Active History

David M. K. Sheinin

This is the third in a series of articles on Toronto public housing in the late 1980s. All entries in the series will be collected here.

In the 1980s, the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority (MTHA)’s tenant population shifted as the demographic makeup of Toronto changed. At the same time, Community Relations Worker (CRWs) developed big and ultimately doomed plans for social service provision. The MTHA was hampered in its unwieldy mission. Poor organizational structure and management of CRWs meant they were not equipped to deliver ambitious programming. Furthermore, since staff failed to take demographic shifts into account and sometimes held prejudiced attitudes toward tenants, they failed to identify and plan appropriate programs. A consultant report from Simon Associates and the MTHA’s response to it provide a window on these major issues in MTHA in the 1980s.

David M. K. Sheinin

This is the second article in a series on Toronto public housing in the 1980s. All entries in the series will be collected here.

At the beginning of the 1970s, the Metro Toronto Housing Authority (MTHA) had a clear purpose; to house those who could not afford a home elsewhere. Over the 1970s and 1980s that mandate drifted as Community Relations Workers (CRWs) imagined grand schemes to address the many social needs of residents. This trend was in keeping with other housing authorities in Canada and the United States, and alongside the exceptional work of hundreds of independent social service agencies in Toronto. This was not the result of an overarching policy shift. It came in fits and starts. MTHA common spaces were used for childcare, extracurricular activities for teenagers, free breakfasts, and much more. In the 1980s, (CRWs) became remarkably ambitious in what they proposed, though without the resources or managerial support to set in motion their dozens of ideas.

In 1987, Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority (MTHA) chair John Sewell struck a Committee on Social Services and Community Relations Work (CSSCRW) comprised of MTHA Community Relations Workers (CRWs) and public housing administrators. The latter included Sewell himself and director of race relations Chimbo Poe-Mutuma. The goal was to bring order to MTHA’s forays into social service provision, to create and advocate for social programs, and to figure out what exactly CRWs should be working on every day. On June 23, at the second meeting, Sewell asked four sharp questions that MTHA ought to resolve quickly. Who should determine the social needs of tenants? Who would decide on the adequacy of current services? Who would provide improved access to needed services? Should problems be solved on an individual or group basis? For years, those questions remained unanswered.