Pubdate: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 Source: Richmond Review, The (CN BC) Copyright: 2008 Richmond Public Library Contact: http://www.richmondreview.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/704 Author: Martin van den Hemel Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/rehab.htm (Treatment) TURNING POINT AN ELECTION FLASHPOINT When it comes to a proposal for a local facility for recovering drug addicts, Richard Lee isn't afraid to voice his support. At a recent all-candidates meeting, the council hopeful spoke strongly in favour of a house like the one recently proposed by Turning Point Recovery Society, which planned to build a 39-room facility on Ash Street before pulling the plug on the plan over the summer. Lee said he once fought against a planned supervised injection site for the Downtown Eastside in Vancouver. He was the chair of a neighbourhood alliance opposed to the enabling nature of those injection sites. "What Turning Point is proposing is dealing with people who have taken the giant step to become a recovering addict, which is not the same as inviting people in to shoot up," said Lee, a former two-term councillor in Merritt who moved to Richmond in 2006 after setting up his general law practice here a year earlier. "That's a world of difference for me." Coun. Derek Dang believes there's a need for supportive housing for people who want to overcome an addiction. "We do need it in Richmond. Location, I think is the issue. The size of the one planned for in a neighbourhood was pretty big, which was an issue for me." Dang gets the sense that residents are concerned that a larger, institution-sized facility, would pose the potential for more trouble. Coun. Bill McNulty said he supports the concept of a Turning Point-style recovery facility, but it has to be in the right location. Asked how he would have voted on Turning Point's proposal, McNulty said: "I don't know it, because until I see the whole proposal I will not comment on it." Coun. Cynthia Chen said she too supports providing facilities for recovering drug addicts. But the proposal by Turning Point was simply too large, and she wasn't comfortable with it considering the neighbourhood's vocal opposition. "Councillors are the employees of the residents of Richmond, that's how I look at it." Had there been less opposition to the Ash Street proposal, Chen said she would have voted in favour of it. Coun. Linda Barnes said there's no question Richmond has its share of people recovering from different addictions, including drug and substance abuse. But she believe the proponents from Turning Point were not given the opportunity to address the concerns from the neighbourhood after word leaked out about the proposal. Barnes believes a middle ground could have been reached, and therefore the project could have been a success. "I truly believe the great majority understand the need," Barnes said. But that doesn't make it any easier to make a decision on a divisive issue like Turning Point, where the needs of the whole community have to be taken into consideration, not solely a neighbourhood's concerns. Coun. Sue Halsey-Brandt supports helping drug addicts to recover. "I think it's an absolute necessity. Ideally, we want to help them within the community." But she said Turning Point's proposal was simply too large for one neighbourhood, and noted that a task force of local residents tackled the issue not too long ago by recommending smaller scale facilities of the type that Turning Point operates on Odlin Road. "What's the point of having a task force on these kinds of issues and not following their recommendations?" The Richmond Review randomly called a handful of other council candidates for their views. Howard Jampolsky said he personally knows people with drug addictions, and as such, believes the community needs to care for this segment of the population. At the same time, the city has established a task force of local residents for dealing with applications of the type that Turning Point proposed, and the city needs to live with that. "I would have to say that I don't believe that Turning Point's application was suitable for the neighbourhood," he said, noting that he spoke to area residents who were strongly opposed to a large institution being dropped in their neighbourhood. Gary Cross said he's in favour of helping drug addicts with methods that are proven effective. Had he been a councillor when the Turning Point issue surfaced, he would have likely voted yes, but he's not so sure today, based on what he's learned. As well, the size of Turning Point's plan was a concern. "We have to be careful that one neighbourhood isn't bearing too much of a burden for that type of thing." David Reay believes Richmond's drug addicts are going elsewhere to get help, "because we can't take care of our own," he said. "We have a responsibility to take care of our own residents." Reay believes the city made it clear that the proposal was unwelcome at any size, although he believes the plans could have been trimmed. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin