THUNDER BAY – Amid growing public frustration over the city’s worsening homelessness crisis, Thunder Bay council’s decision to approve Kam River Heritage Park as the site of a temporary shelter village has ignited backlash. Monday’s 8-5 council vote ratifies the plan after six months of uncertainty, but for many residents, it’s not a solution—it’s a symptom of a city out of its depth.
Council’s narrow approval comes despite serious safety concerns raised by Canadian Pacific Kansas City Railway (CPKC) and vocal opposition from parts of the community. The site sits just 100 metres from an active freight rail yard—far short of CPKC’s 300-metre recommended buffer zone, which city staff admit they haven’t fully assessed.
Council Pushes Forward Despite Public Safety and Funding Concerns
The city argues that the 300-metre guideline is not legally binding and doesn’t apply to emergency shelters. But that’s little comfort to nearby residents, who question why a vulnerable population is being placed in a high-risk area without comprehensive safety protocols in place.
City Manager John Collin insists this is a managed environment, likening the site more to a commercial service hub than a residential development. However, critics argue that Thunder Bay has no track record running this kind of facility, and there’s little public evidence the city is prepared for what’s coming.
Kam River Site Decision Adds to Community Frustration
“This decision feels rushed and desperate,” said one nearby resident, who asked not to be named. “We all agree something needs to be done—but this isn’t it. We’re putting a temporary village in a flood-prone park next to a rail yard with no real plan for the long term.”
What’s more, the facility won’t even open until the fall, months after homeless encampments typically grow in the warmer summer months.
The decision means that the area that last summer was full of tents will be a construction site, and those tents will likely locate across the city.
City administration has already warned that the summer will be “difficult,” as they scramble to manage encampments without the infrastructure the shelter village was supposed to provide.
The encampments have spread across the city, and have people across the city very worried as property crime escalates.
One citizen questioning the decision says, “Is council going to offer counseling or some type of rehabilitation program for these people? Yes this all costs money, but some would be earning “their keep” and maybe eventually turn their life around. Has the city studied other countries that provide housing for the homeless? I have not read, or may have missed any mention of counseling or support programs. Just handing out free “homes” does nothing to really get them off the street. Btw lake front property has always been a dream of mine. Didn’t know I could just get it for free instead of working my a** off for 40 years.”
Elevate Northwest was working with the TBDSSAB and City of Thunder Bay but that has ended. Additionally, the City has ended clean-up agreements with a local private company, and over the spring the huge mess along waterways has angered many people across the city.
City Admits It’s Unprepared to Manage Shelter Operations
Thunder Bay has never operated a sanctioned shelter village, nor does it have specialized staff trained in encampment management. Despite city officials attempting to reassure council with mentions of monitored gates and guest lists, critics say this reactive approach lacks the planning and lived experience needed to run such a facility effectively.
Even more alarming is that the city has not finalized the locations of its planned designated encampment zones, which are dependent on the shelter village being operational. That leaves a dangerous vacuum in the city’s response strategy.
Taxpayers on the Hook for a Temporary Band-Aid
The financial plan for the shelter village is also raising eyebrows. While the province is contributing $2.8 million of the $5.5 million capital cost, the city is left to shoulder the rest—including $1.5 million for the first year of operations alone.
For many people all it takes is a quick Google search to see how in other cities these projects have gone over-budget.
And after five years? There’s no long-term funding strategy in place. City staff have floated the idea of “reusing” infrastructure for a park revitalization effort, but taxpayers are skeptical of investing millions into what amounts to a temporary fix—especially when Thunder Bay is already stretched thin on infrastructure, healthcare, and housing services.
This decision is likely to become a key 2026 Civic Election issue.
“This is a crisis,” one person told NetNewsLedger. “And instead of demanding a regional or federal solution, Thunder Bay is footing the bill with a plan that has more questions than answers.”
As the city barrels forward with construction, many in Thunder Bay are left wondering: who’s really being helped here—and at what cost?
The reality is citizens across Thunder Bay would love to see real solutions to the homeless problem, City Administration and Council in this decision have demonstrated a great lack of fully understanding the rights of homeowners and taxpayers, seemingly putting the rights of homeless people ahead of them.
Real solutions are possible, but it appears City Manager John Collin who is new to Thunder Bay is not as connected to the city as he might be.
