Raise the Hammer

Here are a few "facts" as well...in discussion, rather that SHOUTING, form:

Fact, there is photographic proof that SOME of the buildings are not in such an ill state of disrepair - in some people's opinion. There is also substantial photographic proof of the other side.

Fact, there is documented proof that SOME of the buildings are not in such an ill state of disrepair - Agreed.

Fact, we've been lied to about the actual condition of these buildings for years- who has been doing the lying? Who has even been asking about these buildings or taking any action to do anything with them? Nobody, or at least if they have, they border on a definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Fact, some people who are speaking and acting openly against this demolition, are being threatened - Fact, some people speaking and acting against it are doing the threatening.

Fact, documented proof many of the buildings are not in such an ill state of decay are locked under confidentiality, and not supposed to be seen by public eyes-False. Available at City Hall, if you ask nicely and follow proper procedures.

Fact, most people either fail to see the buildings as you and SO MANY OUTSIDERS do.-??? People see what they want to see...you can't force a vision on people. This isn't a fact...its your opinion.
Fact, many people involved with the “revitalization of our downtown”, including our councillors and our Mayor have personal agendas and REFUSE to see any potential. They want “pretty” buildings. Fact, many of the supposedly historic-looking building such as our Harmony Square, don't look anything like a historic building, and were NOT built as the original plans that were contracted - Again, your opinion.

Fact, nobody is allowed in ALL 41 buildings, not even now that they are empty. True and False. True, now that they are without electricity, fenced and hoarded, it is a safety measure. False, there were several opportunities for the public to go in all buildings that were safe, or not occupied (Mr. P's for example).

Fact, this city has NEVER given the buildings an actual chance to be preserved and restored.-False. A performance grant system was in place for just that...no takers. Several potential, and proven, Farhi-type dudes have come and gone...just like the monorail guy from the Simpsons.

Fact, none of the 41 buildings are “designated” as heritage, even though they are, and should be.- Again, facts combined with your opinion, are not facts.

Fact, even if they were designated as heritage, that designation can be removed in order to demolish. Not sure how this is even applicable.

Fact, the City of the Corporation of Brantford has NEVER owned all 41 buildings until as of February 2010. They had only owned the Esquire Theatre, which already had a contract to be demolished. Yep.

Fact, in order to expropriate these buildings in order to demolish them all, 60 occupants that we know of were kicked out, and about 5 or so businesses or so. Agreed, but with due notice and financial assistance to move and resettle.

Fact, the man who owned his town home on the South Side for 56 years was also the only recipient on the South Side of an award presented by the Council of the Corporation of the City of Brantford in 1994 for the upkeep of his property on the South Side. He was evicted BY FORCE last week.Agreed, but he also bought the building for $20 000 or less, owned it outright, and received a premium (which one Councillor of the 5 seems to have a hard on for) on top of the assessed value of his building, as well as financial assistance to move.


Fact, no other strategies were explored before the expropriation – demolish plan was forced. False - Large developer, post-secondary, grants, one building at a time, improving properties around it by the municipality....all were other strategies that did not work.


Fact, the five councillors, including our Mayor, all have a ruling vote of 6/5 which rules all. Agreed. This is democracy, majority rules.

Fact, our own councillors, Mayor, and city clerks pushing this demolition have IGNORED the recommendations of their own Inquiry Officer, City Solicitor, and the IBI Group of Consultants that stated;- Again, in your reading and interpretation. Opinion.

As much as it seems stupid to demolish with no apparent plan, other than the wait and see approach, which I agree sounds stupid, so is the "keep them up with a wait and see approach", which has been the case for 30 years. The City could have expropriated a long time ago..but they were waiting for the saviour that many advocates seem to think will come along. Well, saviours bill at 5-10% premiums..which is why they have money to save buildings...no one does it for free, and no business plan has been forwarded to work these properties. They are a fire hazard, and history suggests a fire is likely should they remain standing.