Two major, $100,000 studies were undertaken by Ernst and Young and then Cushman Wakefield to determine the way forward. Both concluded that the community should sell EM and move.

A loan for several hundred thousand dollars was taken from the Credit Union.

A third consultant, Sierra, was brought to do a third assesment. The owner of the company, Jon Hack was acquainted with members of the EM tulevik group. He said he could deliver the Estonian community to the promised land.

An initial RFQ was put out in the commercial newspapers. Only one proposal was submitted by a group called Windmill. But that fell through.

Then the consultant found another developer, Tribute, that was going to save EM. The third consultant was fired and a fourth one was brought on. Tribute then fell through.

A third developer, Alterra, was found. Which has now also fallen through without any reasons being disclosed.

The sale of EM is now far more complicated and it's unlikely that the community will ever get the value that they would have had EM been sold 5 years ago.

Under the circumstances, Guido Laikvee's proposal, where once it seemed unattractive, now deserves consideration as a way of saving the value that has been squandered and wasted in EM. Any other reasonable proposal should merit a look as well and be compared to the Tartu College relocation initiative- which may ultimately be the only remaining way to save the community's activity space at this time.

I am a fan of fact based articles. I would suggest that the author would have first wanted to attend the Town Hall and then perhaps write to the extent that matters are still unclear. The community should attend and listen to the presentation and then arrive at their own conclusions.

Those attending today's announcement meeting should do so with an understanding of each organizations agenda, objectives and who they represent:

1) Bank ETCU
The bank has loaned Estonian House somewhere in the range of $200,000-$300,000. With revenues declining, the prospect for EM to repay the loan is unlikely. The only way that ETCU will see that loan repaid is via a sale of EM. It should be noted that a member of the ETCU board also sits on the EM tulevik board.

The bank has purchased the house directly north of the parking lot on Madison ave at the likely cost of some $2 million+ They have spent vast sums on renovations and rezoning. Due to some "misunderstandings" regarding rezoning, the property has remained vacant for two years, acting as a drain. If EM is sold, funds will be used to buy back this house from ETCU, which will allow them to recover. If EM is not sold yet the parking lot is secured, ETCU will sell the house and include part of the parking lot to liquidate this asset.
ETCU's objective will be to recover their assets and loan to EM.

ETCU represents the interests of their members not community stakeholders (as they may claim to)

2) ESK
ESK has invested in EM tulevik with community funds. They pay the rents of all organizations who use the rooms in EM. They also own strategically critical properties adjacent to EM, without which, EM's own value would be drastically reduced.
ESK looks to save money and consolidating to one location will do that.
ESK will also want to liquidate their real estate assets to recover from a poor fundraising year. ESK members and DONORS should ask why ESK is using funds intended for programming to fund consultants for the Madison project. How will ESK be repaid? Are Donor funds being used to benefit the bank and TC?

ESK represents the interests of their paid members, donors and funds they use to fund community acitivities

3) Tartu College
Tartu College's main objective is to secure the parking lot. They will benefit whether the new EM is relocated to Madison or not. If the parking lot is split with ETCU, this will increase the value of TC. If EM moves to TC the value of TC increases and VEMU will be closer to being realized. ETCU and TC are rumored to be in discussions about a permanent move for ETCU from EM to TC.

TC represents the interests of its members and board. An ETCU member also sits on the TC board.

4) Estonian House
The Estonian House is in deep financial trouble with a large mortgage owed to ETCU. Having spent hundreds of thousands on consultants through at least three known failed redevelopment deals, a decision need to be made soon. However, lack of leadership and misdirection have caused the board to fraction with one faction calling for renovations (with considerable
Funds that have been raised), while another supports a move to TC. The former core tulevik committee will try to spin ten years of repeated disappointments into a positive story.

EM has repeatedly stated that it represents ONLY the interests of its shareholders and that community stakeholders and community groups without shares (those who pay rents) have no say in the future of EM.

Is the primary purpose to create a facility that serves 60 to 90 year-olds? Certainly they dominate town halls and post a lot to EWR.

Or is the objective to build a centre that survives for the long term? Does it need to survive for just 20 years or serve multiple generations?

Can the community afford 2 centres just 6 subway stops and 4.5 km apart? Even if feasible, does it really make rational sense?

As Toronto house prices rise aren’t many families moving further out? Therefore do we even need much space on weeknights as time passes?

How long can Toronto Eesti Kool continue on weeknights no matter where? Hamilton’s brand new Eesti Kool is big and hugely successful (on Sundays). Toronto Lasteaed is also big and successful (on Saturdays).

But Toronto Eesti Kool (on Tuesday weeknights) is declining. It was on two weeknights (Mon & Tues) when more kids attended. Now it’s one weeknight despite space used by Meeskoor and Montessori.

Are long weeknight drives into town soon to become a bigger issue? Is that why many Lasteaed graduates already opt out of Eesti Kool?

Scout & Guide troops have consolidated successfully. They function on Saturdays and participation is on the rise. Traffic is lighter and more facilities are accessible throughout Toronto.

Why did the Esto House café/restaurant close? Why has nobody else seized the opportunity to lease this space? Perhaps there just isn’t enough happening at Esto House?

Why does the Pank (ETCU) pay so much rent for sub-standard space? Why does Sihtkapital (ESK) pay rent for Esto groups using Esto House?

Despite rents paid, many classrooms have been lost to Montessori. The parking lot is 15% smaller to accommodate Montessori’s play pen.

What are the real facts about Madison area parking? Most Madison opponents complain there is no nearby parking. Others suggest Green P spaces there outnumber Esto House spaces.

Must the community own every room it uses? What if usage is limited to just once per week? Or once per month? What are the current community use statistics for Suur Saal? What are community use stats for other saalid and smaller rooms? Is it true Esto groups are bumped if non-Estos pay more rent?

How much accessible and usable third-party space is near Madison? There is a big school (with classrooms) right across from TC. Perhaps they rent classrooms on Saturdays (or on weeknights)?

How big an obstacle is the current Esto House share corporation? Does this legal structure prevent making charitable donations? Does it impede reductions to property taxes? Perhaps it makes sense to change Esto House governance if warranted? Can the share corporation be dissolved if that leads to sustainability?

Addressing even some of these basic community concerns should help focus the location debate and will hopefully eliminate many of the erroneous and alternate facts currently in circulation.