St. Albert resident Eric King doesn’t want the city to tell him or others with disabilities where to live anymore.
“I’m asking you not to discriminate against me or others with disabilities,” he said. “Let me live in a place of my choosing.”
Eric, along with his family and supports, asked city council on Tuesday to look at the 300-metre separation group homes have to follow in the city. They argued this minimum distance that keeps group homes from being too close to each other discriminates against those with disabilities like Eric.
“Not allowing me to pick my own neighbours because I have a disability is against my human rights,” he said. “I really love living in a condo with my two roommates, who I really like. People with disabilities shouldn’t be told they can’t live right beside me.”
After listening to Eric’s story, council decided to completely remove the separation limit in a unanimous vote.
Eric’s father, Marcus King, said group homes were brought in at the same time that Canada was introducing residential schools, which saw thousands of First Nations children taken from their homes.
He said thousands of disabled children were forcibly removed from their homes and institutionalized.
“It was the belief that children with disabilities were subhuman, that families and society needed to be protected from disability children,” he said. “Families were ostracized and shamed simply for having a child born with a disability. We had that experience specifically with Eric at the time he was born.”
King argued modern group homes need to be protected to allow them to be inclusive within the community in order to allow people to feel that they belong. He said removing that separation limit will go a long way to help people achieve that feeling of belonging.
While no one on council challenged the merits of eliminating the separation limit, emotions ran high when the discussion centred on the addition of “substance use” in the city’s definition of what could be a permanent supportive housing. The addition of substance use to the city’s definitions means shelters or homes that provide help with substance abuse are now allowed in St. Albert.
Both councillors Natalie Joly and Ray Watkins shared passionate stories about family members who struggled with substance issues.
Joly, who at times was fighting to hold back tears, told the story of her father who suffered from alcoholism. She said she wanted to tell this story to address the stigma substance users face and argued the city should be allowing supportive housing.
“This is corny but let’s be judged on how we treat the less fortunate than us,” Joly added.
Council voted 6-1 to keep the words in.
Coun. Sheena Hughes, who voted to remove substance use from the city’s definitions, told the Gazette on Friday she wanted council to debate this because of feedback she’s received from residents who moved to the city from Edmonton after living next to a substance abuse home.
“Just from their feedback, I thought this shouldn’t be going in carte blanche,” she said. “If people have issues with this, there’s no way for them to actually appeal the decision. You can rezone any piece of land at any time at council’s discretion.”
