NEWS

HOW TO HUMILIATE AND INTIMDATE A MEMBER:

Publish the details of  the financial settlement between the co-op and a current member


THE RATIONALE:

To instill fear in members that this could happen to YOU


THE PURPOSE:

Pure and unrelenting retaliation


THE OUTCOME:

Yet to be determined


Such was the newsletter distributed by our Property Manager.

SECOND READING

Attached to the Agenda for our January, 2013 All Members Meeting was the following resolution:

We resolve that:  The minimum housing charge for members receiving a subsidy in Phase 1 shall be set at the maximum shelter allowance for Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Supplement* Program (ODSP).

The backgrounder for the resolution in part states:

In April 2012, the mortgage was renewed and the co-op was required to pay less towards their mortgage for Phase 1.  Therefore, the Co-op is receiving less money for subsidies.

This is a repeat performance.  Here is an extract from a Confirmation of Assistance letter sent to us by our Office Co-ordinator in 1996:

Due to the economic situation, social cuts and the co-op's mortgage renewal for April 1, 1996 the co-op has a very limited number of dollars for subsidy in Phase 1.  According to CMHC, Rent Geared to Income is to be based on 28% of gross monthly income and for Social Assistance, maximum component based on family size.

In 1996 I was Chairperson of the Maintenance Committee.  Our maintenance budget at that time was $78,410.  Our Capital Reserves were well over $100,000.  The co-op was financially sound. The reason why members on Social Assistance were ordered to pay maximum shelter costs was because of interference by the same woman who phoned me about our 'overhoused' cat.  And everyone knew it.

The spiel worked then and is working now - seventeen years later.  Getting the Provincial Government to pick up the tab for subsidized members on Social Assistance allows the co-op to give extremely  large subsidies to a favoured few in return, of course, for their support come election time.

*Support

Cat Tales

We moved into this co-op in mid-December after having been on the waiting list for four years.  The weather was bone-chillingly cold.  I remember wearing my coat in our very drafty livingroom and having the flu over Christmas, but nothing stands out more in my memory than the phone call I received shortly after move in:

Hi, my name is ___.  I live across from you. I notice that you have two cats.

(She saw our indoor mother and daughter Siamese cats through our patio doors)

Yes, we have two cats.

Can you tell me how this happened?

We just moved in.

It must be the Office Co-ordinator's fault, right?

Nope, she had nothing to do with it.  We just MOVED in!

This is a one-pet co-op. You will have to write a letter to the Board of Directors telling them that you have two cats and wait for their decision.

OK, I'll do that.

I wrote the Board of Directors telling them about the phone call and the instructions given to me by the member who saw my cats through her kitchen window. 

A week or so later, the President of the co-op, who was driving by me, rolled down his window and told me to just ignore the whole thing, which I did.

Our co-op had a Welcoming Committee at that time.  We received a visit from them at a later date, but in the true spirit of co-operative living, we received our initiation the day we received that phone call.

BILL 65/BILL 14

On May 29, 2012, the Neighbourhood Legal Services clinic published the following article:

http://www.nlstoronto.org/3/post/2012/05/co-operative-housing-reform-the-worst-of-both-worlds.html 

I summed up this on-coming legislation in my blog post Evictions - Part II dated February 15, 2009 and again in Inequities, dated January 20, 2011 as 'turnstile evictions'.

There is a rationale behind my blogs, albeit a frustrating one. There is nowhere for members to turn to for help, so I write. Our community legal clinic won't represent members, because co-ops are supposedly democratic entities and any problems incurred should, therefore, be dealt with by our Boards of Directors. Legal Aid only funds criminal, immigration and family law - no civil suits. With new eviction legislation coming on stream in the co-op sector, members' rights will be non-existent. I've coined this 'Turnstile Evictions' - it will just be a case of rubber stamping eviction notices. No need for appeals by members, no costly legal suits for co-ops to contend with. When I write my blog, I use my own personal experiences, but in essence, my blog also conveys what other people are going through in this co-op.

Bill 65 seems to have transformed itself into Bill 14 under the new session of Parliament.  This CHF link gives an update on the proposed legislation.

http://www.chfcanada.coop/eng/pages2007/ontnews.asp?id=977 

With this legislation, a co-op could create fictitious arrears, have a Property Manager march on down to the Landlord Tenant Board, manned by CHF employees and get an eviction notice rubber stamped before noon on a Monday morning and the pesky member in question would be eliminated, no questions asked.  The only remaining residue of the offending member would be an empty unit, which the remaining members may or not even notice.