In February of this year, Council passed a By-Law which required Emergency Care establishments like Transition House to be licensed. This applies to both the current Transition house on Chapel Street and their new location at 310 Division Street. Without any public announcement, the Town’s web site indicates that Transition House is now licensed. The licence is for one year: valid from July 17, 2024 to July 17, 2025. Presumably when Transition House moves in September, the licence will transfer to that location. The licence requirements are quite stringent but do not cover costs to the Town – Transition House serves the entire county but is located in Cobourg. Summarized below are some of the requirements which Transition House must meet and presumably agreed to since they are now licensed.
Summary of By-Law requirements
As listed by the Town
Among other things, this licensing system is intended to:
- Enhance the enforcement of the Zoning By-law provisions that require an E.C.E to be located in a Main Central Commercial Zone
- Address issues related to Public Health and Safety; Consumer Protection; Nuisance Control and the General Well-being of Persons.
- Introduce a requirement to have a local contact available at all times to respond to issues and who is available to attend within a period of no greater than one hour from the time of contact by telephone or email.
- Introduce insurance requirements
- Introduce a Code of Conduct
A full list of requirements is in Section 6 on page 7 of the By-Law – download the by-law from resources below.
Services Provided
As listed by Transition House
As Northumberland County’s emergency shelter, we provide safe, dignified and supportive temporary housing, life skills and transitional support services to men and women over the age of 18 from Cobourg, Port Hope, Grafton, Colborne, Campbellford, Brighton, Hamilton Township, and Alderville. Our service area includes all of Northumberland County.
Since there are a lot of people at the encampment who are homeless, it seems that few are taking advantage of the services provided by Transition House. Licensing may make Transition House acceptable to the Town but does not solve the encampment problem.
And for anyone curious about progress on the sale of Brookside, go to the Infrastructure Ontario Site here.
Brookside is still listed as “On the open Market” despite rumours of negotiations with Fleming College.
Resources
Town Web site
- Emergency Care Establishment Application page – includes list of licensed establishments
On Cobourg Internet
Other web sites
Cobourg Blog reports
- Cobourg Council to regulate Transition House – 4 March 2024
- Progress on Transition House Agreement – 28 March 2024
Print Article:
Now that transition House is licensed, we move on the main event: 310 Division.
A “Special Council Meeting” has been called for today, (Wednesday) at 1pm.
https://pub-cobourg.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=a0e28960-4561-4527-90f1-70ab2779b166&Agenda=Agenda&lang=English
On the agenda is item 9.6:
Report No. LS-2024-020 from Town Clerk/Director, Legislative Services regarding Northumberland County/ Town of Cobourg – 310 Division Street Agreement – Update and Recommendations
Staff ask that Council consider the options as outlined within the staff report, and direct staff to implement and proceed with one of the following options:
a) Agree to the terms of the ‘agreement in principle’ attached as Appendix ‘A’ with the omission of the section requiring the Town to repeal the Town of Cobourg By-law ‘Being a By-law to License, Regulate and Govern Emergency Care Establishments in the Town of Cobourg, being By-law No.018-2024, and all other provisions remain within the ‘agreement in principle’
This option is not acceptable as is.
Yes, a clause requiring the Town to rescind the “310D” bylaw has been removed. However, a second provision that limits the Town’s options in future situations remains.
The Town of Cobourg commits to ensure the following:
1. Rescind 310D BL deleted
2. Agrees that the agreement terminates if the Town makes efforts to regulate shelters through any other bylaw or permitting process
Item 2 is not acceptable and needs to be struck
Note that the agreement has no teeth. There are no penalties for transgressions. Adding some penalties would improve the agreement.
In addition, the agreement does not have a “bail out” or termination provision. There is no way to terminate the agreement except by breaching its conditions.
A 90-day termination notice provision is needed.
With these changes, option A could be acceptable, assuming NC/310D agree.
I suggest that Council provide no approval until NC commits to the changes.
Continued next comment
Comment continued
OR
b) Council direct Staff to draft a revised ‘agreement in principle” with a focused review based on the interests of Cobourg and to remove sections of the current agreement that are covered within By-law No.018-2024, being the Town of Cobourg By-law to License, Regulate and Govern Emergency Care Establishments in the Town of Cobourg….
Option B adds nothing that is not included in a revised option A
OR
c) THAT Council direct Staff to conclude any further discussions on an Agreement between the Town of Cobourg and the County of Northumberland, and not enter into any formal agreement to address the management of the 310 Division Street Shelter as the Town of Cobourg By-law No.018-2024 is reasonable and ensures that Emergency Care Establishments within its jurisdiction are healthy and safe for their residents, but also working with ECE providers within the by-law directly, the licensing program serves to enhance the well-being of Cobourg residents more broadly.
Option C is acceptable.
It retains the “310D” BL and does not give up any of the Town’s leverage or provide restrictions on future actions. It stops wasting Town resources and staff time on negotiating an agreement that has very limited benefit for the residents of Cobourg.
Today (Wednesday), 3:15pm, Council voted for option C: Keep the “310D” BL and dump the proposed agreement with NC.
LC provided a well thought out summary of the issue, the working parts and the decision ramifications. It’s worth watching.
Clr Darling also made a good comment.
Well done Council.
Hold off on comments on this for a new post re the Council meeting which will be posted later this afternoon.
Plans for new Montreal homeless shelter shelved after local pushback
Smart move not having a 24/7 low barrier shelter in the heart of a residential area with schools. Unfortunately we’re not so lucky here in Cobourg with nothing but green space everywhere in Northumberland County.
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/video/news/plans-for-new-montreal-homeless-shelter-shelved-after-local-pushback/vi-BB1qKpdK?ocid=socialshare&pc=U531&cvid=fb7a5241850e4b88b02d400b884b1148&ei=121
Similar situation outlined in Peterborough, temporary shelter quickly prepared with no neighbourhood consultation ( sounds very familiar to Cobourg)…in advance of tent city near their tiny container home complex being removed. Interesting in the five days the temporary shelter had no occupants….July 23. https://www.thepeterboroughexam…
link doesn’t work
Try google Peterborough Examiner tent city removal July 23 Sorry, 1st time l’ve tried redirection to an article
Also Google Peterborough Examiner…temporary shelter at Morrow building for piece on community reaction.
Downtowner, I copy and paste the web page address from the top of the web browser. Frenchy mentioned your link didn’t work.
It seems the temporary shelter was set up to allow removing tents. Maybe this is related to the Waterloo decision. The homeless had a place to go so the tents could be removed. Nobody actually used this temporary shelter and it was closed as planned.
Tent encampment on Wolfe Street dismantled (thepeterboroughexaminer.com)
Where did the people in the tents go?
Can this work for the Brookside encampment? Where will those people go? Maybe Chris K. has some answers. He is back in town riding around on a bicycle with his woman.
Thanks Kevin, my skills are in training
Hi John: A post said Brookside was sold and there was a public announcement. When I asked “to who” I got 3 thumbs up but no answer. Where can I find the announcement? Thank you for all you do.
There has not been an official announcement and I certainly did not say that it had been sold. But in an interview with Pete Fisher, MPP Piccini said it had been sold and they were working on details. Looks like that fell through. The only official place to learn the status is at the Infrastructure Ontario web page here: https://apps.infrastructureontario.ca/propertiesforsale/Home.aspx This indicates that the property is “on the open market” – that is, not sold.
Just above the IOS listings to the right of the page is a note that sale status for IOS properties listed for sale are NOT marked as sold or removed UNTIL money and ownership has been officially exchanged (deed registered on title).
Just noted this in the article, they will not change status until the deal is registered and ownership officially transferred. Just something for everyone to bear in mind. No different than any other real estate deal just likely more complex (there may be other ministries to get clearance from depending on buyer’s intended use), but a real estate deal is not done (sold) until money and ownership has been exchanged, and with commercial/government properties it generally does not happen as quickly as a residential property. Just sayin’.
Mr. Piccini on Instagram Sunday. He actually went to every house on Cottsmore and spoke to each resident and told them that Brookside was sold.
Tucker, there is a rumor the property is sold conditionally. One of the conditions is delivering the property in safe condition. When 310 Division opens there will be a place for some people to go and perhaps the encampment will be removed. I did hear more details but none of it is official so there is not much point in repeating. If the property is sold to a private developer the new owner will likely try to maximize profits. Buyers of low income housing have less money to spend which means less income for a developer. Eventually something will happen to the property, there will be changes and some people will not like the changes. Hopefully the town will enforce the license agreement with Transition House. But what happens if TH does not honour the agreement? If the license is cancelled will residents of TH be forced out?
More importantly than developer profits, low income housing has a lower MPAC valuation thus lower property taxes for Cobourg. We all lose.
It’s not a rumour. David piccini posted a video as a story, so it won’t show anymore. It expired after 24 hours and the video disappears. The video is still in the group Cobourg Neighbourhood Crime Watch if you would like to see it. Mr. Piccini also went door to door as he’s done before on Cottsmore Ave. and told people personally that Brookside has been sold. There’s no closing date yet that I know of.
I hope this clears up the confusion.
Thanks Sonya. But until it actually closes there is the possibility of the deal not going through. The closing date may be many months away to give time to move the encampment. 310 Division is to have the ‘warming room’ operating by September but I am not sure when homeless people will be living there. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if some of the encampment is still there at Christmas.
I’m sure after the public announcement that Brookside was sold we can count on that being true.
Infrastructure does not keep up with anything the way they should. That was my experience with them and I known many more became frustrated with them.
Sold to who?
Didn’t say.
What part of John Draper’s reply to Tucker did you not understand?
Sonya posted before Johns reply appeared did Tucker….notice times of posting for all
Hello Janet. I understand Mr. Draper’s comment perfectly well. Yet I can assure you I watched a video of MPP Piccini door knocking on the weekend notifying residents on Cottesmore that the property has been sold.
Yes. You are correct. Mr. Piccini wanted to tell them first before he announced it publicly.
Excuse me? Please explain.
Great news – a step in the right direction! Having safe, dignified and supportive transitional housing with services to help people get back on their feet is a win in my books.
Safe for who? The kids that have to walk by there to go to school?
That’s what parents or older siblings are for. Walk the kids by “there”.
In a perfect world, that is true. Not all have that luxury
Hello again Janet. Many are single parents, or even 2 parents having to leave work early. Not many “stay at home” mom’s during these economic times. For this reason, they cannot walk their children to school — nor should they have to. Parents should not have to justifiably worry for the safety of their children. And children should not be traumatized by drug-induced behaviours. I would like to think loving and caring citizens unanimously agree..
We’ve had enough kids traumatized already walking to school past the hub. Siblings afraid to walk by people violently fighting in the street.
They had to turn around and go back home again with no parent at home to comfort them.
Who walks the parents, elderly and older siblings by Janet. Surely you didn’t miss the pictures of the large man who lived close to Transition house and the terrible beating he took at the hands of one of the wandering, drug addicted and mentally ill folk who use these facilties.
Janet, what do you mean by “there”? Can we have common sense discourse without silly semantics getting in the way?
To “enable” sin is to embolden someone to continue in sin, to empower his/her ability to sin, or to make it easier for him/her to sin. In our stand for righteousness, we want to avoid enabling the sins of others. Human relationships can be complex, and there are many situations that can lead to involuntary participation in the sin of another…
Enabling someone’s sin is the same as indirectly taking part in that sin, and 1 Timothy 5:22 says, “Do not participate in the sins of others.” Our job as adults is to protect and teach our children about sinful behaviour. Your comment is so absolutely outrageous.
This “win “has been in operation as this assistance model for nearly seven years…..yet nowhere near full to capacity and an encampment evolved during this time. Only a win if it helps end the housing crisis and gets people sheltered. It is not housing the folks with hard drug addiction as there is not freedom to use on site and this is viewed as a human rights violation. Rest assured, however, these same folks show up for short term assistance but stop short of commitment to help their progress toward healthy, safe living.
Transition House and the new residence on Division have a duty to report on their stats and use, reporting to whom and how frequently? The citizens of Cobourg require accountability and transparency on these projects from both the town and county, and it is imperative that we are informed of the operational expenses and use. Close governance on this project needs to be managed and updates provided to the public on a regular basis. At the bare minimum, we need measurable KPIs after a short pilot period before we go full blown on this residence to see if it actually works, if it becomes a white elephant and if it could be repurposed before any extensive funding is put into it for renos, etc. The taxpayers in Cobourg are not a bottomless pit when tax increases occur, so how will this project be managed and updated progress reports provided to the public?
Who ever sits on this Board as with Council will be required to sign / agree to a confidentiality agreement and as I understand those not directly involved with the County or Transition house have no say / vote So who will be reporting and what slant will it portray
Read the headline – Transition House Licensed – and on the end of the LCBO Strike – I thought Licensed – what are they thinking? I think I may go back to bed – thank you for your continued coverage and updates, John.
And who is going to enforce this? Cobourg Police? By-Law officials? Give me a break. They can’t even stop the Ecology Garden from being stolen.
At least 2 businesses have closed or moved because of what’s happening downtown and storeowners I’ve talked to nearby are stoic but also pretty shaken by regular/sometimes violent run-ins with addiction, theft, and serious mental illness. People have a right to feel safe and a part of our leadership has forgotten this.
My question would be if few are taking advantage of Transition House shouldn’t they shift them on. Didn’t Waterloo say that you can’t get rid of them unless you have a place for them to go According to their Chartered rights. Another question would be what about my rights/
Are there any statistics /records kept of follow up verifying that the title “Transition “:house is actually successful in achieving “transitioning” from drugs etc to a normal lifestyle ?
Is it just another asset to those who take advantage temporarily of what is to offer as long as it suits them ?
Will the same apply to 310,Division Street ?
The bylaw is an impressive document. Kudos to the lawyer that obsessed over it. My general impression is the initial license is granted by default BUT the bylaw is a web of every possible mechanism by which the license renewal can be denied.
If denizens of Transition House are down on their luck, but otherwise responsible people motivated to better their lives, then all will be well and the license will renew.
One clause that stood out for me is proof of liability insurance (page 8, $2M or more) with the Town being added as additional insured. As an insurer, what premium would you charge?
You can’t enforce a by-law that does not exist, but you can also choose not to enforce a by-law that does exist. To what degree will the town turn a blind eye when the by-law is inevitably tested?
Well that Blind eye is everywhere in Cobourg There is a situation on King st w. right now
that has been let go since 2018 and many an order against the Landlord s & Owner
have not been enforced or dealt with .
As a result our parking officinaudo turn mold and health inspector seems to be at a loss.
Mean while a business may be forced to close or relocate and several residential tenants displaced after one or 2 went to hospital . Not reliable enough !
So Transition House got an ECE licence. As no one from the town/county/TH has stated otherwise the taxpaying residents can assume that all parts of the bylaw are going to be adhered to? It would be great to see the code of conduct, proposed occupancy date, which company was hired for security etc. The county and TH have been strangely quiet since the vocal opposition to the town bylaw which usually means someone caved in. Will we ever find out?
Caved IN is a very mild term for it !
Obviously the Property Owners of Cobourg are not making enough noise for Council ,Mayor and Management to Hear .
As for town and or BY Law Enforcement that’s a distant dream you can never get these people on the phone or to respond in a TIMLEY fashion the usual response is they are not Mandated to deal with ??
what ever that means ?
If there is not a 24 x 7 Response Team / Persons put in place ahead of time — over and above
By Law Dept —- mandated to handle what’s about to become of Down Town and the neighbouring properties to 310 Division then I think were all in trouble as it will never come into effect after the fact . And what about the impact on Property Values and peaceful safe enjoyment around 310. To many facts and decisions have been made without the publics knowledge or input .
I don’t see this “new” Transition House being any more successful than the old, especially if they serve only County residents. But wait a sec., l guess anyone using Brookside encampment as their address is living in the County…..beware of interpretation of the rules.so Cobourg will continue to pay all of the bills. There will be no relief of the squalor only increased drug activity around the turnstile Hub as the weather turns cold, the drug supply house still exists at James and John and fuels the problem so the Dynamic Patrols needs to really step up in this neighbourhood
“the Dynamic Patrols needs to really step up in this neighbourhood”
Surely your last comment was sarcasm. DYNAMIC patrols indeed.
Yes, should have surrounded with parentheses…..ANY consistent or productive patrol would be welcomed but, as reported in the Police Board report, much attention is needed to address the encampment (seeming to grow)and still will be over this coming winter as these folks are not likely to move into 310 Division but will cycle through daily to get provisions and comforts , then return to the street to use and return to the camp. This was the norm last winter and will be again. All good intention abused and no positive change.
AND, just look at all the money poured into this venture!!
If they can’t drink , smoke or do drugs in the house, they will just go across the street and sit on the curb, to down their bottle of booze OR do their drugs. Any doorway will do.
That’s correct Liz, and with no open space as surrounded St. Peter’s church , for the 24 hour HUB , lawns and stairwells of Trinity Church will again be targeted for gathering as there is no nearby bus shelter to abuse and destroy…..after a quick visit to the cue at James and John….all amenities within short walking distance…a scenario not provided for many more deserving citizens.Add in ample crime and assault opportunities as was proven in our area in recent past.