Dear Editor,

I am requesting formal responses to my questions in writing [from BC Housing].

I did attend the Oct. 30 meeting and did not hear any clear, firm and transparent responses to my concerns. Prior to the meeting in fact, I stopped at Wal-Mart to shop and was approached for money by several homeless panhandlers. Hmmmmmm. Ironic?

I understand very well the concept of supportive housing, harm reduction and intensive case management teams having led several initiatives myself. Each have had clear written terms of reference and objectives, and were transparent in their cost. I cannot say the same for BC Housing鈥檚 presentation on Oct. 30. It was vague, theoretical and ill prepared to inform the community.

What I hear loud and clear from the 91原创 community is not contempt and discompassion for the homeless community and vulnerable populations. In fact, I hear the opposite.

What I hear is empathy and compassion which support long-existing and more vulnerable communities in the 91原创s which do not have the political and media 鈥榮exiness鈥� that homelessness and fentanyl do. For example, supportive housing for adults with developmental disabilities currently living with aging caregivers, seniors living in poverty after having supported our local economy for years, and low income working families who need stable housing for child school enrollment and family development.

The response to one community member鈥檚 question of why the Quality Inn was bought for the purpose of homeless supportive housing of 鈥渂ecause it was there鈥� is unprofessional and non-accountable. BC Housing needs to own its actions and admit when errors in judgement and due diligence/fair process are made sans public consultation prior to spend.

This location for this purpose is irresponsible and completely inappropriate. I hope both TOL and 91原创 City will support the majority.

Adrienne Alford-Burt, 91原创