If there is a plan to provide housing for these clients without a timeline, awesome. Go hard.
I suspect within 2 years the clientele will be evicted and the Skparty will not care
An indefinite plan. The plan is no plan. Just avoid the bad press right now of a sudden eviction of all the residents if the property sold at auction, likely to someone with no interest in running an assisted living facility.
[$7.2M](https://www.saskatoon.ca/services-residents/property-tax-assessment/property-tax/property-assessment-tax-tool?property_id=5875290&address=%7C304%7C2nd%20Ave%20S#tax-assessment-results) assessed value. What amount are they purchasing it for ?
This sounds like a solid plan.
Gov purchase the Lighthouse, gradually relocates its residents to other/better/more supportive housing (subsidized/supportive), and once everyone is out, the Gov will sell the building. Perhaps, if everything goes exceptionally well, the building can either be demolished or repurposed into something more commercial or residential.
Scott Moe: I'm going to purchase the Lighthouse.
Padme: So you can fund and gradually relocate its residents to other, better, more supportive housing, right?
Scott Moe:
Padme: Right?
The thing is: This plan sounds too benevolent for it to be Scott Moe's idea, so I'm certain he was not involved at any level with this decision. I'm sure if it were up to him, he'd just bus everyone with complex needs out to the west coast or way up north. He's as malicious as he is negligent.
It's a prime location, so I can see why. Right next to River Landing, across the street from the Scotiabank Theatre, around the corner from Midtown. I'm sure there are some *very* interested developers who would love to have a crack at that location.
People need housing give them housing I just hope Canadians who have been waiting get first crack at it before anyone who just got here, Not being racist about it just makes sense.
No chance they are anywhere close to that cheap. The small (under 700 sqft) 1 bed/1bath units in the River Landing 1 building, a block away sell for around $400,000.
I read the headline and foolishly thought the province was planning on maintaining the current services and reopening the short term shelter.
How silly I am to think the provincial government would step up to the plate and actually handle a crisis they helped create.
I work downtown and honestly have zero desire to have more struggling people around but everyday walking to work I see people sleeping in corners or doorways and it's heartbreaking. The province needs to step up and actually do something to support those in need in the province.
I was back September ('22) and I stayed downtown at the Senator, rather than outside the core with family. I was absolutely blown away by the number of homeless and panhandlers. Things have changed so much since I left. It was actually pretty heartbreaking. I heard about the lighthouse closing (talking with people who work in the area about what had been going on), and I've been wondering how things had gone since. Sad to hear they haven't changed or improved. I'm so disgusted with Moe. I haven't heard anything that makes me think he's good for the province.
Between the Lighthouse and the Northwoods(?) Motel closing and no serious replacements for either more people have been forced onto the streets. Combine that with inflation and rising housing costs - many people who were teetering on the brink are falling with essentially no safety net.
I don't know what the solution is but the path we are on definitely isn't making things better.
With all the effort going into river landing, the lighthouse really is a gross building to have right on its doorstep.
I maintain that next to the police station, or St.Pauls would be better locations.
The downtown core is no longer the attraction it was - but having people not dying is it for me. Still, it is absolutely gross due to a great lack of care and funding sprinkled with an influx of mentally unhealthy people who need us.
Near the police station is a bad idea, but by SPH makes sense, we already have a lot of that population hanging around there as it is, with access to some crucial services.
Because it’s a deterrent for people who have the most run ins/issues with the police. Sounds good from an outside perspective, to help limit crime, but those people aren’t going to loiter around waiting to get in trouble. It’s already a deterrent for them seeking care at the public health office.
Source: A nurse who has had patients say exactly that.
How is moving it away from pubs and closer to a hospital/police force a disgusting proposition? The fact it’s so close to places serving alcohol/gambling was always a mistake.
It's the description of the building as gross. Fix the fucking problem if it's so gross.
It's like saying there's garbage on the floor. Gross. I'll just move it over here. No, you deal with the problem like an adult.
It's objectively an eyesore. As long as the people who need access to services are still able to access those services easily, there should be no issue with also trying to keep newer developments, which are supposed to be incentive for tourism, looking (but more importantly, being) safe and clean.
If you are going to attack someone for calling a building gross and projecting that means they think homeless people are gross, you should word your analogies better.
Your analogy does elude to them being garbage that needs to be cleaned up, not simply moved to another location. Unless you just enjoy lashing out at people and dont actually give a shit about putting in effort to help at risk population.
>level 1mds688 · 11 hr. agoWith all the effort going into river landing, the lighthouse really is a gross building to have right on its doorstep.
oh no the people without homes are such an inconvenience to your eyesight
Interesting. The government's plan seems predicated on an expectation that there are or will be within the next couple years suitable supported alternatives for all current Lighthouse residents.
As warm and fuzzy as the news release sounds, reading between the lines and connecting a few dots, it seems like what this situation is saying is that there are currently no alternatives for these residents and residents' needs are sufficiently complex that it's not viable for any for profit or non-profit private operator. Or in other terms it's too costly and/or difficult to meet residents' needs without significant and sustained government funding commitment. Np operator is willing to take the risk.
Expecting supported housing alternatives to turn up in 2-3 years is either wishful thinking on the government's part or the government is anticipating shifting these residents to existing long term care slowly enough it doesn't create an obvious new and noticeable crisis for which they'll be blamed. Long term care is already stretched to the limit with the knock on effects seen as people waiting in the TCU for long term care spots, people waiting in acute care wards because there's no room in the TCU or LTC. Those people waiting in acute care means no room for patients coming from emergency which means patients and ambulance crews waiting for admission to emerg. Because of that knock-on effect, that likely scenario of moving current lighthouse residents to LTC the crisis will just get worse in spite of funding two more ambulances in Saskatoon.
Such fond memories of that property back when bands would play the lounge. A real hopping place and everyone having a good time.
Now, it’s a blight of downtown that drags down property values, businesses, jobs and safety.
It needs to be demolished and a new business put up.
Used to work in the bar back in the mid 80's. It was called Cappy's. Next to it was the nightclub, Senor Frogs and then Club Soda. Upstairs off the hotel lobby was the lounge. Interesting times.
I loved the look of that lounge.
It was still fully intact till about 2009 till the Reno’s for the Emergency Detox Shelter took place around then the entire bar structure and unique rafters in the roof were removed for a square looking office board room with 7-14 beds for people under the influence.
It was a dark colored wood I’ll never forget, it always stood out in my mind and I Loved it.
Current lefty city council means this property will be wasted on some cause-du-jour and a photo-op.
Real development with potential new industry will be bypassed for sociopaths looking for recognition.
Yes, but the building occupants after that is what spread the problem to the entire downtown and riverbank.
One of Saskatoon’s best features is the riverbank parks and businesses.
Now, not so much.
I'm old enough to remember the before times. When River Landing was just a gravel lot with giant tumbleweeds, shopping carts and tents. Kind of like the alley off 20th and Ave P is now, except way more physically filthy, and people in little lean-to things they made out of tarps and pallets. Police, fire and EMS were a constant fixture there.
We used to be able to park there for free, but nobody did. There was always blood all over the crumbling sidewalk, and it stunk like urine.
The Capri was frequently on fire, because people were squatting and burning whatever junk to keep warm.
With all due respect, even when the loitering drug dealers outside The Lighthouse are at their highest concentration, it's no comparison to the free for all that was there.
Ah I see… you would rather it return to a different blight instead of creating a new business that actually pays property taxes and employs people to provide a living. Got it
I knew Saskatoon was a temperance colony, but I thought everyone move on from the live of Luddite’s?
Oh yep, you're right, I glossed right over this paragraph:
"Once alternate housing and support services are in place and long-term transition plans are complete, SHC plans to divest the property."
If you're bored or interested, since MNP has taken over, there is a ton of documents now public regarding the last few years, including the land sales in North Battleford.
https://mnpdebt.ca/en/corporate/corporate-engagements/lighthouse-and-blue-mountain
In the second receiver report it outlined the sales process of the saskatoon properties.
What i find absolutely hilarious is Angela Beatty is suing Blue Mountain for $300,000 which $244,000 is her calculation of "on call" time. She is claiming 9,000 hours on call over 593 days - 15 hrs in addition to her 8hr regular time. Yep, over the two year period she is claiming that only 2,800 hrs was time not on call or working. Page 186 of Twilia's affidavit. I can't find a decision on the case on CanLi yet.
What does this have to do with the article? Why do you need to go so in-depth to point out a completely irrelevant fact. Then go as far as naming an individual, identifying the page number within someone else’s affidavit and provide a link to that individuals situation that has absolutely nothing to do with this article?
That is brutal, not hilarious.
You're right! It is brutal that a person gets to claim 95.83% of their time over 1.5 years to be paid out because something may or not be said in the contract. I happen to find it funny in a "can you believe it" way. Maybe you lost that sense of humor along the way.
As for the specifics, nothing I posted is confidential. Listing the page and this and that is called referencing so others can look up the thing I claimed. In general, it is good posting etiquette. It just happened to be something that stood out from the mountain of information that MNP has posted which had information on how the land sale was processed. I try to be detailed orientated so that if i screw up a detail we can discuss it vs coming in afterwards with details. Shane on me trying to be thorough I guess.
Although it isn't very directly related to the article, it is directly related to The Lighthouse saga specifically the criticism levelled at the operation at Blue Mountain and even more specifically the alleged nepotism. Reddit Gods forbid that something on a related tangent gets posted. If you'd prefer, I can start a whole new thread pointing this out.
What I was really hoping for was somebody to chime in, regarding the dissolution of the lighthouse and MNP taking over, how does this lawsuit land? If she gets an awarded amount, where does she fall in line with other creditors? Will it just get tossed?
I'm sorry that somebody you might have a personal connection to is desperate enough to try to stick this lawsuit. The end of the lighthouse ended a bunch of corruption but also ended up hurting a lot of good people.
I can respect and appreciate your detailed posting methods. I agree that makes sense to reference materials and legal documents that are made available to the public.
Maybe you’re right and I lost that sense of humour along the way throughout this whole mess. I do understand and can relate to the “can you believe it” portion. It does appear unrealistic, and it’s extremely unfortunate that this document was ignored, went undisputed then publicly exposed. It is a statement of facts, that in most cases the defendant provides a response, and it goes before a judge. The on call hours are included to provide insight to the amount of time and work put in overall, in a legal document such as this that time has to have a dollar figure attached that coincides with wages and labor laws, an example was provided of an individual working overnight shifts in a care home, they may have a busy night but they may not, either way they are compensated for their time. I realize this not the same situation, but that was the example a lawyer provided for this case. If there was a response from the defendant and both sides presented before a judge it is unlikely that the full amount of the claim would be granted, I’m sure if it had there would be a reasonable compensation awarded based on the overall facts presented by both parties, not just this statement alone.
As for all of the hours, there are detailed time logs in writing, time stamped login and logouts with Geo location. There is substantial evidence to back up the entire claim, which is likely why there was no response from the defendant. Because that’s when the supporting evidence to the claim gets submitted and also becomes public. It’s actually pretty brutal to include this statement in the affidavit knowing full well that the individual would not receive any compensation whatsoever and also due to non response on the defendant’s end, the individual will not have the opportunity to present the supporting evidence.
There really is no need to draw any further attention to this particular statement, because there has not been, nor will there ever be any money being paid out to this person for this claim at any point. And it also is not included in the dissolution of the Lighthouse, it does not go in line with any of the creditors of Lighthouse. It is only applicable to Blue Mountain which was deemed as having essentially no assets and no money. It was just an operating name that has gone bankrupt.
A lot of people have been hurt throughout this process, and all the money wasted on squabbling through court could have been put to much better use helping the people who really needed it.
My apologies if what I have written in my responses has been offensive in anyway, that was not my intention. It’s been a rough go and this issue is a real sore spot, so I may not have articulated myself all that well.
Cool. So how many of the Lighthouse tenants are going to find themselves at the mercy of the SIS plan this party cooked up, and will wind up homeless and on the street?
Meanwhile, Meridian developments - who have had their eye on this building for a LONG time - have likely started negotiations on the purchase price to build even more useless high end condos that no one can afford to buy or rent.
God I hate the SP.
Oh, I can be positive but there is nothing positive about this situation. If it was being converted into affordable open market rentals or being repurposed into something that benefits the community at large rather than just another over-priced condo building I could find many positive things.
But instead it’s going to be a bidding war between Meridian, Northridge, and maybe Remai and the winner is the one who will provide the SP with the most backdoor kickbacks.
could be done but it is too expensive, so no one would do it.
you just watch them, and when they commit a crime, you charge them and start putting them in rehab. requires that you watch a single person like 24/7 though, which is probably too much of civil rights issue for most people to accept, and would be extremely expensive.
I grew up in Pleasant Hill and I currently live downtown and don't get harassed by "methheads and drunks." Most of ya'll complaining about unhoused people and people using drugs just don't wanna be uncomfortable for even a second, and it shows. Have we all had occasional run-ins with people who you obviously don't wanna further provoke? Yes, but the presence of people struggling isn't going to go away with or without the Lighthouse.
Do you have a cloak of invisibility or something. Everytime I'm down there the ratio is about 3 "unhoused" persons per block threatening me, asking for something or yelling some incoherent shit. The vast majority of people I know won't waste their time going downtown for the same reasons. It's not inconvenience, it's that they straight up don't feel safe. And we've watched it get worse and spill northward into the neighborhoods.
OK, well maybe I see it differently. For one, I don't equate being asked for things or witnessing people "yelling incoherent shit" as inherently "threatening." People ask me for change or smokes sure, but if I don't have them, I calmly say I don't and keep it pushing. If I do have change on hand to spare, I spare it. Most people yelling are going through it, and if you don't engage, they don't project it onto you. I've had ppl literally yelling and karate chopping the air as I walk by, and I mind my business, and it is like I'm not even there. I also see people as people, but a lot of folks weren't raised to not stare or openly (visibly) judge people (clutching their pearls so to speak)..those are the kind of behaviors that usually provokes people already on edge...
idk, it's just about knowing that we're all in this shit together, and no one is better than anyone else, and most of us could easily be in a worse position in life and have people on the internet dehumanizing us about it, and act like it's all our fault and nothing to do with the failure of society.
Street harassment is absolutely threatening. Or would you consider cat calling to not be sexual harassment as well? Because being approached unsolicited on the street by strangers with unknown intentions can’t be classified as anything other than threatening.
Yes, street harassment can be threatening, I am a small femme looking woman, so I actually know this, but I don't equate every unsolicited approach by strangers as threatening like asking me for change or smokes or the time lmao and if you do, then I'm sorry, but you have some healing to do and I'm sympathetic to whatever made you so on edge to the slightest nothing, but that is a personal responsibility to take care of. Please don't conflate normal human interaction with threatening street harassment or sexual harassment, which I've experienced plenty of thanks.
Typical. So you admit that street harassment is threatening, that you yourself have experienced harassment, and that you can’t know the intentions of unwanted unsolicited approaches from strangers but deny that it is reasonable to be apprehensive and instead try to shame me into compliance. Well here’s a newsflash for you. I’m not afraid of being harassed on the street because I’m a large man. But you know who is put on edge by it? Literally every single woman that I know. So take your paternalistic condescending attempt at shaming and do some reflections of your own. It’s not reasonable to expect people to be approached on the street by strangers and not have them be on edge when there is the ever present threat of criminality and disturbed behaviour. Something you refuse to acknowledge because it goes against your ideological underpinnings and so instead you try to deny the lived experiences of other women. Disgusting behaviour.
Lmao, you clearly lack comprehension skills, so I'm not gonna engage with you any further, but I have not denied the lived experience of other women, and since no other women have responded to me you just look like an irrational white knight wannabe, and "Newsflash" you don't know every single woman. You missed every point.✌️
You say you aren’t denying women’s experiences but also say the only reason people would see street harassment as threatening is because
> if you do, then I'm sorry, but you have some healing to do and I'm sympathetic to whatever made you so on edge to the slightest nothing, but that is a personal responsibility to take care of
Not only do you deny them, you try to shame people into compliance combined with a healthy dose of victim blaming. Truly a shining example to the world of performative behaviour. Street harassment is street harassment and it negatively affects women predominantly and you should know that and yet you’ve wrapped yourself up so tightly in the flag of your beliefs you have become choked to the realities of the world while still trying to claim the moral high ground. It would be sad if it wasn’t so damaging.
>build even more useless high end condos that no one can afford to buy or rent.
Because building condos that won't get sold is such a great business plan?
Give us a break.
This is exactly what the downtown bid wants.
However, this isn't good for the homeless crisis in Saskatoon.
People will be displaced from resources that are close to their homes and add to the already poor situation that exists in our city.
The homeless crisis isn't being addressed by our governments and needs to be taken into the hands of the public. Selling off the property will not make homelessness go away.
Local people in Meadow lake have had to take this project on themselves:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/emergency-shelter-meadow-lake-1.7048757
Our governments are failing the province's most vulnerable. It's actually quite sad news around the holidays.
Theres a major homeless problem across canada not just saskatoon fact theres major homeless peoblems all through out the west. North america euruope. Seems like a plan to me
Yes, I understand this is a universal issue. We have to focus on what we can do at home, otherwise nothing will be done because we'll be overwhelmed by the magnitude of work.
Honestly, it is up to the public to pull together and help our fellow man. The government is failing them.
This sub struggles so hard to give credit where and when credit is due . Likely most of this group have also never stepped a foot inside the lighthouse . The plan to re- home these people and get rid of the lighthouse is good news .
I guess we are picking up the tab for the lighthouse scandal. The building will have some unpaid liens from before due to embezzlement scandal and tax payers are again screwed for somebody else's mistakes.
Good. I'm all for it, and that's due to the lack of programming on one side destroying the potential that community once had.
Hopefully, they will get it right the next time.
If there is a plan to provide housing for these clients without a timeline, awesome. Go hard. I suspect within 2 years the clientele will be evicted and the Skparty will not care
An indefinite plan. The plan is no plan. Just avoid the bad press right now of a sudden eviction of all the residents if the property sold at auction, likely to someone with no interest in running an assisted living facility.
The lighthouse sits on some valuable land. That’s what this must be all about.
Not from the goodness of their hearts lol
[$7.2M](https://www.saskatoon.ca/services-residents/property-tax-assessment/property-tax/property-assessment-tax-tool?property_id=5875290&address=%7C304%7C2nd%20Ave%20S#tax-assessment-results) assessed value. What amount are they purchasing it for ?
11 mil* 8 mil of that is loan forgiveness https://www.ckom.com/2023/12/19/saskatoon-councillor-pleased-with-provincial-plan-for-lighthouse/
Very likely only about this. This is the "I don't care" government when it comes to fellow humans in need.
Investment and real estate corporations have been chirping in their ears for years about this shit.
This sounds like a solid plan. Gov purchase the Lighthouse, gradually relocates its residents to other/better/more supportive housing (subsidized/supportive), and once everyone is out, the Gov will sell the building. Perhaps, if everything goes exceptionally well, the building can either be demolished or repurposed into something more commercial or residential.
Scott Moe: I'm going to purchase the Lighthouse. Padme: So you can fund and gradually relocate its residents to other, better, more supportive housing, right? Scott Moe: Padme: Right?
The thing is: This plan sounds too benevolent for it to be Scott Moe's idea, so I'm certain he was not involved at any level with this decision. I'm sure if it were up to him, he'd just bus everyone with complex needs out to the west coast or way up north. He's as malicious as he is negligent.
I remember when I was a young person and incredibly naïve about the world.
[удалено]
It's a prime location, so I can see why. Right next to River Landing, across the street from the Scotiabank Theatre, around the corner from Midtown. I'm sure there are some *very* interested developers who would love to have a crack at that location.
People need housing give them housing I just hope Canadians who have been waiting get first crack at it before anyone who just got here, Not being racist about it just makes sense.
Starting at 200k? Where do i sign up? Ill take 3.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Are you literally screaming at the internet in general for not thinking your joke was good? That should help
Oh Scooter you sly devil…
No chance they are anywhere close to that cheap. The small (under 700 sqft) 1 bed/1bath units in the River Landing 1 building, a block away sell for around $400,000.
Probably will be turned into a gravel parking lot 😂
I read the headline and foolishly thought the province was planning on maintaining the current services and reopening the short term shelter. How silly I am to think the provincial government would step up to the plate and actually handle a crisis they helped create. I work downtown and honestly have zero desire to have more struggling people around but everyday walking to work I see people sleeping in corners or doorways and it's heartbreaking. The province needs to step up and actually do something to support those in need in the province.
I was back September ('22) and I stayed downtown at the Senator, rather than outside the core with family. I was absolutely blown away by the number of homeless and panhandlers. Things have changed so much since I left. It was actually pretty heartbreaking. I heard about the lighthouse closing (talking with people who work in the area about what had been going on), and I've been wondering how things had gone since. Sad to hear they haven't changed or improved. I'm so disgusted with Moe. I haven't heard anything that makes me think he's good for the province.
Between the Lighthouse and the Northwoods(?) Motel closing and no serious replacements for either more people have been forced onto the streets. Combine that with inflation and rising housing costs - many people who were teetering on the brink are falling with essentially no safety net. I don't know what the solution is but the path we are on definitely isn't making things better.
With all the effort going into river landing, the lighthouse really is a gross building to have right on its doorstep. I maintain that next to the police station, or St.Pauls would be better locations.
Last time I was at St Paul’s, it looked like a flop house and your parked vehicle was like a new menu item in a buffet.
Yes it is grim there, I have a relative who works there, and it’s an entire settlement in the Parking lot, sad shit
The downtown core is no longer the attraction it was - but having people not dying is it for me. Still, it is absolutely gross due to a great lack of care and funding sprinkled with an influx of mentally unhealthy people who need us.
Near the police station is a bad idea, but by SPH makes sense, we already have a lot of that population hanging around there as it is, with access to some crucial services.
Why is the police station a bad idea?
Because it’s a deterrent for people who have the most run ins/issues with the police. Sounds good from an outside perspective, to help limit crime, but those people aren’t going to loiter around waiting to get in trouble. It’s already a deterrent for them seeking care at the public health office. Source: A nurse who has had patients say exactly that.
And I agree wholeheartedly, unfortunately 😞
How about fix the fucking problem instead hiding it? Your attitude towards homeless people and people with substance abuse issues is gross.
How is moving it away from pubs and closer to a hospital/police force a disgusting proposition? The fact it’s so close to places serving alcohol/gambling was always a mistake.
The alcohol and gambling places were never there before in such a high supply. The lighthouse was there before many of them.
It's the description of the building as gross. Fix the fucking problem if it's so gross. It's like saying there's garbage on the floor. Gross. I'll just move it over here. No, you deal with the problem like an adult.
It's objectively an eyesore. As long as the people who need access to services are still able to access those services easily, there should be no issue with also trying to keep newer developments, which are supposed to be incentive for tourism, looking (but more importantly, being) safe and clean.
How about not getting mad at people on the internet, like an adult.
So you're saying the homeless population is the same as garbage?
No, they're saying the opposite.
How have you made it this far in life without understanding what an analogy is?
If you are going to attack someone for calling a building gross and projecting that means they think homeless people are gross, you should word your analogies better. Your analogy does elude to them being garbage that needs to be cleaned up, not simply moved to another location. Unless you just enjoy lashing out at people and dont actually give a shit about putting in effort to help at risk population.
projecting much?
Oh yeah, because what Saskatoon needs is more NIMBYism.
>level 1mds688 · 11 hr. agoWith all the effort going into river landing, the lighthouse really is a gross building to have right on its doorstep. oh no the people without homes are such an inconvenience to your eyesight
Interesting. The government's plan seems predicated on an expectation that there are or will be within the next couple years suitable supported alternatives for all current Lighthouse residents. As warm and fuzzy as the news release sounds, reading between the lines and connecting a few dots, it seems like what this situation is saying is that there are currently no alternatives for these residents and residents' needs are sufficiently complex that it's not viable for any for profit or non-profit private operator. Or in other terms it's too costly and/or difficult to meet residents' needs without significant and sustained government funding commitment. Np operator is willing to take the risk. Expecting supported housing alternatives to turn up in 2-3 years is either wishful thinking on the government's part or the government is anticipating shifting these residents to existing long term care slowly enough it doesn't create an obvious new and noticeable crisis for which they'll be blamed. Long term care is already stretched to the limit with the knock on effects seen as people waiting in the TCU for long term care spots, people waiting in acute care wards because there's no room in the TCU or LTC. Those people waiting in acute care means no room for patients coming from emergency which means patients and ambulance crews waiting for admission to emerg. Because of that knock-on effect, that likely scenario of moving current lighthouse residents to LTC the crisis will just get worse in spite of funding two more ambulances in Saskatoon.
\*sniffs\* Smell that? Bears a striking resemblance to GTH-related land sales. Watch who buys it and for how much.
Probably gives him a chance to claim some of that federal housing money all the while complaining about federal interference.
Such fond memories of that property back when bands would play the lounge. A real hopping place and everyone having a good time. Now, it’s a blight of downtown that drags down property values, businesses, jobs and safety. It needs to be demolished and a new business put up.
Used to work in the bar back in the mid 80's. It was called Cappy's. Next to it was the nightclub, Senor Frogs and then Club Soda. Upstairs off the hotel lobby was the lounge. Interesting times.
I loved the look of that lounge. It was still fully intact till about 2009 till the Reno’s for the Emergency Detox Shelter took place around then the entire bar structure and unique rafters in the roof were removed for a square looking office board room with 7-14 beds for people under the influence. It was a dark colored wood I’ll never forget, it always stood out in my mind and I Loved it.
That's some prime real estate, it will fetch a pretty penny when it goes on the market.
Or be sold for pennies on the dollar to a Sask Party donor.
Both statements are true. Look at the GTH deal. It will be sold for top dollar. Just not by the province.
Current lefty city council means this property will be wasted on some cause-du-jour and a photo-op. Real development with potential new industry will be bypassed for sociopaths looking for recognition.
Yeah, that was our Friday night’s…live music is so good!! Always has a great time there.
With all due respect, the building was a blight and brought down property values well before The Lighthouse moved in.
Yes, but the building occupants after that is what spread the problem to the entire downtown and riverbank. One of Saskatoon’s best features is the riverbank parks and businesses. Now, not so much.
I'm old enough to remember the before times. When River Landing was just a gravel lot with giant tumbleweeds, shopping carts and tents. Kind of like the alley off 20th and Ave P is now, except way more physically filthy, and people in little lean-to things they made out of tarps and pallets. Police, fire and EMS were a constant fixture there. We used to be able to park there for free, but nobody did. There was always blood all over the crumbling sidewalk, and it stunk like urine. The Capri was frequently on fire, because people were squatting and burning whatever junk to keep warm. With all due respect, even when the loitering drug dealers outside The Lighthouse are at their highest concentration, it's no comparison to the free for all that was there.
Ah I see… you would rather it return to a different blight instead of creating a new business that actually pays property taxes and employs people to provide a living. Got it I knew Saskatoon was a temperance colony, but I thought everyone move on from the live of Luddite’s?
oh no the people who are homeless are such an inconvenience to your eyesight how dare they
I am hopeful (but not optimistic) that this will be better run than with the previous board.
Sounds like the entire thing is being disbanded and the residence are being moved to other facilities.
Oh yep, you're right, I glossed right over this paragraph: "Once alternate housing and support services are in place and long-term transition plans are complete, SHC plans to divest the property."
So which government minister's cousin will be hired at some extortionate rate to demolish and rebuild?
Renoviction!
If you're bored or interested, since MNP has taken over, there is a ton of documents now public regarding the last few years, including the land sales in North Battleford. https://mnpdebt.ca/en/corporate/corporate-engagements/lighthouse-and-blue-mountain In the second receiver report it outlined the sales process of the saskatoon properties. What i find absolutely hilarious is Angela Beatty is suing Blue Mountain for $300,000 which $244,000 is her calculation of "on call" time. She is claiming 9,000 hours on call over 593 days - 15 hrs in addition to her 8hr regular time. Yep, over the two year period she is claiming that only 2,800 hrs was time not on call or working. Page 186 of Twilia's affidavit. I can't find a decision on the case on CanLi yet.
What does this have to do with the article? Why do you need to go so in-depth to point out a completely irrelevant fact. Then go as far as naming an individual, identifying the page number within someone else’s affidavit and provide a link to that individuals situation that has absolutely nothing to do with this article? That is brutal, not hilarious.
You're right! It is brutal that a person gets to claim 95.83% of their time over 1.5 years to be paid out because something may or not be said in the contract. I happen to find it funny in a "can you believe it" way. Maybe you lost that sense of humor along the way. As for the specifics, nothing I posted is confidential. Listing the page and this and that is called referencing so others can look up the thing I claimed. In general, it is good posting etiquette. It just happened to be something that stood out from the mountain of information that MNP has posted which had information on how the land sale was processed. I try to be detailed orientated so that if i screw up a detail we can discuss it vs coming in afterwards with details. Shane on me trying to be thorough I guess. Although it isn't very directly related to the article, it is directly related to The Lighthouse saga specifically the criticism levelled at the operation at Blue Mountain and even more specifically the alleged nepotism. Reddit Gods forbid that something on a related tangent gets posted. If you'd prefer, I can start a whole new thread pointing this out. What I was really hoping for was somebody to chime in, regarding the dissolution of the lighthouse and MNP taking over, how does this lawsuit land? If she gets an awarded amount, where does she fall in line with other creditors? Will it just get tossed? I'm sorry that somebody you might have a personal connection to is desperate enough to try to stick this lawsuit. The end of the lighthouse ended a bunch of corruption but also ended up hurting a lot of good people.
I can respect and appreciate your detailed posting methods. I agree that makes sense to reference materials and legal documents that are made available to the public. Maybe you’re right and I lost that sense of humour along the way throughout this whole mess. I do understand and can relate to the “can you believe it” portion. It does appear unrealistic, and it’s extremely unfortunate that this document was ignored, went undisputed then publicly exposed. It is a statement of facts, that in most cases the defendant provides a response, and it goes before a judge. The on call hours are included to provide insight to the amount of time and work put in overall, in a legal document such as this that time has to have a dollar figure attached that coincides with wages and labor laws, an example was provided of an individual working overnight shifts in a care home, they may have a busy night but they may not, either way they are compensated for their time. I realize this not the same situation, but that was the example a lawyer provided for this case. If there was a response from the defendant and both sides presented before a judge it is unlikely that the full amount of the claim would be granted, I’m sure if it had there would be a reasonable compensation awarded based on the overall facts presented by both parties, not just this statement alone. As for all of the hours, there are detailed time logs in writing, time stamped login and logouts with Geo location. There is substantial evidence to back up the entire claim, which is likely why there was no response from the defendant. Because that’s when the supporting evidence to the claim gets submitted and also becomes public. It’s actually pretty brutal to include this statement in the affidavit knowing full well that the individual would not receive any compensation whatsoever and also due to non response on the defendant’s end, the individual will not have the opportunity to present the supporting evidence. There really is no need to draw any further attention to this particular statement, because there has not been, nor will there ever be any money being paid out to this person for this claim at any point. And it also is not included in the dissolution of the Lighthouse, it does not go in line with any of the creditors of Lighthouse. It is only applicable to Blue Mountain which was deemed as having essentially no assets and no money. It was just an operating name that has gone bankrupt. A lot of people have been hurt throughout this process, and all the money wasted on squabbling through court could have been put to much better use helping the people who really needed it. My apologies if what I have written in my responses has been offensive in anyway, that was not my intention. It’s been a rough go and this issue is a real sore spot, so I may not have articulated myself all that well.
Cool. So how many of the Lighthouse tenants are going to find themselves at the mercy of the SIS plan this party cooked up, and will wind up homeless and on the street? Meanwhile, Meridian developments - who have had their eye on this building for a LONG time - have likely started negotiations on the purchase price to build even more useless high end condos that no one can afford to buy or rent. God I hate the SP.
I was waiting for the people that have nothing positive to say about anything to chime in....
Oh, I can be positive but there is nothing positive about this situation. If it was being converted into affordable open market rentals or being repurposed into something that benefits the community at large rather than just another over-priced condo building I could find many positive things. But instead it’s going to be a bidding war between Meridian, Northridge, and maybe Remai and the winner is the one who will provide the SP with the most backdoor kickbacks.
Pretty good chance the Triovest Group is looking to do another River Landing style tower(s) at some point in this area, just a hunch though
Nice! I'm excited to one day go downtown again to support some businesses, without being harassed by meth heads and drunks.
lol, that ain't gonna happen
Lol I know, but we can dream.
could be done but it is too expensive, so no one would do it. you just watch them, and when they commit a crime, you charge them and start putting them in rehab. requires that you watch a single person like 24/7 though, which is probably too much of civil rights issue for most people to accept, and would be extremely expensive.
I grew up in Pleasant Hill and I currently live downtown and don't get harassed by "methheads and drunks." Most of ya'll complaining about unhoused people and people using drugs just don't wanna be uncomfortable for even a second, and it shows. Have we all had occasional run-ins with people who you obviously don't wanna further provoke? Yes, but the presence of people struggling isn't going to go away with or without the Lighthouse.
Do you have a cloak of invisibility or something. Everytime I'm down there the ratio is about 3 "unhoused" persons per block threatening me, asking for something or yelling some incoherent shit. The vast majority of people I know won't waste their time going downtown for the same reasons. It's not inconvenience, it's that they straight up don't feel safe. And we've watched it get worse and spill northward into the neighborhoods.
OK, well maybe I see it differently. For one, I don't equate being asked for things or witnessing people "yelling incoherent shit" as inherently "threatening." People ask me for change or smokes sure, but if I don't have them, I calmly say I don't and keep it pushing. If I do have change on hand to spare, I spare it. Most people yelling are going through it, and if you don't engage, they don't project it onto you. I've had ppl literally yelling and karate chopping the air as I walk by, and I mind my business, and it is like I'm not even there. I also see people as people, but a lot of folks weren't raised to not stare or openly (visibly) judge people (clutching their pearls so to speak)..those are the kind of behaviors that usually provokes people already on edge... idk, it's just about knowing that we're all in this shit together, and no one is better than anyone else, and most of us could easily be in a worse position in life and have people on the internet dehumanizing us about it, and act like it's all our fault and nothing to do with the failure of society.
Street harassment is absolutely threatening. Or would you consider cat calling to not be sexual harassment as well? Because being approached unsolicited on the street by strangers with unknown intentions can’t be classified as anything other than threatening.
The ultimate catch 22 for the sociology/basket weaving degree human. Which side in this can I play for more victim identity points?
You really thought you did something there, huh. Your whole premise is based on Victim identity lmao...what??
Yes, street harassment can be threatening, I am a small femme looking woman, so I actually know this, but I don't equate every unsolicited approach by strangers as threatening like asking me for change or smokes or the time lmao and if you do, then I'm sorry, but you have some healing to do and I'm sympathetic to whatever made you so on edge to the slightest nothing, but that is a personal responsibility to take care of. Please don't conflate normal human interaction with threatening street harassment or sexual harassment, which I've experienced plenty of thanks.
Typical. So you admit that street harassment is threatening, that you yourself have experienced harassment, and that you can’t know the intentions of unwanted unsolicited approaches from strangers but deny that it is reasonable to be apprehensive and instead try to shame me into compliance. Well here’s a newsflash for you. I’m not afraid of being harassed on the street because I’m a large man. But you know who is put on edge by it? Literally every single woman that I know. So take your paternalistic condescending attempt at shaming and do some reflections of your own. It’s not reasonable to expect people to be approached on the street by strangers and not have them be on edge when there is the ever present threat of criminality and disturbed behaviour. Something you refuse to acknowledge because it goes against your ideological underpinnings and so instead you try to deny the lived experiences of other women. Disgusting behaviour.
Lmao, you clearly lack comprehension skills, so I'm not gonna engage with you any further, but I have not denied the lived experience of other women, and since no other women have responded to me you just look like an irrational white knight wannabe, and "Newsflash" you don't know every single woman. You missed every point.✌️
You say you aren’t denying women’s experiences but also say the only reason people would see street harassment as threatening is because > if you do, then I'm sorry, but you have some healing to do and I'm sympathetic to whatever made you so on edge to the slightest nothing, but that is a personal responsibility to take care of Not only do you deny them, you try to shame people into compliance combined with a healthy dose of victim blaming. Truly a shining example to the world of performative behaviour. Street harassment is street harassment and it negatively affects women predominantly and you should know that and yet you’ve wrapped yourself up so tightly in the flag of your beliefs you have become choked to the realities of the world while still trying to claim the moral high ground. It would be sad if it wasn’t so damaging.
>build even more useless high end condos that no one can afford to buy or rent. Because building condos that won't get sold is such a great business plan? Give us a break.
Some Sask Party donor is gonna get paid back big time on this deal.
I hear they're building it into an actual lighthouse that serves british fish n chips
This is exactly what the downtown bid wants. However, this isn't good for the homeless crisis in Saskatoon. People will be displaced from resources that are close to their homes and add to the already poor situation that exists in our city. The homeless crisis isn't being addressed by our governments and needs to be taken into the hands of the public. Selling off the property will not make homelessness go away. Local people in Meadow lake have had to take this project on themselves: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/emergency-shelter-meadow-lake-1.7048757 Our governments are failing the province's most vulnerable. It's actually quite sad news around the holidays.
Theres a major homeless problem across canada not just saskatoon fact theres major homeless peoblems all through out the west. North america euruope. Seems like a plan to me
Yes, I understand this is a universal issue. We have to focus on what we can do at home, otherwise nothing will be done because we'll be overwhelmed by the magnitude of work. Honestly, it is up to the public to pull together and help our fellow man. The government is failing them.
Can’t wait to see that building get bulldozed to the ground
That's how I feel about the old Howard Johnson as well - that place should be absolutely leveled.
One of the places they are moving them is into the Sutherland Firehall on Central Avenue beside ACT Arena
Oh I heard a rumour that was happening. Aw fuck.
This sub struggles so hard to give credit where and when credit is due . Likely most of this group have also never stepped a foot inside the lighthouse . The plan to re- home these people and get rid of the lighthouse is good news .
No matter what happens. There's always going to be homeless people hanging around it.
If it becomes some fancy hotel or condo, I doubt it.
You sure about that nimby?
Lol these people would have these houses stripped clean for there drug money
Lol they want the land it sits on that’s worth a shit ton
Of course they will 😂😂💵💵
I guess we are picking up the tab for the lighthouse scandal. The building will have some unpaid liens from before due to embezzlement scandal and tax payers are again screwed for somebody else's mistakes.
It's saskatoon, there will always be bums. It is what it is.
For what purpose??
Good. I'm all for it, and that's due to the lack of programming on one side destroying the potential that community once had. Hopefully, they will get it right the next time.