Oppenheimer Park drama ends with a bit of a fizzle, saving oodles of money

    1 of 2 2 of 2

      The Vancouver Police Department could teach other forces, including the Mounties, a few things about crowd control.

      This week, it looked like all hell was going to break loose in Oppenheimer Park after the city obtained an injunction ordering campers to leave by 10 p.m. on October 15.

      As the deadline loomed, media, onlookers, and civil libertarians gathered for what was shaping up as a fiery confrontation between police and homeless people, many of whom were of aboriginal descent.

      The campers were well aware that Oppenheimer Park is on unceded Coast Salish territory.

      In June the Supreme Court of Canada explicitly recognized the existence of aboriginal title in the Tsilhqot'in Nation case, adding legitimacy to the Vancouver protest.

      It raised the possibility of novel arguments in court on behalf of the campers, which could carry on for years. Keep in mind that the B.C. Court of Appeal has already ruled that homeless people can stay in parks if municipal governments aren't providing sufficient alternative shelter space.

      Had things gotten out of control, it would have created a gravy train for lawyers, clogged up the courts, and offered a high likelihood of civil action.

      Protest spokesperson Brody Williams knows the legal history around camping in parks.
      Charlie Smith

      VPD restraint unlike what's occurred in Toronto

      Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed at the Vancouver Police Department and city hall.

      Before the deadline, Chief Jim Chu announced that officers would use body-worn cameras when it came time to dismantle the camp.

      He claimed that this was "to ensure that everyone's rights are protected", which came across as a sign of respect to protesters. But the existence of cameras meant that the images of anyone in the camp who was wanted on any warrants would be captured—a surefire disincentive for some to stick around.

      With the help of community volunteers, officers did what they could to encourage others to leave voluntarily.

      It was notable how many female poice were dispatched to Oppenheimer Park. I don't believe that this was mere happenstance.

      The Downtown Eastside has more than its share of attention deficit disorder, which is characterized by, among other things, ingrained opposition to authority. Any campers who had problems with authority were perhaps less likely to express hostility to female officers.

      While all of this this was taking place, the always-pleasant police media spokesperson, Const. Brian Montague, offered assuring words in interviews. As a former Downtown Eastside beat cop, he understands sensitivities in the neighbourhood.

      While everyone knew that the VPD had plenty of force that could be used against protesters, the approach was to give campers time and hold off on any crackdown.

      In the end, only five people were arrested as almost all the rest dispersed peacefully. And today, the VPD announced that it will not recommend any charges be laid.

      Ordinarily, police shouldn't be making these kind of statements because it undermines Crown counsel, but in this instance it can perhaps be justified in the interest of maintaining good relations with Downtown Eastsiders.

      Huge savings achieved

      The VPD's overall handling of this situation probably saved hundreds of thousands if not millions in legal costs to the province and the city.

      We saw a similar level of restraint by the VPD during the 2010 Olympics and during the 2011 Stanley Cup riot, which stood in sharp contrast to the thuggish behaviour of cops in Toronto during the G8 and G20 summits.

      The VPD has demonstrated that it learned some important lessons from the 1998 Riot at the Hyatt when baton-wielding officers clubbed Vancouverites who were protesting a federal Liberal fundraiser inside. That incident ended up costing an enormous amount of money.

      There's still a question over police salaries

      In the past, I've felt that Chu is somewhat overpaid with an annual salary exceeding $300,000.

      To me, there's no justification for any public servant to be paid that much, including city managers, university presidents, health-authority bosses, the CEO of TransLink, or anyone else working in the public sector. Not even the premier makes that kind of money.

      But this week, Chu and others in the VPD demonstrated that by policing with their brains rather than their batons, they managed to peacefully defuse a protest and protect the public treasury.

      Perhaps if some of these savings are allocated to alleviating the problems that initially led to the creation of the tent city, this situation won't have to re-emerge in the future.

      Comments

      17 Comments

      OMG

      Oct 17, 2014 at 3:25pm

      I was never in any doubt that it would end peacefully. I think people had their fill of aggressive 'civil disobedience' with the seemingly endless protests leading up to the Olympics. And then of course there was the Stanley Cup riots which pissed the entire city off. I realize it was a very different species, but it was still people bashing up everything in sight, including the police.

      From what I understand there was a growing frustration by locals with the campers taking over their park for months, and just like with Occupy, most people were glad to see it end.

      I must say Charlie that you have a very hard time giving credit where it's due. You seem to be saying that the police did something right, but then you go on about salaries, which has nothing to do with your story.

      James Blatchford

      Oct 17, 2014 at 3:39pm

      A fizzle ending is fine with me.

      OMG

      Oct 17, 2014 at 4:13pm

      Charlie, I think you can assume that I will disagree with everything you say. It's so incredibly easy. As a matter of fact, I don't even have to read what you've written, other than the title.

      I've always been curious as to how much you make? You see, I think you make more than me and there's nothing that bothers me more than someone who has a higher income than myself. It's not fair since I work harder than you. Why are you so greedy Charlie?

      Tara Sundberg

      Oct 17, 2014 at 4:35pm

      There must be a way to help the people who want to be helped. Often in low barrier housing there are crime increases. If the city/provincial govt/federal govt could provide some innovative housing would the homeless campers live there and respect their neighbors and not increase crime rates?
      People need somewhere to call home, a place to protect and respect. A safe home is sometimes the first step into a healthier lifestyle. Maybe like a co-op of sorts, where maintenance and other duties could be put towards rents. Advocates for welfare and disability could be on staff to facilitate income assistance, doctors could assist with addiction issues... wait, I'm describing the work of the Portland Hotel Society...

      Grant

      Oct 17, 2014 at 6:19pm

      Glad to see them go.

      Dan

      Oct 17, 2014 at 8:01pm

      Instead of camping in the park I suggest they all move in the empty houses around town. I know of several that are being maintained, but otherwise no one's there. The fridges are likely empty but at least the lawns are mowed.

      Disgusted

      Oct 17, 2014 at 10:07pm

      A good ending to a situation that should never have happened in the first place (hello, Gregor, where is your promised housing?).

      i do find your statement that the place showed restraint during th '11 hockey riot, interesting. They did--but imo, they should have had an 'end of series' disperal plan in place. We certainly know they did not---though not their fault, I believe.

      This was the hubris of our Mayor and Penny Ballem at work. And disappointingly, it seems Chief Chu was either not able to get them to that point of planning---or went along with orders from City Hall. Cops that night had their hands full and weren't able to be fully restrained, because the crowd menaces, building up all day on the Granville mall with morons from our city and beyond, put them in an astoundingly dangerous tactical position.

      So bouquets on this one. Still, this City Hall group seems to let things slide along for far too long, putting everyone at risk. Clearly, because of election optics or the growing band of supporters, enough was enough.

      OMG

      Oct 18, 2014 at 10:36am

      "A good ending to a situation that should never have happened in the first place (hello, Gregor, where is your promised housing?)."

      Okay, so I'm not a big fan of Vision but when I see so many comments like this I have to wonder if the persons are just so anti-Vision that even if every homeless person was provided with a luxury suite, overlooking the ocean, that they'd still bitch about it. Even if Vision is not able to achieve their poorly-thought-out promise they have built a considerable amount of housing, not only for the homeless, but also for addicts and people with other social problems. I know this because I'm currently looking at a brand new 8 story tower that completely dominates a Mt. Pleasant neighbourhood and it's wholly devoted to some of the most severe cases in Vancouver and has zero market housing. The neighbourhood fought it vehemently but it was pushed through anyways - and surprisingly this was never reported in the lefty press. Then there's the monstrosity by the Olympic Village and everywhere you go in large areas of downtown have recent housing units. It may not be perfect and there's still the problem with poor landlords, but the number of people that have been housed (with out taxes) is quite significant. I honestly don't think any of the other major parties would have done as much.

      RUK

      Oct 18, 2014 at 12:05pm

      @OMG

      Well, the 8 story tower was initially an 11 story tower, remember? Three floors of market housing. At the City Hall hearings which went on for days and days, some speakers protested about the size and the City said "ok, you want it smaller? We'll get rid of the market housing."

      If by the lefty press you mean the Mainlander, there's nothing in that scenario which leads itself to 3000 word diatribes on the meaning of Foucault as applied to post-colonial hegemonic ideation of neo capitalist cultural genocide on unceded Coast Salish Territory.