the help.No faith in this plan..no place for it in the downtown.
If only politicians would understand that you can’t solve social problems with money.
Just like the parent that coddles their children and buys them everything, then wonders why they never move out, take responsibility for their own lives, can’t solve basic problems or support themselves.
In the same way, continuing to compel taxpayers to take care of these people and solve their problems, with public tax dollars won’t teach them anything. Instead, it will only teach them that there is no incentive to not be homeless and further entrench them in continued dependence of “taxpayer milk” from mother government.
Enough!
If the County Council members don’t appreciate Cobourg’s position on regulating Transition House, then the other Northumberland Mayors can volunteer their towns to become the home of a new Transition House. “En garde”!!
I would urge that council NOT repeal the bylaw even if Transition House and the County say they will step up. I don’t believe that either party has any intention of committing to a safer community and helping the neighborhood of 310 Division cope with what will likely be a circus. Better to keep the bylaw on the books in case it is needed.
Hopefully to apply to 10 Chapel
Finally it feels like Town council is going to bat for the law abiding taxpayers of Cobourg. The deterioration of socially acceptable behaviour must be reversed. The enablers and drug addicts are running the town, if they won’t abide by the laws the majority of residents live by and support then move on. In a democracy majority does rule.
I agree with all the comments below and appreciate the recent effort made on be half of the Residents & Business owners of Cobourg . How ever we have not heard from the Police dept .
or the Chief on any of this . Its time for a little input and guidance .
Yesterday several of the residence in our Condo complex came upon several needy people
lounging in the sun and sleeping between the cars and snooping about in our south facing parking lot which is partially covered in any event the police were inquired upon as was one of our Councilors
They both responded with pretty much the same thing ” You need to hire private security ”
Up goes the Common element cost to every resident in the building thus the cost of housing
Why won’t the police respond ?
That’s why we should change to the OPP!!!
this answer doesn’t make sense why would the OPP do things differently with less cops in the area and having to stick to the same rules as the CPS.
Fair point.
Same for less money.
Not even false economy, from a catch & release view.
Cynicism and realism battle in perpetuity.
Like most of the Bylaws in Cobourg, they will be on the books but not enforced. How could they be without altercations of some kind all the time. I really doubt the encampment people want the inconvenience of rules placed on them and they will continue to find one encampment after another until they are given a place to live where they can do whatever they want whenever they want. I’m sure there are some cash strapped seniors barely making ends meet who would love the opportunity to live there, rules and all.
Agreed…310 needs no low barrier…..just safe and secure for individuals in need
Another question which l would like to put forward is does the Town have a plan for monies gained from this new Bylaw? The position that the operators will be fined to cover infractions (as there is none coming from those committing the problems) this now becomes fast money(similar to parking fines) and wouldn’t it be nice if those impacted by the location and resulting harm to the neighbourhood felt some relief or a fund for truly homeless issues, not drug addiction offshoots was developed. Perhaps to repair broken windows, damaged property ,Christmas displays etc. that occur overnight ..or counselling for someone harmed in a robbery or assault by just being in the wrong place when a violent outburst occurs. Always follow the money, this effort,seeming relief and genuine concern for taxpayers gains revenue for the Town…..a win win for them. The drug addicts in the parks and in the downtown will still be unaddressed…and the encampment will be somewhere because they will not be going into the low barrier shelter….because now there are more rules.
Add to above, that it is interesting that Transition House Coalition, operating a low barrier(few rules) shelter ,like it’s clients, is bristling at impending restrictions and rules to make it a better, more responsible partner in our community.
It begs the question, which of the new rules do they not wish to comply? They seem pretty basic.
By holding the operators financially accountable, there’s finally some incentive for them to consider those in the neighbourhood that TH impacts.
However, the town is going to need more bylaw officers.
Great Job Mayor and council. Next steps: Establishing date for the removal of the encampment.
While there is no doubt many agree the removal of the encampment should happen, it might not. The encampment is on provincial property. Once 310 Division opens there are no guarantees some of the homeless people will cooperate with TH rules and move in. Remember when the encampment was moved around last year? We were told some people were refusing the help offered. Early last fall outside TH there were people smoking, passed out, doing bicycle maintenance, etc. The Nuisance By-Law and security may help with some of these issues. One of the problems with 310 Division is there is very little parking. Is there a large enough area outside the building for a smoking area? If not, the people being helped will be on nearby public and private property or they will allow indoor smoking. Fines for breaking by-laws don’t mean much to somebody who has nothing. The court system has been lenient which is not likely to change. This Licensing By-Law is a step in the right direction. I hope we continue in that direction.
So Cobourg has been chosen by the few rather than the majority to be the housing centre for thelow level ,no level drug users and will cram 3 to a room if they can convince the possible clients to attend rather than use what was a good standard rental to house really needy old people without drug problems who are under pressure in our community
The Brookside campers will never move until pushed out by a purchaser and then where will they GO.. There soon will be so many that to find a new spot will be alarming Are we looking ahead yet?
When Brookside sells and the encampment’s Provincial property biosphere bursts.
and get ready for the spread of the unhoused all over Cobourg and its “hiding places”
I drove past Brokeside (yes that was intentional) yesterday evening and the size of the encampment is quite remarkable. I witnessed approximately 3 cars dropping things or people off, I’m sure drugs are part of the regular supplies list. I understand the encampment has fragmented under the weight of the local Mayor, who oversees various aspects of the property and facilities, including charging rent. There are 1-2 smaller detractor encamper resorts popping up in quiet places around town and likely coming to a forest near you very soon.
Interesting that Cobourg By Law shuts down a vendor function at the Lions Centre over a licensing issue this past weekend, yet they let this character charge people rent to live at an encampment and do nothing about it. This is an example of how ineffective they will be when enforcing the new proposed By Laws relating to 310 Division.
Cobourg enforcement needs to get its act together or step aside and let the right people do the job.
https://todaysnorthumberland.ca/2024/03/06/cobourg-municipal-law-enforcement-responds-to-unlicensed-event/amp/
Sorry, what? Is this true? Is the leader of the encampment charging rent for people to live in tents at Brookside provincial property?
If not there to enter a warm tent……he sure did to enter an apartment he had control of at James and George, under the guise of helping out the young man Today’s Northumberland showed dodging traffic….who ended up without his bedroom and sleeping on the floor and also at the since closed dwelling at Division and University.
That’s what Rob said and others have as well in various posts.
Cobourg Council is doing the right thing for the taxpaying citizens, businesses and neighbours of this intended facility by introducing Bylaw 048-016.
The majority of the individuals that will potentially use this facility are not exactly law abiding citizens of society, so I doubt they will abide by this By-Law either. However Council MUST not back down! It is one tool in our toolbox to try and have some control over the chaos, garbage and abhorrent behaviour that will surely ensue once this facility is open.
There is no doubt Mr. Nwibe and his colleagues have the greatest intentions to run a clean orderly facility and provide necessary support to those in need, but I doubt any of them will live in the vicinity of 310 Division St. I doubt any of them will have their property values decline, watch their businesses fail, worry about their children’s safety, or be able to police the surrounding area 24/7. We must not continue as we have in the last few months to allow a handful of drug addicts and their enablers dictate to the town how they want to be treated. Abide by the rules of society or go elsewhere.
If this facility has to open, let’s be an example of success, rather than failure and ruination of another Canadian community.
Interesting that Transition House and the County find consultation to be an important component to making complex decisions that impact individuals and organizations. I don’t recall any consultation with taxpayers, the community, neighbouring businesses/residents or Cobourg Council prior to making the unilateral decision to purchase an apartment building to develop a low (no) barrier shelter for more than three dozen people in the heart of downtown Cobourg.
Surprisingly, Council is on the right track here – DO NOT bend! Do not play politics! Protect our businesses, our downtown, the taxpayers, our children, our reputation and our community!
I have just read the letter written by the executive director,Mr. Nwibe, to Town council regretting Transition House’s lact of consultation on a by law designed to protect the surrounding neighbours as this version of emergency sheltered unfolds at 310 Division St
I have no sympathy for the expressed lament that Transition House Coalition Organization nor it’s representatives were not invited to consult before this protective by law comes into effect. Our community was never consulted when the County’s low barrier shelter was imposed upon us five plus years ago and when concerns of safety, crime, open drug use, violence,and decay of our neighbourhood have been continually brought forward to T H, no adjustments were made. Transition House may consider this treatment unjust, l believe it’s Karma and l am appreciative of Town Council for once putting the horse ahead of the cart and protecting we the taxpayers and residents of Cobourg against further erosion of our way of living
Well said!!