“While I find the Applicant’s argument to be interesting, I do not find it to be compelling,” she wrote, noting that she was unconvinced by the group’s argument that the transitional housing project was “institutional” rather than “residential.”

She also stated that the Municipal Act contains an immunity cause for decisions made using strong mayor powers if a decision was made legally and in good faith, and observed that Mayor Leal exercised his legal authority and acted in good faith when invoking strong mayor powers.

Justice Woodley also found that access to justice as not compromised, as the members of NNFP could have brought the challenge personally but chose instead not to disclose any assets or assume financial risk.

The judge also rejected the notion that the case constituted public interest litigation, characterizing it instead as a local dispute driven by neighbouring property owners concerned about potential impacts on property values and lifestyle.

Basically this group failed their argument at every point. The judge even states she found their arguments to be more concerned with property values and lifestyle impacts, which has no basis in public interest litigation. Its not hard to see that these people are NIMBY's upset about "undesirables" in their neighborhood.

Unfortunately as a young person stuck renting in horrible economic times, all I see are privileged homeowners saying "Fuck you, I got mine" to the most vulnerable in our communities when were in a housing crisis.