The following letter was requested by Michael McCormick of the Hidden Valley Seniors Manufactured Home Park Residents Association. I’m providing here my response here, for anyone it’s of interest to.

======================================

Hi Michael, thank you for taking the time to contacting me.

I have a deep history in Langford, having resided here for 19 years, starting when I moved here with my family when I was 16. Shortly after I bought my home near downtown Langford we had the blizzard of ’96. During that crisis many people called CFAX asking for help, and some people called CFAX offering to provide help. I was amongst those who called and offered my help, and I walked in snow that was at times up to my thighs as I trekked all over Langford, from a hobby farm on Selwyn to Hidden Valley. When at Hidden Valley, I shoveled snow off of several manufactured homes before making the trek home. This was my introduction to Langford’s manufactured home parks, and the strong sense of community that exists within them. I was warmly invited into the community, offered tremendous hospitality, and they clearly articulated their appreciation of my contribution.

In my community involvement I have noted that, despite the passage of the Manufactured Home Redevelopment Assistance Policy, there is still anxiety amongst residents of the parks. I think this anxiety is telling, and signifies to me that more needs to be done. It’s not enough to protect people’s homes, people must *feel* that those homes are protected so they can feel safe and comfortable without fear or worry or losing them. A home you’re constantly worried about will feel more like a house than a home. We also have to consider that the parks are not merely individual homes, they are a community and any policy has to be predicated on the idea that transplanting it in part or in whole, such as moving them from one side of the highway to another for example, can hurt people even if the roof over their head is protected.

I support the current Manufactured Home Redevelopment Assistance Policy, and I would work towards ensuring enforcement of it. It is on the implementation side that we have seen problems with policies in Langford before. An example is that there was Langford Council’s promise to protect 52% of Hull’s Field (which was documented in the minutes of a Council meeting), but anyone who has been there recently can see that far less than 52% remains. That creates a credibility gap, and unfortunately the Manufactured Home Redevelopment Assistance Policy is not yet tested and we do not know how deep the political will to enforce it runs. The talk about moving Tri-Way to the other side of the highway, and some of the zonings applied to the parks in the recent Official Community Plan, raise further questions about whether the political will is there at present to enforce it.

I would not only enforce the current Manufactured Home policy, but I would enforce it with an eye to protecting the communities that exist in the parks, so that ties of friendship and neighbourhood are protected as well as individuals and their homes are protected. I would additionally look to enforce the policy guided by my understanding that it’s not enough just to ensure that residents of the parks get fair market value for their homes if they are forced to move, but that the goal is to proect their homes, and in their current places. I sometimes hear people refer to the parks as mere affordable housing, as a place where people end up when they have no other options, and I find this is upsetting because in fact they are communities that people choose to live in and they deserve respect just as much as they deserve protection. When shoveling snow off of the tops of trailers (as the residents called them at the time in 1996) I talked to friendly people who cared about their neighbours and their neighbours’ homes, whereas I lived in a single family dwelling in a residential street and knew fewer of my neighbours than they did, and I wasn’t at all sure I had the better half of the deal.

If elected to Langford Council, I would advocate for another change to the policy. At present the onus is on the residents to prove they don’t want to move, which requires the residents to get organised and to fight for their homes. On Council I would advocate for reversing this, and I would expect the park owners to do the work and to prove that the residents *do not* object to the park being rezoned, resettled, or redeveloped. At present the current policy forces residents to become their own advocates, sometimes difficult for people who are old, or infirm, people who have mobility impairment, or people with other challenges. The current situation, when an application for rezoning or redeveloping a park is made, also creates a period of stress where people have to wonder and doubt whether they will be able to adequately muster their forces to fight to save their homes, a worry residents of single family dwellings almost never have to fear. In fact, if someone is sick and in the hospital and unable to represent themselves or sign a petition, they would effectively be counted as a “yes” vote in favour of rezoning or redeveloping the park merely because they are unable to say “no”! Reversing this would reduce the stress and doubt that I hear from manufactured home owners about the future of their parks, as they would know it can only be sold if residents want it to, and that inaction on the part of a resident (who may or may not be able to advocate for themselves) isn’t seen by the park owner or by City Hall as tacit agreement in rezoning, resettling (moving), or redeveloping the park. While some may argue it’s a small change to the current policy, I think it’s an important change as it not only provides additional protection for the manufactured home parks, it shows a greater degree of respect for the residents of the parks and that the parks are communities and not just groups of homes.

I hope this informs you as to how I feel on the policy, and why I feel that way. I apologise if it was long and wordy at times, but this is an issue I feel very passionately about. I also took the liberty of sharing my idea of reversing the onus on who must demonstrate that park residents are in favour of a rezoning with some other candidates who I believed would be inclined to support it, and if they contact you expressing their support I hope that you would consider adding that to their submissions to you. Please contact me if you have any other questions.

Steven Hurdle