Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Filling In Some Blanks":
Anne Bartley Smith, wife of the late Matthew Smith, a well known developer in the area, refused all attempts to have her property developed.
Further to this point, the Town's outside lawyer, Ms. Kimberly Morris, advised that development of the property would have been problematic for the Town, given that it was held in trust for the benefit of the people of Ontario by the OHF.
The OHF's mandate was to acquire properties of significance for protection. They acquired the whole of HighTor and gave the estate a charitable donation receipt in the amount of approximately $10 million dollars.
Everything indicated that this property was best left undeveloped. The fact that Mayor Jones, Councilor West, Bill Hogg and others decided to advance the development of HighTor with the knowledge of the history of this property is beyond comprehension.
You see, it wasn't about the traffic at all. It was about respecting the will of a generous woman and her final wishes.
***********************
The comment above produces answers and arguments. Thank You.
My understanding of the situation is different.
Since property development applications are made by property owners.It's not clear what attempts might have been refused by the late owner of High Tor Farm.
The late Ann Bartley Smith supported several different charities.
Transferring title to Ontario Heritage for $10 million allowed her to allocate the proceeds between them.
I asked Ontario Heritage about the figure. She wouldn't tell .
A tax benefit of $10 million illustrates better than anything I can say and have said in the past, that title transfer to the Heritage Foundation is not " a generous donation" to the community.
It is a business transaction to the benefit of both parties.
The municipality cannot provide income tax receipts We do not collect a tax on income. .
If the land could have been transferred to Aurora through the same arrangement, it would have. It is now in the ownership of a provincial agency who have shown no willingness to allow community use or any other use of the property.
Note that the beautiful home on the property has had to be demolished because of abandonment.
Ontario Heritage has the right to sell the land. They are the legal owners.
There is no moral stricture. The land is not donated in trust.
The argument offered in the comment has a false premise. The argument is contrived.
Capital Gains tax would also have been avoided as well as income tax.
In the circumstances it is unlikely a competent town solicitor gave the advice referred to about development being "problematic".
Ontario Heritage needed the resources from the sale of land for development.
They would have benefited. As would the town ,in receiving ownership of the remainder of the property and increased assessment from new homes.
Sheppard's Bush was transferred to Ontario Heritage years earlier in a similar arrangement.
The owner approached the town first and learned we could not exchange market value of the land in tax relief.
The town advised how to go about obtaining the tax advantage.
Ontario Heritage had no resources then either to take care of the property.
They put it in the hands of Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority. They didn't have staff resources either.
So guess who takes care of Sheppard's Bush.
We do.
But at least, in return, we have use of the fields and trails through the property.
It's good to know the farm is enjoyed by Aurora families.
It is clear now why the last Council, including former Councillor Mac Eachern, sought a one-sided agreement for the Town to take responsibility for maintenance of the property with nothing in return.
Development apparently is not all that's unwelcome. Residents who have discovered the amenity are threatened with having their cars "keyed"
No comments:
Post a Comment