Welcome to the Thursday Thing King Edition, thank You for being here. I Will continue reading Our Story of the Tarot later this evening, for now, I had to get some things off My chest and Writ another Letter to Geneviève Langlais, associate legal council for the city of Ottawa. Enjoy!
June 13, 2019, 3:24 Post Midi
Good Day, Genevieve,
It is difficult for Me to convey just how disappointed I am that ‘the city’ believes this Matter and complaint has been resolved in any kind of reasonable or correct manner, and/or that I have been treated with dignity and respect by the Housing Services branch during the interim of this investigation.
You acknowledge the time I spent in the shelter was ‘difficult and extremely unpleasant’ (to quote Your letter), though I suppose because I’m in receipt of social assistance, ‘the city’ is of the opinion that I’m not ‘worthy’ or deserving of any cure or remedy for the harm and injury that has been done to Me?
There was no resolution process for complaints in place at the shelter at the time I was a resident. Jason Prevost and Caroline Hards refused to respond to any of My letters complaining of the shelter conditions and/or as King of them for the supports necessary to accomplish My personal goals. Ignoring an individual IS a form of Willful harm, negating the value of the individual’s opinion and concern, adding to the mental anguish they are already subject to. When I was Given the opportunity to participate in a video interview designed to inform the People of Ottawa of the conditions clients in shelters are subject to, I welcomed the opportunity as I felt I had no alternate recourse. The last thing I imagined was that I would barred from the shelter for life for exercising My freedom of speech. The act of shelter operators barring individuals without cause is intended to demoralize their character and intimidate others from advocating for their own rights and dignity. Those who do advocate for their rights or complain of the shelter conditions, are typically characterized as violent, ‘uncooperative’, and barred from the facility.
I am thing King ‘the city’ has forgot this complaint resulted in an application to the Divisional Court for Judicial Review because Housing Services LIED to chair deans and members of council about the shelter conditions, proving their organization untrustworthy, and failed to provide an appropriate remedy to My complaint and/or investigate My concerns. The fact that Shelley VanBuskirk and Housing Services was directed by the city to investigate this complaint when it is known she provided false information to chair deans and members of council in the past, and that the nature of the complaint was that the Housing Services branch was negligent in their duties and responsibilities to respond to My complaint and ensure clients are treated with dignity, respect, and acting in compliance with the shelter standards and all municipal and provincial by-laws and regulations is patently incorrect and unreasonable.
Furthermore, this investigation revealed that all clients were subject to violations of their rights by being compelled to participate in religious services in order to participate in social programs offered by the shelter, that there was no clearly posted resolution process for clients, that bedbugs and other vermin are a ‘continuous problem’, and that Housing Services is NOT ABLE to compel shelter operators to respond to letters of complaints from clients and/or request copies of application forms clients are required to sign in order to access social programs? It sounds more like the Salvation Army is dictating the practices of Housing Services, and that Housing Services is aiding and abetting the Salvation Army’s determination to demoralize their clients and subvert their rights. My dignity and rights in particular.
‘The city’ is now assassinating My character, which further demonstrates the bias and prejudice of Housing Services as My ‘overall actions and behaviour’ have NEVER placed any individual at risk at ANY TIME. Yet Housing Services has no problem assassinating My character without qualifying their accusation with any information. In fact, they are now refusing to provide the information You (Genevieve Langlais) insisted in Our first resolution meeting Housing Services would be compelled to provide (a response from Jason Prevost explaining his reasons for having Me barred from the facility without cause). I have already requested such a letter from Jason Prevost, proof of service was provided to You in the original complaint. You asserted that Jason does have a duty and responsibility to respond to My letter and Shelley promised the letter would be provided with the results of the investigation on or before April 1st. You have hereby reneged Your Promise to Me.
When I filed a complaint to the city, it was also partially because not only did Housing Services fail to respond in a reasonable manner to My initial complaint, but their failure to do so inspired Me to forward the complaint to all members of city council and the mayor. When I think of ‘the city’, I think of the elected officials and the Mayor, sitting on city council, the individuals elected by the People to protect the rights and dignity of the People of Ottawa, NOT ‘Housing Services’. It appears the Housing Services branch was designed to protect city councillors and the mayor from complaints of clients subject to the adverse conditions they are subject to at the Hand of city shelters and their operators, NOT to protect the rights and clients of shelters, and I think this investigation demonstrates this motive very clearly.
Again, this is NOT a formal response and I Will be continuing My application to the Divisional Court for Judicial review, but I thought it best You be advised that I perceive Your client to be city council and the Mayor, regardless if Housing Services is the organization You have chosen to ‘protect’ the rights of People and provide a non-partisan investigation of shelter conditions. Shelley VanBuskirk may be responsible for the unwarranted assassination of My character, but allegedly, Shelley speaks for city council and the mayor, so as far as I’m concerned, if ‘the city’ is endorsing this determination, then it is the mayor, Jim Watson and the members of city council that have chosen to assassinate the nature of My character unprovoked.
I strongly recommend forwarding this letter to the Mayor and city council members, inform them that Shelley VanBuskirk provided false information in her memo and that clients of the Salvation Army were subject to trespasses upon their spiritual belief, practice, worship and observance for at least the 18 months I was a client, and presumably from the moment they began providing emergency shelter service for Ottawa’s People. If city council and the mayor are ‘okay’ with that, then I Will look forward to bringing this matter before a superior court justice to invoke their non-partisan opinion on the matter.
I am as King of You kindly to for Give the passionate nature of this letter and My frustration with the city in regards to this Matter, but I did stop by the Salvation Army after visiting with Dan yesterday, inspired by Your letter, only to discover that clients insist the bedbug situation is as bad now as its ever been, that there is still no clearly visible complaint resolution process (though one client confessed he wouldn’t use it anyway for fear of retaliation from shelter manager, Jason Prevost), and that clients are STILL subject to participation in religious activities to participate in the Stabilization, Anchorage, and Life Skills programs. No offence, but I find the clients of the shelter far more trustworthy and reliable than the Word of Shelley VanBuskirk.
I Will Give You until Monday to speak with city council and the Mayor, and determine if the opinions of Housing Services are in Harmony with their own.
Love and Blessings,
House of von Dehn,
Hand of Stephen,
Kingdom of God.