Thursday, December 27, 2012

City of Surrey evicts homeless shelter - Update



Talk about tearing down bridges. Once again the city of Surrey shows it’s true colours. After accepting a bribe from the dirty developers of the mega casino they are closing down the Surrey Urban Mission foodline and homeless shelter with no plan in sight for a relocation. More blood money. Shame on them and shame on all of us for allowing this to happen.

Update:

The Surrey Leader is reporting that time is running out for the homeless shelter and the Vancouver Province has picked up on the story. This is a dirty stain on Dianne Watts’ campaign. This is something Gordon Campbell would do. Evict the homeless and accept a $24,000 bribe from dirty developers connected to Gordon Campbell for an organized crime megatropolis in Surrey. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

This place is on the same side of 104th just across the street from the new Babylonian City Hall that’s being built. The City of Surrey wants the homeless shelter out of there. They’re even putting up roadblocks on their relocation. This is the place that the City of Surrey just spent $5 million on new furniture. Why are they trampling the homeless in their greed and excess? They’re spending big money on a huge black fence around the Front room so people won’t see the homeless there. God help us.

6 comments:

  1. This is where the Lutheran Church lady (on the woman's beat-down) we mentioned spoke from, I think...

    Now they are gone too.

    She cared about her community.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I figured so. I didn't realize they had a shelter and foodline operating out of there. I've been by there a million times. I am astounded Dianne Watts and her team is turning into just another Doug McCallum evicting the homeless. I thought her PR spin doctors would do a better job than that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've had occasion to speak to, & email, Diane Watts' main spokesperson, Blair Keveston.

    I have to admit he & her office does quick follow-up. I think she specializes in this form of populism. They get back to complaints real fast. Citizens may find this different than the apathy and sluggish-ness many
    Gov't. Departments show...

    ReplyDelete
  4. So did they say they're going to relocate the shelter without evicting them on the street.
    I am not impressed.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Of all the places I thought I would have to discuss the closure of a place I have called home for ten years this would not be it.

    The City of Surrey has nothing to do with the closure of the Surrey Urban Mission. They have in fact made it easier for us to continue to operate so long as we are able to find a new building in the Surrey Whalley Area. Many of the City Counselors, MPs and MLAs have been working to find a solution to the current problem...Dianne Watts? Not so much but you can't blame the entire City for this issue. It is far more complicated then that, and really has nothing to do with politics. While I am sure they appreciate the support please get your facts right.

    The Mission actually did have a space ready to go but the owners sold it 2 hours before the lease was due to be signed. If you want to blame any one, blame BOSA for coming and buying every possible piece of land they could get their greedy hands on, and not wanting to step up and help out a place that has made whalley a better neighborhood to live in over the last ten years.

    If you want to blame anyone blame Christ the King Lutheran church who has offered to let the Mission stay provided they end ALL of their meal and shelter programs immediately, NOT a problem the City of Surrey let alone the slimey Dianne Watts can combat.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Although I agree there appears to be some internal politics opposing the mission, it is clear that dirty deals are in the works here. The City of Surrey did put a roadblock up to them purchasing the old fitness world administration office. They said it wasn't zoned properly. That stalled them long enough to tell BOSA or whoever leased the Fitness World admin office to buy it so that when the city could clear themselves by saying they approved the zoning, it was conveniently too late because someone else bought it. Despite the fact that the old social services office in that same building is vacant and they can't have it. So yes, it is a complicated issue but City Hall are clearly doing their part to exclude the homeless. That's why they are building a big black fence around the Front Room. So the homeless aren't seen.

    ReplyDelete