City of Brantford Council officially came to a decision about a collection of city-owned market-rent homes during its regular City Council meeting on Tuesday, August 27, 2024.
The resolution in question initially called to sell off around 25 homes located in the Park Road South and Lynnwood Drive area that were originally purchased by the City as part of its plan to build the Brantford Southern Access Road (BSAR).
As the BSAR has since been cancelled, the City was looking to sell the homes over the course of the next two to three years, and put the funds from the sales into a reserve to help build more affordable housing in the near future.
Several residents attended the Council meeting on Tuesday, June 25 to express their concerns after they received a letter from the City at the beginning of June asking them to let housing staff know by Thursday, July 3, 2024, if they had any intention or interest in buying their rental property.
The decision on the matter was then deferred until the August 27 Council meeting in order to allow Ward councillors to meet with the tenants and advocate on their behalf.
During last night’s meeting, five delegations came forward to explain more about the community in the surrounding area.
Many spoke about being loyal long-term tenants who have put their own time and money into fixing and caring for their rental properties, the bond between those living in the neighbourhood and the support they’ve given each other over the years, and the repercussions of displacing 25 to 30 individuals and families who are currently living in the homes.
Stephen Larkin, who has lived in his unit since 2010, gave councillors a virtual walk around the neighbourhood, highlighting through pictures, how the local residents have become a family.
From soccer and house-to-house golf tournaments to playing yard games together, Sunday fun-days, weddings, group vacations and more, Larkin said they were more than just neighbours.
He said that the tenants have been dealing with high amounts of stress since the news about the potential upcoming sales has came out.
“Some tenants, to this day, are in a state of shock and the feelings of being bullied, betrayed, worthless and surplus, are still abound,” he said. “We have been subjected to high levels of unnecessary stress and anxiety, and some have had additional issues with health during this period. It is still difficult to comprehend why we are being treated this way.”
Later, Sean Hauk approached the councillors to speak about his parents, who moved into their unit in an effort to downsize after their sons had moved out on their own, and the work they had done to improve, what they initially referred to as the “goat barn.”
Together, the family cleaned the unit from top to bottom, filled the holes in the walls, painted, cleaned out the yard, and replaced corroded faucets.
“My father and my mother, with our help, turned what was four walls and a roof into a home,” he said. “Originally, the ‘goat barn’ was going to be temporary, but then, as the market spiraled more and more out of control, my father and mother decided to extend their time there.”
With the hopes of buying the unit at a reasonable price down the road, the family continued to make more improvements when Hauk moved home to save his own money.
“During those few years, I helped my father with various projects on the house, including adding wider downpipes, cleaning out the gutters, putting a garden in the backyard, and building up the landscaping around the house. When our basement had a small flood, we even put in a masseter toilet in the basement and a sink,” he said. “My father used to lug AC units from the basement and install them in the windows every spring, and after I left, it was becoming more and more difficult. They discussed it and decided that they would put in central air and when they asked the people in charge, they were given the green light. They figured if they could buy the ‘goat barn’ someday, they would enjoy the things they had improved.”
Speaking about how his parents recently got an appraisal on the house, Hauk said he was shocked at the $580,000 price tag that came out of it.
“I couldn’t believe it and so I asked my realtor at the time to do his own appraisal and he came back with a lower figure so he doesn’t know how this person came up with this amount,” said Hauk. “Look, these are nice houses, but they are not ‘turnkey,’ as the saying goes. This is $200,000 more than what I’m paying for my three bedroom, two bath house that has AC and is not on a septic system in Eagle Place. So what’s the difference between my house and the houses in Echo Place? Could it be the neighbourhood? And what makes the neighborhood? People. Wonderful people like Bob, who is always happy to give you a wave, people like our neighbours who we could go and play cards with and the neighbourhood barbecues. That’s what makes a neighbourhood. That’s what makes a community. These 30 families have become woven into the tapestry that is the community of Echo Place, and removing them would leave a hole.”
Bob and Carol Lee White also spoke about how they couldn’t afford another place with two people on a retirement income.
“When we first moved into the house, we were told that the house was appropriated for well under $100,000. Now, over 37 years, we’ve paid almost two and a half times what your purchase price was in rent,” said Bob. “Here we are in the final years of our lives, and we are now finally given the first right of refusal to purchase the house, but at today’s market value. Where is a 73 year old and a 72 year old couple going to get a mortgage on a retirement income. How many couples in their final years of life would even want to take on the burden of owning their own house?”
Later, Councillor Richard Carpenter moved the following amendment to the original resolution.
“THAT Item 14.1 BE AMENDED by:
1. Substituting Clause A with the following:
A. THAT Staff proceed with disposition of all BAR properties identified through the in-camera Report 2023-619, being the “Disposition of Vacant Residential Properties Owned by the City of Brantford” as they become vacant, and to take all necessary actions to dispose of those properties including: marketing, listing, obtaining reference plans, depositing surveys, retaining external real estate agents) and signing agreements of purchase and sale; and
2. Adding the following as Clauses C,D and E:
C. THAT the sale of all listed properties can proceed without regard for section 3.3 of the Acquisition & Disposition of Interests in Lands – Corporate Policy 042.
D.THAT the Clerk be DIRECTED to present the appropriate by-law to remove the designation as a controlled access highway from all the properties purchased by the City for the Veterans Memorial Parkway (VMP) extension that are no longer required based upon the Transportation Master Plan; and
E. THAT Staff BE DIRECTED to place the net proceeds of the sales of these properties to the Affordable Housing Reserve RF0475 to be used for Affordable Housing development.”
Councillors then spoke to the amendment and while many supported it like Councillors Dan McCreary, Brian Van Tilborg, Mandy Samwell, Linda Hunt and John Sless, others were of the belief that selling the homes, while a difficult choice, would be vital in building more affordable housing for those who need it.
“I’m cautious when I’m making these decisions, and I think it’s important that we take into consideration everybody’s best interests in the City of Brantford, not only the individuals who are living in these houses, but through the community as a whole,” said Councillor Rose Sicoli. “…I choose to move us towards our goal of shrinking or eliminating our wait list for the people of Brantford requiring affordable housing. … I have to choose to accept that I may be the villain in 25 or 30 people’s stories, so that I can be the hero in 120 people’s lives. That’s just the nature of our decision making when we sit up here.”
Mayor Kevin Davis had similar sentiments, listing his reasons as to why he would not be supporting the amendment or the resolution as the City is planning to build more housing geared to those who are in desperate need, and that the City needs money to do it.
“I really appreciate what it is you built and created through your committee, but then I’ve got to think about the other residents we have in our city, and frankly, some that their need is much more desperate. ..Unlike many other cities, we’re actually building housing for those most in need,” he said. “I’m talking about those that need rent geared-to-income, those who are on welfare or ODSP, the seniors having one income, maybe at CPP, maybe it’s only OAS. We’re the only ones that are building the housing for them, and we’re struggling to find the money to do it.”
Councillor Greg Martin also moved an amendment to the amendment, adding “by the current leasee” after the words “as they become vacant.” His amendment was considered friendly and added.
The amendment was later carried on a vote of 7-4, noting that Davis, Sicoli, Councillor Gino Caputo and Councillor Greg Martin voted against it.
Before voting on the resolution as amended, Samwell said that while she understands they have to have affordable housing for the other people in the city, there must be another way to do it.
“We’ve talked a lot about the folks that are on the [affordable housing] list and the other folks that are most in need, but I want to keep us focused on the fact that the folks that are sitting in this chamber tonight are also very much in need,” she said. “They have affordable rents because they’ve been there for a length of time. I understand that we need to have affordable housing for everybody else, but I think at this point we need to look at finding another way to fund that until these homes become naturally vacant because these folks are also in need, and I don’t want to add them to the list.
After more discussions, the resolution as amended, was carried on a vote of 9-2, noting that Davis and Sicoli voted against it.
