Superior Park Saga Continues

It no longer has anything to do with Superior Park...it has to do with how this City seems to run. In a nutshell, the Superior Park story confirms to me why I get so angry at the way things are done, and why I started this BLOGsite.

Frankly, I expect that most of you are well past your "Bambi" days (except perhaps for your kids or grandkids) and probably do not care all that much whether Superior Park is sold or not for a French High School. If it was as simple as that, but for my friends being involved, I would not care all that much either. But it is not that simple to be direct.

And there is more to this story that is being disclosed as I am finding as time goes on. Council needs to ask some serious questions of Administration about some information that they have not yet been told. Read all the way through to the end and you shall see.

Just so you know, one of the people opposed to the sale is my friend Debbie who is famous for asking Mike Hurst the "Is this a done deal" question at the public meeting on the border in January, 2003.

Why should YOU be interested in this battle.

Simple, if it can happen to Superior Park, then it can happen to you too. What is the "it?" Not necessarily the sale of a Park but the way the City tries to ram something down your throat as a citizen while pretending to be listening to you!

The tale of Superior Park is an interesting case study. Is this how a City should to operate.

1. As you will recall, the sale of the Park was put forward in a secret, in camera meeting.
2. Then there was a Report to Council trying to pressure Council into accepting a deal with the School Board immediately [a so-called August "drop dead" date by which the sale HAD to be done was inserted]
3. No public meeting was ever called as is required if Parkland is to be sold.
4. The motion was presented to Council as a done deal without notification to neighbours and in the summer when many people would be away on vacation and who therefore would not know about the deal until it was too late.
5. When a fuss was raised, Administration sought a 90 day extension but that was reduced to 30 days and a public meeting was to be held. A victory for Democracy----hardly!

So what has happened since that time. First the "key people" had to be invited to a small "informal" meeting to see what their "objections" were and to placate them. That is to get them "on-side." That is a very clever ploy. Once that is done, the trouble makers have been co-opted right and then the City can have a "peaceful" public meeting.

Except now the public meeting is not a Town Hall-type meeting as one would expect but these darn information sessions designed so no one can know what another neighbour really thinks. Of course, there was a mailing in the last minute and an ad was placed in the paper on the Saturday before the Tuesday meeting. Why give people a lot of time to adjust their schedules so they could actually attend and have their voices heard.

Here let me set out the exchange of emails so you can read it for yourself. Oh by the way, look at another tactic used which is to provide so many meetings that people get fed up and tired and so do not attend:

• In regards to the meeting held at City Hall on September 20/06, between a few residents of Superior Park, Councilor Brister, Don Sadler and Mike Stamp. The Neighbours of Superior Park feel that the conditions of this Public Meeting that is planned for September 26/06 is unacceptable!
  
  1) To have the notifications sent out before we had any discussion about a Public Meeting is a sham!
  2) To hold the Public Meeting outside our ward, for those who not drive, is a farce!
  3) To hold this meeting on a night when a majority of this community will be attending a Church Mission, is totally unfair!
  4) To hold this meeting without an Italian interpreter is discriminate! Keep in mind this is a very strong Italian community.
  5) To have it 2-4 P.M. is absurd for those who are working and cannot get away to attend.
  6) To have it at 2 different times and the way it is structured, means residents will not stick around for the entire time.
  7) The entire meeting process is designed so that neighbours will not hear what other neighbours have to say about this project.
  We demand to have a Town Hall style meeting at 7P.M. at St. Patrick's Church on another date. We are also shocked that this project is allowed to continue when we were informed by two Councillors that the School Board was looking at other sites. We intend to make this an election issue, if it is not resolved immediately to our COMPLETE satisfaction.
  
  SUPERIOR PARK ACTION GROUP

• Kevin & Debbie,
  
  Thank you for meeting with us last night and thank you for the "e" mail below. As Don and I stated last night, if the area residents don't think one public meeting is sufficient, we indicated we would schedule another meeting so that everyone has an opportunity to participate.
  
  We will continue with the meeting on the 26th as those notices have gone out and schedule another meeting at St Patrick's church for a later date. That date hasn't been established yet as we need to check with the School Board on the availability of the Trustee and also with the church on the availability of its hall.
  
  We are always aware of the diversity of our neighbourhoods and we make every attempt to have staff available at the meetings to address those whose first language isn't English.
  
  Since Windsor is a "shift work" economy the scheduling of the meeting from 2:00 to 4:00 and 6:00 to 8:00 is standard for this type of public meeting. It is not designed this way to prohibit people from communicating with one another. We apologize if it has been interpreted this way.
  
  To accommodate scheduling of the Trustee and the 30 day deferral period set by Council, our original intention was to hold the meeting on the 26th at St. Patrick's. We were told it was not available. We were not advised that there was a mission meeting which would be attended by a great number of the neighbourhood residents. The meeting was then scheduled at the College Avenue Community Centre.
  
  As soon as we have some tentative dates set for the second meeting we will advise you. Once a date has been finalized we will send out additional notices and place another ad in the Windsor Star. The format of the meeting will be discussed with you as well.
  
  We are hopeful that the scheduling of 2 meetings will allow for full participation by the area residents.
  
  Regards,
  Mike Stamp
  Senior Property Agent.

Then the absolute piece de resistance:

• We would like to know why the residents of Partington have not received their notices about the Public Meeting of the Sale of Superior Park, that is going to take place on Tuesday, September 26th? In discussions with the neighbourhood, the residents on Mark & Rankin have received their notices yesterday. For us to receive these notices by Monday are too late! We would just like to know what kind of games are being played? It is obvious that this is an another "act of adding more fuel to the already smouldering fire" and reason to call off this meeting!

And the reply:

• Mr. MacDonell,
  
  All of the 230 notices for the public meeting were mailed out at the same time and should have been delivered by Canada Post. We mailed out individual notices to all property owners within 400 feet of Superior Park both north and south of Totten. There was also an ad in the Windsor Star this past Saturday. As I advised in a previous "e" mail this will be the first of 2 meetings on the subject of Superior Park.
  
  I hope you will be able to attend on the 26th
  
  Regards,
  Mike Stamp
  Senior Property Agent
  

SUPERIOR PARK ACTION GROUP

Tell me this is NOT like the Border fiasco with the secrecy and the only public meeting on it that was scheduled in inconvenient Tecumseh.

Tell me it is NOT like the Arena mess with the secrecy and re-scheduled public meetings, with new players popping in and out at different times.

It's not the first time the City has had an issue like this. Why is there such a screw-up? This file has it all:

• Acting one way in the in camera meeting and then posturing in public
• Behind the scenes lobbying
• Secrecy
• Phony deadlines and demand for immediate action
• Not following their own procedures
• Inability to set up a meeting properly and in a readily accessible Community setting
• Information sessions to diffuse neighbourhood complaints rather than a Town hall meeting
• Of course, after the citizens complain, then compromise is suggested.

Now let's get to the fun part. Is there something odd about what is going on that has not been disclosed to Council. If so, why not?

1. Why weren't Councillors Jones and Valentinis who sit on a school liaison committee not consulted
2. If Councillor Jones "could provide the French board with a list of alternative sites as long as his arm" why has this not been pursued
3. Was there some deal made in 1998 with the City involving zoning and St.Patrick's school which was closed down and is that deal still valid
4. Is there an issue about the "ball diamond," since it appears to have been dropped from the plans, and concerning money donated and a lease?
5. Have the school Board of St. Edmond's and the parents been made aware about this school coming given the deep concern about mixing elementary and secondary students?
6. Why is the School Board paying supposedly $1.8 M to buy woodlots just to exchange them with the City who would then turn around and make a new park? Is this sum one that is justifiable in the circumstances?

I am sure that there is more to this than I have discussed. Council needs to have a full fact-finding before being asked to make a decision. The public must be allowed to have a proper meeting to be able to express their concerns --or their approval.

Now you may want to understand why it is not only Bambi who should be concerned.