September 17, 2012, proved an exciting day in the life of St. Thomas, as students returned to Wellington Street School for the first time in several years.

The former Thames Valley District School Board facility, purchased by the city in 2011 to provide parking spaces for the new consolidated courthouse, was being revitalized as the St. Thomas campus of Algoma University.

“This is a great day for Algoma University, and it’s also a great day for St. Thomas and Elgin County,” enthused Algoma president Richard Myers.

“You’ve made my St. Thomas a richer place today, and it’s a richer place for all of us,” added Andrew Gunn, trustee for the estate of Dorothy Palmer, which contributed more than $1 million to the refurbishment of the heritage school.

Fast forward 20 months, and the headline of that day was being put to the test.

The university announced that, because of lower-than-anticipated demand, it was deferring registration for the fall 2014 program at its St. Thomas campus.

However, Brian Leahy, director of extension programming at Algoma, stressed the university was committed to St. Thomas and expected to “re-launch in the fall of 2015.”

That relaunch never materialized.

Since then, the former school has housed the STEAM Centre, it was used by a handful of city employees, and was a temporary homeless shelter during the COVID pandemic.

Hope resurfaced in 2022, when it appeared St. Joseph’s Health Care was interested in leasing the first and second floors of the building, which carries a heritage designation under the Ontario Heritage Act.

Unfortunately, another pipe dream.

As it stands now, the city has a 99-year deal with the province to provide approximately 100 parking spaces at the Wellington Block for use by those attending the Elgin County Courthouse, and the city has use of 12 to 15 parking spots.

More on this deal in a moment.

In 2018, then-city manager Wendell Graves had floated the possibility of converting each classroom into a residential unit, with the wainscotting and chalkboards in place, so that some of them could serve as live/work spaces.

Graves envisioned a total of 19 units of various sizes on the three floors, with each having its own heating/air conditioning system.

Coun. Lori Baldwin-Sands wasn’t taking the bait, as she noted, “Another investment in this building gives me cause for concern.”

The city has invested heavily in the former school. In July of 2017, council of the day approved an expenditure of $466,000 with Forevergreen Roofing for the replacement of the roof.

Five years ago, this corner described the Wellington Block as a forlorn edifice in need of a purpose.

Well, hope may be on the horizon for the Wellington Block.

This week, the city issued a Request for Information (RFI) with an Expression of Interest (EOI) document to invite qualified developers, investors and community partners to submit proposals for the potential purchase and adaptive re-use of the structure that dates back to 1898.

According to the city release, it is seeking “visionary and innovative proposals that respect the site’s heritage character, while contributing to economic growth, housing supply, cultural vitality, and long-term community revitalization.”

“And so I think that was the reason for us to organize it into a real request for proposal. So we’re not leaving anybody out who might want to take over or work with us on the property.”

Possible opportunities include: mixed-use development, residential (either market or affordable), boutique hotel, cultural or institutional uses, commercial space, or other creative, adaptive re-use concepts that align with the city’s strategic priorities.

We spoke with Mayor Joe Preston on Thursday (May 14) regarding the RFI.

“The building just sits there, one of the most beautiful places in town, on a beautiful site. And we’ve had, of late, two or three people say what do you do with Wellington school?

“And so I think that was the reason for us to organize it into a real request for proposal. So we’re not leaving anybody out who might want to take over or work with us on the property.”

Preston continued, “Make your proposal to us, and if we’re the landlord still and it works, we’ll do that because we preserve a heritage building that we all want to preserve.

“If it’s somebody who wants to buy the whole property and then go through the process of remodelling or doing something in the building, we’ll say yes to that, too.

“That’s why we did it this way rather than just hanging up a For Sale sign or a For Rent sign. We started to have some people asking us, could we work together on the Wellington Street Block? Much like we did with the Balaclava Crossing Block (which Indwell is converting into housing).

“Let’s see who comes forward and says, ‘We have an idea.’

“I really am a bit frustrated over time with the expense of maintaining a heritage building without a tenant in it. But almost every year, as mayor, we thought we had a tenant.”

As for the parking spaces, Preston advised, “We’re in the process of requesting relief for the parking that’s dedicated there. So that it can be thought of as its own place.”

The deadline for submissions is July 15. Optional site tours are scheduled for June 10 and/or June 24.

The city has constructed a neighbour playground in the northeast corner of the property, and Preston assured it will remain in place.

MINIMAL ACTION ON THE MUNICIPAL CANDIDATE FRONT

Very little movement so far with candidates filing nomination papers for the municipal election on Oct. 26.

As of yesterday (May 15), just one mayoral candidate, Doug Mactavish, who made his intent known on May 1, when the nomination period opened.

Mactavish was the Liberal candidate in last year’s provincial vote, finishing a distant second to incumbent Rob Flack.

Jim Herbert is the only sitting councillor, so far, to indicate he is seeking re-election.

Joe Docherty Jr. ran in the 2022 municipal election and finished 11th in a 16-candidate race. He garnered 2,140 votes.

Three other individuals have declared their intention: well-known city musician Brian May, Western University student Kyle Yates, and Kay Vaughan, who several years ago requested that members of council allow the raising of hens in backyards.

BILL C-16 DOESN’T GO FAR ENOUGH

Late last year, the federal government introduced reforms to the Criminal Code to protect victims and survivors of sexual violence, gender-based violence, and intimate partner violence, and to keep children safe from predators.

The truth is, according to Elgin-St. Thomas-London South MP Andrew Lawton, Bill C-16, the Protecting Victims Act, did not go far enough to do just that.

And so Lawton, a member of the Justice Committee, put forth amendments to better protect victims of sexually explicit deepfakes and non-consensual images.

His amendments included:

• Increasing the penalty for the distribution of material depicting sexual assault;
• Ensuring harmful and explicit images generated with AI are captured by the law;
• .Mandating social media companies to remove illegal images within 48 hours;
• Clarifying the definition of intimate image so that perpetrators don’t evade justice on a technicality.

We spoke with Lawton in his CASO station office this week about Bill C-16, which has concluded the committee study process and is back in the House of Commons.

Lawton feels the bill and amendments could come up for debate next month.

He cautioned, “I don’t know how long the Senate will sit with this or any other piece because it is actually a pretty large bill and it touches on a number of areas of law, and the more complex something gets, the longer it tends to take.

“We can’t afford to move at the speed of government when the technology is evolving so quickly.”

“It also deals with mandatory minimum sentences, and that’s actually where I find there are some pretty significant shortcomings in the bill, just in not having strong enough penalties for certain classes of crimes, including sexual offenders.”

The amendments on intimate images being shared non-consensually and AI-generated images were moved by Lawton and adopted by committees, and are included in Bill C-16.

The issue of images depicting sexual assault was brought to the forefront recently with the case of Gisele Pelicot in France.

“That really horrible case where images and videos of her being sexually assaulted over many years were being shared, and we wanted to make sure that if some image is depicting sexual assault, it’s treated more seriously than just a traditional intimate image, and that the penalty would be a maximum of 14 years under the amendment that I put forward.”

As to dealing with AI-generated images, Lawton stressed, “We can’t afford to move at the speed of government when the technology is evolving so quickly.

“What we’re finding is that threats and technological advancements are moving more quickly than the law is. And we have laws dealing with someone who shares a photo of themselves naked with a partner, and that partner shares that photo without consent.

“We have laws that capture that, but we haven’t really captured AI-generated images. And we’re seeing more and more technologies and services available that are allowing people to generate really, really horrific and humiliating and degrading images and videos of people wearing no clothes, engaged in explicit sexual activities and people sharing those online.

“The key is that you have to intercept these images and videos early so that they don’t have that exponential sharing that happens online.”

“And these are photos and videos that look increasingly realistic, where you’d look at it and not know that it was AI-generated. So what my colleagues and I wanted to make sure of was that this law was capturing AI-generated images and not just real images that were being shared around. And the publication of them.

“And that was another amendment I moved forward because the law, as it was worded, required sexual organs to be visible and that means that there would actually be a slight technicality if you had someone depicted with everything but one little tiny bit of the photo, and we wanted to make sure that that wasn’t going to let perpetrators who are inflicting a lot of harm evade justice.

“And if I could just add, I spoke to some high school students yesterday (earlier this past week at St. Joseph’s High School). And I was trying to get these Grade 10 students to understand how politics affects them. And I was just talking about this bill as a recent example of work that I was doing.

“And my goodness, the eyes widened when I started talking about this issue because they know it so well. High school students know so well. They know that people are sharing images. They’re using AI tools. And this is so incredibly relevant to our youth who already have enough challenges and struggles. And this new aggravator of their mental health and well-being is something we need to be able to tackle.”

And then there is the issue of quickly removing such images from online sites.

“What victims really want more than anything else is to be offline. So one of my amendments puts a mandatory 48-hour takedown period for the tech companies. Which is, I think, really important because currently there is a requirement that they have to remove it, but no time frame to do so.

“The key is that you have to intercept these images and videos early so that they don’t have that exponential sharing that happens online.”

Lawton stressed the amendments to the bill are not to limit freedom of expression online.

“If someone wants to photoshop an image of me as the Little Mermaid, I don’t recommend it, but they can. That’s not what we’re going after here; we’re going after people who are victimizing, in a sexual manner, people without their consent, whether it’s sharing images that have been taken of them or using AI to generate realistic images. That’s all we’re talking about.”

One of the witnesses that Lawton called upon to appear before the committee was Liz Brown, Executive Director of Valora Place in St. Thomas.

“Liz Brown gave tremendous testimony. Actually, one of the things that I tried to do in the bill, which unfortunately was not adopted, was to call out the need to have a very clear and explicit definition of femicide, the murder of a woman.

“So that’s still something that I think in future legislation needs to be dealt with, just to understand the very unique harms facing women and girls in intimate partner relationships specifically.”

Lawton cautioned, “There are still some grave concerns about the way the bill deals with mandatory minimum sentences. It basically gives judges discretion to say a mandatory minimum sentence doesn’t apply, which defeats the purpose of it being mandatory.

“So that’s something that I still have some big concerns with, and law enforcement has raised that because it goes back to the revolving door issue we’ve talked about in other contexts, where people who have committed pretty serious crimes get back out on the streets.”

He concluded, “I think the most important thing is that we’re trying to put victims first and we’re trying to ensure that the law is keeping up with technology. We’ve seen so many cases in Canada over the years where people have been relentlessly bullied to the point of losing their lives over things that have happened online, from Amanda Todd to Rehtaeh Parsons.

“So we want to make sure that we’re trying to deal with this head-on and really protecting youth, protecting all people, though, from these emerging threats.”

TEMPORARY BYLAW FINALLY IN FRONT OF COUNCIL

After further clarification, the Temporary Use Bylaw to allow swimming lessons to continue at 21 Philip Street in St. Thomas is on the agenda for Tuesday’s (May 19) meeting.

Of note, while the draft Temporary Use Bylaw included a provision limiting the number of students per lesson to three, staff thought “that additional clarification is required that only one lesson can be conducted at a time.

“This is needed in order to prevent the possibility of multiple individuals who reside in the dwelling conducting lessons simultaneously.”

The bylaw will be in effect until May 19, 2028.

In a letter to city staff, Joy Dawdy had requested that the bylaw remain in effect until she retires or sells the property.

She had also sought a compromise on the number of students per class. Dawdy had requested a class size of five students, while neighbours wanted a cap of three. She was willing to compromise at four.

The bylaw, as is, limits the size to three students.

Related post:

For Cliff Barwick, it was always about respect for the mayor’s chain of office

 

THE ECHO CHAMBER

Valerie Young forwarded this response to us regarding last week’s tribute to former Mayor Cliff Barwick.

“Mr. Barwick was my history teacher at AVSS in the 80s. I don’t recall every teacher, but I remember him. He was a great teacher and a nice man.

“He will surely be missed by his friends and colleagues. Maybe they should name the new high school after him. I’m sure closing Voaden would have broken his heart.

“RIP Cliff Barwick, condolences to your family.”

On our item dealing with Joy Dawdy and her efforts to continue offering swimming lessons from her backyard pool at 21 Philip Street, Susan Kalinoski Hill offered this observation.

 “The restrictions on Joy’s critically important swimming lessons are ridiculous. If she did this for free, would the city get involved?

“She is providing a much-needed service for the community, a community that does not have the capacity to provide enough lessons for Elgin County.

“One would think the noise of children learning to swim would be overlooked in an effort to prevent a child from drowning.”

Questions and comments may be emailed to City Scope

Visit us on Facebook

And a reminder, I can be heard weekday afternoons as news anchor and reporter on 94.1 myFM in St. Thomas. As always, your comments and input are appreciated.