While A. Meiusi has done considerable digging into the complicated transaction regarding the fuutre of Estonian House, in this article he definitely leaves the impression that the architecture firm of Tampold and Wells and its principles broke the law in designing student residences in the 1970's. Meieusi has provided a click (4) to access a Ontario Association of Architects ruling of a complaint brought against the Tampold and Wells team at the time.
Quotes from page two: "In dealing with the question of penalty the Board (Ont. Assoc. of Archs.) finds that there was no evidence at all of dishonesty in terms of personal gain by Tampold or Wells." "Accordingly we impose no penalty by way of suspension or cancellation with respect to the findings of misconduct related to the charge contained in paragraph 4(b)."

"20-25 financially qualified Estonian-Canadians are being solicited and interviewed as part of a "capital" campaign to gauge their funding and donation interests;"

Folks, I think we just found the money to revamp and rebuild the present Estonian House.

This is what the Future of Estonian House capital campaign is for, isn't it? For the future house, no matter where it stands.

What needs not to be glossed over is the overhanded approach that Allan Meiusi, at perhaps too great length, but supported by valid documents, was taken by the TC founders. Eestlus was, it seems, secondary to monetary gain and ego. This continued until new possibilities arose.

This observation was true when Tampõld orchestrated the union of the two Toronto esto papers. Both had considered that approach in the 80's, but certain shareholders on both sides were against the idea, well after the deal was almost almost signed. The merger was scuttled. The last years of the 20th century saw Tampõld, with the hope of uniting two financially struggling papers,subscriptions dropping, use his business acumen to midwife the birth of Eesti Elu.

Not to the satisfaction of all. The businesspeople - Tampõld, and some, but not all shareholders of the two papers, were satisfied. Tartu got the newspaper under its roof - and not so curiously, Eesti Maja, where one paper was located - began its slow demise. (Thanks greatly to the inaction of various EM Boards of Directors). Hearsay was that Tampõld used serious pressure, bordering on questionable to bring about the merger.

Readers were disappointed, for EE was not VE or ME, but something else all together. Not an issue, as change is a sign of growth. But subscription remains a worry, thanks to ET's choice of providing content free on the internet. Poor business model.

When ET gained income from the part that now houses TC offices, the newspaper, as well as from the basement level rentals, that is business. But not necessarily patriotic, depriving EM of rental income.

Wells and ET hiding behind their wives as directors of the business entity owning this space is also questionable morally, while perhaps considered as standard business practice. ET is no longer here to explain or defend, but his son-in-law, conveniently parachuted into the TC presidential chair, (very little, if any, community involvement before that from him - how did he qualify if not other than by nepotism?) certainly was avoiding the truth at the January 31 meeting at EM.

Incredible powers of persuasion (while avoiding moral suasion, solely financial suasion) were brought to the table with the newspaper merger. The present case of the Madison Project is seeing even less transparency, avoiding the truth, skirting by-laws, rigging votes. Hearsay has it the meeskoor was not happy in April that their votes were not directed as they had publicly wished at their own meeting before that of the EM.

And Et must be smiling - it is no secre, that he hoped to have the ECU one day at TC. It may just be in the Buddhist building, but a victory for the visionary in any case.

It remains to be seen if the vision is fair, and considers all, rather than the 3 orgs. TC, the land, and the ET fiefdom was the magnet, but its own precarious financial position - having to borrow from many lenders because reserves needed for renovations were used up - has not been publicly addressed. (Had income from the UofT medical clinic, located where the TC office and EE are now, space leased first to ET for $1, income from subleases all his, gone to TC, then that finacial constraint would not have happened, TC would be mortgage free, as opposed to $8 million in the hole.)

Sadly, come what may, too much of this cannot be proven, allegations remain that, it is the tenor of the times. But one concrete fact exists - our community is riven, divided, perhaps not exactly in half, but in numbers significant enough to question the promise made of a prosperous, vibrant future. A slow splintered death seems much more likely.

To inform or what?
If Meiusi wished to inform our community, he wouldn't use ambiguous language to stretch his message to the point where our attention span is challenged; all the while, alluding to the lack of competence and integrity among those trying to construct a new Estonian community centre.

#4 Page 3 "It is our view that the finding we have made of professional misconduct with respect to the conflict of interest is in itself a considerable penalty to a professional architect. We are of the opinion that in the specific circumstances in this case the public interest would not be further served by suspending or cancelling the membership of Tampold or Wells by reason of their misconduct in this respect." Not guilty?

Time to find an architect. I would like local-guy-gone-to-Estonia-and-made-good architect Lembit Tork to redesign a modern Estonian House on the present location -- gut where necessary, build storeys (2?) on top too. He's done commercial buildings and the guy's got heart.

See his work here: https://www.google.ca/search?c...

As the article states, the Tuleviku Komitee Capital Campaign will be soliciting roughly 25 well-to-do Estonians to raise major cash to fund the future house.

I just looked up the "Develper's Guide" outlining requirements for developments adjacent or connecting to TTC Structures or Right-of-way"
My first reaction was "How much that would cost?
One part explains if Development is with in 60 meters of TTC structures or Right of Ways.
Drawing of site plan with reference line of the TTC structure or Right of way.
Architectural drawings,structural drawings, foundation drawings.
Then, (summarizing)
Fire protection requirements, Study indicating the air in-take/discharge (12 meters away from entrances, exits, and emergency ventilation and exhaust vents for high temperature smoke in event of a fire.)
Next, a geo-technical investigation
Also, a impact report from a consultant to show the impact of development on TTC structures.
Acknowledgement tht noice, vibration, and electro-magnecitc interference and atmospheric emission from TTC's operation have been considered in the design
finally, Electrolysis study and stray current study.
Can you confirm that you have done all the studies... since you seem to have the Esto House Buyer... and please share the costs of those studies.
I think keeping the current Estonian House will be much more cost effective.
Please note... I will be calling the TTC om Monday to confirm that they have been in talks with your "consultants"
Finally, this is NOT the whole list of requirements... just a few.

So, the board indicated that when the 2 board members stepped down, the next day they contacted the next people (sing the list of how many votes everyone received). Strange that one person declined on the same day of being asked... and a week has gone by and I have not Heard from anyone on the board.
Is this how you operate... skipping past the rules and guidelines?
Not the best way to gain trust from the community that you are following the rules.

I am one of the few people who use my real name when I write comments online as to opposed to you who do not use your own name... though you might not have realized it your IP address was used to promote Lembit Tork (my friend) to design the changes to the Estonian House.. thus if we both agree that we want to keep the current Estonian House.. What are you asking of me... it really is NOT clear to me at all.

The EHB has been in contact with the next person in line to step onto the Board and discussions are underway. The second individual has declined and the third in line has not been contacted. As for the EHB...it would appear that they are in no hurry to fill any of open positions. If you have any questions regarding this, I suggest you contact EHB to discuss. Linda

Just as Maxim de la Trine decided to leave us in peace, Allan Asol Meisi stepped in to fill the void.
What have we done to deserve this?
To evade this scourge, EWR should only accept comments in Estonian, a language he doesn't know.

Whether we have the resources to speak responsibly of any special commitment to this instead of that, of the particular, of a source, in short, about the good of a place (Canada/Eesti Maja): that is what George Grant questioned. The author's reference to his Lament for a Nation is apt.

"The goal of modern moral striving . . . leads back to a trust in the expansion of the very technology we are attempting to judge. The unfolding of modern society has not only required criticism of all older standards of human excellence, but has also at its heart that trust in overcoming chance which leads us back to judge every human situation as being solvable in terms of technology" (GG, Technology and Empire).

Chance has it that the EHB has not met the requirements of the Resolution for which it sought approval last year. Shareholders must now seek the necessarily particular analysis involved in a true resolution of the problem of renewal for Estonian House.

Just found the actual original Estonian House share document in my files. It made me cry. My father purchased one share for my two brothers and myself. For him this was making sure we were part of the Estonian Community.

If the board has its way...my share will no longer exist. Going to Madison means finding a way to eliminate my family's shares (all shares) we share holders OWN the Estonian House. The board is there to take care of OUR asset.

The board needs to keep the structure when they purchase the land at Madison for tax reasons. Once completed, then they will make our shares go away... thus they are not only selling the Estonian House, they are robbing anyone who purchased a share of their rights.

I wonder with the bank having shares that were valued at 50.00 each how do they take that loss... or do they? The bank is funding the move... in terms of lending the Estonian House funds for the due diligence. So is there a side deal to ensure the Estonian Bank - our community bank - somehow gets the funds out of the proceeds? I cannot imagine a BANK being OK with losing the shares that were valued at $50.00. What am I missing here. I lose my shares... and the bank is OK with the loss of their shares? Not very responsible behavior for a financial entity if you ask me