tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-163076632024-03-07T18:02:09.325-05:00WindsorCityBlogThoughts and Opinions On Today's Important IssuesJoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comBlogger3023125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-62789559331102440122014-07-02T08:06:00.000-04:002014-07-02T08:28:41.815-04:00The Vitamix One Second Coleslaw<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
So I am intrigued by this stuff and want to let you know about it.
<br />
<br />
I saw on the DVD that was sent to me with my Vitamix blender a way to make coleslaw. Quickly. And I do mean quickly.
<br />
<br />
Of course, I have made coleslaw before, or rather, my wife generally does. I have been banished years ago from the kitchen after a failed attempt to make a cold gazpacho soup that my entire family hated with a passion. (Shhhh, I won't tell them that I can use my Vitamix blender to make that as well.)
<br />
<br />
There are a variety of ways to deal with the cabbage for making coleslaw. Obviously, cutting it is one way. The other is to use one of these stainless steel graters. Of course, the problem with the latter is when one gets too close to the grater with the cabbage one might scrape a finger or knuckle or two along the way. That has happened to me before when I tried making it. I always thought that wearing a bandage is part of the coleslaw making procedure!
<br />
<br />
So imagine what my reaction was when I saw the DVD. I'll post it below.
All that was necessary to do was to cut the cabbage into some chunks, put them into the Vitamix Blender, fill the blender with water until the chunks floated and then turn on the blender for one second. That is right: <strong><span style="color: blue;">ONE SECOND</span></strong>.
<br />
<br />
Then, drain the water (perhaps using a salad spinner to make the cabbage dry) add your salad dressing and perhaps some other veggies and it's done. Cleaning is a snap as well just by adding some water to the blender with a couple of drops of soap.
<br />
<br />
Here's the process that I went through with photographs taken at each stage. We also made a very hot, healthy and hearty turkey vegetable soup to go along with the coleslaw (picture of ingedients only):<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/vitamix11a.jpg"><img alt="vitamix11a" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-70873" src="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/vitamix11a.jpg" height="661" width="534" /></a>
<img alt="vitamix11" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-70872" src="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/vitamix11.jpg" height="714" width="540" /> <img alt="vitamix13" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-70875" src="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/vitamix13.jpg" height="718" width="535" />
<img alt="vitamix15" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-70877" src="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/vitamix15.jpg" height="715" width="534" />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNzO7wWHKnoLeNLhSzSri_ERAwCOXy0XM3y8w9eiWzOrLT4jXVhlj_8ox2aEprSVMlG5mp90kpGCSKTzENe9qbDz6t0LXslNSdjcmMwuPeNFyHHLj7VbbrNZLd1ajFQEUGXpsDwg/s1600/vitamix16.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a> </div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEXPtWX_f5GS4_HvJ9LyZwi93ahBNZfBo9xtiWvqDC3ruCN8L7r1lQXToJe32GrG1WvimC0_TFqSaN43fpGDb8f8bu51eNMaTUlrQnFmsKSuqlBcQeFg-30iKmRso6gpSMBOSatw/s1600/vitamix16a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEXPtWX_f5GS4_HvJ9LyZwi93ahBNZfBo9xtiWvqDC3ruCN8L7r1lQXToJe32GrG1WvimC0_TFqSaN43fpGDb8f8bu51eNMaTUlrQnFmsKSuqlBcQeFg-30iKmRso6gpSMBOSatw/s1600/vitamix16a.jpg" height="315" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXraoeDpHfdTIwHCSaN35NDpEp4g7XMuPmuyf-m3Od-n9EmWPPVgShHBmxSsCva7Lzgn4QJR2E4qhpECVg39alyVsD4yfAzbOUH07PDuz28sISys_GRXaClgknX_rgoi2-AwrA1A/s1600/vitamix16a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a> </div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
If you want to see why I was amazed then just check out this video:
<br />
<br />
<br />
<object height="315" width="420"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/rYdM5uxqqRs?hl=en_US&version=3"></param>
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param>
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param>
<embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/rYdM5uxqqRs?hl=en_US&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-82291558858490693622011-04-13T11:07:00.014-04:002011-04-13T12:16:50.347-04:00The Governerd's Bill---It's Just Like Granholm's But More RefinedJust a thought provoker for you, dear reader. Here is the definition of “Crossing” and “Project” in the Governerd’s Bill. Where does it say DRIC or NITC? Why can’t it mean instead the Ambassador Bridge and the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project singly or together, especially if the Governments eventually buy it as the Canadian Prime Minister wants to do: <br /><br />•"Crossing" means a public international bridge and bridge approaches, including, but not limited to, all related structures, plazas, facilities, improvements, extensions, interchanges, property, and property interests, between Ontario, Canada, and this state that is at least partially located in a city that, as of the date of the first commencement of a project activity, has a population of at least 600,000 according to the most recent decennial census… <br /><br />•“Project” means all activities associated with a crossing, including project land activities and project activities.”<br /><br />Why can’t that Ambassador Bridge project be P3ed too! Wasn’t that always the intention to be blunt about it? Look at all of the money that the Governments would make especially if lumped in with the Blue Water Bridge and the Detroit/Windsor Tunnel. We have Mayor Edgar (aka Eddie) Francis and his hired road consultant, Gridlock Sam Schwartz, to thank for telling us that. <br /><br />I have no intention on commenting in detail on the latest Draft Bill put out by the Governerd. Why should I help him by pointing out all of the problems with this Bill now. I would like to believe the Governerd when he says this: <br /><br />• Snyder: Canadian offer for bridge is legit<br /><br />“Gov. Rick Snyder said today he is confident there is a firm offer of $550 million from the Canadian government to pay Michigan's share of the cost of a new international bridge across the Detroit River. <br /><br />"I've had multiple discussions with authorities in Canada from both political parties," Snyder told reporters after signing bills related to Michigan's sex offender registry. <br /><br />"This is the No. 1 infrastructure project for the country of Canada," Snyder said. "That says a lot." <br /><br />The governor said he believes the Canadian government has made "a firm commitment," to pick up Michigan's costs related to the New International Trade Crossing, formerly known as the Detroit River International Crossing, but "it's something we will continue to monitor." (Paul Egan Detroit News April 12, 2011)<br /><br /><br />But I do not! <br /><br />Don’t you find it strange that the Governered is monitoring something that is supposedly firm although it is NOT in the Canadian Budget! The offer letter is not firm so why is the Governered so confident after hearing Minister Strahl’s “Zero dollars” remark? <br /><br />It is so bizarre. Why isn’t the Bill introduced by a Member of the House or Senate officially? Why was it leaked to the media instead? The timing is just so co-incidental too: Windsor Square’s Squeeki-leaks documents, my Article “Zero Taxpayer Dollars, Not A Single Dollar For DRIC,” the Volpe allegation of the $550M being a “bribe” and the AFP attack on DRIC. <br /><br />Damage control time. Try and limit the Bridge Company's reframing of the border issue. Try to blunt their ads. <br /><br />I am writing this for the general reader to understand how we are going to be fooled again with a “no-brainer” DRIC/P3 Bill revision that everyone is supposed to applaud and accept without thinking because the Governerd tells us so. The pressure on Legislators to knuckle under will be enormous. <br /><br />It’s whack-a-mole time. Expect the demonization and vilification of the Morouns to continue as well as that of any Legislator who dares think of voting NO. Director Steudel has already told us what will happen to that Legislator ably assisted by certain members of the unthinking, press release media. <br /><br />Part Two will come later, at the appropriate time, for those who want an in-depth, clause-by-clause, analysis of the Bill and all of the concerns with it. It is to demonstrate that all of the past excesses are still there. Just hidden better. <br /><br />Oh but we have taken out most of the things that Legislators objected about. It is a nice clean Bill that everyone can now accept, right! That is what the three Wise Men PLUS one, the Governerd, Lt. Governerd, the MDOT Director and the Treasurer will tell everyone. <br /><br />Yup, we should believe a Governerd who says there is a “unique agreement” where there is none, a Lt. Governerd who opposed DRIC, an MDOT Director whose Department was accused by four Legislators of alleged fraudulent misrepresentations and withholding of material facts during testimony on the proposed Detroit International River Crossing (DRIC) project and the Treasurer, the former Democratic House Leader who supported DRIC. <br /><br />Sure they have done all of that except if you still believe in legislative oversight, there is none. Canada is no longer an Instrumentality of Government of Michigan, it is now a “public agency” with all of their powers. <br /><br />If you have an 18-wheeler, you can drive through the “availability payments “and the “eminent domain” prohibition loopholes. <br /><br />All those sections that deal with no repayment obligations except from project revenues----nice window dressing that means little if the agreements are carefully drafted or if the intention is really to default on Day 1. <br /><br />Of course, if you are not a corporate lawyer or a CA or someone who understands how debentures and securities work or not involved in high finance structuring of multi-billion dollar deals using the most sophisticated financial instruments that Wall St bankers can imagine and designed to get around Statutes or if you are not expert in eminent domain matters, you will probably be fooled. Heck, your eyes will glaze over reading this stuff never mind trying to understand it. It is the best cure for insomnia around. <br /><br />There are some obvious deficiencies still in the Bill that were planned deliberately I am sure so that when objections are raised MDOT will immediately insert provisions that have been drafted previously to say that they are accommodating the wishes of the Legislators. <br /><br />It really was really quite brilliantly planned although pretty obvious once you start reading through the Bill. Those Canadian bureaucrats at Transport Canada and the PMO who are masterminding this are crafty. You just have to work a lot harder at it and find out that nothing has really changed. <br /><br />The Governerd’s proposed Bill is supposedly designed to avoid the excesses of all the previous drafts that have been presented to the Legislature by MDOT/Canada. The previous versions were so overreaching that no Legislator in my opinion should ever have voted YES. Most Democrats did and they still support DRIC. <br /><br />Michiganders were saved from financial disaster by members of the Republican Party and a few Democrats voting “NO” in spite of tremendous pressure imposed upon them by media people who did not have the faintest idea what they were talking about and who bought in to the press release journalism of the DRIC-ites. If you think that pressure was bad before, here is what Susan Demas of MIRS would like the Governerd to do to threaten Legislators: <br /><br />•“The governor should do the same for his case for DRIC. Go through all 110 House districts and 38 Senate districts and list all the road and bridge projects in each that his deal will finance for the next five years. Send the list out to every lawmaker and local media outlet in the state. Hold town hall meetings from Iron Mountain to Independence Township arguing that a vote against DRIC is a vote for crumbling roads. It's a better strategy than counting on a GOP Legislature to automatically go along with your agenda.” (Mlive.com Susan Demas January 28, 2011) <br /><br />Effectively, what the previous legislation was proposing would have destroyed the separation of powers in the Michigan governmental system by allowing the Department to run amuck without any legislative oversight at all. It could have caused all kinds of constitutional issues as well that have still not been explained away. <br /><br />Of course, Canada was lurking in the background because it was to be made an Instrumentality of Government of Michigan, whatever that meant. The Bill was so necessary for Canada that they dangled a $550 million loan which was not a loan and in fact was a nothing without any binding legal force whatsoever to try to persuade Legislators to pass the bill. Once the Bill would have been passed, then Canada would have got what it wanted and even if it backed out of paying Michigan anything, it still accomplished its purposes. <br /><br />Why no one in the media or in the Democratic Party seemed to understand this is beyond my comprehension. <br /><br />Now the Governerd has jumped into the fray. To be blunt, his Bill will fool some initially. It is somewhat better than the one before on first blush because it seems to be restricted primarily to DRIC and to financing of the Project. It does not overreach by allowing Canada some control over all major State transportation facilities <br /><br />•ie any new or existing domestic or international highway, lane, road, bridge, tunnel, overpass, ramp, interchange, ferry, airport, vehicle parking facility, vehicle transportation facility, port facility, locks facility, rail facility, intermodal or other public transit facility, or any other equipment, rolling stock, site, or facility used in the transportation of persons, goods, substances, vehicles, information, etc. <br /><br />Of course, we can guess that it is merely step one of a two-step process. Pass this and then MDOT will come back for what they really want: to pass another Bill to try to accomplish what it wanted in the earlier Bill ie to cover those major transportation facilities. After all, a similar Act was passed before so who could object now? <br /><br />Clearly, the Bridge Company people will not be involved in stage 2 to mess up things up since there is nothing in the new Bill that will deal with border crossings. As for me, I have enough trouble dealing with border issues such that I’m not going to write any Articles about transportation matters in Michigan. And then who will object? The wording will be very, very similar so it will truly be a slam dunk once it is introduced. <br /><br />We saw a similar game that Canada played with the International Bridges And Tunnels Act and how it was separated out of an Omnibus Bill because the railroad companies were objecting to that Bill. <br /><br />But the key areas, the ones that every Republican Legislator in the last House and Senate and a few thoughtful Democrats opposed before, well they are alive and well and hidden in legalese. <br /><br />Keep in the back of your mind why there is such a push to have a P3 Bill. Why does there have to be a Public-Private Partnership? There are other ways to finance a DRIC project, the way it has been done successfully for decades before. Whatever a P3 proposes can be accomplished contractually in a traditional construction approach. <br /><br />Does Michigan or Canada for that matter need another Port Mann Bridge P3 fiasco or the lawsuits over Highway 407 through Toronto which the Province lost. Who needs an Auditor General Report saying that taxpayers have been ripped off? <br /><br />Obviously there is a hidden agenda to all of this that we have not been told although it is becoming clearer and clearer all the time. <br /><br />Canada needs the Bill in order to force the Bridge Company to sell out. <br /><br />MDOT wants the Bill because it allows him to make, they believe, millions and billions of dollars so that they can become an autonomous Governmental body within the Government that can ignore the Legislature. <br /><br />Naturally, a Governerd wants something like that as well in order to achieve his/her objectives without bothering to go to the House or Senate for approval. <br /><br />Unfortunately, you will need to read through the Bill to understand exactly how we are to be fooled. You will learn from me later that: <br /><br />• Michigan taxpayers are at risk financially <br /> “Availability payments” are still possible but under a new name If bonds are not issued then everything is fair game with little taxpayer protection Canada is a “public agency” now and not an “Instrumentality” with no significant differences Legislative oversight, oh don’t be so silly <br /> It’s so easy for Canada to become owner of the entire project right away <br /> “Eminent domain” is alive and well <br /> Pressure is put on the Ambassador Bridge’s project <br /> Constitutional issues are not addressed. <br /><br />And so much more!JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-17470078016021845102011-04-13T09:46:00.005-04:002011-04-13T09:57:11.076-04:00Zero Taxpayer Dollars, Not A Single Dollar For DRIC<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Oh, so you think Canadian MP Jeff Watson is a mere backbencher speaking on a frolic of his own about the lack of Canadian commitment for the $550M for Michigan and that what he says does not represent Government policy. Then watch and listen to this comment made in Parliament by the Canadian Transport Minister on March 23, 2011.</p><embed height="390" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4-DA6mfCF64?fs="" hl="en_US&rel=" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></embed> <br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Oh Watson was accurately reflecting what Canada wanted to do: sucker Michigan Legislators into passing a P3/DRIC Bill without Canada committing one single penny to the project under its non-legally binding Letter of Intent. Canada would get the “Canada provisions” of the Bill put into law and then who knows what would happen next to the owners of the Ambassador Bridge.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">You had better watch and listen to the video again so you will truly appreciate what Canada’s Transport Minister, Chuck Strahl, said in the Canadian House of Commons just days before the federal election was called! It is Canada’s official position on DRIC.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Former Progressive Conservative Cabinet Minister and now President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Perrin Beatty was right. Canada’s actions respecting DRIC and the $550M are “unprecedented.” Pretending to provide money to a financially distressed State is reprehensible and revolting when the reality is that Canada intends to provide:</p><br /><p style="PADDING-LEFT: 30px"><span style="color:#ff0000;"><strong>Zero Taxpayer Dollars, Not A Single Dollar For DRIC.</strong></span></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Combine this new revelation along with the <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/2011/03/20/squeeki-leaks-exclusive-was-parliamentary-privilege-violated-in-the-border-file/" target="_blank">Squeeki-leaks documents </a>dealing potentially with the withholding of relevant information from Parliament. Add in Senior Liberal MP Joe Volpe’s allegation that the <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/2011/04/08/unpredictable-border-file-update/" target="_blank">$550M could well be a bribe</a>. Then wonder why the Opposition Liberal and NDP Parties have not jumped on DRIC as a major election issue going to the heart of the credibility of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Government!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Are the media asleep as well?</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Governor Rick Snyder, if he has any respect for himself and the people of Michigan, has no alternative but to instruct Lt. Governor Calley to cease working immediately on a DRIC/P3 Bill and to denounce the Government of Canada for its perfidious actions. He must demand that Canada allow the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project to be constructed now.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">If he does not have the guts to do it or if he has bought into Canada’s plan to destroy the Moroun family ownership of the Ambassador Bridge (and perhaps P3 Michigan assets like the major highways and turn them all into toll-roads), then the Michigan Legislature must.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">If you will remember, ex-Transport Minister Baird told us when he first made the offer of the $550 million loan that it is part of a generation or two of effort by Canada to try and crush the owner of the Ambassador Bridge. Note significantly that he also said that the last decade was the really hard work. It is true after all. That comment is significant as you shall see shortly.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">And the $550M loan which is not a loan, Transport Minister Strahl just ripped up the worthless Letter of Intent and threw it in the Governerd’s face. It was a nothing anyway and Strahl just admitted it. So much also for the Governerd’s “unique agreement” and the $2.2B federal matching grants based on Canada’s money!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Thank goodness for the Canadian election. It forced the truth out.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">To put it simply, I was stunned. Completely unable to believe what I was hearing and reading.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">But there is even more if you can believe it. There are two separate statements that mean the end of DRIC.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Strahl’s comment was the first, then this remark was next.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">I was completely vindicated. Everything that I had said on here was absolutely correct. The entire DRIC process was a complete and utter fraud perpetrated on both taxpayers in Michigan and Canada and the Ambassador Bridge Company.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">He has been around at the Canadian Consulate in Detroit since at least 1985 so he would have some idea of what he is talking about. George Costaris made this comment that just has blown my mind:</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">“The Canadians' offer to cover all $550 million of Michigan's costs, at least at this point, is not term limited, said George COSTARIS, director of the Consulate General of Canada. <span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">The last four governments in Canada, dating back to 1999, supported the idea of the bridge formerly known as the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC).” </span></strong></span>(MIRS March 24, 2011)</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Do you understand the significance of what he said? What Baird said above is true. For a dozen years we have been playing a game. We thought that we were going through a fair, unbiased, objective and proper exercise to determine if a new bridge was needed in Detroit/Windsor and if so where it was to be located and who would build it.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">That wasn’t the case. It was a done deal right from the start. We should have known especially when the so-called independent consultants on both sides of the river came out without shame and were part of an advocacy ad supporting DRIC. Did you hear anyone objecting to that?</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">The decision had already been made in 1999 according to Costaris. We wasted all this time and all this money for one purpose only: to get rid of the Moroun family ownership of the Ambassador Bridge. After all, just over a year ago the Prime Minister instructed his Transport Minister to buy the Bridge since he knew before we did that the US Feds turned off the money for the northern border crossings. DRIC would not work. There was not enough money to build it.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Was DRTP part of this game as well? Perhaps since a similar concept had been turned down many years before but no one told us that. It was taken so seriously with a huge PR budget with its front in Canada being a former Windsor Mayor. Do you remember how many business and labour groups demanded it be built, just like with DRIC now? What a similar modus operandi!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Was it step number one to try to force the Moroun family to sell out cheaply? After all, it was said that it would take away about half of Moroun’s business, just like DRIC. If that didn’t work, then was the pretend DRIC bridge project the backup plan? Now we have the doublestack rail tunnel as the new DRTP.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">How much money has been wasted? Scores of millions of dollars on both sides of the river.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">How much time has been wasted? Over a decade.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">How much has the region been devastated by this inaction? Incalculable… but look at the drop of the population in Detroit and probably in Windsor as well as the unemployment numbers to understand how we have lost out!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Frankly, I want my money back that has been spent on this file and so should all taxpayers. I want those responsible for this charade to pay us back those millions of taxpayer dollars. And as for the Bridge Company, their lawsuits already started will look even better especially when punitive damages claims are added and individuals are sued as well.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">It has all been a lie. That is not what Governments are supposed to be doing. Those who have perpetrated this fraud on us should not be allowed to get away with it. Let them suffer now. Make them pay. Let their heads roll too.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">However, if you think that is bad, it gets even worse when you add in the Strahl comment. It is again confirmation of everything I have said about the phony offer of $550 million from Canada.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Here is the exchange during the House of Commons Question Period. You will not believe what you are reading:</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">“Champlain Bridge</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Mrs. Josée Beaudin (Saint-Lambert, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in a letter published in La Presse, the Minister of Transport continues to deny the facts. Although engineers have said that some sections of the Champlain Bridge could collapse, the minister continues to claim that the bridge is safe and that construction of a new bridge can wait.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Does the Minister of Transport realize that it is his indifference to the needs of Quebec that could trigger an election?</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">[English]</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Hon. Chuck Strahl (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC): Mr. Speaker, clearly the Champlain Bridge is an extremely important bridge. That is why we are investing almost $400 million in it over the next 10 years to make sure it stays safe.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">I am not an engineer. A good question to ask is: whom do we ask about this? We ask the engineers who inspect the bridge. We ask the CEO who oversees the bridge. We work with the provincial government, which works with us to make sure the bridge is safe.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Of course the bridge will have to be replaced in the longer term. However, Montrealers should know that the bridge is safe and will be safe. We will be working closely with the Quebec government to make a long-term plan for its replacement in the years to come.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">[Translation]</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Mrs. Josée Beaudin (Saint-Lambert, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives managed to find the money needed to build a new bridge in Windsor, Ontario. <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">They even advanced $550 million to help Michigan pay for its share. </span></strong>However, when the time comes to replace the busiest bridge in Canada, which is in Quebec, they cannot come up with the money. That is just wrong.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">When will Quebec's needs get the same attention as the needs of Ontario and Michigan?</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">[English]</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Hon. Chuck Strahl (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC): <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">That was a good question, Mr. Speaker. How much money are we going to spend on the new Windsor bridge? </span><span style="color:#ff0000;"><em><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline">We are going to spend zero taxpayer dollars.</span></em></span><span style="color:#ff0000;"> It is a P3 project. </span><span style="color:#ff0000;"><em><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline">It will not have a single dollar in it</span>.</em></span></strong></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">Perhaps that is an option for the Champlain Bridge. The reason we are not saying that is because we are going to wait for the report to be tabled with me. When that report is tabled, options will be presented to us, including design ideas, whether it should include a railway, whether it should include rapid transit, whether it should include a bus route. There are lots of options. We are certainly not going to go into this willy-nilly.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">While the bridge is safe, Montrealers should use it.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px">We will be working with the Quebec government to design an option.”</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">ZERO DOLLARS. NOT A SINGLE DOLLAR.</span></strong></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Take a look at and listen to the Transport Minister. He is so proud of himself</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">What happened to the $550 million? I told you I could not find it in Canada’s Economic Action Plan. I told you that it was not in the Budget. I asked Conservative Member of Parliament, Jeff Watson, months ago to tell me where it was budgeted but he refused to answer me.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Clearly, the Minister has now confirmed that it has never been there. It too was all a joke on Michigan.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">As I have said so many times, there was no binding and enforceable legal commitment on Canada to put up one single penny. All that Canada wanted was a DRIC/P3 Bill passed so that the “Canada provisions” would come into law so that Canada would become in Instrumentality of Government of Michigan thereby taking over some of the sovereign powers of that State.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">When the time came for Canada to put up some money, there are so many provisions in that Letter of Intent that allowed Canada not to put up cash that it was a joke.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Did the MDOT Director know this? Or was he fooled too? Do you remember this drawing showing us where Canada’s money was supposed to go?</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/2011/04/11/canada-zero-taxpayer-dollars-not-a-single-dollar-for-dric/strahlzerodollars/" rel="attachment wp-att-14790"></a></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Someone needs to ask the Director how he could possibly provide this information to the Legislature if in fact he knew that Canada was not going to contribute anything. If he knows it only now, what choice does the Director have but to tell the Governor that it won’t cost Michigan taxpayers a dime but rather it will cost them $550M and more? And if there is a toll revenue shortfall, since Canada contributes zero taxpayer dollars, who makes it up other than Michigan taxpayers or the whole project goes into receivership on Day 1!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Look at the drawing---$550M was earmarked for specific parts of the project. It was to be Canada’s money, not P3 money. How then can the Minister claim that zero taxpayer dollars would be spent? How can he claim it would be P3 money when it was not?</p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq1r338k1Dy86Xo3vFn1mEbPkPp2BhF5kTSDws7F7F-7LKq4TrTsVoMB5TLZFZP13YFPW8xVTwxIgF7MdiNUKZ_1ufUHARtlcO4YgUahQLSKwLSv0GZTQK7bUZze1omgkE7nGL1A/s1600/strahlzerodollars.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 359px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5595066398356827218" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq1r338k1Dy86Xo3vFn1mEbPkPp2BhF5kTSDws7F7F-7LKq4TrTsVoMB5TLZFZP13YFPW8xVTwxIgF7MdiNUKZ_1ufUHARtlcO4YgUahQLSKwLSv0GZTQK7bUZze1omgkE7nGL1A/s400/strahlzerodollars.JPG" /></a> <br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Did he forget <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/?attachment_id=14783" target="_blank">what Minister Baird said </a>when he first offered the loan? Or did he think we would forget. Just click the link</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">What is the truth!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">That leaves a nice big $550 million hole for DRIC, along with another $270 million hole because the US Federal Government does not have money to put into the northern border. Alternatively, if the P3 is going to pay for it, then it must finance an additional $820 million. It should be obvious that the project is not financially viable because there is no way that toll revenues will ever be able to cover this amount of money along with the bridge costs. Tolls would have to be so high that no one would ever use DRIC</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">If there is no $550 million, then their $2.2 billion that the Governerd and MDOT were counting on under their “unique agreement” for federal matching grants has vanished. The Governerd now faces a $600 million hole in his Transportation Budget for 2012 and 2013. Can it truly get any worse for Michigan!</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Let me be blunt. The Canadian Transport Minister has just kicked the Governerd and the State of Michigan where it hurts the most. Canada has made a fool out of Michigan. Or rather, the Governerd has allowed himself to be made a fool and has caused severe financial distress to the State.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">A decade-long plan to force the Ambassador Bridge out of business. A Letter of Intent with no intention to pay out a single penny--- <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">ZERO DOLLARS. NOT A SINGLE DOLLAR.</span></strong> That is all that this border file has all been.</p><br /><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">In Canada, we set up judicial inquiries and demand Auditor General investigations of boondoggles and scandals like this. Our American friends must have an equivalent approach. It is time to let the light shine in on the DRIC file and to ensure that those responsible for it face the consequences of their actions.</p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-45805527678729725972010-07-27T22:20:00.007-04:002011-03-30T19:42:30.866-04:00Meet Me At The Square<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">In case you have not heard, I have a new address. Come and meet me at The Square:</span></strong><br /><br />I have moved to <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/">http://www.windsorsquare.ca/</a><br /><br />See you at The Square with my new Blogs. Click OPINION and you will find me!<br /><br />Remember as well to change your WindsorCityBlog Favorites in your browser toolbar to: <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/">http://www.windsorsquare.ca/</a><br /><br /></div><p align="center"><object width="300" height="245"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cBzPJIL3nDY&hl=en_US&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cBzPJIL3nDY&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p><p></p><p></p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-47857751694498665052010-07-19T07:00:00.006-04:002010-07-19T07:25:59.326-04:00WindsorCityBlog Is Moving to Windsor Square<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">It was time already.<br /><br />With thousands of BLOGs posted already, and hopefully with many more to come, I needed a new website that allowed me to do more than the Blogger template allowed.<br /><br />Enter The Square! </span></strong></div><div align="justify"><br /><br /></div><a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 392px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 102px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5495573968522392786" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQobFxFPkCjrUyckA_oIZdrwY0MC-XVyk8TE7j5mMcjNF-rkdO6HqcaKl9OnBDqvpTbVXWveOqzMr1CmH41M61irBqXhW_5HexU2K0AMJG3s9YkbVdPNsWsQXW-pj_jS-4U5rfRg/s400/Windsorsquarelogo.JPG" /></a><br /><br />Go on, don't be afraid. Click on the image and see what happens! <div align="justify"><br />I was invited to move my BLOGsite to Windsor Square. Who could resist considering who my neighbours would be: some of the best political Bloggers in town with more to come on board later.<br /><br />So I bid a fond adieu to my home for these many years and start the next leg of my Blogger journey at Windsor Square <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">http://www.windsorsquare.ca</span></strong></a><br /><br />See you at The Square this morning with my first new Blog. Click OPINION and you will find me!<br /><br />Remmeber as well to change your WindsorCityBlog Favorites in your browser toolbar to: <a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">http://www.windsorsquare.ca</span></strong></a><br /><br />Check out the Press Release: </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><ul><li><div align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>Introducing Southwest Ontario's newest information destination</strong></span>.<br /><br />Windsor Square is an online news and opinion portal featuring regular political commentary and analysis of the happenings in and around Windsor and Essex County. The Square provides insightful news perspectives, in depth analysis, and solid background for people who want more than what traditional news sources provide.<br /><br />Some of the area's best known political observers have agreed to join our new community. Look for the insightful discussion of events that you have come to expect from Line of Sight, The Mayor of Monmouth, Windsorcityblog and others. They are now all regular contributors in one convenient location at The Square.<br /><br />Windsor Square also provides access to news from around the corner and around the world with many of the articles sourced directly from the newsmakers themselves. Whether originating in Tiananmen Square, Times Square, or Trafalgar Square, the readers of The Square can access the world in their own backyard.<br /><br />WHY "THE SQUARE"<br /><br />Based on the notion of a town square, The Square is a public space in the heart of our community where citizens can gather, converse, and learn. Think of The Square as your little area of firm foundation from which to expand your knowledge. All persons are encouraged to join together in respectful discourse and cooperation.<br /><br />Add "Windsor Square" to your list of favourites. We trust that you will become a regular visitor to The Square!<br /><br />Register as a subscriber and make your feelings known through the online comments section or by writing to <a href="mailto:letters@windsorsquare.ca"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">letters@windsorsquare.ca</span></strong></a> or <a href="mailto:editor@windsorsquare.ca"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">editor@windsorsquare.ca</span></strong></a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.windsorsquare.ca/"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">http://www.windsorsquare.ca</span></strong></a><br /><br /></div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-46587017773829884262010-07-16T08:00:00.000-04:002010-07-16T08:06:13.515-04:00The Anti-Bridge Company Conspiracy Revealed<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">You know perfectly well, dear reader, from what I have Blogged so many times before that I believe that the three levels of Government in Canada--Federal, Provincial and Municipal--are working together to try to force the Ambassador Bridge Company to sell out cheaply.<br /><br />So if I said it again, it would just be ho-hum news to you.<br /><br />However, what if a person who can hardly be said to favour the Ambassador Bridge Company said it or someone who supported another crossing alternative, say a rail tunnel, and what if this person said it years ago? Would that change your mind?</span></strong><br /><br />Here are some comments that I read from an article that I found on the Internet that I consider to be particularly fascinating. What is really of significance as you read it is that each level of Government in Canada is working strictly within its constitutional authority:</div><ul><li><div align="justify">The Federal Government is dealing with the International Bridge via Bill C3. </div></li><li><div align="justify">The Province has responsibility over the road to the border. </div></li><li><div align="justify">The City does its part by passing bylaws to prevent the Bridge Company from doing anything with respect to the Indian roads houses demolition and with its interim control by law. </div></li></ul><div align="justify">When looked at in a combined fashion, the Governments have circled the Bridge Company to try to stop them! Magnificent plan isn't it. And so well co-ordinated. </div><div align="justify"></div><br /><div align="justify">I have no idea who the author is, Samuel Knapp but the same article is seen in a number of websites. Knapp is a clear advocate for the DRTP rail tunnel. And remarkably, a fellow by the name of Bill Muir wrote an article with the same title. Hmmm I wonder if it was a search engine optimization gambit.<br /></div><br /><div align="justify">And don't you just love the article title too to make it so much easier to confirm my suspicions:</div><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Canada is Fully Engaged on the Detroit-Windsor Border Crossing</span></strong><br /><br /><strong>Federal Action</strong>: At the end of January 2007, the Canadian federal government passed a law known as C-3. This law confirms the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over international bridges and tunnels; requires governmental approval for the construction or alteration of new and existing bridges or tunnels; requires governmental approval for all changes in ownership, operation and control of international bridges or tunnels; and authorizes the government to make regulations regarding bridge maintenance and repair, safety and security, and operation and use. In short, this law gives Transport Canada control over all 24 border crossings -- including private structures -- and any future border crossings between Canada and the U.S. (see page 6 of the Addendum for additional highlights).<br /><br /><strong>Provincial Action</strong>: Last week the Ontario provincial government announced that it would explore a "comprehensive solution" to border traffic problems, with tunneling (of trucks in Windsor) as a part of the discussion. Building a tunnel under Windsor for trucks would provide environmental, health, safety and economic benefits (see page 9 of the Addendum for a Windsor Star article on the Provincial action).<br /><br /><strong>Local Action</strong>: Also last week, the city of Windsor City Council passed two bylaws that will be in effect for one year and may be extended to two years while a community improvement plan is completed. The bylaws will not permit the construction of new buildings or structures or the demolition of old ones, and will ensure that the area's attributes and physical features are not negatively affected or destroyed. In effect, this suspends the Ambassador Bridge's plan to build a new, expanded customs plaza in Windsor (see page 11 of the Addendum for a Windsor Star article on these bylaws)." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">It is set out so precisely and succinctly than even a DRIC-ite could understand it and be able to figure out how he/she has been used to further Canada's border ambitions!</p><p align="justify">And you wondered why Canada had to become an Instrumentality of Government of Michigan under the proposed Michigan P3 Bill after Transport Canada Minister Baird's UP TO $550M loan offer which is not a loan. </p><p align="justify">DUH, Canada would be able to act on BOTH sides of the river against the Bridge Company and to take action against an American company that neither Michigan or the US feds would dare try!</p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-52957073550288235862010-07-15T11:15:00.001-04:002010-07-15T11:19:40.173-04:00Windsor Tales<div align="justify"><span style="color:#ffff00;"><strong>Here are some more thoughts for you.<br /></strong></span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>IT IS ALL GARBAGE</strong></span><br /><br />A reader scolded me recently:</div><ul><li>"You have been strangely silent on the contacting out of garbage-recycling."</li></ul><p align="justify">Frankly, he is right. My defense is that I just couldn't be bothered. I know it is not a good one but that is how I felt.<br /><br />There was no doubt in my mind what the result would be. How could there be considering what happened with the daycare workers and soon with the Parking enforcement officers.<br /><br />Where you have a City Council that has to be re-elected based on an anti-Union campaign, there is not much point trying to convince them to do something else otherwise. The workers needed to develop a program to protect their position but I did not see anything that they did to help themselves.<br /><br />Where you have a City Council that will not give its workers basic courtesy by deferring reports for a week or two so that they can properly either try and work out an arrangement to save daycare or to talk with the County Board or to investigate further into the supposed winner of a garbage RFP, then you know it is all a done deal.<br /><br />Moreover, I have little respect for CUPE. It has let its members down terribly from its shameful handling of the bad faith claim against the City to its failure to take obvious steps that would have protected both the daycare workers and the garbage workers at least in the short term.<br /><br />As you know, I have offered suggestions on here as to what they should consider but I've not seen any steps taken by the local leadership to suggest that they want to listen to anything that I have to say.<br /><br />In the circumstances, there are a lot of other subjects for me to write about and so I have chosen to let this issue go and let others do the work about it.<br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">ALL IS FORGIVEN</span></strong><br /><br />Whew, it looks like Edgar (aka Eddie) may be a favourite with the Toronto media again. They must have forgotten about the disaster involving the near riot which forced the unfavorable settlements for taxpayers in both Windsor and Toronto with respect to the CUPE strikes.<br /><br />Ooops, I forgot. We in Windsor believe that the hardliners won the strike.</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"But Ford’s campaign manager Nick Kouvalis said Green spoke to a couple of city staff, including director of council services Winnie Li, telling them the Ford team was not permitted to have a campaign event in the square...<br /><br />No wonder Ford’s promises to protect the taxpayer are resonating with angry citizens.<br /><br />Despite Green’s best attempts to thwart the delivery — and the Toronto Star’s weak effort to divert the message with their “smear de jour” — Ford’s proposals respond very well to a public disenfranchised with City Hall.<br /><br />His Taxpayer Protection Plan will include opening the $1 billion in major city purchases and contracts to competitive bids and offering protection to those city employees who blow the whistle on waste, abuse and mismanagement of the public purse.<br /><br />“Taxpayers have the right to know they’re getting the best value for their money,” he said.<br /><br />“Too often ... too many purchases are negotiated behind closed doors without competitive bidding,” he added, pointing to the sole-source contract signed with Bombardier for $750 million in subway cars...<br /><br />Ford said he’ll be definitely be looking at contracting out garbage pick-up as well — following a decision by Windsor city council to do so earlier this week.<br /><br />Early Tuesday morning Windsor council voted 8-3 to award a seven-year contract to Turtle Island for 100% of its residential curbside garbage pickup. Pickup by the private sector, projected to save $8.9 million, will commence in the new year.<br /><br />No wonder Green attempted to shut down Ford on Wednesday." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Is that a Windsor boy who is Ford's campaign manager? If so, I guess there was no work here with no one running of significance yet for Mayor of Windsor.<br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">THE MANAGEMENT GARBAGE MAN GOETH</span></strong><br /><br />What a coincidence that Ron McConnell is retiring now that the garbage collection may be outsourced to a private entity. He was one of the management people who was skeptical about private collection. It seemed as if Council was never given the opportunity to listen to what he had to say since more senior people made the presentations about the issue.</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Please join us in congratulating Anne Marie Albidone in her appointment to the position of Manager of Environmental Services...<br /><br />Anne Marie came to the Corporation in 1995 as a Plant Operator in the Pollution Control area. In 1998, she became temporary supervisor at Environmental Services and since 2005, held the position of Environmental Services Contract and Operations Administrator at Solid Waste.<br /><br />In her new capacity, Anne Marie will be challenged with the transition from public sector to private sector collection services and the reorganization of duties of various management staff in the Environmental Services area as a result of these changes." </div></li></ul><p align="justify"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">TOO BAD WIMBLEDON IS OVER</span></strong><br /><br />I see that our Head of the Undevelopment Commission is flying over to England for a trade show. Flying overseas seems to be a tradition for the Undevelopment Commission people. England is so lovely at this time of the year.<br /><br />However, I wonder how many jobs have been created by all of these wonderful trips.<br /><br />He may as well go because I am not sure what he is accomplishing in Windsor considering that the Mayor is doing all of the development work without him:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Mayor Eddie Francis returned from a one-day round-trip to Montreal Tuesday saying that progress had been made in an attempt to bring further economic investment to Windsor.<br /><br />"We continue to make progress, it was a very productive meeting but we still have two or three steps to complete before we can contemplate any type of announcement," said Francis. "I'm fairly confident it will continue to go well and that we can bring this investment to Windsor."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">I see that the Vice-President still does the talking for the Commission. </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Our objectives in attending this show are quite simple," said WEEDC vice-president Patrick Persichilli, who will be at the show with CEO Ron Gaudet."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">I love this comment as well considering that it is a taxpayer paid trip:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"And anytime you get an opportunity to put the Windsor region on someone's radar screen, it's priceless."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">I'm shocked that the Mayor did not say so far if he is going over or is he because he's not going to be at the Council meeting I am told on July 26</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Attending trade shows of this kind is important if the Windsor area is to stand any chance of becoming a bigger player in the aerospace sector, said Mayor Eddie Francis.<br /><br />"It's something you have to do to open up and keep open channels of communication," said Francis."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">The next Farnborough International Airshow will be held from 19-25 July 2010.</p><p align="justify">I should not be so cynical. I guess that they might be following up on the fabulous success with industry members, something we have heard nothing about, during the sessions at the Red Bull air races. You remember, I Blogged about the various sessions held.<br /><br />Who knows, maybe there is something going on with respect to our air industry since Montréal is a centre of aviation in Canada.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>CANCELLED CITY HALL PRESS RELEASE</strong></span><br /><br />One of my inside moles found this press release in a dumpster at City Hall. I guess someone forgot to shred it. It obviously was prepared for the hugely successful one day trip of Edgar (aka Eddie) to and from Montréal as discussed above: </p><ul><li><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">News Release<br /><br />Mayor Achieves Huge Result for Windsor, Again<br /></span><em><span style="color:#ff0000;">(Except We Cannot Tell You About It)</span><br /></em></strong><br />The Office of the Mayor announced today that the Mayor will have an announcement sometime in the future. This announcement has nothing to do with previous announcements of announcements.<br /><br />"I cannot give the taxpayers any more details about my trip. At the request of the investor, I cannot tell anyone, including councillors, what I am doing," said Francis. "I would like to thank the Windsor Star for planting this story despite the fact that no one, including many councillors, knew that I was out of town. The newspaper's continued support of me is appreciated."<br /><br /></div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-18379870031118828162010-07-15T00:01:00.001-04:002010-07-14T19:23:19.486-04:00The Real Border Issue: The Corridor Not The Bridge<div align="center"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;"><span style="font-size:85%;">“Transport Canada’s “NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGIC GATEWAYS AND TRADE CORRIDORS”<br /><br />“Gateways and trade corridors are major systems of marine, road, rail and air transportation infrastructure of national significance for international commerce, within a defined geographic zone.<br /><br />Gateway: a multi-modal entry/exit point through which goods and international passengers move beyond local, and even regional, markets.<br /><br />Trade Corridor: a linear, multi-modal orientation of international passenger and freight flows that connect gateways to major markets.<br /><br />Gateway and corridor strategies are integrated packages of long-term investment and<br />policy measures that advance the development and exploitation of gateways and corridors for national benefit.’</span><br /><br /></span></strong></div><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Most of us missed it, completely. One of the key parties did not, however, as I shall describe below. Our attention was too directed towards the Ambassador Bridge itself and the proposed DRIC bridge. We missed the “Big Picture.”<br /><br />I could never understand why Transport Canada Minister Baird talked about the Canadian Government working for a generation or two, about 50 years, in this area. It made no sense. Oh sure, I understood that the Government wanted to take over the Ambassador Bridge. After all, that is what Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s secret mandate letter was all about. But for 50 years?<br /><br />There had to be more to it than that but I could not figure out what it was until I read the opinion by the Wayne State professor that supports the Bridge Company position.<br /></span></strong><br />What that opinion really says is that the Government of Canada recognized that it made a mistake almost 80 years ago and that it has been trying for 50 years to correct it without tipping their hand or letting anyone understand why.<br /><br />The mistake: losing control of the major trade corridor and Gateway between Canada and the United States, the entire waterfront area between Detroit and Windsor and even beyond. It must be galling for Canadian bureaucrats when they hear about the Ambassador <strong><em>Gateway</em></strong> project.<br /><br />The lightbulb finally went on. I completely had ignored it after all of this time. The hints were there but I was too focused on the wrong object. The Government of Canada has known it all along since they have been working on getting control back for 50 years. Here are a couple of examples of what I overlooked even in my own BLOGs:</p><ul><li><div align="justify"> Conservative MP Russ Hiebert has thrown support behind a plan to nationalize security, maintenance and use of border infrastructure. Bill C-3, known as the Bridges and Tunnels Act, will give the federal government exclusive authority over 29 bridges and tunnels to the U.S....This bill will allow us to fully manage trade and security at all border points, and is especially timely as the <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Detroit-Windsor trade corridor is growing</span></strong> desperate for additional border transit capacity,” the MP said"<br /><br /> <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Given the importance of the corridor</span></strong> and the fact that 40% of Canada's trade goes along the corridor and adding another bridge is very essential, not only just to Ontario and Quebec but the rest of the country with our GDP so tightly wound around basically a private American operator that owns the current bridge"</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Even Jeff Watson got into the game:</p><ul><li><div align="justify"> “<strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">In my corridor</span></strong>, a private bridge operator is threatening the binational process for moving forward. This private interest is moving very quickly to twin the span there which really threatens to undermine a process that we are a partner in.” </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Transport Canada’s “NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK” talks about Windor/Detroit this way:</p><ul><li><div align="justify"> <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">The Windsor-Detroit corridor is Canada’s busiest artery of trade</span></strong>. With the area handling almost 30% of total Canada-U.S.trade and more than 2.5 million trucks, an efficient and secure Windsor-Detroit corridor is essential to the Canadian economy. </div></li></ul><p align="justify">What is the common word in all of the examples: “corridor.”<br /><br />Let me go a little bit further. I said that most of us missed it. The Bridge Company did not. They obviously figured out the issue. Here is what Dan Stamper said in the Canadian Senate hearings during the Bill C-3 hearings:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Mr. Stamper: The [Presidential]} permit process has developed in the U.S. by saying, "We will <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">issue a permit for the corridor</span></strong>. We want to know that the corridor is in the right geographical area for the good of the U.S. We want to know that that corridor is needed. We want to know that that corridor will not affect an existing corridor.” The presidential permit being issued says, "We the U.S. have looked at that and said the corridor is good." That is why the current presidential permit process says, "<strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">We are not going to affect or remove rights that a current corridor has because we issued that right to be there</span></strong>.<br /><br />Mr. Stamper: The bureaucrats projected the traffic growth at the Blue Water Bridge by taking it away from <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">the corridor in Windsor, Detroit</span></strong>...<br /><br />This attempt at Blue Water failed mainly because they built everything but what was needed, which was additional inspection booths for customs. The attempt now by the bureaucrats, if they could not move the traffic from Detroit-Windsor corridor to Sarnia-Port Huron, is to build <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">a bridge in the Windsor corridor</span></strong> and compete with us, but they cannot do it on a straight-up competition, and they know it. They have to have Bill C-3 to take our away business legally." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">It is the corridor that Canada wants to control not just the Ambassador Bridge. The corridor includes that bridge, any new Bridge, the Tunnel and the existing and proposed rail tunnel and whatever else might be constructed in the future. Remember the breadth of the P3 language as to what facilities it can cover.<br /><br />Here is the key section of what the Professor said that made me see clearly what this is all about.</p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpNJM4wwqZyE-4y2c2H0xRhjFYzmz2kq9o59K_4j_1pareBgoQCyMRvt4AurLS4P-6HkuwTrXmP7PL7rIWFeblo-nA27-VNXr_FxXl9IrBd4yJgrgHzOzw7ChxLhj-XXLmo9ZFXA/s1600/treaty.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 94px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5493882018428562962" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpNJM4wwqZyE-4y2c2H0xRhjFYzmz2kq9o59K_4j_1pareBgoQCyMRvt4AurLS4P-6HkuwTrXmP7PL7rIWFeblo-nA27-VNXr_FxXl9IrBd4yJgrgHzOzw7ChxLhj-XXLmo9ZFXA/s400/treaty.JPG" /></a><br />Note the extent of the grant. It is NOT to a specific location. Rather it is:</p><ul><li>"within or near the city limits of Detroit, Wayne County, Michigan." </li></ul><p align="justify">The Canadian legislation must be comparable. </p><p align="justify">That is the corridor that Canada signed away in an agreement with the United States and now wants back any way it can. Canada gave it all away to the Bridge Company, the entire corridor and is now desperate to get it back even if it means becoming an Instrumentality of Government of Michigan to do so through a P3 Bill.</p><p align="justify">For those looking for the word "exclusive," it is not necessary. If there had been the desire to allow another person to build a bridge in that territory, the right granted would have been "non-exclusive."<br /><br />Considering where the Governments want to build the DRIC bridge, such construction would interfere with the grant given to the Bridge Company and therefore would be illegal. </p><p align="justify">In passing, presumably, both Congress and Parliament might be able to pass new legislation permitting the DRIC bridge to be built. However, in this case, the Government would have to pay to the Ambassador Bridge Company compensation for taking away part of the right granted to them. The anomalous position would be that yes, the Government could build the DRIC bridge but would have to pay a huge sum of money to the Ambassador Bridge Company for the business that they would be taking away from them. And we know how much that is according to the DRIC engineers... up to 75% or so. Triple the truck traffic of today as Minister Baird continually keeps telling us.</p><p align="justify">Don't you get it? The Governments would be paying twice for a bridge across the Detroit River: once for the DRIC bridge and once for the Ambassador Bridge traffic that was lost. Is it any wonder now that the Prime Minister wanted to buy the Ambassador Bridge! </p><p align="justify">Transport Canada's policy says it all:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Gateways and trade corridors are major systems of marine, road, rail and air transportation infrastructure." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">No wonder that Canada wants a P3 Bill in Michigan with it being an Instrumentality of Government of Michigan that covers such facilities as "international highway, bridge, tunnel, ferry, airport, port facility, locks rail facility, intermodal or other public transit facility."<br /><br />You see, dear reader, Canada has corridors and gateways in the Atlantic region and in the Pacific region of our country that we control so we have some influence over trade and commerce into and out of the US. For 50 years, we have been trying to control the centre of North America. </p><p align="justify">It is so close that the bureaucrats can taste it. If it wasn't for that damn Bridge Company. </p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-19072197224921234382010-07-14T11:30:00.000-04:002010-07-14T11:30:00.911-04:00Border Banter<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Just a few thoughts on items that caught my eye over the past few weeks.</span></strong><br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>SERGIO MARCHIONNE AND DRIC</strong></span><br /><br />The things you learn that help make things understandable such as Chrysler's Sergio Marchionne's backing of DRIC:<br /></div><ul><li><div align="justify">James J. Blanchard<br /><br />Board of Directors, Chrysler Group LLC<br /><br />James J. Blanchard was appointed to the Board of Directors of Chrysler Group LLC on July 6, 2009.</div></li></ul><p>Paisano...did you know that Giacomo</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"is a $630-per-hour consultant to the DRIC project as a subcontractor of the Southfield office Louisville-based The Corradino Group.<br /><br />Corradino is a principal DRIC contractor, orchestrating environmental, traffic and engineering studies.<br /><br />He was hired as a DRIC consultant in 2007."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Did you expect him to tell you all the negatives about the DRIC bridge, mio amico? Have you asked him yet what the tolls would be on the new DRIC bridge for </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Each day, Chrysler moves more than 1,300 shipments, some 2,000 cars and trucks, and makes 1,600 entries per day at the Detroit-Windsor border, he noted. Hundreds of the automaker’s employees cross the border to work in the U.S. or Canada."</div></li></ul><p>Some have said they could quadruple! That would increase the price of your vehicles wouldn't it?</p><p align="justify">What about the toll revenue shortfalls, Sergio, did Blanchard explain to you how they would be paid for? Perhaps higher taxes on your profits?<br /><br />I like how the Detroit media reported the Mackinac visit by Sergio where he gave his pro-DRIC speech:</p><p align="justify">Crains reported: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Marchionne's dinner companions before his speech included former Gov. James Blanchard, now the UAW's representative on the Chrysler board and an adviser to a major consultant on the Michigan Department of Transportation's DRIC project."</div></li></ul><p>I guess the Free Press forgot </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Marchionne traveled to the island accompanied by Robert Kidder, Chrysler’s chairman, and former Michigan Gov. Jim Blanchard, a Chrysler board member appointed by the UAW-run retiree health care trust that that is Chrysler’s largest shareholder."</div></li></ul><p><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>WHY AREN'T DRIC-ITES ASKED THE QUESTION<br /></strong></span><br />How dare Dietrich Bergmann cast any doubt on the DRIC. There can only be one reason he is against it. Listen to this </p><p align="center"><br /><br /><br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sP9Q-rUARFg&hl=en&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><br /><br /><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sP9Q-rUARFg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br /><br /></p><div align="justify">It was like a blast from the past that gave me chills when I heard Senator Bash-him ask a question like this. Nothing like trying to smear a person who attends as a witness.<br /><br />Perhaps the Senator can explain why he was so nice to Representative Gonzales, a DRIC supporter, and did not ask him who gave him campaign contributions. </div><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">WHY BAIRD WANTS A BILL </span></strong><em><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">NOW</span></strong></em></span><br /><ul><li><div align="justify">"As for the DRIC, only Dillon is for it, having guided legislation authorizing the project through the House last week. Hoekstra and Ann Arbor businessman Rick Snyder have reservations and Bouchard, Attorney General Mike Cox, Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero and Sen. Tom George are all again’ it."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Here is what the candidates for Governor in Michigan are saying about their support for DRIC:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">Mike Cox said he doesn't support the project<br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Tom George said “the question is, will it help Michigan. I don't believe it will.<br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Rick Snyder said Michigan “should be a transportation hub,” but he has questions that need to be answered about the public-private partnership model.<br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Virg Bernero said he opposes the DRIC-related legislation as written, but thinks there is a need for a second span.<br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Mike Bouchard said they have received money from the Ambassador Bridge owners, and Bouchard said that “if we've got a private sector investor that's willing to build the bridge, let's take our money, time and investment elsewhere. He said he believes twinning the Ambassador, based on traffic studies, is the appropriate step.<br /><br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Peter Hoekstra said he's in favor of a public-private partnership to build a second bridge, using private money but he said that "we don't need charity from Canada"<br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Andy Dillon, who has supported the House-passed legislation that would allow the Michigan Department of Transportation to enter into public-private partnerships, said that investors are “not going to spend over $1 billion” on the DRIC if traffic doesn't justify the project, and that costs would be borne by the private sector.</div></li></ul><p align="justify"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">DOES MINISTER BAIRD DARE TRAVEL TO MICHIGAN AGAIN</span></strong><br /><br />I saw this story:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Granholm Urges Legislature to Send Anti-Bullying Bill to Her Desk</span></strong><br /><br />In her weekly radio address, Governor Jennifer M. Granholm today urged the Michigan Legislature to send her a bill that will help end harassment and bullying in schools.'</div></li></ul><p align="justify">While it is not the same, I do not think that the Governor and the Michigan Legislators would be amused with these comments heard in a Canadian House of Commons Committee meeting in relation to the Minister recently:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The proceedings quickly turned into a scene unbecoming of elected officials when Baird began shouting, questioning whether the committee chair knew what she was doing and declared himself ready to answer questions about the goings-on in his office.<br /><br />"Any member of Parliament, any one of the 308 members of Parliament, are entitled to come to committee, they are entitled to be heard," Baird said.<br /><br />"And Madame Chair, while I cannot vote, I am an elected member of Parliament and I am here to be heard. And I appreciate that it only took me 50 times to be able to ask to be heard, because you don't know the rules, and it is an absolute disgrace. I'm here as a member of Parliament, and I have every right to be heard."<br /><br />Committee chair and Liberal MP Yasmin Ratansi told Baird that "you are speaking as a witness, so decide what you want. You can't have it both ways..."<br /><br />Baird interrupted to say he never claimed to be a witness, to which Ratansi retorted: "Good, ‘bye."<br /><br />In another exchange, committee member and Liberal MP Siobhan Coady said "bullies in the schoolyard should never be listened to."<br /><br />"Are you trying to intimidate me, Minister Baird?" Coady later yelled. "Because I'll put myself up against you any day on intimidation factors. Don't try to intimidate me, ever!"</div></li></ul><p align="justify"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">HEADLINES AND NO ANALYSIS</span></strong><br /><br />Now you will understand why people have turned to BLOGs for analysis:</p><ul><li><div align="justify"><strong>Detroit Free Press </strong>"Study: New bridge can rake in $108M"<br /><br /><strong></strong></div></li><li><div align="justify"><strong>Windsor Star </strong>"DRIC bridge toll revenue set at $59.9M" "DRIC would be cash cow" </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Not one word about the financing costs and the huge shortfalls that someone has to pay for!<br /><br />And the newspapers wonder why people look elsewhere for information.<br /><br />At least the specialized business paper in Detroit had the story right although their headline could have been a bit better: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">DRIC span annual revenue estimated at $60 million in first year</span></strong><br /><br />Absent from the predictions are the annual construction financing debt payments. MDOT and the other DRIC partners want a private sector partner to finance, build and operate the bridge itself, and would put all financing payments and risk on the operator.<br /><br />Its assumed tolls would pay the construction and operational costs — something disputed by some infrastructure industry analysts who say the border traffic estimates upon which the revenue predictions are based are too optimistic.<br /><br />Most of the private-sector early-interest bids on the project also doubted tolls could cover the financing costs, and instead called for guaranteed government payments. The state has said it is confident that the small number of bids that believe tolls can pay for the project will force other bidders to fall in line." </div></li></ul><p align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>IS THE DRIC P3 BILL UNCONSTITUTIONAL</strong></span><br /><br />I thought that the AG letter to Rep Opsommer was pretty clear on that.<br /><br />However, now there is even more:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"State Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, said the House bill is flawed. He said Senate Republicans believe a second span is needed, but that the House-passed legislation is flawed and possibly illegal. Bishop said he will ask Attorney General Mike Cox to determine if it is unconstitutional.<br /><br />Bishop questioned the constitutionality of creating autonomous authority operated by the state transportation department, the Canadian government and private contractors.<br /><br />The federal constitution says a state is not allowed to enter into any kind of agreement with a foreign power like that,” Bishop said. “I’m concerned it’s directly contrary to our United States Constitution.”<br /></div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-42080876699154520002010-07-13T14:30:00.001-04:002010-07-13T14:44:13.687-04:00DRIC Road/Bridge Beauty Contest Winner Announced<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">It's just like the Miss Universe contest.<br /><br />All of those foreign companies who responded to the TC/MDOT RFPOI, wearing their finest gowns and skimpiest bathing suits as they flash their big smiles so that they could win the prize of DRIC P3 investor. The gifts are huge: billions of dollars of guaranteed DRIC availability payments (assuming they are legal) by ripping off tax-payers for 50 years or more on both sides of the border. It really is a no-brainer----for the winner. It's like money in the bank at a guaranteed rate of return with no risk, taxpayer money to boot!<br /><br />Michigan represntative Opsommer has been hinting about OMERS's role in DRIC:</span></strong></div><ul><li><div align="justify">"Why risk it? All of our bridges were constructed via specific legislation that did not grant MDOT new powers. It would be bad policy to cede tolling approval for the sake of one DRIC project. Also, it is important to note there is no "free bridge" as the $550 million dollars Canada would "give" us is a loan that would be repaid through tolls on Michigan drivers. (<strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Speculation is that the Canadian pension fund OMERS would be a 99-year investor</span></strong>.) The Legislature would have no say in toll increases, which would be set by MDOT and the investor."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Since the Representative has opened the door to speculation, let's close it and give the answer who the winner is.<br /><br />The beauty pageant winner? Who will be named as the fairest of the fair DRIC P3 proponents and be awarded the prize of excessive billions of taxpayers dollars if DRIC-ites get their way? </p><p align="justify">It is as easy to guess as speculating that the DRIC Engineers were never going to choose the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project as the new crossing for our border. Except we know that Prime Minister Harper really wants to buy that bridge as the media reported on his secret mandate letter and why Transport Minister Baird supposedly offered $550M to pass the Michigan P3 legislation.<br /><br />This is a public service announcement BLOG to warn two of the bidders on the Ontario DRIC road P3 project and many of the MDOT/Transport Canada RFPOI proponents to save their time, effort and money. Avoid disappointment. They have absolutely no chance of winning. So if you, dear reader, do not want to read the convoluted corporate machinations about how I came to my conclusion, then you are free to skip this BLOG.<br /><br />If on the other hand, you want to understand how I can be so sure of what I am speculating, read on.<br /><br />Actually, since the DRIC project is clearly now Canada's, and MDOT does what it is told, this BLOG really covers the entire DRIC Project since it will all be grouped into one big project, all of it. And the winner will take all.<br /><br />The Blogmeister is pleased to be able to let you know well in advance who the winner of the beauty pageant to build the DRIC Road is. Oh sure, I know nothing is supposed to happen until the end of the year but why keep you in suspense for so long.<br /><br />Here are the 3 lovely contestants who have been short-listed by our judge, Infrastructure Ontario. Well before that, as I have told you before, Gord is actually the one who gave it away a long time ago. I wonder if his provincial government insider gave him the scoop because it came in a pre-emptive strike against local contractors to make sure they do not get their hopes up:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"I don't know about you, but it would be this taxpaying motorist's worst nightmare if the most costly highway development in Ontario's history were to wind up being administered by some mom-and-pop Windsor company that would be in way over its head and unable to deliver the goods in a timely manner...<br /><br />Think about it. <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">When the feds built the $1-billion Confederation Bridge linking P.E.I. with New Brunswick in the 1990s, did they hand the assignment to local boy Bud The Spud and his trusty backhoe? No. They awarded the project to a major Calgary-based firm, Strait Crossing Inc</span>., </strong>which provided outside expertise but employed thousands of local workers and completed this remarkable link in less than three years...<br /><br />Windsor-area residents, who will have to endure a living hell during the anticipated four years of construction, with noise, dirt and traffic gridlock, have every reason to want this done by the most talented and fast-paced company, regardless of nationality, that money can buy."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Hmmm, only one company named. Interesting. And we know how well-connected Gord is.</p><p align="justify">The best a local can be as mini-Gord re-inforced is as a sub-contractor: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Cocos still player in parkway</span></strong><br /><br />Members of the local construction industry were shocked last week when the Coco Group of Companies was knocked out of the running to build the multibillion-dollar Windsor-Essex Parkway...<br /><br />But don't go crying for the Cocos. They're going to make millions on the Parkway project anyway. They would have raked in the profits had they won the grand prize to own half of this gigantic contract, but they'll do just fine as subcontractors to whichever international consortium is chosen to helm the job."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">I wonder for whom the Cocos will be a sub. Have they ever introduced a major contrator to Windsorites? If so, that would give us a big hint. Let the traditional media ask them for an answer. I can guess whom they saw, can't you, if anyone.</p><p align="justify">There, you have it. The winner is the group with Strait Crossing Inc as part of it. Straight from Gord's mouth (Oooops, sorry, bad pun). Or rather by way of the provincial government insider who really does know everything. [I wonder if you can guess who he/she is.] Only one company named in his whole column. But wait you say, you remember who the contestants are from a previous BLOG and they are not named there: </p><ul><li>- <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Rose City Parkway Group including</span></strong>:<br />- Aecon Concessions is a division of Aecon Construction Group Inc.<br />- Fengate Capital<br />- Dufferin, a division of Holcim (Canada) Inc.<br />- The Miller Group<br />- MMM Group Limited<br />- Macquarie Capital Group Limited<br />- HOCHTIEF PPP Solution North America Inc.<br />- Peter Kiewit Sons Co.<br />- AECOM Canada Ltd.<br />- H.W. Lochner<br />- Thurber Engineering Ltd.<br />- Applied Research Associates, Inc.<br />- RC Spencer Associates Inc.<br />- West 8<br /><br />- <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Windsor-Essex Transportation Partners including</span></strong>:<br />- Carillion Canada Inc.<br />- The Bank of Nova Scotia<br />- Stantec Consulting Ltd.<br />- PCL<br />- Bilfinger Berger Project Investments<br />- HSBC Specialist Investments Ltd (HSBC Infrastructure)<br />- John Laing Investments Limited (John Laing)<br />- Walsh Construction Company, a subsidiary of The Walsh Group, Ltd.<br />- Parsons Corporation<br />- Trow Associates Inc.<br /><br />- <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Windsor Essex Mobility Group including</span></strong>:<br />- Dilion Consulting Limited<br />- RBC Dominion Securities Inc.<br />- Iridium Concesiones de Infraestructuras, S. A.<br />- Acciona, S.A.<br />- Fluor Canada Ltd.<br />- Dragados Canada Inc.<br />- Acciona Infrastructure Canada, Inc.<br />- Hatch Mott MacDonald Ltd.<br />- AMEC Earth and Environmental, Ltd. </li></ul><p>Don't you just love the word "including." It is who is being hidden that makes this fun.</p><p align="justify">Ahhh, but you have to do some research to find out how Strait Crossing Inc got there. And the PEI Confederation bridge is a key fact to remember.<br /><br />Let's start here: </p><ul><li><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Strait Crossing Inc.</span></strong><br /><br />In 1988 a new, special purpose corporation, STRAIT CROSSING INC. (SCI), was established to undertake the $1.0 billion Confederation Bridge Project. Nearly all the senior staff of W. A. Stephenson and SCI Engineers & Constructors were transferred to lead the complete financing, design and construction of this major project. </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Then this: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">SC Infrastructure Inc. (“SCI”) Armbro, in conjunction with Strait Crossing Inc., formed SCI as a wholly owned subsidiary of Armbro effective December 1, 1997. The transaction involved SCI’s purchase of all of the noncontract assets of Capital Projects Group Inc. (“CPGI”), the principal operating subsidiary of Strait Crossing Inc. In addition, SCI retained all of CPGI’s senior management and staff. Based in Calgary, Alberta, it operates in North America and internationally. SCI combines Armbro’s experience in the development, construction and operation of infrastructure with Strait Crossing Inc.’s expertise in infrastructure development, design, financing, construction and operations.<br /><br />Strait Crossing Inc., as the sponsoring joint venture partner, led the consortium that completed the development, financing, design, construction and commissioning of operations of the awardwinning $1.0 billion Confederation Bridge between Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. For the past 20 years, senior management and staff of CPGI have provided project leadership for the construction of numerous high profile infrastructure projects in North America.</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Guess who became the owner of SCI: Armbro Enterprises Inc. </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"1999 was a year of significant achievements for Armbro. It was a year that marked Armbro’s 70th anniversary. But more importantly, it was a year that set a new benchmark for performance and created a new foundation for Armbro’s growth.<br /><br />A large part of that foundation was put in place in December 1999 with our acquisition of BFC Construction Corporation (“BFC”), the most recent in a series of strategic acquisitions that included SC Infrastructure (“SCI”) in 1997 and Miwel Construction in 1998. BFC adds its own long and proud history, dating to 1910, to that of Armbro’s. BFC was already a partner with Armbro in delivering several key projects such as the ground-breaking Highway 407 located just north of Toronto – Canada’s first all electronic toll highway and the Highway 104 toll road in Nova Scotia...<br /><br />infrastructure development _ Through SC Infrastructure Inc. (“SCI”) as well as through our interest in Canadian Highways International Corporation (“CHIC”), Armbro Enterprises is working with governments and their agencies to find new ways of conceiving, planning, financing, designing, developing, building and operating their infrastructure projects. Armbro has participated in a significant number of public-private partnerships world wide."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Then Ambro changed its name: Aecon Group Inc (formerly Armbro Enterprises Inc)<br /><br />Do you remember, part of the Rose City group is Aecon Concessions, a division of Aecon Construction Group Inc. Aecon Construction Group, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Aecon Group Inc. </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Aecon Concessions</span></strong><br /><br />Aecon Concessions brings the specialized capabilities and diverse strengths of the Aecon Group and its strategic partners to the development of domestic and international Public-Private Partnership (P3) and Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects. Within these projects, Aecon plays a pivotal role as an investor, constructor and/or operator." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">In fact, I was astounded that the Aecon President knew so much about the DRIC Road and to mention it specifically in the firm's annual report:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">June 17, 2008 ""The road building budget for the Ministry of Transportation has doubled over the last few years … and there is more work to be done.<br /><br />But while MTO is one of our most important customers, it is not the only transportation infrastructure game in Ontario.<br /><br />Plans are well advanced for the new $3 billion Detroit Windsor crossing scheduled for completion in 2014 …<em><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">and we plan to be there</span>."</strong></em></div></li></ul><p align="justify">And then this in June, 2009: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"We see an excellent bidding pipeline of new project opportunities coming on stream in 2009 and 2010. In particular, the appetite for “big transit, big highway and big energy projects” has never been stronger.<br /><br />To give you an idea of the scale of the work that is being conceived, looking out through to 2010, we have visibility on between $3 and $4 billion worth of P3 transportation projects ... and that is just in the Greater Toronto Area.<br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">The same thing is happening in other parts of the province– with projects like the Detroit/Windsor crossing..<br /><br />Aecon is well positioned to participate in its fair share of these projects. The field of qualified bidders for this kind of work is smaller and the margins can end up being better than what we see on smaller projects"</span></strong></div></li></ul><p align="justify">While not as precise, the Aecon people said in 2010:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Today, Aecon is doing more work in more parts of Canada than ever before. But we believe this is only the beginning of what Aecon is now poised to achieve.<br /><br />With our added size and diversification, comes the opportunity to increase the SCALE of the projects we pursue. Canada is a very big country. When we build things, we tend to build them big.<br /><br />And when project sponsors look around for the contractors that can help them achieve these big dreams, Aecon is now clearly seen as one of a select handful of firms that makes the cut...<br /><br />This change signals an important trend.<br /><br />As Aecon has become more diversified in the scope and geographic reach of our capabilities, and as our capacity has grown, we have been successful in winning and managing larger, more complex and higher value contracts...<br /><br />As Aecon moves ‘up market’ in terms of the type of contracts that we pursue, a number of good things happen.<br /><br />First, we find the competitive field less crowded. There are only so many contractors that have the experience, resources and surety capacity to qualify for these projects.<br /><br />Second, bidding is more disciplined as these larger more seasoned competitors operate under very structured environments and stay very focused on profit.<br /><br />And third, <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">larger projects will frequently see us participating with partners</span></strong>...<br /><br />The vast majority of our revenue is derived from contracts that are let either directly or indirectly by governments or large multi-national companies."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">No wonder Gord smashed the local contractors! </p><p align="justify">Oh and surely you did not forget this important connection between AECON's head honcho and Windsor:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The tony Toronto enclave Rosedale is abuzz this week with talk of a love match between well-known financial journalist Diane Francis -she writes a column in the National Post - and building baron John Beck.<br /><br />Mr. Beck is CEO and chairman of Aecon Group, which is the largest publicly traded construction and infrastructure company..." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">I explained what happened between them and Windsor's role in that in this BLOG:<br /><a href="http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2009/10/even-more-border-stories.html">http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2009/10/even-more-border-stories.html</a><br /><br />Then I found this:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP was recently involved in the following transactions:<br /><br />acting for the lenders to the Rose City Parkway Group consortium (with Macquarie, Hochtief, Aecon and Fengate as sponsors), which has been short-listed to design, build, finance and maintain the Windsor-Essex Parkway in Ontario."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Pshaw, you say. Blogmeister, you can do better than that. That is not enough information.</p><p align="justify">All right ye of little faith. Remember that the Confederation Bridge is important. Why----guess who is involved in its ownership:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">OMERS acquires Interest in the Confederation Bridge</span></strong><br /><br />(Toronto - June 2, 2003) OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System), has announced today that its subsidiary, BPC Maritime Corporation, has reached agreement with Ballast Nedam Canada Developments Inc. (Ballast Nedam) to acquire a 34% share of Strait Crossing Development Inc. (SCDI)."</div></li></ul><p>And guess who owns MMM Group Ltd. part of the Rose City Group:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"MMM president and chief executive officer Bruce Bodden said in an interview...<br /><br />his firm’s partnership with Borealis Capital Corp., which recently made a “significant” investment in MMM, together with its newly expanded capacity, will allow the firm to take on increasingly larger roles on complex projects while increasing its strength in key sectoral markets and considering new geographic ones." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">I saw this on MMM's website: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"MMM was subsequently retained to provide due diligence technical services by Borealis Capital Corporation for its purchase of the bridge. MMM also sits on the technical review committee for ongoing bridge services."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">You would not be surprised to know that:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"MMM is providing program management, transportation planning and design, environmental approvals, construction administration, mapping and surveying, and other services for the Detroit River Tunnel Project."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">But I especially liked this connection between OMERS and AECON:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The Ontario Power Authority has the job of ensuring that the people of this province have the power they need to light their homes and run their businesses.<br /><br />Aecon is part of the solution. A consortium comprised of Trans Canada, OMERS and CAMECO is investing more than $5 billion to upgrade the Bruce Nuclear plant on Lake Huron.<br /><br />Aecon’s Industrial Group is participating, together with SNC Lavalin, in a $200 million joint venture to upgrade, repair and replace numerous systems and equipment in the facility."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Bruce nuclear plant...wasn't Windsor's own Spanky the Minister of Energy at the time. The deal over Bruce was criticized by the Ontario Auditor General. But did our Dwight Duncan get upset about the extra money spent:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Still, Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said he would sign the same deal all over again.<br /><br />"The trade-off is what you pay for power," said Duncan, who was energy minister when the deal was negotiated, before becoming finance minister in October 2005 for seven months and then returning to the energy job."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">OMG...will he say that as Finance Minister when the DRIC Road deal costs too much too!<br /><br />Don't you find it interesting that Macquarie is part of the Rose City group too. They also submitted a proposal to finance the DRIC Bridge as a P3. </p><p align="justify">Wow, aren't they lucky they sold off their interest in the Detroit/Windsor Tunnel to Alinda. They probably would not have been allowed to bid since then they might be considered to be in a quasi-monopoly position the way Moroun was accused when he made a bid to operate the Tunnel for Detroit. What an insightful move by Macquarie.<br /><br />I wrote this in March, 2007:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Are the City and Macquarie working together too? Are Windsor, the Feds and Macquarie working together?<br /><br />My brain was reeling. I noted that Gowlings works for competitors of the Bridge Co. I knew that at one time they were Governance Counsel for Borealis too.<br /><br />Oh no.....Were Windsor, the Feds and Macquarie working together along with Borealis?<br /><br />Were Macquarie and Borealis going to be the P3 partner for the new border crossing?"</div></li></ul><p align="justify">But, but, but you say...where is the OMERS/Borealis name on the short-list?<br /><br />Get real. They cannot appear there. They just announced a competitive DRTP tunnel deal that could take away a whole bunch of the DRIC traffic and could put them in a quasi-monopoly position too!<br /><br />And have you forgotten what its leader, Michael Nobrega, really wants to do. He wants to be Canada's equivalent to a Macquarie Bank and be an investment manager for other pension funds because of OMERS' infrastructure skills, not just a pension fund manager for Ontario employees: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The C$60billion Ontario Municipal Employees’ Retirement System is currently seeking about three partners for a C$20 billion “global strategic investment alliance with like-minded investors to jointly own large-scale infrastructure and real estate assets”. The alliance, the brain child of OMERS CEO Michael Nobrega, is set up so that the LPs can bypass the GPs but still get great access to deals by virtue of the sheer amount of capital they have to deploy...<br /><br />The fee structure is as follows: two of OMERS’ investment arms, Borealis and Oxford, will source and manage investments. In the first five years, Borealis and Oxford will receive an annual asset management fee of 50 basis points on equity under management. A management board that will oversee the alliance will charge an additional fee of 35 basis points on invested capital to reimburse expenses...<br /><br />“What we’re trying to do is get access to large-scale, alpha projects. And having an extra fee here or there really doesn’t do it for us,” Nobrega said. “We really need to get the preferential product through capital formation. And that’s where the pension fund makes its wind – not through a carried interest.” </div></li></ul><p align="justify">And he wants big bucks too---to be like the Canada Pension Plan it seems: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Michael Nobrega, president and chief executive of Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS), wants the Ontario government to enact legislative changes immediately to make it easier for people in the province to save for their retirement...<br /><br />"I never believe these things happen with a big bang; these things are always incremental," Mr. Nobrega said. But he would like to see the Ontario government, through its legislative powers on pension plans, tweak its rules and allow individuals to join major pension plans already in existence.<br /><br />OMERS and Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, the two largest pension plans in the province, are available only to their constituents. But with a little legislative imagination, these plans could be open to anyone who wants to join, and ease the pension woes of people who are not covered by a plan, Mr. Nobrega contends."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">And this</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"OMERS is one of Canada's top pension plans, with more than C$43 billion ($41 billion) in assets under management, but Nobrega has argued it needs to be bigger to be able to take advantage of global opportunities.<br /><br />"I think anything under C$100 billion, you can't play," he told BNN television in an interview. "OMERS itself will grow organically over the next three to four years into the C$70 billion-C$80 billion range."<br /><br />Nobrega said OMERS -- the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System -- has not held merger talks with the country's other major pension funds, but has been approached by mid-size funds with assets under management in the C$5 billion to C$13 billion range to invest together in global opportunities.<br /><br />"Empirically, we have found that scale has worked to our advantage with respect to returns."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">And just so you think I am NOT kidding, this was said back in 2009:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Mr. Nobrega did not mince words when he told the audience that the government should mandate through legislation of private and public sector funds to create more such "super-funds." He argued that OMERS must be one of those funds because it was an industry leader in the area of infrastructure investing.<br /><br />Mr. Nobrega's pitch sounded like more of a plea to government. But he made a solid case.<br /><br />OMERS, he argued, "led the renaissance in the nuclear industry in this province... invested in the bricks and mortar of our healthcare infrastructure, (and) <span style="color:#ffff00;"><strong>we are currently invested in the Windsor/Detroit border crossing where one of the largest infrastructure programs must take place in order to produce hundreds of thousands of jobs."</strong></span><br /><br />In short, <span style="font-size:130%;color:#ffff00;"><strong>OMERS has paid its dues</strong></span>, he said."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Now you know why the DRTP Tunnel is so visible again. It's Nobrega's way of telling everyone the project is owed to him. Everything, the DRIC road, the financing of DRIC or rather the Ambassador Bridge purchase and the building of the twinned bridge beside it. </p><p align="justify">And the winner is....Representative Opsommer was right! </p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-46347902255870217262010-07-13T00:05:00.000-04:002010-07-12T17:26:05.202-04:00Survey Results: Most Expect Edgar To Break His Promise<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQ60qc8CHrXHiPAVrmuNZ1h1JgTXLytxUtYRum994eBfAC4sNAj00gpSPTTX9LYX58uR7K0BlQvy9F02Z3WOd68AyfekemmNDAZD5uFxDznTUUb1cRgvZRa0Aqw2u7CqXr0s-PGw/s1600/edgarsurvey.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 180px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5493132411061165954" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQ60qc8CHrXHiPAVrmuNZ1h1JgTXLytxUtYRum994eBfAC4sNAj00gpSPTTX9LYX58uR7K0BlQvy9F02Z3WOd68AyfekemmNDAZD5uFxDznTUUb1cRgvZRa0Aqw2u7CqXr0s-PGw/s400/edgarsurvey.JPG" /></a><br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">The latest WindsorCityBlog survey results are in.</span></strong><br /><br />Fewer than 20% of my readers who voted expect Edgar (aka Eddie) to keep his word about running for only 2 terms.<br /><br />Almost 50% of my readers expect Edgar to break his promise and run for a third term.<br /><br />The balance, don't know, don't care or live outside of Windsor.<br /><br />Looking at Windsorites only who had an opinion, almost 72% of them think Edgar will run again. </div><div align="justify"><br />The interesting question that I did not ask is whether Edgar running again is a good idea or a bad one for Windsor. That will come another time.<br /><br />As for me, my own view is that it does not matter what Edgar will say or do on July 20. It is nothing more than a ploy for whatever it is that he has already planned out a long time ago. We are nothing more than pawns in Edgar's chess game as he calls the moves.</div>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-46259085806936288142010-07-13T00:01:00.000-04:002010-07-12T18:03:46.056-04:00Unanswered Questions<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">I wonder if the City auditors have started working on the arena audit yet and how many years it will take before the public gets to see it. Will it be another Dunbar audit fiasco?<br /><br />There are so many "unanswered questions" surrounding that project. Actually, that expression is starting to dominate the Windsor political scene.<br /><br />Everywhere you look these days there are questions that are unanswered lying around it seems, just begging to be dealt with. But no one does. Does that seem fair to you?<br /><br />Here are just a few typical examples:<br /></span></strong><br /></div><ol><li><div align="justify">"I think our members are going to be very upset by this ... this still leaves unanswered questions," Local 543 president Jean Fox said of the board's decision not to hold a hearing.</div></li><li><div align="justify">Well, the Olympic Games are over and Stephen Harper stated he prorogued Parliament to stop and think. Upon reading government-related articles in The Windsor Star, I have some unanswered questions. (Letter to the Editor)</div></li><li><div align="justify">'A lot of unanswered questions' around Essex animal deaths</div></li><li><div align="justify">Paul Fields at Council saying that there were "unanswered questions" and missing information about the 400 audit</div></li><li><div align="justify">But while the big [DRIC] cable-stayed bridge and associated highway approaches could shift into gear possibly next year, one of the big unanswered questions is how it will be tendered and financed.</div></li><li><div align="justify">Detroit's council has so far refused to establish its new tunnel authority because of too many unanswered questions around the [Tunnel] deal.</div></li><li><div align="justify">County councillors unanimously called for a halt Wednesday to any attempt to close Windsor and Essex County daycare centres until there's been broad consultation with parents, staff and the county itself.<br /><br />Councillors cited too many unanswered questions to even consider the recommendations of a city social services department report to close in the coming months all seven daycare centres in the city and county, as well as two satellite operations in schools.</div></li><li><div align="justify">"Again, I have no idea what conversations took place between them and the proponent. It's not part of what showed up on the audit. Those are questions left unanswered."</div></li><li><div align="justify">Yet events this week seem to suggest that the original audit contained information about activities that some might consider malfeasance.<br /><br />Obfuscation on fiduciary matters is troubling and raises issues beyond the ones addressed monday night.<br /><br />Even those who think these actions were justified to avoid a lawsuit would have to agree there are still many unanswered questions.</div></li><li><div align="justify">Despite tightened security at U.S. airports and unanswered questions about how Abdulmuttalab escaped notice until it was almost too late, business proceeded as usual at Windsor’s airport on Monday</div></li><li><div align="justify">There are so many unanswered questions to a proposal to link Point Pelee with Hillman Marsh that the Essex Region Conservation Authority board had no choice but to send a consultant's report to Leamington to find out what council and residents think about it .</div></li><li><div align="justify">But Mayor Eddie Francis questioned in a phone interview Monday the need for an audit and accused Halberstadt of "creating a cloud of suspicion where there should be none."<br /><br />He said there were no "unanswered questions" and that Halberstadt was part of the discussions on the new arena until "declaring a conflict at the 11th hour."<br /><br />"If he wanted answers to the questions, he should have stayed on as part of the process," said Francis.</div></li></ol><p align="justify">Wow, do you see what I mean. All of those questions that are just waiting to be answered but who has the time to do it.</p><p align="justify">Now I do not want to be the one who has to tell Edgar (aka Eddie) this but I think a lot of people do have questions that they want answered over the Arena deal. Take the Pizza Queen, she has one:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Windsor's audit committee hopes to confirm a new auditor general in three weeks. It's asking council for a budget of half a million dollars.<br /><br />One of the first tasks could be an audit of the construction of the WFCU Centre. It should include the question people still ask: Did the city receive value when it swapped downtown land for the arena site?"</div></li></ul><p align="justify">So to provide a service to the Mayor, I would ask the Audit Committee to direct Angela Berry to find the answers to these specific questions since she is going to do the work anyway. If you can add to the list, dear reader, please let me know:</p><ol><li><div align="justify"> How and why did a public-private partnership concept to build an arena downtown at a maximum City cost of $15m and no other risk wind up in the East End with a City-run project at 100% with all risk on taxpayers<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Beztak rejection---was it fair how they were attacked in such depth but not anyone else<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was this all a done deal and worked out in advance<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was the process all a phony but designed to select a favoured company regardless of cost<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was Project Ice Track (PIT) treated the pits<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Were the Spitfires tied up by the City so PIT could never get them<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Were there unreported collateral deals not in the City’s interest to get the deal </div></li><br /><li><div align="justify"> Was the business case justifying the arena a proper one based on reality or was it based on a dream that bore no relationship to reality especially based on the actual experience<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> How could an arena to be built in Port Huron in 1999 cost so little today especially when much of the concrete forms to be used were all scrapped<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was the City “extraed” to death<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Where was PCR for all of the years of the arena debate and how did they just appear all of a sudden and after one or two letters become the contractor of choice<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Why were the other possible proponents just noted and filed<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was the Purchasing by-law circumvented thereby allowing another MFP-type deal (If so, what happened to all of the protections we thought that the PWC report was to give us)<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was there validity for the single source justification </div></li><br /><li> Why was it not mentioned that the City had its own arena plans which it purchased and why weren't they used<br /></li><li><div align="justify"> Was the Spitfires lease deal a good one for the City considering the huge sums to which the Spitfires are entitled over the term of the agreement<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> What was the total cost of the project and was it "on budget" based on original costs<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Were any“overage” costs buried in Departmental budgets and if so, which ones<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Should the developer where the arena land was purchased have paid some of the costs normally that the City has paid,<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Why was his land picked and not others that cost less in the area<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Did the City do proper due diligence before doing the deal with Mr. Farhi<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Did we get value for money ie what was left out to be paid for after the next election eg parking<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Did we get comparable arenas at the East end site with the smaller City arenas that are supposed to be closed (eg less seating)<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Why was a sound system not included originally in the package but added subsequently<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was the land exchange PLUS paying for the cleanup PLUS the 3 year tax holiday a good one for the City<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Why was everything rush, rush, rush to get everything done before the Council term ended eg no definitive plans and yet the deal was signed at the last Council meeting and is this a proper way to do municipal business<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Were there environmental issues there that were “buried”<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Are there still environmental issues eg Wickes plant takeover which means the City may to clean up arena lands if hazards migrated<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> What was the role of the Casino in all of this, if any<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Are legitimate arena costs now charged to General Revenues since the project is finished eg interest costs on borrowings and if so, how much<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify"> Was the PIT Price Waterhouse Report correct in its analysis?</div></li></ol><p align="justify">Oh so many questions. Oh so few answers unless the auditors help out. Wouldn't it be nice if their work was completed before the election in October too! </p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-79394631926282677922010-07-12T13:30:00.002-04:002010-07-12T13:51:10.751-04:00Tip Of The City's Litigation Iceberg<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">It is starting to get ugly and expensive as I have warned before. There are consequences to actions.<br /><br /></span></strong></div><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 310px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5493078453434076946" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYgRkEcnModXRXe6TH-dRfcGsAEhMbFTwFv7rHfAoMaS0Bed42WM8mWYF_7E-qP-ShAOp6JXADVtI3Eoa62DrSeFCzSuvvHDXmE94FzVDMNYWAmSsBjW3YuJK5U81jo6PDGvA9qQ/s400/icebergtip.JPG" /><br /><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">It is obviously the start of massive litigation against the City of Windsor. The Bridge Company has sued the City for bad faith in passing the Interim Control by-law and the Anti-Demolition by-law and is seeking monetary damages. </span></strong></div><br /><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">The effect on Windsor taxpayers can be quite substantial down the road. Let me explain.</span></strong><br /><br />One of the Councillors should ask tonight whether this lawsuit, the legal fees and damages, are covered by the City’s insurance policy. If they are, frankly it is no big deal depending on what the deductible is and the maximum amount of the Insurance Policy. Assuming that the deductible is low and the coverage is very high, then taxpayers do not have all that much to be worried about, especially if the maximum claim is only $250,000.<br /><br />I thought that the City had increased its deductible to $250,000. If that is the case, then, depending on the wording of the policy, there may be no insurance coverage for this particular claim at all and all of the legal costs may have to be borne by the City. Those could be quite substantial, perhaps running in the hundreds of thousands of dollars especially if the City loses. Nevertheless, the City could bear that risk.<br /><br />However, remember that the Bridge Company has an outstanding claim for over $3 billion in its NAFTA claim. What if a lawsuit down the road goes after the City for that amount for bad faith. I would strongly doubt that there is a policy in existence that would cover the extent of a claim that large although I may be wrong since I have no idea what the City’s insurance policy says. Accordingly, taxpayers would be responsible for any excess over the insurance limits. (Technically, the City would be responsible and taxpayers would have to make up the amount through property taxes. I wonder what the tax increase would be for a billion-dollar damages judgment).</p><p align="justify">But what if there is no insurance at all that covers a “bad faith” claim. Again, I have no idea what the City’s policy covers but in a normal case, errors and omissions and liability policies do not cover bad faith which is a deliberate act. That type of action is not normally what insurance policies cover.<br /><br />In this case, if this is the first of many “bad faith” claims, then we as taxpayers have a lot to be concerned about. Legal costs would be horrific… just remember the millions our legal weapon of mass destruction cost us for his border legal fees. However, these amounts would be miniscule in a major claim for damages and probably punitive damages if the Bridge Company was successful in a bad faith claim against the City. The amounts could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars or even higher… perhaps in the billions. Just remember that Minister Baird said that traffic volumes would triple. That sets a nice price for losses. Don't forget delays in moving forward eg interest costs alone on a billion dollar project..<br /><br />Who pays for this other than taxpayers?<br /><br />Here’s where it gets really interesting. Depending on the wording of the insurance policy or lack thereof, I would have thought that the City should be considering suing those members of Council who are responsible for the bad faith claim. What should be done I would have thought at this stage is to Third Party those members and in effect seek indemnification from them. </p><div align="justify">That would be a fascinating turn of events as well. We would have one Member of Council going after another Member. That puts the Member's personal assets at risk. Presumably now, they ought to be seeking their own independent legal advice.<br /><br />But what if Council decided to do nothing, to not seek an indemnity from those responsible on Council. Frankly, I'm not sure what happens next other than perhaps an action by a taxpayer against Council seeking that Indemnity.<br /><br />You may think that this is a tempest in a teapot because after all a Member of Council would seek indemnification from the City for any damages in any event. I'm not so certain that that would be allowed even if the City wanted to do so. Here's what the Municipal Act says:</div><ul><li><div align="justify">"Immmunity<br /><br />448. (1) No proceeding for damages or otherwise shall be commenced against a member of council or an officer, employee or agent of a municipality or a person acting under the instructions of the officer, employee or agent for <strong>any act done in good faith </strong>in the performance or intended performance of a duty or authority under this Act or a by-law passed under it or for any alleged neglect or default in the <strong>performance in good faith</strong> of the duty or authority." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">It would not seem therefore that the City would be prohibited from seeking indemnification from someone who did not act in good faith.<br /><br />While not exactly on point, the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act says</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Insurance<br /><br />14. (1) Despite section 279 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or section 218 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, as the case may be, the council of every municipality may at any time pass by-laws,<br /><br />(a) for contracting for insurance;<br /><br />(b) despite the Insurance Act, to enable the municipality to act as an insurer; and<br /><br />(c) for exchanging with other municipalities in Ontario reciprocal contracts of indemnity or inter-insurance in accordance with Part XIII of the Insurance Act,<br /><br />to protect a member of the council or of any local board thereof who has been found not to have contravened section 5, against any costs or expenses incurred by the member as a result of a proceeding brought under this Act, and for paying on behalf of or reimbursing the member for any such costs or expenses." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Section 5 deals with acting properly in the event of a conflict of interest. In other words the Member must have acted by complying with the section of the Act to get the benefit of any insurance indemnity.<br /><br />Anyway you look at it, the City and its taxpayers are in trouble. It really doesn't matter if there is insurance or not. If the Bridge Company is successful in its bad faith claims against the City the amount of the damages could well exceed any insurance coverage that the City has.</p>Another fine border mess for which taxpayers may have to be responsible.JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-87064192388475646302010-07-12T00:15:00.000-04:002010-07-11T18:22:34.237-04:00Last Chance to Vote<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwuv38hPdhZzASdZvk274amBXgHJPi37uGHGBF58PQRCwO9PfaPS1tX7CGFll74NKNYEkbtXUi5xsauQfEUKjCNq5n0M6bUkRRFmR3SO4zKT5UzYS_m37HOaXqn75GQN39b2CW_w/s1600/edgarsurvey.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 220px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5491302372468525586" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwuv38hPdhZzASdZvk274amBXgHJPi37uGHGBF58PQRCwO9PfaPS1tX7CGFll74NKNYEkbtXUi5xsauQfEUKjCNq5n0M6bUkRRFmR3SO4zKT5UzYS_m37HOaXqn75GQN39b2CW_w/s400/edgarsurvey.JPG" /></a><br /><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">What do you, dear reader, think that Edgar will do? Can you read his mind?</span></strong></div><br /><p align="justify">Go to: <a href="http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132">http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132</a> </p><p align="justify">Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.<br /><br />The survey closes at 5 PM Monday, today, right before the Council meeting.</p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-57501462639967849122010-07-12T00:10:00.002-04:002010-07-11T18:07:08.623-04:00Whatever Happened To The Integrity Commish And His Final Report<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">From the Mulroney Inquiry:<br /></span></strong></div><ul><li><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">"the importance of the integrity of government, and, more particularly, the integrity of those who govern, is the theme that resonates throughout this Report.<br /><br />In my view, Canadians are entitled to expect from those who govern, particularly the holders of high office, exemplary conduct in their professional and personal lives.." </span></strong></div></li></ul><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">It's strange that everything is so quiet about Earl Basse:</span></strong></p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Councillors deferred a discussion on the integrity commissioner's annual report at the regular council meeting, but earlier decided they would continue the part-time office.<br /><br />Basse, whose contract ended Dec. 31, will continue till June."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Gee, it's July now. Do you think that the silence may have something to do with the fact that there have been complaints made against the Mayor with the Commish and that an election is coming?<br /><br />According to the Council Report. the Commish accepted Council's offer to extend his contract until June 30, 2010 "<strong>on the same terms and conditions as his previous contract</strong>." [emphasis added]<br /><br />Basse it seemed tried to change that contract. I trust that Mr. Basse did NOT try and play games by acting improperly by doing the following</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"the Integrity Commission has provided Council with <strong>the protocols he intends to follow</strong> for investigating the remaining complaints he has received...[emphasis added]"</div></li></ul><p align="justify">It is in my opinion absolutely improper for him to investigate any complaint as was described using protocols that he has chosen to use. It is Council's job not his to create and change any protocols. He would be usurping the proper role of Council by his action.<br /><br />I am sure that Edgar (aka Eddie) being a lawyer set him straight on that.<br /><br />Given the wide interpretation of "conflict," the high ethical standards that politicians must follow and the language of our Code of Conduct, it should be interesting to see what Basse decides.</p><p align="justify">Just to re-emphasize the broad interpretation of conflict, Mr. Basse may want to read this Editorial from the Toronto Star. You dear reader may want to re-read first my BLOGs "Friendship--The Five Part Series" <a href="http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2009/12/friendship-part-i-of-five-part-series_18.html">http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2009/12/friendship-part-i-of-five-part-series_18.html</a> </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">What’s a conflict?</span></strong><br /><br />Mississauga residents and, indeed, people across the province have been well-served by a judge’s decision this week to take a broad view of alleged conflict of interest in Mayor Hazel McCallion’s city hall.<br /><br />McCallion’s lawyers had attempted to narrow the scope of the inquiry by defining “conflict of interest” in strict legal terms as applying only to votes at meetings of council or one of its committees. In other words, the only test for McCallion would be whether she declared a financial interest in a matter at a public meeting and refrained from voting. What she said or did in private meetings would be off limits.<br /><br />Justice Douglas Cunningham, who is heading up the inquiry, found that definition too limited. “Members of city council are entrusted by those who elect them to act in the public interest,” Cunningham said in a strongly worded ruling this week. “<strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Optics are important. In other words, members of a municipal council must conduct themselves in such a way as to avoid any reasonable apprehension that their personal interest could in any way influence their elected responsibility.</span></strong> <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Suffice it to say that members of council (and staff) are not to use their office to promote private interests, whether their own or those of relatives or friends.</span></strong> They must be unbiased in the exercise of their duties. That is not only the common law, but the common-sense standard by which the conduct of municipal representatives ought to be judged.”<br /><br />The inquiry has only just begun examining the mayor’s role in a failed land deal involving her son, Peter McCallion. (Its initial hearings probed the signing of a controversial utility deal). In fairness to both the McCallions, the public should avoid leaping to conclusions before the inquiry has heard from everyone and reported.<br /><br />Whatever his findings, however, Cunningham’s decision to take an uninhibited look at conflict of interest is a welcome indication that his report will be comprehensive in nature." </div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-64484846624946894812010-07-12T00:01:00.001-04:002010-07-12T07:10:40.631-04:00Our State Of Emergency Is Over---Why<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Whew, so much excitement. But it's done now. Strange don't you think in the circumstances.<br /><br />There was a big garage collapse in Kingston but no State of Emergency was declared. A huge one in Montreal but no State of Emergency was declared. Another in Ottawa and again, no State of Emergency was declared.<br /><br />In each of those cases, local authorities were able to handle the matter.<br /><br />In fact, it appears that our local authorities were able to handle our situation because we learned that:</span></strong></div><ul><li><div align="justify">"the Heavy Urban Search and Rescue Team was ready to take off from Toronto with specialized equipment to shore up the structure. The HUSAR team’s deployment was cancelled after officials determined no other victims were trapped in the rubble.<br /><br />Francis said that in the event Windsor faced a catastrophe that threatened or claimed lives, Windsor can avail itself of Detroit’s emergency services personnel and equipment, including the city’s HUSAR team."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Nevertheless, our Mayor did declare a State of Emergency. It is fine to play Monday Morning Quarterback but something obviously gave him a great deal of concern for him to react in such a fashion.<br /><br />Imagine then my reaction when I read the following:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"An engineering firm has given the city a report on the collapse of a Dufferin Street parking garage, but it was kept under wraps Friday.<br /><br />The firm was contracted by the building’s owners to examine the structure and Mayor Eddie Francis said the report will be released publicly only at the discretion of the firm or the building’s owners.<br /><br />Because the structure is privately owned, the site of the collapse — and the cleanup — is now in the hands of the building’s owners, Romalist Developments Limited."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Wait a minute. Something does not smell right here. City resources were used to ensure that there were no deaths or serious injuries or more destruction, people were evacuated from their homes and offices, City personnel protected the site and the City paid for people to stay in a hotel room while they were evacuated and we are merely to accept someone's word that everything is okay without being given any reason.<br /><br />People have been allowed back into their apartments, back into their offices "with some conditions" and we are told everything is all right but we don't know why the incident happened in the first place. What assurances do these people have to be blunt that it is safe to return?<br /><br />There's something very strange going on when the City has a copy of the report that explained what happened but allows a private party to keep it secret. That is unacceptable to me and it should be unacceptable to everyone else in this City, especially those who live and work nearby.<br /><br />If it was necessary for the Mayor to declare a State of Emergency for some reason, then it is just as necessary for the Mayor to undeclare that State of Emergency by telling us exactly what happened.<br /><br />This is a matter of public safety. By keeping this report secret, is the City now assuming a liability in case something happens in the future? The more important question to ask is why the City is not undertaking its own independent investigation considering that lives were at stake.</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Francis expressed relief that the incident didn’t claim any lives. “Everything else can be repaired. Everything else can be fixed, but you can never restore life,” he said."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Edgar did say after all:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"I think it's incumbent on us as a municipality to look into this ... and make sure that something like this never happens again," Francis told reporters.<br /><br />He said the scope of such a review will depend on investigators' findings on the cause of Thursday's collapse."</div></li></ul><p align="justify"></p><p align="justify">Until complete answers are provided to the public, in my opinion, the Emergency still exists.</p><p align="justify"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ffff00;">UPDATE</span></strong><br /><br />We have now been told:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The parking garage that collapsed Thursday morning may have already been overloaded with weight before a 10,000-kg boom drove across it, says a local engineer.<br /><br />Norm Becker, of The Becker Engineering Group, said the asphalt layer on the parking surface contributed to the structure’s collapse.<br /><br />“Putting asphalt down does nothing to strengthen the structure and it does everything to weaken it because it’s dead weight that limits the amount of live load you can put on it,” Becker said. Becker was hired by the garage’s owner to investigate the structure and help plan its repair...<br /><br />Becker said there may be other factors contributing the structure’s collapse that his firm will investigate but the asphalt was definitely a contributor." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Should we now be satisfied? Hardly.<br /><br />Do not forget that this report came from an Engineer hired by the owner or perhaps their insurer. We learned one of the contributing factors but not all. The one we were told puts liability on the previous owner it seems. Gee what a surprise that is:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Becker said the repair work was done by a previous owner of the property."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">The scarier part of the story says this:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"There are a number of cases even locally in Essex County that we found building owners don't understand this and if they see any blemishes or swelling or any defects in the surface of the concrete deck they try to keep it in good repair and they feel by putting asphalt on it they will be doing something they get good value from and that is not the case for parking garages."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Given his actions, the Mayor cannot wash his hands of the matter. Unless we understand exactly what happened so that incidents like this can be prevented, he may have to declare many more States of Emergency! </p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-30735181014057463732010-07-09T11:45:00.000-04:002010-07-09T11:59:23.449-04:00BLOGExtra: Will Harper Survey Windsor Damage<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Can you imagine if 211/311 had moved there, to the building behind which the parking garage collapsed:</span></strong></div><ul><li><div align="justify">"Council scrapped a recommended move of the city’s 211/311 call centre to vacant office space on Ouellette Avenue Monday, concerned the process to pick a new location was faulty and incomplete...<br /><br />The city administration’s recommendation to council was to enter a five-year agreement with the Mr. Bay Inc. to occupy 1368 Ouellette, paying $80,958 annually, with an option for another five years at $98,295 annually.<br /><br />Roger Bramhall of Mr. Bay Inc. was visibly angry after council’s decision to disregard the RFP, but refused to comment when approached." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">I never understood why that site was rejected. At the time I wrote:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"In any event, the Administration decision was rejected not because of anything wrong with the Mr. Bay site. In fact, I don't even think the site was discussed by the Councillors. Rather, Councillor Jones in particular thought that the RFP was too narrow in scope and should be completely redone."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Let me see now. It was a "storm of the century" we were told and "and the city's heaviest rainfall in almost 30 years:"<br /></p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Heavy rain flooded hundreds of homes in Windsor, Ont., on the weekend as part of the same storm system that spawned a tornado in nearby Essex County also pummeled the border city.<br /><br />At least 1,400 homeowners reported water – and in some cases sewage – in their basements on Sunday."</div></li></ul><p>What does the City do:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Starting well before sunrise Friday, municipal sanitation crews roamed the streets to tackle mountains of storm-related garbage...<br /><br />He said residents were appreciative the city was offering the free special pickup that continues through today."</div></li></ul><p>Up to 2,000 homes damaged and the Mayor had this to say:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"You can never avoid Mother Nature," Francis said. "When there's a storm that's of such intensity and of such ferocity, you just deal with it and hope that the damage is as minimal as possible." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Then we get a once in a long time parking garage collapse and the Mayor declares a State of Emergency. Even though the "Building and now-collapsed parking lot are privately owned," for the residents in the nearby apartment who were forced out: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Tenants of Church and Hanlin’s apartment building beside the collapsed structure were told to plan on sleeping in a hotel for at least a week.<br /><br />“The evacuation is being done out of an abundance of caution,” Francis said...<br /><br />The city’s social services department would pay for the hotel rooms, Francis said."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Why it would not suprise me to read next that yes, the Prime Minister is coming here to survey the damage after the Big State of Emergency declared by the Mayor:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Harper surveys flooded Prairies; offers aid package and then travels to Windsor</span></strong><br /><br />Prime Minister Stephen Harper surveyed flood-stricken areas of Saskatchewan from a helicopter Thursday after announcing a relief package for rain-drenched farmers.<br /><br />The prime minister made one stop during his aerial tour, landing at a farm to speak with farmers whose fields and crops have been washed out by recent downpours.<br /><br />Harper, who did not speak with the media, told the farmers they can count on the federal government to lend a hand during these difficult times...<br /><br />Following his visit to Saskatchewan, Harper will head to Alberta to visit family and attend the Calgary Stampede.<br /><br />After that, he and his family will head to Harrington Lake, the official country residence of the prime minister near Ottawa.<br /><br />However, since the Harpers are travelling WestJet as an economy measure, they will stop off in Windsor, one of WestJet's stops, on the way back. Here, Harper will survey the damage to the parking garage (and Sandra Pupatello's office) and to offer Windsor UP TO $5.50 in a loan that has to be paid back using Tunnel tolls provided that Canada becomes an Instrumentality of Government of Windsor."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Darn, too bad that Red Bull air race is over. Harper could have toured the area by air as well, as Dwight Duncan did recently. Unfortunately the Red Bull pilots have already left town."<br /></p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-47616810748593083092010-07-09T11:30:00.001-04:002010-07-11T18:20:45.853-04:00Will Edgar Break His Promise<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwuv38hPdhZzASdZvk274amBXgHJPi37uGHGBF58PQRCwO9PfaPS1tX7CGFll74NKNYEkbtXUi5xsauQfEUKjCNq5n0M6bUkRRFmR3SO4zKT5UzYS_m37HOaXqn75GQN39b2CW_w/s1600/edgarsurvey.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 220px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5491302372468525586" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwuv38hPdhZzASdZvk274amBXgHJPi37uGHGBF58PQRCwO9PfaPS1tX7CGFll74NKNYEkbtXUi5xsauQfEUKjCNq5n0M6bUkRRFmR3SO4zKT5UzYS_m37HOaXqn75GQN39b2CW_w/s400/edgarsurvey.JPG" /></a><br /><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">What do you, dear reader, think that Edgar will do? Can you read his mind?</span></strong></div><br /><p align="justify">Go to: <a href="http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132">http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132</a> </p><p align="justify">Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.<br /><br />The survey closes at 5 PM next Monday, right before the Council meeting.</p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-70846358891864252592010-07-09T00:05:00.001-04:002010-07-08T20:13:35.357-04:00More Fascinating Stories<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Just a few matters you may find of interest:</span></strong><br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>NUMBERS, NUMBERS, NUMBERS</strong></span><br /><br />Happy days are here again. Just like with traffic numbers showing huge truck traffic increases that the DRIC-ites like to use, can we now say that the Big Three crisis is over using the same logic? Hardly: </div><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Chrysler Canada said its June sales soared 101 per cent</span></strong>"</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Its numbers went from 9,211 in June 2009 to 18,502 this year.<br /><br />Wow spectacular until you remember that in 2009, industry sales were much lower and two of the Big Three were in bankruptcy. Remember as well that Chrysler sales in 2007 and 2008 were 22,029 and 22,048.<br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;">MORE ON FOREIGN INFLUENCES ON DOMESTIC POLITICIANS</span></strong></p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Canadian Intelligence Director Repeats Claims of Foreign Influence</span></strong><br /><br />The director of Canada’s intelligence service told a committee in Parliament on Monday that he thinks two provincial cabinet ministers, as well as some municipal politicians and public servants, are under the influence of foreign governments...<br /><br />“This is not quite as extraordinary as everyone is making it out to be,” he told the committee, noting that past annual reports by the intelligence service have included general accusations about foreign nations’ influence in Canada...<br /><br />“We are dealing here with a spectrum of behavior by foreign entities that often start out innocently, but later veer toward something that actually harms Canadian interests,” he said. ”This is a very subtle process.”</div></li></ul><p align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="color:#ff0000;"><strong>SPY STORY</strong></span><br /></span><br />Those Russian foreign agents are small-time players, not in the Big Leagues when it comes to influencing.<br /><br />Great story in the Wall Street Journal that you must read about how foreign governments try to compromise people: "<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">A Cold-War Spy Story</span></strong>."<br /><br /></p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Ever since news broke that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had rounded up alleged Russian spies in New York City, the lingering question has been: What were they after with all their B-movie spycraft?<br /><br />Paul Browne thinks he has a pretty good idea. Long before he had ascended to his position as a deputy New York City police commissioner, Mr. Browne had firsthand experience being recruited by a Russian agent—a Soviet spy betting a relationship with a small-town newspaper reporter would one day bear fruit.<br /><br />The year was 1973, and Mr. Browne, then 24 years old, had taken a leave from his job as a political reporter at the Watertown Daily Times to get a master's in journalism at Columbia University. As part of a class taught at the United Nations, he met and became friendly with Alex Yakovlev, a 32-year-old who broadcast U.N. news to Eastern Europe.<br /><br />Mr. Yakovlev started wooing Mr. Browne over drinks and dinner. At one point, he offered Mr. Browne $30 to write a freelance article "on anything you wish..."<br /><br />But 35 years later, it seems clearer. Since Columbia and Watertown, Mr. Browne has been chief of staff for U.S. Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan and for the Office of Enforcement of the Treasury Department, where he had top-secret clearance and sat in on daily federal law-enforcement briefings. Today, he is one of Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly's top policy strategists.<br /><br />"At the time it made no sense to me," Mr. Browne said about Mr. Yakovlev's attempted recruitment. "But in retrospect, the Russians were in it for the long haul. Had I been turned, it would have paid dividends for them years later."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">$30...Peanuts! Imagine if they had $550M to offer! Why the Russians could take over major assets of a US State for that and become an Instrumentality of the State Government too I bet.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>DECLARING A STATE OF EMERGENCY</strong></span><br /><br />Think the declaration by Edgar (aka Eddie) was correct or an over reeaction? You decide: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<span style="color:#ff0000;"><strong>Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act</strong></span>.<br /><br />“emergency” means a situation or an impending situation that constitutes <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">a danger of major proportions</span></strong> that could result in serious harm to persons or substantial damage to property and that is caused by the forces of nature, a disease or other health risk, an accident or an act whether intentional or otherwise.<br /><br />Declaration of emergency<br /><br />4. (1) The head of council of a municipality may declare that an emergency exists in the municipality or in any part thereof and may take such action and make such orders as he or she considers necessary and are not contrary to law to implement the emergency plan of the municipality and to protect property and the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the emergency area.<br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ONTARIO (EMO) ENGLISH GLOSSARY</span></strong><br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">declared emergency</span></strong><br /><br />A signed declaration made in writing by the Head of Council or the Premier of Ontario in accordance with the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. This declaration is usually based on a situation or an impending situation that threatens public safety, public health, the environment, critical infrastructure, property, and/or economic stability and <span style="color:#ffff00;">exceeds the scope of routine community emergency response</span>.<br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">emergency</span></strong><br /><br />A situation or an impending situation that constitutes <span style="color:#ffff00;">a danger of major proportions</span> that could result in serious harm to persons or substantial damage to property and that is caused by the forces of nature, a disease or other health risk, an accident or an act, whether intentional or otherwise. Term defined in the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.<br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">ACCESS TO PROVINCIAL RESOURCES FOR CBRN RESPONSE AND HUSAR</span></strong><br /><br />The Office of the Fire Marshal (OFM) has recently received several requests for information on how to access the resources of the chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear (CBRN) response teams and <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">heavy urban search and rescue (HUSAR) teams</span></strong> operating under memorandums of understanding (MOU) with the Government of Ontario and available to respond to significant emergencies across the province.<br /><br />In this context, significant emergency is defined as:<br /><br />a large-scale or complex natural or human caused heavy urban search and rescue emergency,<br /><br />where the need for resources to respond effectively to the situation <span style="color:#ffff00;">exceeds local capabilities</span>, and the municipality has declared an emergency or is in the process of doing so. </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Wouldn't you like to see this and know what was in it</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Municipal emergency plan</span></strong><br /><br />3. (1) Every municipality shall formulate an emergency plan governing the provision of necessary services during an emergency and the procedures under and the manner in which employees of the municipality and other persons will respond to the emergency and the council of the municipality shall by by-law adopt the emergency plan."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Imagine, how comforting that this would be if anyone was trapped in the rubble:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis declared a state of emergency to allow the city to access provincial emergency response teams that will delve into the wreckage to help search for any trapped victims...<br /><br /><span style="color:#ffff00;"><strong>Provincial Emergency Response Teams from Toronto and Bolton, Ont</strong></span>., were dispatched to Windsor with search dogs."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">There is a heavy urban search and rescue (HUSAR) team in Toronto that responds anywhere in Ontario but one wonders why they would need to travel here:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Crews sent in a robot and later dogs to determine if anyone was stuck in the rubble or in one of the vehicles smashed under the concrete ceiling. Engineers worked to determine how many nearby buildings might have been affected by the collapse.<br /><br />Eventually, it was determined no one was trapped in the rubble.<br /><br />“A Windsor police department robot was able to give us some visual of the situation, and the dogs determined that there was no one trapped,” said Francis."</div></li></ul><p align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ff0000;"><strong>CONFLICT OF INTEREST</strong></span><br /><br />Interesting decision out of the Mayor Hazel McCallion inquiry:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">McCallion’s lawyers lose fight to limit inquiry</span></strong><br /><br />The judge overseeing the Mississauga judicial inquiry has rejected attempts by Mayor Hazel McCallion’s lawyers to narrow the council-ordered probe of a controversial land deal involving her son.<br /><br />“Members of city council are entrusted by those who elect them to act in the public interest,” said Justice Cunningham in a strongly worded ruling today.<br /><br />The decision is the first setback for the veteran mayor at the inquiry.<br /><br />“<strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Optics are important</span></strong>. In other words, members of a municipal council must conduct themselves in such a way as <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">to avoid any reasonable apprehension</span> </strong>that their personal interest could in any way influence their elected responsibility.”<br /><br />“Suffice it to say that members of council (and staff) are not to use their office <strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">to promote private interests, whether their own or those of relatives or friends</span></strong>,” said Cunningham. “They must be unbiased in the exercise of their duties. That is not only the common law, but the common sense standard by which the conduct of municipal representatives ought to be judged.”<br /><br />“For these reasons: I don’t need to more precisely define conflict of interest,” he said.<br /><br />McCallion’s lawyers had appeared before Cunningham this week saying she should be judged and examined in the inquiry by a very narrow definition of conflict of interest as set out in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.<br /><br />They argued the act only requires politicians to declare a financial interest in a matter (as it relates to themselves, a parent, spouse or child) at council meetings and committee votes."</div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-59360273160859149052010-07-08T11:59:00.001-04:002010-07-08T12:01:20.201-04:00BLOGexclusive: Is This Edgar's New Job<div align="justify"><span style="color:#ffff00;"><strong>Announcing on July 20---too early to make sense to me. The question is why.<br /><br />Could this be the reason why something is being announced now?<br /></strong></span><br /></div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr2FwGiujJMWcrke0wtVFQqzMLTeMudAegIlCHIZ67oJQf2fIlAGNySNZ3KlK94koOBpVWTJ4LmIcGFqty94yP69DLVNHZZwr69qpgS9pHkvVmfV9T59ZAgbmfbjs_Fuj3v9bDxA/s1600/noble.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 390px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5491556684089134018" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr2FwGiujJMWcrke0wtVFQqzMLTeMudAegIlCHIZ67oJQf2fIlAGNySNZ3KlK94koOBpVWTJ4LmIcGFqty94yP69DLVNHZZwr69qpgS9pHkvVmfV9T59ZAgbmfbjs_Fuj3v9bDxA/s400/noble.JPG" /> <p align="justify"></a>There are extremely close connections between senior officials in Edgar's (aka Eddie) office and the Consulate. After all, you remember the Comerica Park evening baseball game sponsored by the office of the Consulate General of Canada.<br /><br />Moreover, relations are so wonderful with the Conservatives especially with Jeff Watson as well.</p><p align="justify">And who better to keep promoting DRIC?<br /><br />So Mr. Noble retires and his leaving accommodates Edgar's timetable. And it gives Edgar his chance to control who his replacement will be and to screw his opponents royally.<br /><br />Don't you just love it.<br /></p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-67086309361079953812010-07-08T11:45:00.000-04:002010-07-08T12:04:24.621-04:00The Early Edgar Returns<p align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2QT3pZOa6re2c-yp3mG-Q8fEvlKtadPPRXt6lw1IjW4YI9NQX_z0dSLakRI3HddzckFYtoAqohQnmSbKfUyBoFP41ufC2zGvqWcxA3DJosJmI0eLEPJg8sTCpgfYr2r2zm5V1Gw/s1600/edgarsurvey.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 180px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5491498607820162082" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2QT3pZOa6re2c-yp3mG-Q8fEvlKtadPPRXt6lw1IjW4YI9NQX_z0dSLakRI3HddzckFYtoAqohQnmSbKfUyBoFP41ufC2zGvqWcxA3DJosJmI0eLEPJg8sTCpgfYr2r2zm5V1Gw/s400/edgarsurvey.JPG" /></a><br /><br /><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Thanks to readers who have replied already to the to the Edgar (aka Eddie) running survey. Feel free to send the link to your friends and family so they can vote too.<br /></span></strong><br />Go to: <a href="http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132">http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132</a><br /><br />Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.<br /><br />The big Star story today was a non-event. If you believe this then I have a DRIC bridge to sell you:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"On July 20, says Mayor Eddie Francis, both he and the city will know.<br /><br />"That week works for me in terms of really buckling down and considering all the things I need to consider," Francis said Wednesday.<br /><br />"I'm still going back and forth...<br /><br />"I've got to come to a decision ... I'm just not there yet." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Coming from the guy who saved up clippings for years so that he would have the news stories about him at his fingertips to use before he first ran for Mayor, that is completely out of character.<br /><br />If you think that July 20 is the real deadline date think again. That does not one-up Hurst!<br /><br />Think about this and July 20. It's a no-lose for him.<br /><br />If Edgar says NO, then others will announce so he knows who will run against him so he can actively work to destroy them. He can then change his mind subsequently after some huge need for him arises. I can just imagine the Star Editorials and columnists begging him not to leave us. Only HE can save us from disaster.<br /><br />If he says YES, then he may well prevent a number of people from announcing so that when he drops out in the last minute for "family reasons," or because of an exciting new job to help Windsor his chosen successor has a clear run for the top.<br /><br />There are still a number of months left in this term of Council. Plenty of time for Edgar to do more horrific deals, say P3ing Enwin and WUC, that will burden us for a generation or two. There is no way that a micromanager would put himself in a position of being a lame-duck Mayor who cannot dominate his Council. </p><p align="justify">Don't forget that the unexpected economic slowdown has changed things considerably, delayed plans. The real calculation being made is whether everything Edgar wanted to do within 2 terms has been done, can be done or not. That will determine what Edgar's decision will be.<br /><br />Nope, this is just another E-machine ploy. I bet Mike never thought of it!</p><p align="justify"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ffff00;">PS</span></strong></p><p align="justify">Speaking of polls, have you voted yet for The Something so they can open for KISS? So far they are second in the rankings and with your help can be #1.</p><p align="justify"></p><p align="justify">The contest ends shortly, so please visit the link below, click "DEMAND IT!" on the right side of the page and vote for them! Let's make their dream come true!<br /><br /><a href="http://eventful.com/competitions/kiss2010/boston">http://eventful.com/competitions/kiss2010/boston</a><br /><br />Make sure to tell everyone to vote please!!<br /></p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-86137015470879793002010-07-08T00:01:00.002-04:002010-07-08T20:14:07.092-04:00The Survey: Will He Or Won't He<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwuv38hPdhZzASdZvk274amBXgHJPi37uGHGBF58PQRCwO9PfaPS1tX7CGFll74NKNYEkbtXUi5xsauQfEUKjCNq5n0M6bUkRRFmR3SO4zKT5UzYS_m37HOaXqn75GQN39b2CW_w/s1600/edgarsurvey.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 220px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5491302372468525586" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwuv38hPdhZzASdZvk274amBXgHJPi37uGHGBF58PQRCwO9PfaPS1tX7CGFll74NKNYEkbtXUi5xsauQfEUKjCNq5n0M6bUkRRFmR3SO4zKT5UzYS_m37HOaXqn75GQN39b2CW_w/s400/edgarsurvey.JPG" /></a><br /><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Run for Mayor again, obviously.<br /><br />Edgar announced that he will finally make up his mind and will graciously tell us on July 20 whether he will keep his word and only be a 2-term Mayor or break it and run again for Mayor for a 3rd term.<br /></div></span></strong><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;"></span></strong></p><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;"></span></strong></p><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;"></span></strong></p><p align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Here is exactly what Edgar (aka Eddie) said in his Campaign Kickoff Speech Thursday, July 24, 2003, Riverside Arena, typo and all, in case you forgot:</span></strong> </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"I SAID TO YOU EARLIER THAT I AM NOT A POLITICIAN AND I AM NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE TO BE MAYOR FOR LIFE. MY TERM IN OFFICE WILL BE ENERGETIC, FOCUSED AND INCLUSIVE. SHOULD I BE FORTUANTE TO BE ELECTED TO LEAD OUR CITY, AND SHOULD I ASK THE CITIZENS FOR A SECOND TERM …….MY TERM IS NOT TO EXCEED TWO."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">So what do you, dear reader, think that Edgar will do? Can you read his mind?</p><p align="justify">Go to: <a href="http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132">http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132</a> </p><p align="justify">Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.<br /><br />The survey closes at 5 PM next Monday, right before the Council meeting.</p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-20570234134821142942010-07-07T12:30:00.000-04:002010-07-07T12:32:44.553-04:00The ABEs Are Having Fun<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">The ABEs--- The "Anybody But Edgar" group.<br /><br />They aren't the movers and shakers that Gord talked about who are looking for a mayoral candidate. Unsuccessfully it seems, according to Gord, so that should discourage anyone from running, right. If the rich and powerful cannot find anyone to oppose Edgar, who can?</span></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;"></span></strong></div><br /><div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Rather the ABEs are a bunch of people who talk informally together. They are of a similar mind about what Windsor has become under this Mayor and Council and who want it changed and are prepared to work quietly to do that. </span></strong></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#ffff00;"><strong>We'll probably never know who all the members are because it is just set up that way. It is very fluid as people come and go. There is no "leader," no "organization," and no "structure." Just a bunch of people united temporarily with a common goal.<br /><br />Guerilla politics might be a good description of who they are and what they are trying to achieve and how.<br /><br />They are having a good time this summer by not doing anything, at least not publicly. They don't have to. They're driving Edgar (aka Eddie) nuts by their seeming inaction. Edgar can't tolerate that because it means he cannot control the universe around him.</strong><br /></span><br />Gord at least figured out part of the ABE strategy to neutralize Edgar:</div><ul><li><div align="justify">"Given the math on council, given the absence of real political clout for mayors in Canada, it wouldn't take much of a numerical switch, orchestrated by special interests, to neuter the next occupant of the corner office." </div></li></ul><p align="justify">Sure we know about Brister going but Councillor Postma is another Edgar vote that is gone after the election. Can you imagine, Edgar being a lame-duck Mayor for 4 years ie being in a situation that Mike Hurst was in during his final year when he could NOT get much support for anything he wanted from his Councillor colleagues, losing 7-3 or 6-4 almost every time.</p><p align="justify">And surprisingly, the prime "special interest group" is not headed by an ABE but headed by someone that I believe that Gord knows very well. No one would believe that this person would do anything to the Mayor, at least not right now. Instead, he/she and his/her colleagues have been working behind the scenes for a very long time. It should be that obvious to political junkies.<br /><br />How else to explain the campaign over the last six months or more to try to discover who is going to run against the Mayor or alternatively trying to prevent anyone else from doing so. The E-Machine is extremely upset that nothing that they have done has worked.<br /><br />They forgot that people understand that Edgar has his own agenda and that nothing that anyone else does or says will have an impact on what he has already decided to do a long time ago. There was no way that Edgar was going to say anything last winter or even in June when he has Mike Hurst's river walk to one up.<br /><br />Don't you like how the Star and the Pizza Queen went after the Mayor demanding that he announce already. After all, a quiet campaign means little advertising and reduced sales of newspapers to the Star and fewer visitors to the website.<br /><br />In reality though, the Editorial and column were nothing more than ensuring that the Star could point to seemingly anti-Edgar writings in the event anyone ever complained. At the same time, Gord did his "Francis's personal cost-benefit analysis justified" to make everything all right for the Mayor.<br /><br />I'm not certain that Edgar is going to run again. After all, does he want it known that he breaks his promises? That is not certainly good for one's reputation. Still, what other job pays almost $200,000 a year even though the person in the position has failed miserably at almost every significant task that he has tried.<br /><br />I must admit that I don't believe much of what Gord said in his column about Edgar's future.<br /><br />In passing though, it appears that our Mayor is making a mockery of YQG. Again when he travels, he uses Detroit airport rather than ours. It appears that it is a not so quick a getaway after all if he chooses to fly out of the US. If that is the case, then how can anyone make the case that we should spend millions of dollars to upgrade the airport when even the Chair of the Board doesn't use it because it takes too long. What kind of a message is that delivering to potential new investors? </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Francis, who has job offers involving considerably more than he earns as mayor."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">From whom, a law firm? I doubt it. He has barely practiced law in reality so he would start at best at a very junior level. He is hardly a "rainmaker" and I doubt would bring in an awful lot of business to a law firm.<br /><br />For large corporation? Which one? And what would he do, what executive position could he fill? His experience at running a business would not impress too many large organizations. Windsor's reputation of being well run is hardly outstanding given our low numbers on almost any significant poll about cities in Canada. Government relations... oh please.<br /><br />He might make it as a candidate for political party but which one and at what level? Federally, he would have a tough fight against the NDP. Given what was said about him in the Senate, I would doubt that the Conservatives would be too interested in him and even if they were, I doubt that they would offer him a Cabinet position. As far as the Liberals go, my information from a Liberal insider is that he is heard nothing about an approach to the Mayor to run for them.<br /><br />Provincially? It would be tough to beat either Sandra or Dwight.<br /><br />In any event, the Opposition would chew him up if he was a Cabinet Minister because they would know that he cannot tolerate criticism or face blame. He would never last after his first crisis.<br /><br />As Mayor of Windsor, would he be able to succeed afterwards? I doubt it. Depending on who the new Mayor was, he may not even be allowed in City Hall to speak to a clerk, especially a CUPE one.<br /><br />Perhaps he might go into the land development business. After all, the Star told us that:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Sources said Farhi is working alongside Mayor Eddie Francis in discussions with officials from the University of Windsor and St. Clair College to create a new joint post-secondary complex in the downtown core that could house up to 1,000 students. It was unknown whether that use would utilize existing buildings or new ones would be constructed."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">I wonder if that is student housing given the problems with landlords in the West End and which location downtown, perhaps one that the gentleman from London already owns.<br /><br />Try and guess which University building would be closed down and its occupants moved to the downtown. Obviously, it has to be a building that is in the way of "progress" and rather than tell us exactly what is going on, the students will be moved downtown and it will be described as "revitalization" of our inner core when that is not the truth.<br /><br />It is even more interesting if what Gord says turns out to be the truth:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The interesting thing about the new list is that the pros are short and sweet. He loves certain aspects of the job, especially the kind of deal-making, networking, investment-snagging CEO stuff that sent him to Bahrain and back in triumph, with booty that could, if everything falls into place, land Windsor the long-sought 50-metre pool that would be for the area swimming community what the WFCU Centre is for the region's hockey fans. The WFCU, by the way, was built with expansion in mind for such a facility."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">So now we will have two white elephants in the East end thanks to Edgar: an Arena that barely pays its own way and a swimming pool that requires taxpayers subsidization. Will this location be single-sourced? Oh well, at least Edgar's "shrewd investors" who picked up property near the arena and the pool will be happy.<br /><br />The big challenge for the ABEs was who was going to run for Mayor. For their strategy, it didn't matter whether Edgar ran or not. As Gord guessed, he would have been neutralized no matter what. However, to be frank, they expected that Councillor Bill Marra was going to run again for the job. It is something that he always wanted, even more than a victory in a Senior Level election.<br /><br />It was also expected that Marra would win easily. He lost out to Edgar first time but only by a few percent when he had the baggage of Hurst-Lite weighing him down. This time around, Edgar has a record and not a very good one upon which he can be attacked. Marra is smart, attractive and a unifier, something that this City needs badly. He also ran an excellent campaign when he ran against Edgar whose campaign had only one good week of success, the first one.<br /><br />It was well known that Marra had a four year strategy for becoming mayor but something happened that stopped it in its tracks. Obviously, it was the deal with Edgar and Dwight over the border road that ended any hope that Bill had to become mayor. It was the second time that Bill was screwed by his so-called Liberal friends in a nayoral run.<br /><br />However, the ABEs remembered Marra's dithering the last time around and were smart enough not to put all their eggs in a Marra mayoral basket. In fact, they counted on him NOT running. Al Maghnieh running in Ward 10 signalled the end of Marra's Mayoral run since Dwight-Lite would have played a prime role in Bill's mayoral election campaign.<br /><br />Fortunately, there are several people who have said that they are very interested in running for Mayor. Some of them are older and wiser and actually know how to run a business because they have one. They also are united in wanting Edgar out as Mayor. One especially has had a run in with the Mayor and would like nothing better than to be one of the people responsible for removing him from office. And he has the friends and associates to provide the financial backing too. I would expect as well that Gord's movers and shakers would flock to the candidate quickly to lend their support.<br /><br />It may well be that the ABEs will find themselves with an abundance of riches and will have a number of attractive candidates amongst whom to pick.<br /><br />The question to be asked is why not start a campaign today. Why wait until it may be too late especially if the candidate is relatively unknown.. The answer is obvious. Why allow the Messenger to hammer a possible Edgar opponent for months and months and months. Why allow the Star to badmouth the person now when there is no reason to do so.<br /><br />Running a mayoral campaign is not at all like running one for Councillor. The approach is completely different. More importantly, remember that this is a small town of 200,000 people where people know everyone else. Word spreads quickly. I know. I have been there with STOPDRTP. I have seen how quickly our organization was perceived as controlling members of Council. It took us about a month without spending much money. Just remember what happened when it was thought that the new arena would go Tecumseh. Overnight, the story spread like wildfire through the City. Summer Fest stayed in the downtown because of a Facebook campaign.<br /><br />We just should take Gord's advice from back in August, 2004:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"people who are growing impatient for action should kick back and enjoy the final three weeks of summer because the municipal universe is unfolding right on schedule."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">David Cassivi gave some good advice then too:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"people should keep their shirts on because it will soon become evident significant progress is being made.<br /><br />"It's understandable that the public is getting a little antsy. But we must allow the process to unfold. Over the next little while things will be rolled out in a very methodical way and at the appropriate time..."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">As Gord concluded</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Stick around. The fun begins after Labour Day."</div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-48852725037719755742010-07-06T00:01:00.001-04:002010-07-05T18:34:30.342-04:00Should The WUC Board Resign<div align="justify"><strong><span style="color:#ffff00;">Of course not. Why should they?<br /><br />Just because some Star Editorial writer on Saturday wanted to intimidate them and was doing possible damage control in advance doesn't mean that they should back down from what needs to be done now and to prevent something happening that may cost taxpayers dearly in the future if I am right.<br /><br />Why, there is nothing better than having a malleable Board:<br /><br /></span></strong></div><ul><li><div align="justify">"Under the City of Windsor Act of 1936, WUC was granted most but not all of the legal powers of a separate corporation. WUC has the power to raise rates to carry out its duties. But it does not have the power to borrow money, or appoint its own board.<br /><br />WUC exists entirely as a legal creature subservient to the City of Windsor and its elected city council. Windsor voters elect councillors who appoint WUC's board members. They can "un-appoint" them, too."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">By acting as the Star is putting forward, I would suggest that the Board members are opening themselves up to legal liability. They were not put in their position to knuckle under any time Council demands. They are put into their job to act in the best interest of the Commission.<br /><br />I really find what is going on quite fascinating. It is all part of a well laid out plan just like the CUPE strike.<br /><br />There was no need for 101 day labour dispute except that there was a political agenda that had to be met designed to destroy public service unions not only in Windsor but in Ontario and even overseas as I had Blogged previously: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">"The Public and Commercial Services union warned that it would use "all means" at its disposal to fight moves by the coalition administration [in the UK] to target payments to public sector employees who were made redundant.<br /><br />Last week the Office of Budgetary Responsibility predicted that 600,000 public sector jobs would go if departmental budgets were cut by 25%, as envisaged in the budget. A document sent to ministers by the Treasury has asked them to look at the possibility of stepping up departmental cuts to 40%, it emerged over the weekend."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Even though the hardliners caved in and cost the taxpayers millions of dollars over the lifetime of a public servant's career, the Messenger made it appear as if the Mayor and certain Members of Council won. The fact that the union lasted 101 days in the face of overwhelming anti-union propaganda is a huge surprise to me. But they did.<br /><br />What happened almost immediately after the strike ended: privatization. First came the garbage collectors even though they are supposedly the second-best service in the country. Daycare workers then had to be eliminated because the private sector could do it so much better while parking enforcement officers had to see their jobs go out to tender.<br /><br />It became so much easier to accomplish when union workers were smeared as being greedy even though they were prepared to settle with 0% increase in salary. Photographs in the Star, video on A-Channel, police comments on a legal decision that I have never been able to find were all part of the technique that was used to vilify the Union so the public would go along with eliminating them.<br /><br />Tell me what is different today with the Windsor Utilities Commission. They wanted initially a 10% increase in rates as they explained to the public to make the water system viable while our Mayor and certain members of Council wanted a much lower rate that was never put forward by the Commission at all. Immediately, WUC was the greedy bad guy and certain members of Council were fighting for taxpayers.<br /><br />WUC was sent back to do their work again and came up with a lower rate but not one that Council was prepared to swallow. Accordingly, Council voted for a 3% increase. Then, shockingly, the decision is made by the Commission to go with 5%.<br /><br />That was the opportunity needed to slam the Commission for doing what the law imposes on them:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Windsor Utiliites Commission to ignore council's wishes on rate hike</span></strong><br /><br />Ignoring city council’s preferred option for water rate hikes, the Windsor Utilities Commission is proceeding with its own pricier plan that will see five per cent increases in each of the next five years for the average residential customer."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Like the language used?<br /><br />Acting responsibly, how could a Commission Board member support a rate increase that was unacceptable? Commission Board members are doing their jobs by acting the way that they are. It is not something they just dreamed up overnight but was based on staff recommendations and supported by the public in meetings across the City. Did you ever hear a Council Member, especially one who is on the Board object before at the higher rate? Why now, in the last possible second, days before a report had to be submitted to the Ontario Government?<br /><br />Why would the Star try to intimidate them today by suggesting that Council could appoint others? Why would the Star write:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Since WUC is choosing to ignore the direction of the majority of city council after substantial discussion and debate, it may be time for council to find a new chairman for WUC. Council has the ultimate authority over WUC rates and they should be sure its collective decision is implemented by WUC."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">The answer is as I have Blogged before: privatization. Soften them up for what is to be done in the future. Figure out who can be pressured to go along or needs to be forced out.<br /><br />It is absolutely the same as what took place after the labor dispute ended. Council immediately moved to privatize.<br /><br />Do not forget as well that we had the brouhaha involving the date of the meeting that the Commission was to go in front of Council. Another confrontation:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Windsor Utilities Commission to boycott city meeting on water rate hikes</span></strong><br /><br />The Windsor Utilities Commission plans on boycotting a special meeting of council called to deal with water rate hikes because the Thursday night meeting won't be broadcast by Cogeco.<br /><br />"The meeting is going to go ahead but we're not going to be there," said WUC chairman and Ward 4 Coun. Ken Lewenza Jr. "It shouldn't be hidden in a special meeting of council. We have done too much work on public transparency to discuss this issue at a meeting no one will see."<br /><br />Lewenza sent an email Monday requesting the meeting be deferred and claims he has been stymied by Mayor Eddie Francis in his bid to have WUC officials lay out their six-year plan at a regular session of council -- one that would be beamed live into the living rooms of Windsor residents still smarting from an 86 per cent rate hike in 2007.<br /><br />Francis bristled at the suggestion he is attempting to keep the issue of rate hikes off the public radar before October's election, pointing out media outlets other than Cogeco, including The Star, would likely cover Thursday's meeting."</div></li></ul><p align="justify"></p><p align="justify"></p><p align="justify">Remember that the Commission wanted to appear in front of Council on June 14 but the control of the Mayor of the Agenda meant that that was not possible. Did you ever read about the June 14 meeting request in the Star? Why was Edgar (aka Eddie) afraid to have them appear in a timely fashion?<br /><br />Controversy leading to bad mouthing an organization leading to privatization. Why not? We are being set up for such a move, probably after the next election because there would be too much controversy now if it was put forward. Better to do at after election when the hardliners are in control again too.<br /><br />Junior has never figured out that he was made Chair of the Commission for a purpose: to beat up on the Unions when it was decided to P3 the water system. He would take the hit for it and would be forced to justify it as a Chair of the Commission. There really is no need to keep him in the job any longer because the Messenger has done such a good job that the Public will believe almost anything that the hardliners tell them as long as it it is positioned as greed against the poor taxpayer.<br /><br />If you have read any of my BLOGs on the Michigan P3 legislation, you will know that I am absolutely opposed to the P3 concept. It is nothing more than ripping off taxpayers to the advantage of investors. That means huge water rate increases in the future that taxpayers will have to pay and they will have no control over at because Council would have leased out the water system for up to 99 years.<br /><br />It really is as simple as that. Look for more controversy involving the Commission. Look for more attacks against Lewenza. In particular, he has to be destroyed because he dares suggest that the Mayor is wearing no clothes. It's interesting to me that he and the Mayor no longer speak very much as revealed by the Star in their cell phone story.<br /><br />After the Star Editorial, it will be very interesting to me to see what the Commission decides to do, if anything. Will they just sweep it under the rug and ignore what took place? That is really what the Star editorial is all about. Keep your mouth closed and do what are told and everything will be fine.<br /><br />The most obvious question that must be answered is why the option dealing with the 3% was put before Council in the first place. That justified the 3% Council decision. In my opinion, that was a key step in the destruction of the credibility of the Commission and of the Board members themselves.<br /><br />It is clear that the Chair had no idea that this action was going to be taken:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"Asked to explain why councillors were given WUC documents providing two options, Lewenza said Tuesday: “I’m completely perplexed.”<br /><br />Because of the “disconnect” between what WUC wanted and what council was willing to approve, Lewenza suggested there be a discussion on whether to continue having a separate board to oversee Windsor’s water utility."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">I believe that such a debate is worthwhile. However the outstanding issue of how did Option #2 got in front of Council must be dealt with first. It is a tremendous embarrassment to the Commission and brings into doubt their judgment or lack thereof.<br /><br />More importantly, the answer to that question will help us decide whether or not this is all part of a plan designed to destroy the Commission and if so, who is involved in it.<br /><br />Obviously, the Chair was unaware that Option #2 was going to be introduced. Did the Commission Administration decide to do it on their own, directly disobeying the Board? If so, some people ought to be fired. It is not their job to make those kind of decisions but rather the Board's job.<br /><br />Was there a lack of communications? I doubt it since the Board had never suggested such a low rate of increase in all of their discussions with the public.<br /><br />What else could it be? There is an obvious alternative that I am certain you have figured out on your own by now.<br /><br />There are serious questions whether something is going on at WUC, something that is not necessarily in the best interest of taxpayers. If Junior goes, I wonder who would become WUC Chair. Can you guess?<br /><br />If Junior and the Board fail to take immediate action, then they should not resign. Rather they should be fired. They have a legal duty and may have a duty under the City's Code of Conduct to take the appropriate action depending on what went on.<br /><br />Get moving. Peform your legal obligations. And ignore the Messenger completely!</p>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16307663.post-44486256185603538992010-07-05T08:30:00.001-04:002010-07-05T08:37:19.501-04:00Giving Taxpayers The Business<span style="color:#ffff00;"><strong><div align="justify"><br />I have to ask this in all seriousness. Is this really how Governments operate?<br /><br />Don’t they care about taxpayers and the problems that we have in this difficult economy? Is there no accountability for the millions of dollars that they waste it seems day in and day out? Is it ever going to be possible for taxpayers to control what is going on with our elected representatives and the bureaucracy?<br /><br />I’m sure that you are expecting me to talk about the DRIC file again. But I’m not going to do so this time around. It is in a league of its own.<br /><br />Instead, I want to talk about the Truck Ferry and the Detroit/Windsor Tunnel and the Tunnel Plaza improvements in particular that are going to be done on our side.</strong><br /></span><br />I never understood why the Canadian and Ontario Governments are spending about $9 million to help out a private operator at the border. They are doing no favours for the Ambassador Bridge Company, another private operator, even though $300 million had been set aside to do a road to the border a number of years ago. It just means another lawsuit/NAFTA claim too.</div><br /><div align="justify">The Truck Ferry project was a comedy of errors and naturally the costs increased dramatically.</div><ul><li><div align="justify">“Construction is underway on an $8.8-million improvement project for the Detroit-Windsor truck ferry following several months of delay because of a dispute between federal and provincial government officials over costs.<br /><br />Provincial government officials leading the project originally estimated the costs at around $6 million, but a tender process was held and awarded to Mill-Am Corporation, a company affiliated with Amico Contracting, which was the lowest bidder at $8.8 million.”</div></li></ul><p align="justify">The Truck Ferry’s owner, Gregg Ward, had to be happy that all of this money was being spent on his behalf so that he did not need to spend millions of dollars on his part.<br /><br />But here is what is very strange to me. If the DRIC bridge was ever to be built, then there would be little need for the Truck Ferry. The new bridge would be able to carry hazardous materials. Who would go out of their way to visit Mr. Ward’s facility if they can cross a bridge so much more quickly.<br /><br />Here’s something else that is very strange. During the Michigan Senate hearings, we were told that the Bridge Company is also trying to obtain permission to have hazardous materials go over their bridge, other than explosives. In fact, they have been trying for around two years and because of the delay now have their lawyers involved.<br /><br />It that permission was granted, then again, who would use Mr. Ward’s service other than perhaps for explosives. I am sure that some cynics will have an explanation why it is taking so long for the Bridge Company to get their approvals.</p><div align="justify">Do you see what I mean? Millions of dollars are being spent on a service that ultimately could go out of business tomorrow. I don’t get it.<br /><br />What I also don’t get is why we’re spending any money whatsoever on Tunnel Plaza Improvements. I attended their Open House meeting a few weeks ago and was disgusted by what I heard. More taxpayer money being wasted on a project that makes little sense to me.<br /><br />Think about it, a project that initially was to cost $30 million will now be costing about $44 million. Of course, that number is a phony one because it was not calculated on actual numbers. I am sure that the reality will be very much along the lines of the massive increases that almost every Windsor construction project has encountered such as the festival stage which has about doubled in cost since it started.<br /><br />But what makes it ludicrous is that the Tunnel volumes have decreased so dramatically since their peak. There was this story in the paper the other day as well that does not bode well for any significant increases:</div><ul><li><div align="justify">“Local tourism CEO Chris Ryan has been sitting on a nine-person board that has been meeting twice a month in London in a bid to get the regional tourism organization off the ground.<br /><br />“There is a lot to do,” he said. “We are putting together a new organization and governance, developing strategic and marketing plans. We are being positive and working at it.”<br /><br />Ryan said 68 per cent of Ontario tourism dollars is linked to residents within the province — a number projected to grow to 84 per cent by 2013.<br /><br />Meanwhile, U.S. visits will continue to shrink from 20 per cent today to 10 per cent by 2013.”</div></li></ul><p align="justify">Moreover, the DRIC people believe that their new bridge will take 25% of the Tunnel traffic.<br /><br />So please explain to me what was said at the session ie over the next 20 years traffic will increase by about 1% per year at the Tunnel. How can that possibly be?<br /><br />Even if one assumes that there will be a 1% increase over that period of time, the number of vehicles that will be going through the Tunnel will still be well below their peak.<br /><br />I remember being given a presentation by one of the Senior Tunnel people several years ago and he had a brilliant plan about how to improve Tunnel operations without the necessity of spending all these millions of dollars on Plaza Improvements. I could never understand why the Head of the Windsor Tunnel Commission, our Mayor, did not listen to him and try to achieve what he wanted to do so much earlier. That would have helped the Tunnel business years ago.<br /><br />It seems to me that the only people who are going to gain from this project are those whose properties will be expropriated and those nearby whose property values might increase if this area ever gets redeveloped.<br /><br />I asked a simple question at the session why the “No Build” alternative was not being put forward. My reason for asking the question was because of excessive cost and low volumes.<br /><br />The answer given was that in the mornings with all the commuters going over there could be lineups and therefore we need to spend money to fix up the Tunnel entrance. All of this disruption in the core and waste of money for this. Absurd.<br /><br />Spend, spend, spend. Spend money for a business that could be out of business tomorrow. Spend excessive amounts of money for a business whose business is declining.<br /><br />What kind of business is this? Oh I forgot, this is not business… this is Government.</p><p align="justify"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#ffff00;">PS.</span></strong><br /><br />Do you remember what solved the truck backup problem for Windsor? Not spending $5.3B on a new bridge but rather the Bridge Company spending a few million of its private funds to build 4 new truck booths into the US.<br /><br />The analogy used is that it is like opening up a couple of cash register lanes in a supermarket to reduce the line-ups.<br /><br />So why do we need Tunnel Plaza Improvements if this is happening now and there is more to come to get Tunnel users through more quickly:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">"<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">New Lane Opens at the Detroit Windsor Tunnel<br /><em>Two New Inspection Booths For CBP</em><br /></span></strong><br />Detroit – U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers at the Detroit Windsor Tunnel received two new inspection booths with the completion of the first phase of construction at the facility. The expansion increases the number of available lanes from ten to eleven for traffic coming into the U.S.<br /><br />On June 19, 2010, the first phase of construction, originally announced in March 2010, at the Customs and Border Protection inspection plaza was completed with the opening of an additional traffic lane and two new inspection booths. Tunnel President and CEO Neal Belitsky announced that crews had finished the $900,000 phase of upgrades at the Detroit side of the tunnel.<br /><br />“The tunnel company, working with the General Services Administration, is making improvements to the infrastructure at the tunnel that will help CBP efficiently and effectively accomplish our mission,” stated Port Director Roderick Blanchard. “Working co-operatively with our partners and stakeholders ensures that our travelers receive the best services available...”<br /><br />The next phase of construction at the tunnel is scheduled to begin in September 2010 and be completed in June 2011. This phase will renovate the CBP secondary inspection area and offices to improve traffic flow into and through that area of the facility."<br /></div></li></ul>JoeBloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03915954829618386813noreply@blogger.com