08/16/2026
GOVERNANCE WORKS BEST WHEN IT HAS THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED
Encampments are a serious issue and a public safety concern, not a solution to homelessness. The city is hearing concerns and is working to improve communication with the public about its approach to homelessness, addictions and safety. Acknowledging our concerns has accomplished nothing, thus far.
To: The Members of Council,
Mayor: Michelle Boileau
Councillors: Steve Black, John Curley, Lorne Feldman, Bill Gvozdanovic, Andrew Marks, Kristen Murray, Cory Robin, Roch Whissell,
Subject:
ENCAMPMENTS;
Unauthorized Encampments, Encampment Response Initiative (HOPE Proposal), Temporary Encampment Site, Municipal Authorized Encampments
LEGISLATION / BY-LAWS / PROTOCOLS / POLICY
Community Safety and Well-Being Plan; Encampment Protocol Policy; Parklands By-lawSafer Municipalities Act; Trespass to Property Act; Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act
Does the council intend to amend the city’s policies/by-laws to reflect and align with the principles and requirements of the Safer Municipalities Act, 2025, particularly the Amendments to the Trespass to Property Act, which gave municipalities and the police authority to remove encampments, to protect community safety and restore public order, and how the designated temporary encampment site (Pine St. S.) will be implemented to move people out of unsafe encampments?
The council should direct the CAO to obtain a comprehensive legal and operational risk assessment addressing how the city’s ordinances interact with the Safer Municipalities Act, 2025 and the city’s dedicated temporary encampment site (Pine St. S.) for spring/summer 2026, prior to any action taken on the proposed 2026 encampment protocol.
Integrating provincial legislation into our local planning is essential for enhancing transparency and accountability in safety initiatives and strengthening public trust through clear legislative alignment. This would help residents better understand how local efforts fit into the wider provincial framework and ensure that Timmins remains a leader in proactive community safety.
Those living with the direct consequences of these policy decisions should not be treated as an afterthought, their experiences, safety concerns, property impacts, and proposed solutions should have been heard and that feedback reflected in any updated plan or protocol, considering the ongoing recurring impacts on nearby residents, businesses, and neighbourhood safety. The residents are not asking for slogans, sympathy, or another temporary measure (pilot project).
The safety and well-being of all the community’s citizens should be a top priority for those at the helm of the City of Timmins. Residents are not asking the City to ignore human rights or to criminalize homelessness. They are asking why the City has not clearly explained how it will balance those obligations with the rights of surrounding residents and businesses to safety, security, peaceful enjoyment of their property, and access to public spaces.
This raises a further question for council which has acknowledged the concerns of residents living near the Living Space shelter, why has no councillor brought forward a motion requesting the city’s current Community Safety and Well-Being Plan and Encampment Protocol Policy to be reviewed and updated to more clearly reflect and align with the principles and requirements of the legislation, considering the ongoing impacts on nearby residents, businesses, and neighbourhood safety. It would be valuable for the council members to communicate the rationale behind their decisions to the public, especially regarding council’s endorsement of the Act and identifying a dedicated temporary encampment location.
We are asking for leadership that is willing to make a clear decision, explain the legal and policy basis for that decision, and accept responsibility for the outcome. If the member is prepared to defend the current and proposed approach, then you should say so openly, if not, then it is time for the member to stop just acknowledging our concerns, and to start taking formal action to produce results. If council has no intention of changing the local approach, residents deserve to know why.
Residents would like to know who is prepared to act on their behalf and bring forward a motion/resolution directing staff to prepare an impartial report on the current CSWB Plan and Encampment Protocol, including whether they remain adequate, what enforcement options are available on municipal property, and what changes are necessary to protect affected neighbourhoods?
Residents should not be left to rely on media comments, informal assurances, or vague references to legal limitations. Further clarification on the anticipated timeline for finalizing a decision would be appreciated.
Re:
Homeless encampments have been a contentious issue for members of council and many residents, especially those who live in the vicinity of Living Space North Against Poverty’s low-barrier emergency shelter. The presence of this recurring group of seasonal residents in the laneway behind the shelter has once again brought disruptions and other social disorders that negatively impact not only everyday life, but also the quality of life and safety for the residents and businesses in the neighbourhood.
It is fair to hold elected officials accountable, if the goal is to see action on encampments, then the focus should stay on policy, available tools, funding and outcomes. The conversation should be based on what has been done, and what still needs to happen, in managing this complex issue that show results in winding down these sites and address the specific needs of people in encampments and quickly move them from crisis into safer accommodation and ultimately stable, long-term housing, and public safety obligations.
Although the City of Timmins which was awarded $3.194 million in funding for the city’s response to the Encampment Response Initiative the members of council decided not to follow through with the HOPE Proposal, which would have provided for a much needed additional 40 units for unsheltered individuals as an alternative to shelters and encampments with the capital costs provided by the provincial and federal governments.
It is also important to remember that this was not a decision made by the members of council alone, the CDSB Board were also part of the decision-making process, however, council is the municipality’s policy making body. The Chief Administrative Officer’s position acts as principal advisor to the council/board in the development of public policy, including ensuring all relevant information is provided to make informed decisions. The real issue is the council/board not being provided all relevant information necessary.
The members of council voted unanimously in favour of the Safer Municipalities Act, proposed legislation making amendments to the Trespass to Property Act, and the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act. The City of Timmins has experienced a rise in homeless encampment sites in public places, and the use of illicit drugs in parks and in public is a grave concern for our community. The City of Timmins supports the government in giving municipalities and police more authority and the tools necessary to remove and act decisively against trespassers in unauthorized homelessness encampments and take strict action on illicit drug usage in parks and public places to protect community safety, and further that this resolution be shared with the Premier of Ontario, the MPP Honourable George Pirie, the Solicitor General, FONOM, and the Timmins Police Services Board.
The Community Services Director/City Clerk, Steph Palmateer said, “it appears that the province will be enacting legislation that will change how we’re able to deal with those encampments on parklands and city property in the future, but until that change happens, it’s kind of a grey area right now.”
A draft legal opinion on Timmins encampment-related bylaws will be presented to council early in the new year. There was a discussion at Timmins city council planned in early 2025, where there may be updates to the city’s approach. Council said, “it will review its by-laws and enforcement tools in an effort to address growing concerns about public drug use and encampments.”
The council received a legal opinion on the city’s encampment protocols, services, and other policies related to addressing homelessness on February 4, 2025.
While the Safer Municipalities Act grants police officers to enforce its provisions, it does not explicitly mandate Police Services Boards to adopt specific enforcement provisions, the provincial government’s expectations were that municipalities would align with this legislation and assumed that the relocation sites would be paired with enforcement powers, to place encampment dwellers.
The Timmins Police Services Board (TPSB) governs municipal policing in Timmins, providing direction and oversight to the police service, but does not itself administer encampment protocols directly. Encampment management is primarily under City of Timmins jurisdiction, with protocols involving city staff, enforcement services, public health, outreach agencies, and collaborating community partners.
Every member of council should also have known that the City’s own Community Safety and Well-Being Plan and Encampment Protocol would continue to govern how encampments are addressed locally, including the policy position that encampments were permitted on public property, with distance restrictions that ty and find a balance between the rights of individuals to use an encampment and the rights of others living and working in the community. The individuals in encampments were not compelled to relocate, that is why council’s unanimous support for stronger provincial legislation under the Safer Municipalities Act, 2025, and its direction to the Cochrane District Services Board to apply for the $3.194 million HOPE proposal, must be explained against what council did afterward.
The Safer Municipalities Act, 2025 received Royal Assent on June 5, 2025, yet council accepted the updated Community Safety and Well-Being Plan on June 17, 2025, without clearly updating the local framework to explain how those new provincial tools would be used, or why the City’s encampment response would continue to restrict removal. If council had no intention of changing the local approach, residents deserve to know why that was not stated plainly at the time.
Many residents saw council’s actions as performative. Timmins was caught between a provincial framework that expected enforcement and a local protocol and community safety and well-being plan that prohibits it.
Plans are underway to establish a temporary encampment site in Timmins ahead of summer.
At its March 19, 2026 meeting, the Cochrane District Services Board (CDSB) heard that partners are actively working to identify a designated location, with supports expected to be in place once it’s selected.
Director of Community Development and Services Christine Heavens said, “partners are aligned around plans for a designated temporary encampment location, with the City of Timmins working closely with service providers and Indigenous partners. My understanding from the voices around that group was that people are aligned and feel that is a good effort from the city to be designating one location that people are getting prepared to provide the supports at that location.”
Timmins Councillor Steve Black raised concerns about, “preparedness heading into spring, when encampments typically increase.”
Heavens said, “planning is already underway to ensure a smoother response this year.”
Timmins Councillor Steve Black said, “there are going to be costs, and follow-up reports in the coming weeks that will include those details. There are costs with this issue now. We have endured costs cleaning up, taking care of facilities, sending bylaw, sending police, sending fire to all these sites for three years.”
Ward 5 Councillor Steve Black requested to discuss the encampment protocol, so that was placed on the agenda for the March 24, 2026, council meeting, and a resolution that council designate Pine Street South as the authorized temporary encampment site which was approved.
PRESENTATIONS & REPORTS
Temporary Designated Encampment Location for Spring/summer of 2026 – D. Landers
Dave Landers, CAO was in attendance to present the report to council and answer questions.
The city’s CAO started the presentation explaining, “that city staff had been tasked with finding a suitable location and that Council provide direction to Administration to select and approve a temporary designated location for tent-based encampments for 2026, outside of parks, roadways, and laneways, to reduce safety risks and support temporary response.”
Throughout 2025, multiple initiatives were undertaken to respond to encampments across the city. Despite these efforts, individuals experiencing homelessness gathered in the laneway adjacent to 316 Spruce Street South. The site was not formally designated or approved by Council; however, in the absence of an alternative location, and in consideration of human rights obligations, the encampment remained in place and Enforcement Services worked with Public Works to manage waste collection.
Providing a designated, safer location may assist the municipality in responding in a more consistent and lawful manner.
During the meeting, Councillor Steve Black asked, “will we be able to enact our other bylaws and remove encampments from any other sites that pop up in the community, correct?
“By having a designated area for an encampment, the city hopes to be able to remove other encampments that may pop up. To be fair, the legal situation just keeps rolling with this. Our understanding of it as it stands now is that, yes, we could, if an encampment springs up in the Hollinger Park, we could direct them to one of these sites if they’re deemed appropriate. It’s not to say we won’t face challenges, every community’s facing legal challenges,” said CAO Dave Landers.
Note: The legal basis for enforcement authority is more specifically about the fact that parks are already governed by a by-law that gives the city regulatory authority overuse of that land, That’s an important distinction
That was enough of a guarantee for Councillor Steve Black, who led the push to choose a site at the meeting. “I guess my hope is that we will enact our bylaws until a court tells us that we can’t, after we designate this site.”
Council formally designated the Pine Street South location as the temporary encampment site for spring/summer 2026. Interpreted independently, there being no additional action other than designating a site, staff and the municipality can then treat it as the authorized dedicated location for that purpose, and it creates no binding obligation on council or staff to compel residents of unauthorized encampments to relocate to the site identified by the members. Properly construed, the resolution is limited to the formal designation and operates solely to designate Pine Street South as the designated temporary encampment site. The resolution is ambiguous as written if the intent is to remove and compel individuals in unauthorized encampments relocate to the designated temporary encampment site.
There are some obvious flaws with the Pine Street South option, for one, the area isn’t ready. On Tuesday, CAO Dave Landers explained some of the additional challenges. “Some of the concerns with that are just the sheer distance from any services that homeless individuals might require – food banks, access to health and social supports, etcetera, who pointed out some of the operational implications for that location. We’d have to figure out some sort of transportation system, or process. How to ensure enforcement activities occur on site. There would be transportation costs, our weekly cleanup costs. Some level of security would be required, and some level of land clearing might be required as well.”
Landers spoke to the media about some of the other discussions that had taken place about the Pine Street South location. “There is some cleared space within that area, but he believes we’ll have to clear more. Obviously with the sheer amount of snow still in the Timmins area, crews will not be able to get in and do any site preparation, likely until late May, depending on the spring thaw. Because that parcel of property is owned by the city, the costs for site work will be the responsibility of the city. We’ll have to do some internal work as well, because we’ve got to coordinate amongst public works, bylaw, and our community safety and well-being lead, on how we can get some of this stuff done.
“There are still concerns about whether or not the residents living in the current encampment will actually use the new site, as there are many challenges with it. What he would expect is that the agencies that are involved in supporting unhoused people, would work to provide them the service that they need. So if its transportation from an encampment site to a medical appointment, or access to a food bank or whatnot, we would certainly be leaning on the partners for that,” said Landers.
The resolution passed that was only the first step. Councillor Lorne Feldman said, “we have to continue to take more steps to make this happen. I know it’s a long process but to sit and do nothing is no answer at all and tonight we have taken an important step.”
The City of Timmins CAO, Dave Landers in an email April 2, 2026 said, “In brief, we have asked for a legal review of our bylaw & current jurisprudence in regard to encampments. Based on what comes back, we will make updates to the protocol and advise council on what we may or may not be able to do. There is an important ruling in relation to actions taken in the City of Hamilton that will be important to know and understand.”
The appeal challenges the Ontario Superior Court’s decision which upheld the City of Hamilton’s right to remove homeless encampments, focusing on alleged Charter rights violations and procedural errors from a December 23, 2024, ruling.
Based on all credible reporting and legal analyses available so far, no source documents any new post-June-2025 court applications or injunctions filed against municipalities specifically because of encampment evictions under the new Act.
During a closed Special Council Meeting held on April 24, 2026, the members received advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose regarding Encampment Protocol.
May 23, 2026
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice barred the regional municipality of Waterloo from removing encampments on Thursday.
Justice Michael R. Gibson held that the municipality’s bylaw, allowing forced evictions of the encampment residents in the particular site, violates the residents’ right to life, liberty, and security under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He sided with the residents, accepting that the government has not provided sufficient alternative shelter nor allowed residents to shelter elsewhere since its previous application in 2023. The ruling follows a court order requiring the region to develop a safe tenting protocol and provide an alternative encampment site.
June 2, 2026
Councillor Black requested to discuss the encampment protocol, so that was placed on the agenda. There was no administrative report requested or completed.
Encampment Protocol
Response to Encampments – A Protocol for the City of Timmins
Purpose and Scope
The City of Timmins has developed a response to encampments, a protocol to guide a coordinated, consistent, and legally compliant response to encampments located on public property. This protocol establishes procedures for engagement, safety assessment, and response when temporary shelters or encampments are identified within the municipality.
Legal and Human Rights Framework
The City of Timmins recognises that homelessness is both a social and human rights issue that requires thoughtful, coordinated responses from all levels of government. Recent court decisions in Canada have considered the relationship between municipal by-laws regulating public spaces and the rights of individuals experiencing homelessness. As a result, municipalities must carefully balance the management of public spaces with the rights of individuals experiencing homelessness. In light of this evolving legal context, The City of Timmins has adopted an approach that prioritizes engagement, safety, and connection to services while ensuring that public spaces remain safe and accessible for all residents. Municipal responses should therefore focus on minimizing harm while working collaboratively with health, housing, and community partners.
Municipal Authority
Municipalities have legislative authority under the Municipal, 2001 to regulate the use of public spaces, maintain public safety, and address matters that may pose risks to the community. This includes the ability to manage public nuisances, regulate park use, and respond to safety hazards associated with temporary structures or obstructions on public property. The City of Timmins will exercise these authorities in a manner that is consistent with its legal obligations under the Charter and applicable human rights legislation. The City of Timmins is committed to responding to encampments in a manner that is respectful, coordinated, and considered with legal and human rights obligations.
Balancing Rights and Responsibilities
This protocol is not intended to penalize individuals experiencing homelessness. Instead, it establishes reasonable conditions to ensure that public spaces remain safe, accessible, and usable for their intended purposes. The City recognizes that homelessness is a complex issue and will continue to prioritize engagement and connection to services while maintaining responsible management of public spaces.
Municipal land-use planning practices commonly use separation distances to reduce potential conflicts between incompatible uses and to protect sensitive land uses.
Encampment Protocol Update – Councillor Black
Mayor Boileau said, “that Councillor Black asked to speak to the incoming protocol.
Councillor Steve Black asked, “CAO Dave Landers to speak to whether that dedicated spot is enforceable.”
Landers responded, “our ability to compel people to go to one site that we select is very limited, I’m not sure that it’s possible to enforce.”
“No work has been done on the Pine Street South property. If someone chooses to go there, there is space, we had not intended to bring in power, lights, security, any of those sorts of things. As it stands right now, the shelter’s not running at capacity, so there is capacity for people to enter right into the shelter as we speak. We’re not in a spot where we are looking for overflow space,” said Landers.
At some point, Councillor Lorne Feldman said, “the city may have to take a stand to be trailblazers and compel a one-site encampment location. I think the residents would support us taking some action, legal action, and test the waters because I think our protocol is pretty solid. I think we have tried to strike a balance between those requiring encampments but also protecting residents.
Mayor Boileau said, “So, considering that there is no decision to be made tonight, we had quite a bit of discussion on this item. We had a discussion on this item at this council table many times before, definitely heard Councillor Black’s call for some solutions to come back, that we keep looking for solutions and so definitely looking forward to continuing discussions as we move forward into the summer months.
The CAO’s answers may have blurred legal authority with policy justification, if staff present legal constraints as though they fully understand the matter before council has debated options, councillor’s may feel the decision has effectively been made for them. That can create the impression that staff were pre-empting council’s role in making it. The issue should also be about council not being provided with all relevant information necessary to make an informed decision. This situation raises some important governance and ethics questions.
Although they’ve already posted the proposed version of the Timmins encampment protocol (2026) on their site, it has not yet been approved by council. That is a concern. When a proposed protocol is posted in a way that makes it look final by posting it and directing members of council and others to view it on the city’s site before council has formally approved it, residents are left with the impression that the decision has already been made.
The proposed 2026 version of the Timmins Encampment Protocol Policy has been discussed by council but not yet brought forward as a motion or resolution to be voted on. The council should reject further advancement of this ordinance/policy update until residents have an opportunity to provide input before any final decision is made or the protocol is implemented. Resources and attention should instead prioritize consistent, even-handed enforcement of existing encampment, trespass, and nuisance laws on public and private property, focused investment in treatment capacity for mental health and substance use disorders (the primary drivers in many chronic cases).
The current approach appears to be reactive rather than preventative, creating new municipal authorized encampment zones in residential areas, with municipal by-law visits, weekly cleanups, and police collaboration being used to manage the symptoms while the same unsafe conditions continue to reappear. This approach risks turning code enforcement and police into ongoing case managers for a program the city itself created. The council’s actions thus far, does not solve those problems, it relocates and multiplies oversight difficulties. The city’s own parklands by-law recognizes that intervention may be required where immediate public safety concerns exist.
Regards,
The Citizens Forum
James McMahon
