An excellent analysis from the standpoint of the whole of the majority-minority relationship and the issue of meaningful communication for the community.
Thank you.

This sentence is key and is the reason that this project has divided our community:

Instead of just seeking to convert the undecided, community leaders should be talking to the people on the other side in order to seek consensus.

Markus outlines the Estonian dilemma perfectly. The holistic conclusion he proposes would save our community from extinction. Unless everybody in the community feels at home in an Estonian Center, whatever remains in this case is only a name without community.

Bravo, Markus!

I wholeheartedly agree. While volunteering with seniors in the Estonian community, I see their disappointment and anger of not being included in the decision making process of the future community centre. A holistic approach would have prevented much heart-ache in the community. We live in an aging society in Canada, which will be a more acute issue within the next ten to twenty years. Seniors are a vibrant part of our community, ignoring their hopes, desires and needs is a mistake.

Hr. Alliksaar has identified the key issue. Eesti Maja's originating and most senior shareholders aren't being asked to donate the proceeds of their asset in favour of a new one, they are being asked to yield over their legacy. Those thousands of people who invested whatever cash they could to buy Eesti Maja shares also invested their expertise, sweat and heartfelt efforts to create the equity we are fortunate to have. Now senior shareholders are being told to cede their equity and that dividend (that House) in order to advance a pre-determined outcome and grant "benefactor(s)," with term sheets, the unfettered ability to determine the vision of their legacy going forward.