Late breaking news: Housing First leadership want to meet resident group
An unexpected knock at the door was how residents first heard news of the shock sale and the beginning of a fast and furious relocation with very limited options.
TWiSK held a group interview with residents on site in a sunny courtyard at the Oasis at very short notice last Friday. About ten residents answered the call and told of their surprise, shock and sadness of being forced to move on.
Many recalled their relief many years ago after being accepted into social housing. At the time they were told that this would be their home for as long as they needed.
But since then, the management of the Oasis social housing has changed many times and the philosophy is clearly more motivated by finances.
It’s now emerged that the sale of the 25 units was decided at least 18 months ago without the residents being considered or informed. Council has confirmed to TWiSK that it was informed about the sale plans during the term of the last council (pre-November 2024).
Now after only informing residents on 2 March, TWiSK can reveal that multiple residents have been shown alternative properties by HousingFirst and told they must decide almost immediately.
High noon or the highway
On Friday TWiSK meet an older woman tenant who had been shown an alternative property in the last day or so and been told she must decide by Monday at noon. Deploying such heavy-handed high noon or the highway tactics against a frightened and vulnerable older woman tenant would be considered shameful behavior from any landlord, let alone a council supported not-for-profit.
And that gets us to the history of this so-called Oasis.
Theses 25 social housing units were created in the early 2000’s when council exchanged the old depot site with a developer in return for 28 community housing units.
The initial social housing units were funded by a transfer of 1.223ha from council to the developer in return for the construction and transfer of 28 housing units as consideration for the land and at no construction cost to the council. They are fuilly owned by Port Phillip Housing Trust.
At the time the Oasis was lorded as pace setting and best in class. The then Port Phillip Mayor, Cr Darren Ray, said perhaps the most outstanding feature of Inkerman Oasis is the fact that the community housing is undifferentiated in design and blends in seamlessly with the other 89 privately-owned units.
But now that vision is kaput.
Financial motives drive the sale
HousingFirst has managed the Port Phillip Housing Trust since being appointed Trustee by the City of Port Phillip in 2005. The Trust is a separate legal entity from the rest of HousingFirst. The purpose of the Trust is to provide affordable housing in the City of Port Phillip.
HousingFirst made the sale decision after a ‘careful review’ concluding that the ‘properties were too expensive for a social housing provider to hold based on their income stream from rent compared to the cost to maintain the buildings and the tenancies.’
In a media statement they said ‘HousingFirst’s strategy is to divest from a property and reinvest the proceeds within the Trust to house more people in need of social housing.’
HousingFirst is a corporate NFP with a significant portfolio valued at $628M and a rental income of 27.6M in the last annual report. It houses 2817 residents across 2025 hpuseholds.
HousingFirst property are spread across many municipalities with about one-third in Port Phillip. And the legal structures mean they can do as they please without reference back to council. However, Cr Justin Halliday and Beti Jay currently sit on the HF Board having replaced former Crs Peter Martin and Tim Baxter.
In a statement to TWiSK, Mayor Alex Makin said as trustee, HousingFirst was able to make [the sale decision] decision without requiring approval from Council.
In the most recent annual report, Emmanuel Tsakis Board Chair highlighted HF’s three strategic pillars: Resident First, Portfolio Growth and Organisational Enablement.
‘We remain closely focused on delivering the best resident experience,’ he wrote.
Truth and what’s really happening
Both Mayor Makin and Josh Burns MP (Federal Envoy for Social Housing) have been reassured that everyone would be relocated in social housing.
Makin said HousingFirst has told us they have spoken individually with each resident and will work closely with them to understand their individual needs and preferences.
Burns said sometime difficult decisions need to be made but how you treat people in the process is crucial. ‘We are talking to them about then making sure that people have options, that if there are places that can be made available in St. Kilda.’
HousingFirst told TWiSK that ‘the welfare of our Greeves Street residents is our highest priority.’
‘Residents were informed of the news in one-to-one meetings earlier this month, where we outlined alternative accommodation options within our portfolio. We will continue to work closely with the residents through this transition period.
‘We will consult closely with the residents to ensure the alternative accommodation meets their needs and preferences. We will take into consideration local networks and supports, such as access to support services, when decisions are made about suitable homes.’
And after the close of business on Friday a spokesperson for Housing First emailed to emphasise that there has been further significant one-to-one engagement between our housing officers and the affected residents.
‘Already, there have been 10 viewings of alternative HousingFirst homes, many within our City of Port Phillip portfolio. Two households have already accepted offers within the City of Port Phillip. Several residents have already shown very positive interest in the Brighton East dwellings.
‘Housing officers have emphasised to residents that this is a measured process with every effort made over the coming weeks and months to match residents to suitable alternative accommodation. No one will be rushed into making a decision.’
Frankly that’s bollocks
The residents we meet with told a very different story. Many reported that they would get a maximum of two alternative offers and after that it was the street. Yes – the word the street was used – it was clearly and unambiguously a ‘take it or leave us’ message.
TWiSK has the names of eleven residents who had that experience. In multiple cases the meeting with the HousingFirst representatives left people in tears. Some have required anti-anxiety medication.
These people feel betrayed because the were promised secure housing by a not for profit supported by council. Betrayed because their council had the vision to swap a council depot in a prime location for innovative award winning social housing only to see it sold off from under them.
Bullied because the clear and apparent threat of homelessness has been felt by multiple tenants in the attitude and messages received from HousingFirst staff. Multiple residents said they felt there was a two strikes and you’re out policy at HousingFirst.
And bollocks because the actions of Housing First do not match their words. ‘No one will be rushed into a decision.’ Not true. ‘Residents are our highest priority.’ Not true. ‘Relocating residents with care.’ Not true.
One creative resident suggested a good headline for our story would be ‘HousingFirst, Residents Last.’
Given the performance so far, the resident might well be right.
Late breaking news [Saturday AM]
A HousingFirst spokesperson has told TWiSK that the CEO was unavailable at short notice to discuss this story but that the head of housing will personally meet with all the residents as a group to hear their concerns and to continue to discuss options and timeframes.
Bravo. Lets also get people in the room from Council, Josh Burns’ office and Nina Taylor’s office to participate in that discussion. That might even up the power balance in the room. Fingers Xed.
Significant questions remain unanswered
Why was the decision to sell not communicated earlier, given it was made more than a year ago?
Why are some tenants experiencing significant pressure to make rapid decisions?
What oversight role should councillors play in major decisions affecting the Port Phillip Housing Trust?
What precedent does this process set for security of tenure among other HousingFirst residents?
What formula are HF using to assess the financial viability of properties? Can we see the workings behind the Oasis decision?
FYI Sources in full
HousingFirst media statement 17 March after TWiSK questions
Mayors response in full 20 March
HousingFirst has a long history of growing social housing in Port Phillip and is continuing to invest in increasing the supply of social housing in Port Phillip.
The previous Council was advised that HousingFirst was planning, at some stage, to sell 25 units at the Inkerman Oasis development due to building maintenance costs being unsustainable. HousingFirst has committed for the proceeds to be reinvested into the Port Phillip Housing Trust to deliver more social housing within our City.
As trustee, HousingFirst was able to make this decision without requiring approval from Council. That said, we acknowledge that change can be challenging and we expect any process to prioritise residents’ wellbeing and to be handled with care, transparency and respect.
HousingFirst has told us they have spoken individually with each resident and will work closely with them to understand their individual needs and preferences.
Every resident is being offered alternative accommodation, including at a HousingFirst property in East Brighton. Two of the affected Greeves Street residents have already accepted offers to move to other housing within Port Phillip, and HousingFirst expects further Port Phillip options to become available over the coming months as vacancies arise in their local portfolio.
Our Council remains strongly committed to advocating for affordable and social housing in Port Phillip. That commitment is clearly set out in our Homelessness and Affordable Housing Strategy, endorsed in 2025.
final-homelessness-and-affordable-housing-strategy-pdf-kb-711.pdf
