Social Control and Homeless Encampments: Shifting the Role of Shelters Through Judicial Review

This paper examines the recent Canadian judicial decisions in relation to the eviction of encampment residents from public space to analyze what constitutes “reasonableness” in government decision-making in relation to short-term shelters. I argue that courts have called into question a key aspect of social control that relates to unhoused populations: the institutional belief that temporary shelters serve as a reasonable form of accommodation and an appropriate alternative to living in encampments. Recent legal decisions have challenged both this institutional belief and the methods used by officials to track which shelters are available. I conclude that the legal approach of using judicial review of administrative decision-making provides a means to challenge administrative decision-making that insufficiently scrutinizes the availability of accessible and appropriate shelter spaces for the specific unhoused people they intend to displace, raising the bar on shelter suitability. Judicial review of administrative decision-makers, a form of legal evaluation, offers a tool to confront what Katuna and Silfen-Glasberg (2014) call an “incompetence of rules” in the social control of those living in encampments

Out of Bounds: San Francisco\u27s Homeless Policies

Homelessness, both a legal and public policy issue, has dominated the City of San Francisco government agenda for over fifteen years. Despite the front-and-center nature of homelessness, the policies enacted have done little to reduce the count. This paper, first, presents San Francisco’s new approach to the issue; namely, the creation of a new and far more limited class of “chronically homeless” persons. This first section includes an examination of the causes of homelessness, the physical alienation of homeless persons through “quality of life” laws, and recent policy initiatives used to social exclude the bulk of homeless persons by limiting the definition to a narrow few. In the second section, the paper examines alienation scholarship, exploring how and why certain groups are excluded. With roots in law and economic scholarship and critical race theory, the conclusion reached is that the City of San Francisco has used law and policy to exclude homeless persons based on their inability to participate in the market economy

A Tale of Two Casinos: Unequal Spaces of Local Governance

Local actors, including resident and business associations, do not simply influence decision-makers, but can also reshape the purportedly neutral governance model within which decision-making takes place. In big cities like Toronto, this reshaping exacerbates the existing geographic and socio-economic unevenness. The work of James Scott, Mariana Valverde, and Cheryl Teelucksingh helps to explain how local actors interface with seemingly neutral governance bodies to have their interests heard, particularly in relation to locally undesirable land uses. The paper considers two case studies detailing the governance practices at work in differing decisions about casinos in the City of Toronto. A 2012-2013 debate about a casino in downtown Toronto saw a little-used bylaw invoked by city councillors to help them investigate the effects of a casino on “local” issues like traffic and planning. These empowered local actors played a central role in the debate. By contrast, in a 2015 debate about a casino in a poor neighborhood on the margins of the city, the debate proceeded through the usual decision-making process for “city-wide” deliberations, leading to fewer opportunities for involvement by local actors. The final section brings theoretical literature and case studies together to conclude that the institutions of local governance can be reshaped depending on the local actors involved, and claims that shifts in scale, from local to city-wide, have implications for the inclusivity and fairness of Toronto’s governance model

Regulating Critical Mass: Performativity and City Streets

On the last Friday of every month, tens of thousands of cyclists across 300 cities ride their bicycles for about an hour. In these events, cyclists disregard laws and regulations by bursting through red lights, traversing highway overpasses, and occupying multiple lanes of the road. These cyclists form part of Critical Mass. For the time in which Critical Mass takes place, participants are part of a nomos, or “normative universe”, which determines laws for their particular community. Critical Mass’ conception as a nomos, together with its interaction or performance among the legal orders set out in municipal, provincial, and federal law, are analyzed in this paper. paper presents an understanding of how performativity contributes to the interdisciplinary legal geography project by challenging the language of jurisdiction imposed by law

Business Improvement Districts and the Urban Commons

This chapter contributes to existing work that bridges two rich scholarly conversations by examining the role that BIDs play in city governance and their relationship to the urban commons. The first section summarizes the existing literature on the scope and meaning of the urban commons: what do we mean by the governance of the ‘urban commons,’ and how do BIDs fit into this scheme? Section two contends that decision-making, representation, and accountability should be used as factors in evaluating urban commons institutions. Third, the chapter concludes that, instead of framing BIDs as singular bodies capable of managing a common pool resource within the city, scholars should insist on inclusive decision-making, representation, and accountability as necessary elements of the urban commons, including BIDs

Municipal Power and Democratic Legitimacy in the Time of COVID-19

As COVID-19 swept through Canada, cities were at the front lines in curbing its spread. From March 2020, municipalities introduced such measures as restricting park access, ticketing those lingering in public places, and enforcing physical distancing requirements. Local governments have also supplemented housing for the vulnerable and given support to local “main street” businesses. Citizens expected their local governments to respond to the pandemic, but few people know how constrained the powers of municipalities are in Canadian law. Municipalities are a curious legal construct in Canadian federalism. Under the constitution, they are considered to be nothing more than “creatures of the province.” However, courts have decided in many cases that local decisions are often considered governmental and given great deference. This chapter focuses on the tensions in this contradictory role when it comes to municipal responses to COVID-19, particularly when those responses take the form of closure of public spaces, increased policing by bylaw officers, and fines. I conclude that municipalities serve an important role in pandemic responses, alongside provincial and federal governments. Provincial law should be amended to capture the important role of municipalities in Canadian federalism, especially in the area of municipal finance

Conceptualizing the Urban Commons: The Place of Business Improvement Districts in City Governance

Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) are self-taxed organizations that are comprised of businesses and property owners, are approved by city governments, and spend funds to improve profitability within certain neighbourhood boundaries. BID governance structures can also include neighbourhood residents and city councillors as voting or non-voting members. Numerous scholars have written about the role of BIDs in city governance, including the extent to which they improve or undermine inclusivity and accountability. This paper focuses on a related question that has not yet been deeply analysed in legal scholarship: can BIDs be considered a form of urban commons? The term ‘urban commons’ is contested, but generally refers to the application of the property law notion of the commons to the shared management of bounded city spaces. This paper extends from existing debates on the meaning of the “urban commons” and its application to BIDs. This paper uses BIDs in Toronto to introduce decision-making, representation, and accountability as elements of just urban governance can serve as the basis of an evaluation of the urban commons

Reimagining Toronto\u27s Community Councils

This article examines Toronto’s community councils, a post-amalgamation creation meant to buffer the effects of a much larger city. Using a mixed methodology approach to understand their role and function, this paper finds that community councils largely focus on local planning and land use issues. However, under applicable law, Toronto’s community councils have the capacity to increase their delegated and decision-making power to serve a greater stewardship role in matters of concern to the city’s neighborhoods, such as the “local” effects of “city-wide” issues, and to include non-councilor members as decision-makers. This paper argues that the City of Toronto should reimagine the design of community councils so that they may serve a stronger role in the city’s governance model, bringing them in line with similar bodies in other North American cities and fostering a more accessible and participatory municipal government