Downtown renewal through expropriation

Every city and town has a rundown area it would love to see knocked down, cleared out and rebuilt like new as a pretty, prosperous neighbourhood.

St. Catharines would love to be rid of the old GM plant on Ontario Street — the very definition of an eyesore. Just like the old hospitals were.

Welland has the same problem with some of the aging industrial properties in and around its downtown. In Niagara Falls, residents have been complaining for years about the downtown and its many empty, rundown properties.

Even though those buildings are all privately owned, “the city should do something about it,” people grouse (and rightly so — some parts resemble a shabby, shaky ghost town).

Now, that city might take that giant step most other municipalities have only dreamed of: expropriation.

Led by Mayor Jim Diodati, city staff is preparing a report for council on how the process might actually work and, presumably, how much it might cost and what happens after the city buys the properties.

If Niagara Falls actually decides to expropriate, those landowners have no one to blame but themselves. Presumably, most are sitting on their properties waiting for someone else to come up with the big idea that will revitalize the old downtown around Queen Street.

The coming of daily GO train service; maybe that innovation centre plan with Ryerson University; a big residential development.

But they’ve sat and sat, the buildings are crumbling, and an entire district has become a neglected museum of yesterday’s glory days. A few years ago, one building actually did fall down.

“I think it’s embarrassing and disgusting when you get off a train or a bus and you look at some of those buildings,” Diodati said. “I think it’s deplorable, and we’ve given these landlords years.”

Just the same, expropriation is a big step.

For any government, taking land owned by a private citizen without consent should be an extreme step, even when that owner is paid the appraised value of the property.

It’s justified as being in the public’s interest, so if this happens in Niagara Falls, then certainly the city must gather public feedback before doing it.

Also, before council goes down this path, it’s fair to ask: has the city given this ultimatum to the landowners — one last chance to do it themselves, or else.

If the answer is, they are waiting for the GO train or Ryerson but absolutely plan to repair or upgrade their properties when those arrive, then maybe expropriation isn’t the answer.

GO is already in Niagara Falls and presumably that service will expand and the Via Rail station will be upgraded. And the Ryerson deal is very close to being finalized, according to Diodati.

But if they’re owned by people who can’t or won’t fix their properties, expropriation could work.

But the public needs to realize that buying enough of those properties to make a difference involves a significant outlay of cash, with no guarantee of a good return.

What if GO doesn’t expand? Maybe Ryerson doesn’t happen. The city could be stuck with those same properties that have been a burr in its side for decades.

Expropriation has worked in some places, but it isn’t a magic wand. There are genuine risks.

Diodati might only be sabre-rattling anyway, with his public threat to take away the land. The best outcome is for the landlords to finally do the responsible thing and fix, flatten, or sell the property to someone who will.

This has gone on for way too long.