The City of Regina released a report stating how much it would cost to end homelessness, a number that an advocate calls inflated.
The city said in a report that the city would have to increase taxes by 21.73 per cent in 2023 and by 4.24 per cent tax rate in 2024. The increase would result in $487.08 annually in 2023 and $142.80 in 2024 for the average homeowner.
It would cost the city $122.5 million to create supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness in the city.
Peter Gilmer, an advocate with the Regina Anti-Poverty Ministry, said they have concerns about how much money was being suggested.
“The reality means that if it doesn’t end up in the budget, there is no new funding in terms of combating homelessness, and that’s the big issue,” he said. “There probably are more reasonable costs that could be looked at in terms of what a supportive housing, housing first supports would be that would come in lower than what was suggested in terms of the mill rate.”
“That the mill rate increase that’s being suggested is really kind of scarring folks off putting some immediate supports in place that would make a huge difference,” he continued.
Gilmer also said they have concerns that the ‘end homelessness’ motion was not in the recently proposed city budget.
“We were very hopeful back on June 15th when many of us presented to city council and saw a unanimous decision for the motion to end homelessness with the understanding that there was going to be financial support in this year’s budget. We were disappointed to hear that it wasn’t there and felt it was a front to democracy,” he said. ” This was a decision that had been approved unanimously by council, so very concerned that it wasn’t there.”
The motion not being in the proposed budget has caused a pair of Regina city councillors and local residents to take the city manager to court for not including the motion.
Gilmer said that they support the councillor’s decision to go to court.
“It’s very unfortunate that it has to come to that, but when you are looking at what could be described as a front to democracy and the blocking of a very clear, unanimous democratic decision, I think that it leaves limited options.”
