Just read an interesting article in the Washington Post regarding donations and the wealthy and the power that can be derived with the simple act of a donation, which most of us at the lower level give in good faith without strings attached. You’ll notice – “no strings attached”, unlike donations we have seen lately. Notably Peter Gilgan who gives large sums of money to worthy causes but has to have his name put on the building or, NO MONEY FOR YOU.
Readers of my blog have seen where my children were put at risk by Mattamy Homes and the Town of Oakville, under the leadership of then mayor, Ann Mulvale, did nothing regarding the illegal act in order to sell the home. Nada, nothing, zip. Not even an apology. Now, Wellspring, a worthy outfit, managed to get some major funding from Mattamy at the time – funding arranged by Ann Mulvale. Did this donation have some impact on the way my complaint was handled. Only Ann and Peter know and there was a plethora of lawyers who surrounded this case and basically shut the door to my complaint. By the way, my complaint was asking that homebuyers get protection in that they could have a house inspector monitor the construction of their home. This had no financial benefit to me.
I’m not going to explain the whole article here but the link is available. The following quote kind of sums it up:
Billionaire philanthropy is powerful. It goes beyond quaint notions of “doing good.” But it is clear that we need checks and balances on this power. That’s the only way to stop good intentions from turning the United States — and the world — into a plutocracy.
When one looks at Milton and Oakville, you see the shadow of Mattamy Homes and Peter Gilgan over some of the decision-making. The guy who buses in non-residents to protest development charges that benefit the taxpayer but makes the development community pay their own way. When a developer gives money to a cause (and usually worthy causes) one wonders at the strings attached. Naming a building is but a small piece of the pie methinks.
In the U.S., they tried to pass a bill that would limit donations involving elections to $5000 in the last 21 days prior to an election. It was defeated. Remember, in the GTA, developer donations are the majority of donations. Wonder what they are in the U.S.? But, they did state that anything over $25 had to be identified.
“State law was designed to prevent attempts to secretly influence elections with large, last-minute contributions, and we’re reviewing how this decision impacts the state’s ability to prevent that,” Guthrie said.
I find it interesting just who donated to the Hudak election camp days before the Ontario election – large sums, Maximum amount. Don’t worry Mr. Gilgan, your secret is safe with me.**
So, in 2012 when you sign up to donate your $25 to a favourite charity remember, it is the thought that counts and those small donations do add up and can make a difference to those in need. But remember, you donation has no strings attached but the next time you see the big donation ask yourself. Even though the large donation from a wealthy philanthropist is a nice act, just what is it going to cost me down the road?
In my case, I think it had some impact on the Town of Oakville’s actions concerning the act that put my children at risk. Who else but Mattamy can illegally wire a furnace in order to ensure the sale of a house? Monarch, Tridel, Greenpark?
Donations to historical societies? I’ve seen developers grab historical places and then they burn down. Mattamy – at least two burned under their stewardship. I bet donations to historical societies are few and far between from developers. But then, what kind of demand would be attached to the donation.
Your Town Historical Society – PETER GILGAN MATTAMY WING???? They could use it to store pictures of what could have been.
**
| Mattamy Homes Ltd | 09/07/2011 | 09/21/2011 | 9,300.00 | 9,300.00 |
.
.
http://condron.us/index.php?i=6
condron.us
href=”http://blogitti.blogiche.com/”>Blogitti
* The above is intended to show the reader examples of how to obtain a house inspector, no matter which builder you buy from. Remember, awards and advertising are designed to make you buy, not ensure you quality. We’ve shown that awards are not the standard on which to base your decision on. My use of my experiences are not made to embarass Mattamy Homes or Peter Gilgan but, are used because they are based on fact and show the larger picture that a house inspector is a requirement when buying a house, new or old from any builder. My experience only shows that in fact it can happen and is a fact of life. Your experiences with Mattamy may have differed.
Oakville Homes 
Leave a comment