A war of words has broken out at City Hall over the proposed demolition of much of Peterborough’s former General Electric complex, with Councillor Joy Lachica accusing Mayor Jeff Leal of concealing details from council and the public — a claim Leal calls “false and defamatory.”
In a strongly worded statement issued Thursday, Lachica said the plan to tear down a large portion of the GE site at 107 Park Street North was advanced without public consultation or adequate oversight. She said the decision “puts the wellbeing and history of our community in the hands of a $230 billion corporation,” warning that demolition could release contamination from the long-industrial property.
“Demolition will release unknown levels of contamination into the surrounding neighbourhoods, lets GE paper over the harm it caused injured workers, and paves the way for taxpayers to absorb the risk and cost of a massive, un-remediated brownfield,” the statement read.
Lachica is urging council to reverse its position when the matter returns to the table tonight (October 14), calling for a full heritage designation, a comprehensive environmental impact assessment, and greater public engagement before any demolition proceeds.
Mayor Leal responded Friday, rejecting the councillor’s accusations and outlining a detailed timeline of communications. He said he informed council members on September 5 — three days before GE Vernova publicly announced its plans — and that the company mailed 4,500 letters to nearby residents that same week.
“The accusation that I have concealed anything to members of Council is false and defamatory,” Leal said. “Far from concealing it, I publicized it.”
Leal added that demolition cannot move ahead without approval from the city’s Chief Building Official and compliance with all provincial regulations. He said the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks remains the lead authority on any environmental concerns.
The former GE plant, which dates back to 1891, has been largely vacant since 2018 and remains listed — but not designated — on the city’s heritage register. Council voted earlier this week not to pursue heritage designation for most of the site, though several buildings were flagged for further review.
(Written by: Scott Arnold)
