Mayor Tom Dyas
City of Kelowna
Members of City Council
City of Kelowna
Kevin Mead, Acting Community Safety Director
City of Kelowna
Via email
Dear Mayor Dyas, Mr. Mead, and Councillors Cannan, DeHart, Hodge, Lovegrove, Singh, Stack, Webber, and Wooldridge:
Re: Treatment of Residents of Tent City (Outdoor Sheltering 4)
The BC Civil Liberties Association (“BCCLA”) writes to you in relation to your residents who live in, or recently lived in, Tent City.
The BCCLA is deeply disturbed to learn that, according to their former neighbours, at least two Tent City residents have died since the City of Kelowna’s March 26, 2025 decampment. [1] While the City described the action as “spring cleaning,” many residents experienced it as a forced eviction. We acknowledge that the City of Kelowna (the “City”) continues to maintain a dedicated public space where unhoused people can shelter 24/7, but the City’s approach is inconsistent with a human rights-based response to encampments and is causing more problems than it purports to manage. As such, the BCCLA supports the Unhoused Solidarity Collective Okanagan’s (USCO) call to dismantle the restructured carceral-style encampment, in favor of a peer-led model where residents themselves are empowered to govern and take care of the site. Furthermore, we urge the City to officially adopt the National Protocol for Homeless Encampments in Canada (the “Protocol”), attached as “Appendix A”.
Outdoor Sheltering 4 (OS4) Site and the March 26, 2025 Decampment
It is our understanding that on March 26, 2025, the City, in collaboration with bylaw officers and RCMP decamped the Tent City located at 735 Weddell Place (“OS4”) without sufficient notice or meaningful engagement with the residents. Based on what transpired, this operation appears to have been intended for the purpose of clearing and enclosing the area to make it easier for the City to exert more control over the area.
During the operation, eyewitnesses reported that City workers and RCMP officers were observed forcibly removing residents and confiscating or destroying their belongings. In addition, media, USCO, legal counsel, legal observers and Indigenous cultural support providers were prohibited from entering the area where residents were being forcefully evicted. Many residents were left traumatized and uncertain of their options, as the City selectively permits temporary overnight sheltering in certain parks or public spaces.[2]
After the March 26 decampment, the City erected fencing around a portion of OS4 and established a controlled access site with 60 spaces for 24/7 outdoor sheltering. This is not nearly enough space to accommodate the roughly 100 people who were evicted from Tent City.
To access the controlled access site individuals must agree in writing to a code of conduct and an onerous set of rules (the “Good Neighbour Agreement”). The agreement attempts to constrain what little autonomy residents have, and people don’t appear to have had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel about their rights before being forced to sign, or leave their shelter.
In addition to the 24/7 area, there is an overnight-only outdoor sheltering site, where people are allowed to shelter overnight. However, access to water and sanitation is only available inside the controlled-access site. Thus, the City is restricting access to water and sanitation services only permitted to residents who sign the “Good Neighbour Agreement”.
The City’s Current Restrictions on Residents at OS4 is Inconsistent with a Human Rights-based Approach
All governments in Canada, including municipalities, have legal obligations to respect, protect and fulfill human rights-this includes the right to adequate housing. When people don’t have access to adequate housing, encampments are inevitable. Many unhoused people establish or gravitate to encampments because they offer increased safety and community, compared with the much more dangerous alternative of sheltering in isolation.
Flowing from these legal obligations, and in response to the failure of all levels of government to successfully implement the right to adequate housing, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing developed A National Protocol for Homeless Encampments in Canada. The Protocol includes eight Principles to guide governments and other stakeholders in adopting a rights-based response to encampments:
- Recognize residents of homeless encampments as rights holders
All government action with respect to homeless encampments must be guided by a commitment to upholding the human rights and human dignity of their residents. This means a shift away from criminalizing, penalizing, or obstructing homeless encampments, to an approach rooted in rights-based participation and accountability. - Meaningful engagement and effective participation of homeless encampment residents[3]
- Prohibit forced evictions of homeless encampments
- Explore all viable alternatives to eviction
- Ensure that relocation is human rights compliant
- Ensure encampments meet basic needs of residents consistent with human rights
- Ensure human rights-based goals and outcomes, and the preservation of dignity for homeless encampment residents
- Respect, protect, and fulfill the distinct rights of Indigenous Peoples in all engagements with homeless encampments
The City of Kelowna Must Meet the Basic Needs of All Residents, including Encampment Residents
Until accessible and adequate housing options are available, the City must meet the basic needs of encampment residents. Where an encampment has been established, this does not entail taking advantage of residents’ vulnerability and lack of choice, fencing them in, stripping them of their autonomy, and subjecting them to unnecessary state surveillance. In fact, as we have seen since the March 26 decampment, this kind of approach drives people away and into the margins where they are less connected to support providers and more likely to resort to harmful coping mechanisms.
In supporting USCO’s call for a peer-led model, we ask that the City, in concert with USCO, consider and implement the guidelines set out under Schedule B of the Protocol: An Elaboration of Principle 6.
The City’s compliance with international law requires providing:
- Access to safe and clean drinking/potable water;
- Access to hygiene and sanitation facilities;
- Resource to support and ensure fire safety;
- Waste management systems;
- Social supports and services;
- Guarantee personal safety of residents;
- Facilities and resources that support food safety;
- Resources to support harm reduction;
- Rodent and pest prevention
While encampments are not a solution to homelessness, it is critical that governments uphold the basic human rights and dignity of encampment residents while they wait for adequate, affordable housing solutions that will meet their long-term needs. Therefore, we respectfully request that the City end its carceral reign over the OS4, and instead champion the facilitation of a human rights-based approach to encampments, in cooperation and collaboration with its unhoused residents.
Sincerely,
Veronica Martisius (she/her)
Litigation Staff Counsel
CC: Unhoused Solidarity Collective Okanagan (USCO)
[1] Michelle Gamage, “Kelowna’s New Tent City Policies ‘Make People Want to Give Up’ (6 June 2025), online: The Tyee Kelowna’s New Tent City Policies ‘Make People Want to Give Up’ | The Tyee
[2] City of Kelowna “Myth: The City has the power to prevent people from sheltering in parks and public spaces” (last visited 13 June 2025), online: Kelowna’s Homelessness Strategy | City of Kelowna
[3] The right to meaningful engagement was affirmed in Bamberger v. Vancouver, 2022 BCSC 49, a case addressing the rights of the CRAB park encampment residents in Vancouver. The Court held that municipalities have a duty of procedural fairness and “[residents] have a right to notice and a right to be heard, as their rights, privileges, or interests are uniquely affected” at paras 64 and 69.
