Plans For Colborne St.

Now that the City has started the process of expropriating all those buildings on the south side of Colborne St., when are they going to disclose the plans for these properties? Does it also involve the construction of a new City Hall on some of this property as has been rumoured for years. That would involve far more money than was announced when this bylaw was rushed through. The public has a right to know and have their say and not be informed just days before it becomes a done deal, as was the case of the expropriation bylaw itself.

And really is this property even suitable for a new Y building? Most of the current buildings are smaller and more suitable for this very sloped area. But could a large building be properly supported on any site along this side of the street. It's one thing to build on flat ground but quite another to build on a steep slope. Of course I'm sure that the brains at City Hall will assure us that all will be fine, but didn't we hear the same thing when it was decided to build the Fire Hall and Police Station on Greenwich Street on an old garbage dump in a formerly swampy area? And look at the problems that these buildings had and the millions in ongoing repairs that they required. But then again just look at the Bus Terminal that can't even last ten years.

The Brantford Bus Terminal

The Brantford City Council now wants to build a new bus terminal downtown at a cost of over four million dollars even though the current bus terminal is less than ten years old. Councilor Littell has even gone as far as labeling this building old. Maybe to a six year old but certainly not when compared to most other buildings in this city. I don't know where Mr. Littell lives but maybe he moves constantly so that he is always able to live in a new house. How many people could afford to rip down their residence and replace it every ten years? And it shouldn't be necessary.

It also has been suggested that this building was poorly constructed and is now in poor shape. Well if this is true, can we not go after the contractor for doing such a shoddy job? And where were the city building inspectors? Shouldn't they be even more vigilant when taxpayers money is involved? If they do this poor of an inspection job on a public building imaging what it's like for private construction projects. I hope that they all have been or are soon to be fired. Obviously they must be incompetent if they allowed such poor workmanship to be approved. And what about the Councilors themselves? They are the ones who approved the design and selected the winning bid. Did none of them ever go to check on this building during construction? And many of these same people are still on Council and expect us to trust them on the rebuilding of the south side of Colborne St. Really? Unbelievable how this Council can come up with ways to squander taxpayers money especially when it involves the downtown.

Brantford Property Taxes

Brantford property taxes have been set for this year with a 3.4% increase. This is well above the rate of inflation and way more than the 2.5% increase in the Canada Pension Plan benefits for 2009. Once again seniors are falling further behind because of City Council's lavish spending ways. It is too bad that no one on Council considers the seniors or those other on fixed income. City taxpayers are seen as a never ending source of money by this Council. And this at a time when Canada is in a recession if not the start of a depression.

And in reality the increase is far greater than this 3.4% as the average home owner has seen their property assessment increase by at least 5% for this year meaning that the actual increase is closer to 9%. Why does Council not take this assessment increase into consideration when setting the new tax rate? Homeowners should really be seeing a decrease in the tax rate not an increase. And we all know that the windfall that will result will not be returned to the taxpayer or used to reduce taxes next year but will be used on some new hair-brained scheme of this Council like the huge cost of expropriating those buildings on Colborne St.

It's time that the whole property tax system was revised. Because of reduced incomes and greater deductions to help them cope, both Federal and and Provincial Income Taxes are reduced as a person becomes a senior. Not so with property taxes. No matter how much a senior's income decreases they must cut corners to pay the ever rising property taxes. Many seniors pay far more in municipal property taxes than their combined total of Federal and Provincial Income Taxes. Does that seem right? Maybe a municipal income tax is now the way to go.

Another option might be for a standardized tax rate for every property in the City regardless of the assessed value. Every house would pay the same amount. Not sure if this would increase or decrease the average tax bill but might be fairer too. After all why should one household pay more for the same services than any other household? The owners $400,000 house don't get any more fire or police protection or snow plowing etc. than the owners of a $100,000 house do. And under this plan some accommodation could be made for seniors as well.

Whatever is done City property taxes must be held to reasonable rates not these wild spending increases or soon more and more people especially seniors will be force out of their longtime homes thanks to this inept and uncaring council.

More Downtown Madness

The Brantford City Council, in it's infinite wisdom, has voted six to five to go ahead with the expropriation of a number of buildings on the south side of Colborne St. for some unstated use.

I have a number of problems with this. First if it is such a good idea why was it done in such a rush without proper time for consultation with the public. It is announced (or leaked) at the end of last week then all three readings of the bylaw are rushed through on Monday night after an hour's discussion. Some show of democracy.

And I have a real problem with this whole expropriation thing. There has been no plans shown for what these buildings (or more likely the land they sit on) are to be used for. But the suggestion is that some will be sold or given to the University or the Y for the construction of sports facilities. Expropriation is a powerful tool and should not be used lightly. And it should not be used by the City to acquire properties for third parties. What if someone wanted your property and you didn't want to sell it to them or couldn't agree on a price, is it then okay for the City to expropriate your property for them? I think not. This mass expropriation also opens a can of worms where ongoing native land claims are involved. If one of these claims is successful could not the natives demand that the Provincial of Federal Government expropriate the disputed land to satisfy their demands? The City would have lost any moral right to oppose such a move.

And really why are spending any more money on the downtown? The old downtown is dead and gone years ago. It's never coming back. Council should deal with this fact and move on. Retail and other businesses and consumers have moved to either King George Rd or the Lynden Rd. area. Make this the new downtown focus and you have a thriving area. We have seen over the years what a complete failure successive councils have been with their schemes for the old downtown area. From the closing of Market St., to the Eaton's /Market square, to the acquiring of the former strip club, to the bus terminal that needs replacing after less than ten year of it's existence and even to new businesses on the Harmony Square that have failed already. And according to certain Councilors the way to preserve the downtown is to destroy this strip of buildings. Hello! Does this make any sense at all?

And how realistic is the cost estimates? Less than $12 million? Very doubtful. Expropriation can be a slow and costly process with huge legal fees. And at a time when the average taxpayer has seen the value of their houses go down and is faced with an over 8% property tax increase for this year (yes, 8%, more the 3% in an actual tax increase which is on top of an average 5% increase in assessed value). The Council seems happy to do the bidding of developers and the University while ignoring the plight of the taxpayer. The only thing expected from the taxpayer is to pay and pay and pay for these pipe dreams. There has been more money spent per square inch in the downtown over the years than on any other part of the City. And with little to show for it. It's time to concentrate on other problems in Brantford like the overcrowding of the hospital's emergency room, the lack of doctors, crumbling infrastructure, lack of long term care facilities for seniors, growing crime rates, the list goes on and on of thing that should be the top priorities for this Council rather than Colborne St. Things where extra money should be spent and real results could be produced.

Get your heads out of the downtown sand Council and scrap this plan. Is the next election really still almost a years and a half away?