A technicality may have rendered a Kitimat housing petition invalid, after circulating for months, but in the end it managed to achieve its primary goal of highlighting the town’s acute housing shortage.
Initiated by housing advocate Matthew DeSousa, the Affordable Housing Development petition aimed to garner support for a partnership with BC Housing to construct a rental complex for full-time workers struggling with the high cost of living.
The petition, which collected 241 signatures, sought to raise awareness and rally support for the project and was presented to district council at its March 11 regular meeting. However, about 100 of the signatories were not Kitimat residents, and those that were failed to include their street addresses, a requirement under the B.C. Community Charter for council to formally consider the petition.
Despite this oversight, DeSousa said the petition fulfilled its purpose by drawing attention to the community’s support for the housing initiative, criticizing council for focusing on “fine-print policy” over community needs.
“That petition was for informational purposes, not a request for them to do something about it,” he said. “They committed to addressing the issue four years ago in their housing action plan and needs assessment, so it was just a reminder that they were doing nothing, and 10 per cent of the community was still in need.”
Kitimat’s Director of Economic Development, Walsham Tenshak, later clarified that council could still address the petition, regardless of its formal status.
“The intent of noting that the Petition does not qualify under the Community Charter is not to diminish the efforts or the message that Council receives,” he said. “But rather assures Council that there is no legislated action that must be taken. Council may direct further action on the petition if they so choose.”
Council ultimately filed it in the municpal records as per district policy, but not before it raised concerns with procedure in the digital world. Councillor Michelle Martins expressed disappointment with the petition’s flaw and sought assurance from staff the rules for petitions are clearly stated on the website.
“I appreciate the grassroots engagements that petitions can provide between the public and local government, and I also understand there needs to be checks and balances, but I would like clarification.”
The deputy CAO replied it is customary for petitioners to visit the offices in person to learn the rules of petitions, and wasn’t aware of these rules being posted to the website.
Furthermore, the majority of signatures were collected via Change.org, which lacks a field for entering addresses, a requirement in the majority of cases.
—
A previous version of this story inclorectly idetified Director of Economic Development, Walsham Tenshak, as the Chief Administrative Officer. The above story has been corrected. We appologise for any inconvenience this may have caused.