West End Shocker
Is the Star wrong? If it is, an immediate correction is required! Has she moved? If so, when? Or has she lived there all of the time?
- $87,900 for a loan/mortgage
- $17, 630 grant for a cedar roof (I was not sure if she also got a requested interest free loan in the amount of $5,876)
She had in the past appeared as well
- " before Council to speak in support of the use of the Ontario Heritage Property Tax Relief Program as a pilot project to assist the owners of designated heritage properties in Sandwich."
When she was in front of the Ontario Municipal Board in July 2005 to oppose the City of Windsor's approval of an application by Canadian Transit Company for variance from the provisions of By-law 8600, it was said in the decision:
- "The appellant, Mary Ann Cuderman resides at 3118 Sandwich Street, Windsor and she testified in opposition to the motion to dismiss. She stated that she was a lifelong resident of Windsor."
In April of this year, the Detroit Free Press said
- "Mary Ann Cuderman, ... lives in a 200-year-old home 2 blocks from the bridge..."
In passing, Ms Cuderman made a very damaging remark at the OMB hearing for those who think there is a need for more capacity. In other words, she was stating at the hearing that there was NO need for a DRIC bridge since the Bridge Co. had more than enough capcity to handle traffic:
- "She raised many concerns about the proposal. She questioned whether or not the expansion of the Bridge Plaza was necessary since only a short time ago there had been approval given for 3 new booths. An additional 6 booths would bring the total to 9. In her opinion, the additional 6 lanes were not required. She pointed out that the Deputy Prime Minister had asked for a 25% increase in capacity for Canada Customs to alleviate the slowdown for the quick and efficient flow of goods and services from the United States and Canada. She stated that 3 new booths, which had already been approved, would more than meet this capacity."
If Mary Ann moved from Sandwich St to Indian Rd. after mid-2005 or after April, 2007 you have to ask the obvious question: if the area is so bad, then why did she move there? Why would someone knowingly move to an area that could be impacted by a bridge and then complain about it? She knew what she was getting into. I would have to draw the conclusion that it is not as bad as the Ward Councillors are saying it is.
It's like the fellow in the Star story the other day:
- "Neil Misquitta peers over the backyard wall of his rented Indian Road home and shakes his head at the newly constructed hulk of bricks and steel -- massive customs booths to clear border trucks entering Windsor off the Ambassador Bridge...
Misquitta and his family of four, ages nine months to 12 years old, are among the last remaining residents living among the weeds and boarded-up homes on the east side of the 700 block of Indian Road.
Every house on the block borders on the new truck plaza.
The homes were long ago purchased by bridge owner Matty Moroun...
Misquitta, who expects to be relocated at month's end to another bridge company rental home on nearby Bloomfield Road, applauds the heritage plans because he loves the neighbourhood."
HUH....I don't get it...Why would he rent on Indian Road in the first place and then why would he relocate to another Bridge Co. home if it was so awful? I don't get it at all! Given his negative comments, I would have thought he would be pleased to look elsewhere in the City for a home. Again, maybe it is not as bad as some would have us believe!
Frankly, if Mary Ann moved to Indian and now lives there after 2005 or 2007 with all of the information she had about the border fight and given her opinion of the Bridge Co., then she knew what she was getting. She moved to the area by choice and why should any one listen to her complaints now. As I learned in first year law school "Volenti non fit iniuria." In English: "to a willing person, no injury is done."
I must admit that my first reaction after seeing the address where she lived was one of surprise. Perhaps the references in the Council Minutes to her Sandwich address were just to be used as her mailing address.
Some may now want to question the description of her as "a west-end community activist." After all, isn't she now just a NIMBY-type merely protecting her monetary interests and not looking out necessarily for what is good for Windsor or Sandwich in particular? Is she also in a conflict as an Indian Road resident and as a member of the Sandwich Heritage Conservation Task Force?
Frankly, one could write her off very easily and quickly. One could easily now explain away her opposition to the Bridge Co. as self-interest not Windsor's interests.
I don't think however that is fair or right to do. She is entitled to her point of view and the right to express it as is any Windsorite. It is no different than what the people along the STOPDRTP corridor did: opposed DRTP to protect their neighbourhood. She is doing the same for her area.
However, what we have to consider now is when she decided to live on Indian Road in order to decide what weight we should give her opinions and comments.