Fron Standing with Brindi

Still here supporting Brindi and Francesca
Standing with BrindiHomeAboutNews Links
These actions do not represent my values
Posted by AnaSophia in Brindi on November 27, 2010

I again yield the floor to one of our readers —

24 November 2010

If Francesca was on city water, the city could check the records with the water department to see how much water she was using and therefore make an observation about whether her house has running water. But she is not on city water. She has her own well.

Does she have heat in her house? It has been stated by at least one witness that she does in fact have heat.

To this, add that on the day the city arrived to evict her, she was wearing light clothing (must have been warm inside) and she washed her hair before she left (with her running water).

So without being inside Francesca’s house, how can the city say there is no water and no heat? Perhaps they are relying on the interview from the Herald with David Hendsbee from some time back where he states that he has not spoken with Francesca. His quotes include, “it might be,” “it could be,” “they’re kind of concerned.”

At best he is conveying, what, hearsay? Conjecture? Personal opinion? Or perhaps he is just a blunderbuss of sorts. Maybe he even means well, but clearly misses the serious implications of his words.

When the Herald first reported the charges against Francesca with regards to this recent “alleged” incident with Brindi, they included owning an unspayed female dog in heat. Quite a feat that Brindi would be in heat given that she was spayed a few years ago, don’t you think?

As just one example of the inaccuracies the Herald has published with regards to Brindi and Francesca, should we really count on them to report the truth in this situation? Or do they tend to err on the side of what is more scandalous and sensational?

Given that the topic is Francesca and Brindi, I submit that they err for the scandalous and sensational angle, overlooking the more serious problems that are actually occurring here.

There is a legal term that comes to mind when I try to make sense of these actions by the city regarding Francesca’s home: vexatious. In the dictionary, it is defined as: ‘Law . (of legal actions) instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance to the defendant.’ Another definition states it as: A legal action or proceeding initiated maliciously and without Probable Cause by an individual who is not acting in Good Faith for the purpose of annoying or embarrassing an opponent

Without probable cause… the city cited no potable water, no heat and maybe a problem with a pipe. But these grounds do not exist. We know there was potable water and heat. I find it hard to qualify “might” as a problem. ANYTHING “might” be a problem.

This forced eviction by the city is, at the least, embarrassing to me as a citizen. And beyond that, it is frustrating for the pettiness it exhibits on the part of city management to, what seems, wield some misguided power.

I believe in abiding by the rules of our city, but I do not support bending them to satisfy a personal whim at the expense of someone’s character or well-being.

I cannot support the city’s intent to make someone homeless absent of real contributing factors. Otherwise, where does it stop? What will your reaction be if it is you?

Locking Francesca out of her house and, in the process, damaging her property* such that it makes a livable structure unlivable is a travesty. And the city should be held accountable. These actions by the city do not represent my values.

Halifax city government should not be in the business of making people homeless when compliance with conditions has been met. Per municipal spokeswoman Shaune MacKinlay, “As always . . . our first efforts are to work with the property owner to redress the issues in a timely way.” Really?

The city just keeps changing the rules of this game. And it makes me mad as hell.

~ Gregory H.

And let’s not forget that the city continues to deny Francesca visitation with Brindi without providing any reason for this decision.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

* The official response from the HRM legal department regarding the broken pipe is this:

“Staff have advised that [Francesca's] water pipe broke while they were at [her] premises without any interference on their part.”

Now, on the chance there is any merit to this statement, did “staff” happen to do anything to correct this or to prevent any further damage to property like contact the homeowner, turn off the well, turn off the water heater, report the problem to their superiors?

Also, in an email, Francesca maintains that “the issue of heat and water was never raised in the Oct. 8 order, the Nov. 20 order, or in anything ever said to me on any occasion including Nov. 20. Yet HRM represented to the public that this was a reason to evict me.”

ACTION
Please contact the following people and kindly tell them these unwarranted actions by the city do not represent your values as either a citizen or as a human being. Ask that Francesca be allowed to return to her home. And ask that Brindi be sent home, too.

Member of Parliament, Peter Stoffer: Stoffp1@parl.gc.ca
Halifax Mayor Pete Kelly: kellyp@halifax.ca
HRM Legal Services, Angela Jones-Rieksts:jonesa@halifax.ca
Manager of By-Law Services, Tanya Phillips: phillit@halifax.ca
HRM Distict 3 Councillor, David Hendsbee: David.Hendsbee@halifax.c


When will these ill in formed people get it? Fran has broken several By laws and the matter is before the courts,there is nothing that any of the above can do,in fact if they did it would be considered obstruction of justice under the CCC. So Gregory suggests that fran be allowed to return to her """HOUSE"""",which is considered unsafe.....Yep a great idea...