A church which has stood on the main street of Picton, Ontario for over 130 years is about to be torn down. An attempt by the local Heritage Advisory Committee to designate it as a historical structure – which it most definitely is – failed when local councillors lacked the spine to stand up to a two-bit lawyer hired by the property owners. Or maybe, they’re just corrupt and morally bankrupt? Of course, since they’re politicians, that could be a redundant statement.
A local paper, the County Weekly News, wrote an article about the situation. It doesn’t come off as objective reporting… it sounds like it was written by the building owner’s sister, trying to sound objective while painfully obviously omitting the viewpoint of those opposed to the demolition. CountyLive.ca, a new local news outlet which is based on the web, wrote an article in support of the church in late July, but then made it disappear. I’ve provided a capture of the cached page from Google below.
The entire situation reeks of corruption and graft, extending even to the local media.
I thought that in addition to the removed supportive article from CountyLive, I should also excerpt and translate the article from the Weekly News, as it seems to need some clarification.
The news article begins:
After exhausting all avenues for creating income, the owners of the former Methodist Episcopal Church on Main Street, Picton, will tear it down.
Translation:
Some people bought a historical property a few years back, but didn’t have a viable business plan for it. Because they lack both imagination and the will to do so, they couldn’t make any money. Because they lack the intelligence to use the property to generate any kind of income, they will blame the structure for their problems and destroy it.
County Weekly News Article:
An eleventh-hour attempt by the Prince Edward County Heritage Advisory Committee to have the building designated of significance failed. Senior Planner Ryan Leary said that although the Ontario Heritage Act does allow for a building to be designated heritage without the owner’s permission, “It has not been the habit of this municipality to do so.”
Translation:
We would only have the guts to interfere if the public would obviously be on our side right away. If Wal-Mart wanted to tear down this church, we’d be all over it like white on rice, but HOLY SHIT, THESE WOMEN GOT A LAWYER, PLUS ONE OF THEM IS LIKE, A LITTLE OLD LADY OR SOMETHING AND SOMEONE MIGHT FEEL SORRY FOR THEM.
Article:
Lawyer Tony Fleming, retained by the former church’s owners Edith and Janina Jenkins, told council the Jenkins’ oppose the intent to designate. The Jenkins’ operated a flea market out of the building, but now it is not feasible, he said.
“The structure is at the end of its’ (sic) useful life,” said Fleming. “It is costly and impractical. The owners have no economically viable use for the building and to designate the structure would be unfair.”
He noted that when the Jenkins’ bought the church, it was not under a heritage designation, and if council did designate it “The County should be prepared to purchase the church at a fair market value.”
When asked by Coun. Barry Turpin what the owners planned to do with the property in the future, Fleming said that beyond having applied for a demolition permit, he did not know what their future plans were.
Translation:
I was hired by my clients to try to garner pity for their very poor decision making skills and outrageously shortsighted and pathetic business talents. They thought they could purchase a cool, historical building and make money running a flea market without considering the fact that it is located in a town of only 4000 people and had no hope of success. Their entire concept was based on the idea that this wonderful, distinctive building would draw in people like flies, and they’d be making more money than they’d know what to do with. My clients shouldn’t have to suffer for their own stupidity; someone else should have to pay because they bought a pig in a poke and now can’t get enough out of it to satisfy their greed. And don’t you dare go trying to go all Eminent Domain on their ass and try and expropriate the property, because I WILL CUT A… I mean, I’ll see you in court.
I’m not allowed to tell you that my clients think selling the vacant lot to a large, corporate enterprise like Applebees or Old Navy will net them a boatload of cash, so I’ll just claim I don’t know anything about what their plans are.
The property co-owners viewpoint in the article:
“We’ve exhausted every option,” said Edith Jenkins. “We cannot comply with handicapped access regulations. We’ve fixed the steeple three times and it still leaks. It’s been on the market for two years and has not sold.”
Janina Jenkins added that the heritage committee had never once visited the church or spoken to her or her mother.
“They gave us no notice they wanted to save the building. We only found out by reading the local newspapers,” she said.
“We’ve given a demolition contractor a $10000 retainer, and he can’t wait too long. He has other projects to do,” said Edith Jenkins. “To force us to keep this building is asinine.”
Translation:
We can’t think of anything else to do but have a flea market, mostly because those other things would cost actual money to start up. We can’t think of any way to create handicapped access for under a hundred bucks, so we couldn’t possibly comply with those regulations – it’s IMPOSSIBLE! We’ve tried to do a cheap-ass repair on the steeple several times because we’re not willing to actually invest the funds to do it properly, and we’re astounded that duct tape and caulk hasn’t solved the problem. We’ve been trying to sell it at an inflated price for 2 years, and because we can’t get exactly what we’re demanding we’ve turned away every offer.
We were hoping if we threatened to tear it down, the county would be forced to purchase the church at the price we demanded due to the public outcry, and then we’d be able to make some money on the deal. We fully believe in free markets and freedom of property owners when it is in our best interest, but if we can extort what we think we deserve for owning this former church for a few years from the local government, we’re OK with that.
The heritage committee should have just told us that a building from 1875 was a historical building! We could NEVER have known that! NO ONE TOLD US, and we’re far to idiotic to figure it out ourselves!
Also, to demonstrate the same astute decision-making skills we showed in buying the place to make a flea market in the first place, we gave a demolition contractor ten grand before we had a permit to demolish the property. We already paid the guy! It’s not fair if you won’t let us demolish the property! If you stop us, I’m going to hold my breath until you let this go ahead. NANANANANA not listening to you any more, holding my breath, holding my breath!
Councillors speak:
Coun. Kevin Gale said the owners should be free to proceed with the demolition.
“If a group is stopping property owners from doing something to their own buildings, they should be buying the building,” said. (sic)
Coun. Dianne O’Brien agreed that to stop the demolition at this point “would be wrong.”
Coun. Laverne Bailey agreed, saying, “The heritage committee has had ample opportunity to designate the building, I hate to see the church come down, but it is ludicrous to hold these people up.
Translation:
I, Kevin Gale, as a real estate agent, cannot oppose people doing whatever they want with the property they purchase, because that may make me look bad to future customers interested in purchasing property. I support the right of anyone to do whatever they want to the property they own, no matter what the public or historical interest might be, because to do otherwise might impact my future sales income.
I, Dianne O’Brien, feel that when people make very poor financial investments, we as a community should simply let them do anything they want to recoup their funds and allow them to avoid personal responsibility for their mistakes. As a matter of fact, I feel so bad about the situation, I’m writing these women a cheque right now, just for being so dumb. Do I submit this receipt to the county clerk, or the treasurer?
I, Laverne Bailey, agree that it is completely unfair that these women should have to suffer financially because of their own lack of sense. I once bought the Brooklyn Bridge AND some Florida swampland, and I was in no way responsible for checking on those things before I sent my money, so these women should not be held responsible, either. I mean, how could they POSSIBLY know that something from the 19th century would have historical value?
The article goes on to quote a councillor who opposed to demolition, making it sound like she supported it, and stated that the owners agreed to “do something with some element of the building” to provide a tribute to the church. I’m sure that’ll happen when they’ve sold it to someone building a new Dollarama.
I am disgusted by the entire situation. Some intellectually stunted, greedy people are destroying a piece of history, and have somehow managed to actually get the majority of the area council to feel guilty enough to just rubber-stamp their request. In the upcoming election, I will not vote for anyone who supported the demolition, nor will I ever use their businesses or services again.
I’m going to go vomit now.
__________________________
Below is the retracted/unpublished article from CountyLive. You may click to make it larger.
