Needle resolution defeated
Emotional debate in council chambers
The most divisive issue of recent history and memory in the city of Lethbridge will continue. And it would have regardless of Monday’s vote swing on a resolution proposed by Lethbridge City Councillor Blaine Hyggen, said council members and ARCHES.
That proposal — to develop a bylaw that could see an end to offsite needle distribution by ARCHES at the supervised consumption site — was defeated 5-4 in front of a more-than-capacity crowd at Lethbridge City Hall after a two-plus-hour debate Monday afternoon.
The five votes against the resolution were from Mayor Chris Spearman, Coun. Jeff Carlson, Coun. Jeff Coffman, Coun. Belinda Crowson and Coun. Rob Miyashiro.
The four votes supporting the resolution were from Hyggen, Coun. Mark Campbell, Coun. Joe Mauro and Coun. Ryan Parker.
Miyashiro cited that World Health Organization best practices on harm reduction are being done. Carlson said he was looking at facts and also thinking about if it was his loved ones who were in the situations, while Crowson said she was voting on facts rather than fear.
Coffman, who proposed several amendments which were each defeated or withdrawn, said he wants to see the supervised consumption site operate for a year, then revisit the analysis. Mauro cited he was voting with the community sentiment in mind, while Campbell had similar reasoning, saying he’s listening to the people who elected him.
Parker said in his 20 years on city council, he’s “never seen” an issue that’s divided a community to this extent.
“It affects everyone,” he said. “Everyone has skin in the game. I think the debate was reflective of the community right now.”
During the meeting, Parker suggested a trial period of six months of ending needle distribution in order to measure more data on that side. The amendment was made in an effort of compromise, he said.
The vote split was the same as the main Hyggen resolution with a 5-4 defeat.
“Obviously, my colleagues didn’t agree with the amendment,” Parker said. “But at least I tried. I think we need some true hard numbers and facts.”
The original resolution was presented by Hyggen on July 9, then delayed to Monday. He suggested restricting the needle program — a provincially mandated effort to reduce diseases such as HIV and hepatitis B and C within the drug-using community.
Alberta Municipal Affairs later confirmed council had the ability to pass bylaws in the interest of protecting residents, but those bylaws could be challenged in court.
Hyggen said after the meeting he was frustrated, as there was so much research done by so many in the community in the lead-up to Monday.
“You feel like it’s a letdown, but I don’t think it’s all a loss. It really brought the community; as far as getting out and wanting to speak up regarding this,” he said.
“We talked about it here earlier; when this resolution is done, you’ve got to check the personalities at the door. You flip that page and you start on the next resolution. It’s so important that we look at each and every resolution separate and we don’t bring one and mix that in.”
Spearman said after the meeting that council and the community need to remain open on the issues, including that the number of users at the supervised consumption site continues to increase while the number of needles being distributed continues to decline.
“I think that’s a very positive thing,” he said.
“ARCHES is a community partner and I respect them. Everyone has a strong opinion, but when people are providing a contracted health service — that’s a challenge.”
Stacey Bourque, executive director at ARCHES, said even if the resolution has passed, they would not have stopped distribution of needles.
“I do agree with council that we do need to continue our collaboration with community and continue to find ways to support the local businesses and support the community at large,” she said following the meeting.
“We would just forge ahead with trying to find other solutions and other ways of addressing the concerns. We live and breathe this every day. We feel badly that it’s such a divisive issue in the community, but obviously we’re happy that we don’t have to continue to fight that battle.”
Bourque added she believes councillors did a lot of research to prepare for the meeting.
“Some of them brought forward a lot of really good points,” she said. “There was a lot of healthy debate that went on. I’m glad that the vote went in the direction that it went.”
When council began at 1:30 p.m. on Monday, a mostly full chambers half cleared when Spearman confirmed the listed agenda time of the needle distribution resolution was set to begin at 4 p.m.
Several people in the crowd were also wearing T-shirts saying: “Instead of whining why not just LEAVE — Mayor Spearman, 2018” in reference to a Facebook comment. They were created by local man Reuben Tams, who said he spent $600 of his own money to have 50 of the shirts printed.
Later, during the debate, another man left as he was yelling “you’re an idiot” to Spearman. Others were told to leave if they were going to be vocal in council chambers. Those who stayed decided to use quiet thumbs up and thumbs down as a means to voice their opinion.
Hyggen, meanwhile, said the next step for the community is to keep educating themselves.
“In my opinion, it’s not getting any better,” he said. “I think if we try something; nothing ventured, nothing gained. Let’s try to see if this is going to work. And you know what? It may not. But it’s not getting any better the way it is.”
“It’s a public health service in the community that we need to be providing to marginalized populations of people who are very vulnerable,” said Bourque. “So, we are going to keep providing that service to prevent the disease transmission. All we can do is share best practices and evidence-based practice.”
“Today; it sets a decision and now I have the opportunity to go and talk to the provincial government, the health minister, even to the premier, and say look ‘we need help in Lethbridge,’” Spearman said.
“The solutions are too slow in coming. If something was approved tomorrow, it might take a year-anda-half or two years to implement it. We would have some similar issues if we had a safe sobering site approved. Where would we put it? I’m sure the neighbours wouldn’t be happy wherever we put it. But we need it in our community. How do we manage those neighbourhood issues and make sure we get the services that we do need?”