The fight to save a Thornhill neighbourhood is picking up steam.
At their national conference, earlier this month, the Co-op Housing Federation of Canada unanimously passed a motion in support of Thornhill Green’s fight to remain as a co-op rather than a project of Housing York.
The strongly-worded motion condemned the region’s attempt at a forced takeover, as well as what they described as the hurried, secretive legal process used to that end.
The co-op’s plight drew spontaneous donations, some as high as $1,000, from people across the country according to the federation’s Ontario region manager of government relations, Harvey Cooper.
“You are not alone in this struggle,” he told a gathering of residents last week.
“There is no question in anyone’s mind that (the region) has overstepped the bounds of any reasonable authority with their attempt to abolish Thornhill Green co-operative homes,” Mr. Cooper said, calling the region’s actions “draconian.”
The federation views the region’s move as an attack on co-ops across the country.
“We were very shocked... this is so precedent setting. We know of no other situation where a co-op has been taken over, involuntary, by a public housing body,” federation manager of co-op services Diane Miles said.
Forty of the co-op’s units are subsidized housing and the federation argues the region failed to provide adequate funding, putting a strain on the co-op’s finances.
However, the region says it has acted within the rules.
“The funding formulas are complex. The region has provided subsidy to this housing community... in accordance with the Social Housing Reform Act,” the region’s director of housing, Sylvia Patterson said.
As for the federation’s claims the region voted to place the co-op in receivership before the legal deadline residents were given to respond, Ms Patterson said it is a matter before the courts upon which she cannot comment.
While residents implored local politicians to hear their side of the story, Markham Councillor Valerie Burke said she does not have the authority to interfere with a matter that is regional in scope and before the courts.
“As a ward councillor, it’s frustrating for me because it’s between the co-op and the region,” she said. “I do care very deeply about the situation (and) want the best outcome.”
In 2006, the region placed the self-managed 101-townhome development in receivership, citing financial and other problems. Last month, board members received a notice that the region was purchasing the development from the receivers, Mintz and Partners.
“Our goal is to stabilize the property as a social housing project,” Ms Patterson said.
That is proving little consolation to residents who once ran their own affairs and expected to have their neighbourhood returned to them. Last week, they gathered at Heintzman House to discuss their strategy as they take their fight to the courts.
“We have very deep roots as a community here,” said Jim Common, one of those who has lead the
fight against the takeover.
While some residents moved in a few months ago, many at the meeting had been there a decade or longer, some as long as 40 years.
“The co-op is more than a ledger sheet... we have a community and they can’t take that part away,” Carolyn Steele said.
Ms Steele’s mother has lived in the community for 38 years and she has lived there, on and off, for most of her life.
On July 18, the court hears the region’s motion to purchase the property, but residents are countering it with two motions of their own. One is to move the case out to the divisional court from the list court, which expeditiously deals with bankruptcy matters.
A cross-motion asks the court to discharge the receiver, Mintz & Partners. If granted, the co-op would be back in the hands of its residents sooner rather than later.
“Time is short and there’s lots of work to do,” Ms Miles said.
“We’ve got a long fight to go,” Mr. Common said.
TIMELINE
1966 - Thornhill Green founded as a private townhome development.
1991 - Residents vote to create a co-operative housing venture, in which they manage the property together. As part of a funding deal with the province, 40 of the units are subsidized, rent-geared-to-income.
2000 - The provincial government downloads social housing to municipalities. According the co-op federation, because of quirks in the funding formula, Thornhill Green has a “negative subsidy,” meaning that while they budget each year as if they receive money from the region, they get nothing for five years.
2004 - Thornhill Green’s board requests funding from York Region for capital repairs. The region counters that the governance structure of the co-op needs to change.
March 29, 2006 - The board is notified it has until May 11 to respond to a motion by the region to place the co-op temporarily in receivership.
April 27, 2006 - Before the deadline, York Region votes to place the co-op in receivership and asks the courts to hand administration to Mintz & Partners, along with a $2.1 million loan for repairs.
Feb. 13, 2008 - The region’s housing committee makes a behind-closed-doors decision to review a staff report about purchasing the property. It is approved by regional council, again in camera, eight days later.
May 16, 2008 - On the Friday before the Victoria Day weekend, board members receive a 426-page court document, alerting them they have until May 29 to respond to a motion for Housing York to purchase Thornhill Green from Mintz and Partners for $8.9 million; approximately one-third of its value, residents say.
May 29, 2008 - Justice Colin Campbell grants two weeks for Thornhill Green, now working with the Co-Op Housing Federation of Canada, to respond to the motion.
June 11, 2008 - Thornhill Green responds, filing an affidavit disputing that the co-op was financially unsound. They ask the judge to move the case to divisional court for a proper hearing and ask for the initial receivership to be quashed.
July 18, 2008 - Hearing date at which lawyers argue their cases before the judge.