Postma's Demolition Notice of Motion

Charles Goren would be so proud. Council is clearly made up of experts at playing bridge games or so they think! After all, bridge has "tricks" and someone can be trumped. There are grand slams too.

It is almost an insult. The bridge games-playing should infuriate residents. Here is what the Councillor is proposing with respect to the Bridge Company homes that they want to demolish:

• "Notice of Motion
  
  To be considered at the May 25, 2009 Meeting of Council:
  
  Moved by Councillor Postma, seconded by Councillor ________________,
  
  Whereas, the Ambassador Bridger Company owns approximately 75 properties along Indian, Edison, College, Bloomfield, Felix and Mill; and
  
  Whereas, the properties have become an extreme eyesore and a hazard to the neighbourhood, and the area is currently under a demolition freeze; and
  
  Whereas, the residents and property owners have handed in a petition to demolish these homes with over 230 names on it; and
  
  Whereas, a letter of invitation was sent to the Ambassador Bridge by the City in March inviting them to present a greening plan or green corridor for the homes along the Bridge and the City has never defined an acceptable greening plan for all of the properties owned by the Bridge Company;
  
  Therefore be it resolved, that Mayor and City Council meet with the Ambassador Bridge Company to discuss acceptable plans for their 75 properties throughout Sandwich Town and clearly define greening plans for the properties to ensure the residents are no longer living near boarded up, abandoned homes and restore the safety, security and aethetic looks of their neighbourhood."

If you ever wanted proof of the City playing bridge games, this is it. Consider the following:

• considering the number of homes, the response rate on the petition is very impressive
• the homes are an eyesore and hazardous because of the demolition freeze
• a meaningless letter was sent to the Bridge Company that wasted several more months of time (See below)
• what was the purpose of the Bridge Company presenting something if they had no idea what the City was thinking
• typical Eddie negotiation: Council to define an "acceptable" greening plan and the Bridge must react to it
• the residents have signed a petition saying what they want and are ignored

• no involvement of the residents impacted
• more required of the Bridge Company than other people who have received demolition permits
• the Bridge Company has said already what was "acceptable" to them and the residents seemed to be in agreement. What more is there to discuss"
• there is nothing there that requires the City to issue demolition permits nor does the City promise to do so. It is all one-sided.

Councillor Mom is just being used or is she helping in the bridge game too? This is nothing more than the Francis style of negotiations. My way or no demolition. I can hardly wait to see what Councillor Jones' FIVE-POINT PLAN friendly amendment to the Motion will be.

If someone thought this would work to convince a Court that the City was not dealing with the Bridge company in bad faith, then the strategy has back-fired badly. It is just another element of the Mayor and Council playing bridge politics at the expense of residents!

Oh I forgot to mention that there are dummies when playing bridge. However, in this case, the Bridge Company is not one of them .

PS. Here is a copy of the letter to the Bridge Compnany. If you received it, would you have the faintest idea what you were to do with it other than file it in the garbage can!