10/20/2025
We appreciate the thoughtful media coverage of the clearing of the encampment at St Stephen-in-the-Fields from the CBC, the Toronto Star, Canadian Press, and others. However, there are some aspects which haven't been dealt with, one of them the highly irregular, rushed, and chaotic process by which this clearing came about.
1) A City spokesperson apparently told NOW Magazine that the clearing was carried out in accordance with the Interdivisional Protocol for Encampments. This is not accurate.
The City's Encampment Protocol states that encampments can only be cleared with at least 72 hours notice, and that "enhanced supports" must be provided first. We had approximately 40 hours from the time the Fire Marshal's notice first appeared on our door, and the beginning of the clearing operation; we did not have clarification on the full scope of the order until about 24 hours from the time at which full removal was required. City staff did not arrive to give the residents formal notice until 23 hours before the specified time of final clearing, and only 19 hours before the clearing operation began.
"Enhanced supports" have never been provided to this encampment, although that possibility had been discussed with us at a meeting with City staff the week before, and we had expressed willingness to proceed.
2) Even if we assume that the Fire Marshal outranks the City's protocols, there are other irregularities. The Fire Chief stated in an email on Wednesday that the fire inspector had been "unable" to speak to anyone from the church on Tuesday afternoon. Our parish administrator was in the office all day and into the evening. The building was open for evening prayer at 4:30 pm. The notice was posted sometime between 4:30 pm and 6 pm. It should have been easy to find and speak to church staff during that time.
As soon as I was made aware of the notice on Tuesday afternoon, I filed a request for review, asking for more time to develop mitigation plans. I received a computerized notice of receipt at 6:38 pm. That is the only acknowledgement I have ever received. A request for review should have frozen the process while it was considered. If it was in fact considered and discarded within a matter of hours, I should at the very least have received the courtesy of a response. Direct mention of this to the Fire Chief the next day was met with silence.
3) The clearing operation was apparently considered so urgent that the No. 8 Hose Station, across the street from the church, was shut down for the entire day to facilitate the operation. We do not know all the consequences of this shutdown, but we do know that there was a gas leak on Brunswick Avenue, one block to the north, and that a different fire station was required to respond, resulting, according to the crew on site, in a significant response delay.
When I spoke to the Fire Chief on Wednesday, one of the reasons she gave for the apparent extreme urgency of clearing was that the encampment was "difficult for the neighbours." We do acknowledge that fire risk in encampments is a real concern, and have been frustrated by the lack of willingness of most City staff to discuss risk mitigation plans, as well as being frustrated that fire extinguishers have actually been confiscated from residents. But we have to wonder if political pressure was the reason that this was considered such an urgent situation that it was necessary to violate multiple protocols and processes.
