WindsorCityBlog

The Governerd's Bill---It's Just Like Granholm's But More Refined

2011-04-13T11:07:00.014-04:00

Just 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:

•"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…

•“Project” means all activities associated with a crossing, including project land activities and project activities.”

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.

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:

• Snyder: Canadian offer for bridge is legit

“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.

"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.

"This is the No. 1 infrastructure project for the country of Canada," Snyder said. "That says a lot."

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)

But I do not!

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?

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.

Damage control time. Try and limit the Bridge Company's reframing of the border issue. Try to blunt their ads.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

If you have an 18-wheeler, you can drive through the “availability payments “and the “eminent domain” prohibition loopholes.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

•“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)

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.

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.

Why no one in the media or in the Democratic Party seemed to understand this is beyond my comprehension.

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

•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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

Canada needs the Bill in order to force the Bridge Company to sell out.

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.

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.

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:

• Michigan taxpayers are at risk financially
 “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
 It’s so easy for Canada to become owner of the entire project right away
 “Eminent domain” is alive and well
 Pressure is put on the Ambassador Bridge’s project
 Constitutional issues are not addressed.

And so much more!

Zero Taxpayer Dollars, Not A Single Dollar For DRIC

2011-04-13T09:46:00.005-04:00

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.

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.

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.

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:

Zero Taxpayer Dollars, Not A Single Dollar For DRIC.

Combine this new revelation along with the Squeeki-leaks documents dealing potentially with the withholding of relevant information from Parliament. Add in Senior Liberal MP Joe Volpe’s allegation that the $550M could well be a bribe. 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!

Are the media asleep as well?

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.

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.

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.

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!

Thank goodness for the Canadian election. It forced the truth out.

To put it simply, I was stunned. Completely unable to believe what I was hearing and reading.

But there is even more if you can believe it. There are two separate statements that mean the end of DRIC.

Strahl’s comment was the first, then this remark was next.

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.

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:

“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. 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).” (MIRS March 24, 2011)

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.

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?

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.

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!

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.

How much money has been wasted? Scores of millions of dollars on both sides of the river.

How much time has been wasted? Over a decade.

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!

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.

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.

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.

Here is the exchange during the House of Commons Question Period. You will not believe what you are reading:

“Champlain Bridge

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.

Does the Minister of Transport realize that it is his indifference to the needs of Quebec that could trigger an election?

[English]

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.

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.

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.

[Translation]

Mrs. Josée Beaudin (Saint-Lambert, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives managed to find the money needed to build a new bridge in Windsor, Ontario. They even advanced $550 million to help Michigan pay for its share. 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.

When will Quebec's needs get the same attention as the needs of Ontario and Michigan?

[English]

Hon. Chuck Strahl (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC): That was a good question, Mr. Speaker. How much money are we going to spend on the new Windsor bridge? We are going to spend zero taxpayer dollars. It is a P3 project. It will not have a single dollar in it.

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.

While the bridge is safe, Montrealers should use it.

We will be working with the Quebec government to design an option.”

ZERO DOLLARS. NOT A SINGLE DOLLAR.

Take a look at and listen to the Transport Minister. He is so proud of himself

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.

Clearly, the Minister has now confirmed that it has never been there. It too was all a joke on Michigan.

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.

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.

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?

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!

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?

Did he forget what Minister Baird said when he first offered the loan? Or did he think we would forget. Just click the link

What is the truth!

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

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!

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.

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--- ZERO DOLLARS. NOT A SINGLE DOLLAR. That is all that this border file has all been.

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.

Meet Me At The Square

2011-03-30T19:42:00.001-04:00

In case you have not heard, I have a new address. Come and meet me at The Square: I have moved to http://www.windsorsquare.ca/ See you at The Square with my new Blogs. Click OPINION and you will find me! Remember as well to change your WindsorCityBlog Favorites in your browser toolbar to: http://www.windsorsquare.ca/

Meet Me At The Square

2010-07-27T22:20:00.007-04:00

In case you have not heard, I have a new address. Come and meet me at The Square:

I have moved to http://www.windsorsquare.ca/

See you at The Square with my new Blogs. Click OPINION and you will find me!

Remember as well to change your WindsorCityBlog Favorites in your browser toolbar to: http://www.windsorsquare.ca/

WindsorCityBlog Is Moving to Windsor Square

2010-07-19T07:00:00.006-04:00

It was time already.

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.

Enter The Square!

Go on, don't be afraid. Click on the image and see what happens!

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.

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 http://www.windsorsquare.ca

See you at The Square this morning with my first new Blog. Click OPINION and you will find me!

Remmeber as well to change your WindsorCityBlog Favorites in your browser toolbar to: http://www.windsorsquare.ca

Check out the Press Release:

Introducing Southwest Ontario's newest information destination.

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.

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.

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.

WHY "THE SQUARE"

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.

Add "Windsor Square" to your list of favourites. We trust that you will become a regular visitor to The Square!

Register as a subscriber and make your feelings known through the online comments section or by writing to letters@windsorsquare.ca or editor@windsorsquare.ca

http://www.windsorsquare.ca

The Anti-Bridge Company Conspiracy Revealed

2010-07-16T08:00:00.000-04:00

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.

So if I said it again, it would just be ho-hum news to you.

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?

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:

The Federal Government is dealing with the International Bridge via Bill C3.
The Province has responsibility over the road to the border.
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.

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.

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.

And don't you just love the article title too to make it so much easier to confirm my suspicions:

"Canada is Fully Engaged on the Detroit-Windsor Border Crossing

Federal Action: 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).

Provincial Action: 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).

Local Action: 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)."

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!

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.

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!

Windsor Tales

2010-07-15T11:15:00.001-04:00

Here are some more thoughts for you.

IT IS ALL GARBAGE

A reader scolded me recently:

"You have been strangely silent on the contacting out of garbage-recycling."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

ALL IS FORGIVEN

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.

Ooops, I forgot. We in Windsor believe that the hardliners won the strike.

"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...

No wonder Ford’s promises to protect the taxpayer are resonating with angry citizens.

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.

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.

“Taxpayers have the right to know they’re getting the best value for their money,” he said.

“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...

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.

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.

No wonder Green attempted to shut down Ford on Wednesday."

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.

THE MANAGEMENT GARBAGE MAN GOETH

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.

"Please join us in congratulating Anne Marie Albidone in her appointment to the position of Manager of Environmental Services...

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.

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."

TOO BAD WIMBLEDON IS OVER

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.

However, I wonder how many jobs have been created by all of these wonderful trips.

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:

"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.

"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."

I see that the Vice-President still does the talking for the Commission.

"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."

I love this comment as well considering that it is a taxpayer paid trip:

"And anytime you get an opportunity to put the Windsor region on someone's radar screen, it's priceless."

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

"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.

"It's something you have to do to open up and keep open channels of communication," said Francis."

The next Farnborough International Airshow will be held from 19-25 July 2010.

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.

Who knows, maybe there is something going on with respect to our air industry since Montréal is a centre of aviation in Canada.

CANCELLED CITY HALL PRESS RELEASE

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:

News Release

Mayor Achieves Huge Result for Windsor, Again
(Except We Cannot Tell You About It)

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.

"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."

The Real Border Issue: The Corridor Not The Bridge

2010-07-15T00:01:00.001-04:00

“Transport Canada’s “NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGIC GATEWAYS AND TRADE CORRIDORS”

“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.

Gateway: a multi-modal entry/exit point through which goods and international passengers move beyond local, and even regional, markets.

Trade Corridor: a linear, multi-modal orientation of international passenger and freight flows that connect gateways to major markets.

Gateway and corridor strategies are integrated packages of long-term investment and
policy measures that advance the development and exploitation of gateways and corridors for national benefit.’

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.”

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?

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.

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.

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 Gateway project.

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:

 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 Detroit-Windsor trade corridor is growing desperate for additional border transit capacity,” the MP said"

 Given the importance of the corridor 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"

Even Jeff Watson got into the game:

 “In my corridor, 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.”

Transport Canada’s “NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK” talks about Windor/Detroit this way:

 The Windsor-Detroit corridor is Canada’s busiest artery of trade. 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.

What is the common word in all of the examples: “corridor.”

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:

"Mr. Stamper: The [Presidential]} permit process has developed in the U.S. by saying, "We will issue a permit for the corridor. 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, "We are not going to affect or remove rights that a current corridor has because we issued that right to be there.

Mr. Stamper: The bureaucrats projected the traffic growth at the Blue Water Bridge by taking it away from the corridor in Windsor, Detroit...

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 a bridge in the Windsor corridor 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."

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.

Here is the key section of what the Professor said that made me see clearly what this is all about.

Note the extent of the grant. It is NOT to a specific location. Rather it is:

"within or near the city limits of Detroit, Wayne County, Michigan."

The Canadian legislation must be comparable.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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!

Transport Canada's policy says it all:

"Gateways and trade corridors are major systems of marine, road, rail and air transportation infrastructure."

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."

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.

It is so close that the bureaucrats can taste it. If it wasn't for that damn Bridge Company.

Border Banter

2010-07-14T11:30:00.000-04:00

Just a few thoughts on items that caught my eye over the past few weeks.

SERGIO MARCHIONNE AND DRIC

The things you learn that help make things understandable such as Chrysler's Sergio Marchionne's backing of DRIC:

James J. Blanchard

Board of Directors, Chrysler Group LLC

James J. Blanchard was appointed to the Board of Directors of Chrysler Group LLC on July 6, 2009.

Paisano...did you know that Giacomo

"is a $630-per-hour consultant to the DRIC project as a subcontractor of the Southfield office Louisville-based The Corradino Group.

Corradino is a principal DRIC contractor, orchestrating environmental, traffic and engineering studies.

He was hired as a DRIC consultant in 2007."

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

"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."

Some have said they could quadruple! That would increase the price of your vehicles wouldn't it?

What about the toll revenue shortfalls, Sergio, did Blanchard explain to you how they would be paid for? Perhaps higher taxes on your profits?

I like how the Detroit media reported the Mackinac visit by Sergio where he gave his pro-DRIC speech:

Crains reported:

"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."

I guess the Free Press forgot

"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."

WHY AREN'T DRIC-ITES ASKED THE QUESTION

How dare Dietrich Bergmann cast any doubt on the DRIC. There can only be one reason he is against it. Listen to this

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.

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.

WHY BAIRD WANTS A BILL NOW

"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."

Here is what the candidates for Governor in Michigan are saying about their support for DRIC:

Mike Cox said he doesn't support the project
Tom George said “the question is, will it help Michigan. I don't believe it will.
Rick Snyder said Michigan “should be a transportation hub,” but he has questions that need to be answered about the public-private partnership model.
Virg Bernero said he opposes the DRIC-related legislation as written, but thinks there is a need for a second span.
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.
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"
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.

DOES MINISTER BAIRD DARE TRAVEL TO MICHIGAN AGAIN

I saw this story:

"Granholm Urges Legislature to Send Anti-Bullying Bill to Her Desk

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.'

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:

"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.

"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.

"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."

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..."

Baird interrupted to say he never claimed to be a witness, to which Ratansi retorted: "Good, ‘bye."

In another exchange, committee member and Liberal MP Siobhan Coady said "bullies in the schoolyard should never be listened to."

"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!"

HEADLINES AND NO ANALYSIS

Now you will understand why people have turned to BLOGs for analysis:

Detroit Free Press "Study: New bridge can rake in $108M"
Windsor Star "DRIC bridge toll revenue set at $59.9M" "DRIC would be cash cow"

Not one word about the financing costs and the huge shortfalls that someone has to pay for!

And the newspapers wonder why people look elsewhere for information.

At least the specialized business paper in Detroit had the story right although their headline could have been a bit better:

"DRIC span annual revenue estimated at $60 million in first year

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.

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.

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."

IS THE DRIC P3 BILL UNCONSTITUTIONAL

I thought that the AG letter to Rep Opsommer was pretty clear on that.

However, now there is even more:

"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.

Bishop questioned the constitutionality of creating autonomous authority operated by the state transportation department, the Canadian government and private contractors.

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.”

DRIC Road/Bridge Beauty Contest Winner Announced

2010-07-13T14:30:00.001-04:00

It's just like the Miss Universe contest.

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!

Michigan represntative Opsommer has been hinting about OMERS's role in DRIC:

"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. (Speculation is that the Canadian pension fund OMERS would be a 99-year investor.) The Legislature would have no say in toll increases, which would be set by MDOT and the investor."

Since the Representative has opened the door to speculation, let's close it and give the answer who the winner is.

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?

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.

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.

If on the other hand, you want to understand how I can be so sure of what I am speculating, read on.

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.

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.

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:

"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...

Think about it. 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., which provided outside expertise but employed thousands of local workers and completed this remarkable link in less than three years...

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."

Hmmm, only one company named. Interesting. And we know how well-connected Gord is.

The best a local can be as mini-Gord re-inforced is as a sub-contractor:

"Cocos still player in parkway

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...

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."

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.

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:

- Rose City Parkway Group including:
- Aecon Concessions is a division of Aecon Construction Group Inc.
- Fengate Capital
- Dufferin, a division of Holcim (Canada) Inc.
- The Miller Group
- MMM Group Limited
- Macquarie Capital Group Limited
- HOCHTIEF PPP Solution North America Inc.
- Peter Kiewit Sons Co.
- AECOM Canada Ltd.
- H.W. Lochner
- Thurber Engineering Ltd.
- Applied Research Associates, Inc.
- RC Spencer Associates Inc.
- West 8

- Windsor-Essex Transportation Partners including:
- Carillion Canada Inc.
- The Bank of Nova Scotia
- Stantec Consulting Ltd.
- PCL
- Bilfinger Berger Project Investments
- HSBC Specialist Investments Ltd (HSBC Infrastructure)
- John Laing Investments Limited (John Laing)
- Walsh Construction Company, a subsidiary of The Walsh Group, Ltd.
- Parsons Corporation
- Trow Associates Inc.

- Windsor Essex Mobility Group including:
- Dilion Consulting Limited
- RBC Dominion Securities Inc.
- Iridium Concesiones de Infraestructuras, S. A.
- Acciona, S.A.
- Fluor Canada Ltd.
- Dragados Canada Inc.
- Acciona Infrastructure Canada, Inc.
- Hatch Mott MacDonald Ltd.
- AMEC Earth and Environmental, Ltd.

Don't you just love the word "including." It is who is being hidden that makes this fun.

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.

Let's start here:

Strait Crossing Inc.

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.

Then this:

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.

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.

Guess who became the owner of SCI: Armbro Enterprises Inc.

"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.

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...

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."

Then Ambro changed its name: Aecon Group Inc (formerly Armbro Enterprises Inc)

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.

"Aecon Concessions

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."

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:

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.

But while MTO is one of our most important customers, it is not the only transportation infrastructure game in Ontario.

Plans are well advanced for the new $3 billion Detroit Windsor crossing scheduled for completion in 2014 …and we plan to be there."

And then this in June, 2009:

"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.

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.

The same thing is happening in other parts of the province– with projects like the Detroit/Windsor crossing..

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"

While not as precise, the Aecon people said in 2010:

"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.

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.

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...

This change signals an important trend.

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...

As Aecon moves ‘up market’ in terms of the type of contracts that we pursue, a number of good things happen.

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.

Second, bidding is more disciplined as these larger more seasoned competitors operate under very structured environments and stay very focused on profit.

And third, larger projects will frequently see us participating with partners...

The vast majority of our revenue is derived from contracts that are let either directly or indirectly by governments or large multi-national companies."

No wonder Gord smashed the local contractors!

Oh and surely you did not forget this important connection between AECON's head honcho and Windsor:

"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.

Mr. Beck is CEO and chairman of Aecon Group, which is the largest publicly traded construction and infrastructure company..."

I explained what happened between them and Windsor's role in that in this BLOG:
http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2009/10/even-more-border-stories.html

Then I found this:

"Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP was recently involved in the following transactions:

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."

Pshaw, you say. Blogmeister, you can do better than that. That is not enough information.

All right ye of little faith. Remember that the Confederation Bridge is important. Why----guess who is involved in its ownership:

"OMERS acquires Interest in the Confederation Bridge

(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)."

And guess who owns MMM Group Ltd. part of the Rose City Group:

"MMM president and chief executive officer Bruce Bodden said in an interview...

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."

I saw this on MMM's website:

"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."

You would not be surprised to know that:

"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."

But I especially liked this connection between OMERS and AECON:

"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.

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.

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."

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:

"Still, Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said he would sign the same deal all over again.

"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."

OMG...will he say that as Finance Minister when the DRIC Road deal costs too much too!

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.

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.

I wrote this in March, 2007:

"Are the City and Macquarie working together too? Are Windsor, the Feds and Macquarie working together?

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.

Oh no.....Were Windsor, the Feds and Macquarie working together along with Borealis?

Were Macquarie and Borealis going to be the P3 partner for the new border crossing?"

But, but, but you say...where is the OMERS/Borealis name on the short-list?

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!

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:

"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...

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...

“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.”

And he wants big bucks too---to be like the Canada Pension Plan it seems:

"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...

"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.

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."

And this

"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.

"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."

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.

"Empirically, we have found that scale has worked to our advantage with respect to returns."

And just so you think I am NOT kidding, this was said back in 2009:

"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.

Mr. Nobrega's pitch sounded like more of a plea to government. But he made a solid case.

OMERS, he argued, "led the renaissance in the nuclear industry in this province... invested in the bricks and mortar of our healthcare infrastructure, (and) 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."

In short, OMERS has paid its dues, he said."

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.

And the winner is....Representative Opsommer was right!

Survey Results: Most Expect Edgar To Break His Promise

2010-07-13T00:05:00.000-04:00

The latest WindsorCityBlog survey results are in.

Fewer than 20% of my readers who voted expect Edgar (aka Eddie) to keep his word about running for only 2 terms.

Almost 50% of my readers expect Edgar to break his promise and run for a third term.

The balance, don't know, don't care or live outside of Windsor.

Looking at Windsorites only who had an opinion, almost 72% of them think Edgar will run again.

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.

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.

Unanswered Questions

2010-07-13T00:01:00.000-04:00

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?

There are so many "unanswered questions" surrounding that project. Actually, that expression is starting to dominate the Windsor political scene.

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?

Here are just a few typical examples:

"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.
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)
'A lot of unanswered questions' around Essex animal deaths
Paul Fields at Council saying that there were "unanswered questions" and missing information about the 400 audit
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.
Detroit's council has so far refused to establish its new tunnel authority because of too many unanswered questions around the [Tunnel] deal.
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.

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.
"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."
Yet events this week seem to suggest that the original audit contained information about activities that some might consider malfeasance.

Obfuscation on fiduciary matters is troubling and raises issues beyond the ones addressed monday night.

Even those who think these actions were justified to avoid a lawsuit would have to agree there are still many unanswered questions.
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
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 .
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."

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."

"If he wanted answers to the questions, he should have stayed on as part of the process," said Francis.

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.

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:

"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.

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?"

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:

 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
 Beztak rejection---was it fair how they were attacked in such depth but not anyone else
 Was this all a done deal and worked out in advance
 Was the process all a phony but designed to select a favoured company regardless of cost
 Was Project Ice Track (PIT) treated the pits
 Were the Spitfires tied up by the City so PIT could never get them
 Were there unreported collateral deals not in the City’s interest to get the deal

 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
 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
 Was the City “extraed” to death
 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
 Why were the other possible proponents just noted and filed
 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)
 Was there validity for the single source justification

 Why was it not mentioned that the City had its own arena plans which it purchased and why weren't they used
 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
 What was the total cost of the project and was it "on budget" based on original costs
 Were any“overage” costs buried in Departmental budgets and if so, which ones
 Should the developer where the arena land was purchased have paid some of the costs normally that the City has paid,
 Why was his land picked and not others that cost less in the area
 Did the City do proper due diligence before doing the deal with Mr. Farhi
 Did we get value for money ie what was left out to be paid for after the next election eg parking
 Did we get comparable arenas at the East end site with the smaller City arenas that are supposed to be closed (eg less seating)
 Why was a sound system not included originally in the package but added subsequently
 Was the land exchange PLUS paying for the cleanup PLUS the 3 year tax holiday a good one for the City
 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
 Were there environmental issues there that were “buried”
 Are there still environmental issues eg Wickes plant takeover which means the City may to clean up arena lands if hazards migrated
 What was the role of the Casino in all of this, if any
 Are legitimate arena costs now charged to General Revenues since the project is finished eg interest costs on borrowings and if so, how much
 Was the PIT Price Waterhouse Report correct in its analysis?

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!

Tip Of The City's Litigation Iceberg

2010-07-12T13:30:00.002-04:00

It is starting to get ugly and expensive as I have warned before. There are consequences to actions.

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.

The effect on Windsor taxpayers can be quite substantial down the road. Let me explain.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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..

Who pays for this other than taxpayers?

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.

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.

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.

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:

"Immmunity

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 any act done in good faith 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 performance in good faith of the duty or authority."

It would not seem therefore that the City would be prohibited from seeking indemnification from someone who did not act in good faith.

While not exactly on point, the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act says

"Insurance

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,

(a) for contracting for insurance;

(b) despite the Insurance Act, to enable the municipality to act as an insurer; and

(c) for exchanging with other municipalities in Ontario reciprocal contracts of indemnity or inter-insurance in accordance with Part XIII of the Insurance Act,

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."

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.

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.

Another fine border mess for which taxpayers may have to be responsible.

Last Chance to Vote

2010-07-12T00:15:00.000-04:00

What do you, dear reader, think that Edgar will do? Can you read his mind?

Go to: http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132

Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.

The survey closes at 5 PM Monday, today, right before the Council meeting.

Whatever Happened To The Integrity Commish And His Final Report

2010-07-12T00:10:00.002-04:00

From the Mulroney Inquiry:

"the importance of the integrity of government, and, more particularly, the integrity of those who govern, is the theme that resonates throughout this Report.

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.."

It's strange that everything is so quiet about Earl Basse:

"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.

Basse, whose contract ended Dec. 31, will continue till June."

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?

According to the Council Report. the Commish accepted Council's offer to extend his contract until June 30, 2010 "on the same terms and conditions as his previous contract." [emphasis added]

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

"the Integrity Commission has provided Council with the protocols he intends to follow for investigating the remaining complaints he has received...[emphasis added]"

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.

I am sure that Edgar (aka Eddie) being a lawyer set him straight on that.

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.

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" http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2009/12/friendship-part-i-of-five-part-series_18.html

"What’s a conflict?

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.

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.

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. “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. 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. 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.”

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.

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."

Our State Of Emergency Is Over---Why

2010-07-12T00:01:00.001-04:00

Whew, so much excitement. But it's done now. Strange don't you think in the circumstances.

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.

In each of those cases, local authorities were able to handle the matter.

In fact, it appears that our local authorities were able to handle our situation because we learned that:

"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.

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."

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.

Imagine then my reaction when I read the following:

"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.

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.

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."

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

"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."

Edgar did say after all:

"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.

He said the scope of such a review will depend on investigators' findings on the cause of Thursday's collapse."

Until complete answers are provided to the public, in my opinion, the Emergency still exists.

UPDATE

We have now been told:

"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.

Norm Becker, of The Becker Engineering Group, said the asphalt layer on the parking surface contributed to the structure’s collapse.

“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...

Becker said there may be other factors contributing the structure’s collapse that his firm will investigate but the asphalt was definitely a contributor."

Should we now be satisfied? Hardly.

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:

"Becker said the repair work was done by a previous owner of the property."

The scarier part of the story says this:

"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."

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!

BLOGExtra: Will Harper Survey Windsor Damage

2010-07-09T11:45:00.000-04:00

Can you imagine if 211/311 had moved there, to the building behind which the parking garage collapsed:

"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...

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.

Roger Bramhall of Mr. Bay Inc. was visibly angry after council’s decision to disregard the RFP, but refused to comment when approached."

I never understood why that site was rejected. At the time I wrote:

"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."

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:"

"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.

At least 1,400 homeowners reported water – and in some cases sewage – in their basements on Sunday."

What does the City do:

"Starting well before sunrise Friday, municipal sanitation crews roamed the streets to tackle mountains of storm-related garbage...

He said residents were appreciative the city was offering the free special pickup that continues through today."

Up to 2,000 homes damaged and the Mayor had this to say:

"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."

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:

"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.

“The evacuation is being done out of an abundance of caution,” Francis said...

The city’s social services department would pay for the hotel rooms, Francis said."

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:

"Harper surveys flooded Prairies; offers aid package and then travels to Windsor

Prime Minister Stephen Harper surveyed flood-stricken areas of Saskatchewan from a helicopter Thursday after announcing a relief package for rain-drenched farmers.

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.

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...

Following his visit to Saskatchewan, Harper will head to Alberta to visit family and attend the Calgary Stampede.

After that, he and his family will head to Harrington Lake, the official country residence of the prime minister near Ottawa.

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."

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."

Will Edgar Break His Promise

2010-07-09T11:30:00.001-04:00

What do you, dear reader, think that Edgar will do? Can you read his mind?

Go to: http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132

Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.

The survey closes at 5 PM next Monday, right before the Council meeting.

BLOGexclusive: Is This Edgar's New Job

2010-07-08T11:59:00.001-04:00

Announcing on July 20---too early to make sense to me. The question is why.

Could this be the reason why something is being announced now?

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.

Moreover, relations are so wonderful with the Conservatives especially with Jeff Watson as well.

And who better to keep promoting DRIC?

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.

Don't you just love it.

The Early Edgar Returns

2010-07-08T11:45:00.000-04:00

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.

Go to: http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132

Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.

The big Star story today was a non-event. If you believe this then I have a DRIC bridge to sell you:

"On July 20, says Mayor Eddie Francis, both he and the city will know.

"That week works for me in terms of really buckling down and considering all the things I need to consider," Francis said Wednesday.

"I'm still going back and forth...

"I've got to come to a decision ... I'm just not there yet."

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.

If you think that July 20 is the real deadline date think again. That does not one-up Hurst!

Think about this and July 20. It's a no-lose for him.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Nope, this is just another E-machine ploy. I bet Mike never thought of it!

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.

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!

http://eventful.com/competitions/kiss2010/boston

Make sure to tell everyone to vote please!!

The Survey: Will He Or Won't He

2010-07-08T00:01:00.002-04:00

Run for Mayor again, obviously.

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.

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:

"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."

So what do you, dear reader, think that Edgar will do? Can you read his mind?

Go to: http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=58db53f3-b573-4f40-b345-f492f65e3132

Enter your response in the blank, click finished and you are done.

The survey closes at 5 PM next Monday, right before the Council meeting.

The ABEs Are Having Fun

2010-07-07T12:30:00.000-04:00

The ABEs--- The "Anybody But Edgar" group.

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?

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.

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.

Guerilla politics might be a good description of who they are and what they are trying to achieve and how.

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.

Gord at least figured out part of the ABE strategy to neutralize Edgar:

"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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I must admit that I don't believe much of what Gord said in his column about Edgar's future.

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?

"Francis, who has job offers involving considerably more than he earns as mayor."

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.

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.

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.

Provincially? It would be tough to beat either Sandra or Dwight.

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.

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.

Perhaps he might go into the land development business. After all, the Star told us that:

"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."

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.

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.

It is even more interesting if what Gord says turns out to be the truth:

"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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

We just should take Gord's advice from back in August, 2004:

"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."

David Cassivi gave some good advice then too:

"people should keep their shirts on because it will soon become evident significant progress is being made.

"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..."

As Gord concluded

"Stick around. The fun begins after Labour Day."

Should The WUC Board Resign

2010-07-06T00:01:00.001-04:00

Of course not. Why should they?

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.

Why, there is nothing better than having a malleable Board:

"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.

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."

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.

I really find what is going on quite fascinating. It is all part of a well laid out plan just like the CUPE strike.

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:

"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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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%.

That was the opportunity needed to slam the Commission for doing what the law imposes on them:

"Windsor Utiliites Commission to ignore council's wishes on rate hike

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."

Like the language used?

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?

Why would the Star try to intimidate them today by suggesting that Council could appoint others? Why would the Star write:

"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."

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.

It is absolutely the same as what took place after the labor dispute ended. Council immediately moved to privatize.

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:

"Windsor Utilities Commission to boycott city meeting on water rate hikes

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.

"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."

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.

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."

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

It is clear that the Chair had no idea that this action was going to be taken:

"Asked to explain why councillors were given WUC documents providing two options, Lewenza said Tuesday: “I’m completely perplexed.”

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

What else could it be? There is an obvious alternative that I am certain you have figured out on your own by now.

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?

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.

Get moving. Peform your legal obligations. And ignore the Messenger completely!

Giving Taxpayers The Business

2010-07-05T08:30:00.001-04:00

I have to ask this in all seriousness. Is this really how Governments operate?

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?

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.

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.

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.

The Truck Ferry project was a comedy of errors and naturally the costs increased dramatically.

“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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

“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.

“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.”

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.

Meanwhile, U.S. visits will continue to shrink from 20 per cent today to 10 per cent by 2013.”

Moreover, the DRIC people believe that their new bridge will take 25% of the Tunnel traffic.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

What kind of business is this? Oh I forgot, this is not business… this is Government.

PS.

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.

The analogy used is that it is like opening up a couple of cash register lanes in a supermarket to reduce the line-ups.

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:

"New Lane Opens at the Detroit Windsor Tunnel
Two New Inspection Booths For CBP

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.

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.

“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...”

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."

The Something Need Your Help

2010-07-05T06:00:00.001-04:00

I need a favour from you, dear reader, and your children, grandchildren, family, friends, school-mates, colleagues and anyone else you can think of!

My daughter is promoting an awesome rock group from Boston called "The Something."

They are hoping to tour with KISS and need your votes immediately!

The contest ends in two weeks, 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!

http://eventful.com/competitions/kiss2010/boston

Make sure to tell everyone to vote!!

If you want to check out their music, make sure to visit their fan page here on Facebook:
www.facebook.com/thesomethingboston

Will Homeland Security Investigate The Michigan/Canada Relationship

2010-07-01T00:01:00.001-04:00

Did you see this terrible story reported in the press? And now about the alleged Russian spies in the US?

It seems though that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Director is back-tracking. Yet he is a well-repected career bureaucrat who ought to know better. Did this outburst the day before his arrival have anything to do with the Chinese President coming to Canada for the G20/G-8 meetings. A not-so-subtle warning that we are watching you perhaps with built-in Government deniability so the Prime Minister can say he had no idea what was going to be said.

I hope that there was a real strong reason for him to say what he did because I can see how it can be turned against Canada as a result of the DRIC/P3 Bill believe it or not. Even though we are "friends" with the US.

Shades of the cold war, KGB, spies, industrial espionage:

"Some politicians under foreign sway: CSIS

Richard Fadden, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, in an exclusive interview with the CBC.

Canada's spy agency suspects that cabinet ministers in two provinces are under the control of foreign governments, CBC News has learned.

Several members of B.C. municipal governments are also under suspicion, Richard Fadden, the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, told CBC News in an exclusive interview.

"We're in fact a bit worried in a couple of provinces that we have an indication that there's some political figures who have developed quite an attachment to foreign countries," Fadden said.

"The individual becomes in a position to make decisions that affect the country or the province or a municipality. All of a sudden, decisions aren't taken on the basis of the public good but on the basis of another country's preoccupations."

He said the politicians and public servants see it as a long-standing relationship and have no idea they are being used.

"There are several municipal politicians in British Columbia and in at least two provinces there are ministers of the Crown who we think are under at least the general influence of a foreign government."

Fadden said the agency is in the process of discussing with the Privy Council Office the best way to inform those provinces there may be a problem.

"We'll do the same with the public servants. I'm making this comment because I think it's a real danger that people be totally oblivious to this kind of issue."

Fadden warned that foreign regimes — through universities and social clubs — will develop a relationship with people who have a connection to the homeland.

"You invite somebody back to the homeland. You pay [for] their trips and all of a sudden you discover that when an event is occurring that is of particular interest to country "X," you call up and you ask the person to take a particular view," Fadden said."

Hmmmm. I wonder now. Will Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano feel obliged to make some comment if a Senior Canadian Government Minister comes to the US?

After all, Homeland Security is concerned about Canada. While we are not treated like Mexico yet

"The measures I’ve described today are for the Southwest border. However, we have other measures we we’ve apply at the northern border. Including more deployment of mobile-type radar systems, more agents – [to meet] the congressional mandate on the number of agents that have to be at the northern border. We have excellent cooperation with the RCMP and have an aggressive program under way now to improve and provide better equipment and technology in the ports of entry all along the northern border.”

I wonder how she will react once she is made aware of the huge change in Michigan's P3 Bill to benefit Canada. Will she want to investigate further.

It is not hard to make the case.

From this in the P3 Bill originally:

"Instrumentality of government" means a legal public entity created or empowered to carry out functions commonly carried out by units of government."

To this:

"Instrumentality of government" means a public entity created or empowered to carry out functions commonly carried out by units of government, public agencies, or public authorities.

Instrumentality of government additionally means the government of Canada or a public agency or public authority created by the government of Canada or another state of the United States or a corporation without share capital created and empowered under the Canadian international bridges and tunnels act to carry out functions commonly carried out by the government of Canada."

Oh sure, Minister Baird pooh-poohed any negative suggestions about Canada taking over any Michigan sovereignty. DUH, what would you expect him to say "Darn, you caught us!" Why then was the provision put in?

Didn't this change come in around the time when Canada offered its two-page letter supposedly offering Michigan a riskless, no-brainer offer of money, $550 million worth. That money was to encourage Michigan House members to pass the P3 Bill and accomplished that objective according to the Minister. In anyone's league, that is a lot of money.

Just think of the broad scope of the P3 Bill. It is much more than merely the DRIC Bridge: 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.

The DRIC bridge is worry enough since Canada keeps telling us that it is Canada's most important project. The Minister keeps reminding us how much of our trade goes over the Ambassador Bridge and also, interestingly enough, about all of the security concerns.

I wonder if Homeland Security will be as impressed as I was about the role of the Bridge Authority which all of a sudden has become front and centre to supposedly shield Michigan from any liability. Sure some members will be American but will they be people that have been "contaminated" by Canada ie who "are under at least the general influence of a foreign government." Will Canada get to choose the Americans while the "non-loan" loan is outstanding? Who knows since there are no Terms and Conditions yet.

Why it is interesting is no one would be concerned if the Authority defaulted where they would be concerned if Michigan defaults. And default it must because no one wants to provide any information whatsoever that total revenues would exceed costs. I am sure that Homeland Security will pick up on the fact that Canada is now talking about "availability payments" rather than a deal in which payments come from toll revenues only.

Naturally if there is a default, the Bridge goes to the investors, most of whom are foreign including some Canadian banks, or presumably to the guarantor who may well be the Government of Canada. In any case, the control of the most important land crossing in North America is lost to Americans and this corridor of trade into and out of the United States is no longer in American hands.

Obviously, if Canada has reason to be concerned if "cabinet ministers in two provinces are under the control of foreign governments" then I would expect that the United States ought to be concerned if there is a potential for a foreign country to control the trade and corridors of a State and the United States of America.

Do you understand now why I am so critical of the Canadian Government and how it is treating its relationship with the United States? I have written before that Prime Minister Harper is getting bad advice about how to deal with the Americans. I've also written that the Ambassador Bridge will become a flashpoint between our two countries if someone is not careful. It may become our new softwood lumber case as the NAFTA litigation moves forward

I hate to say it but I would expect that very soon I may be able to say "I told you so."

Another WUC Investigation Needed

2010-06-30T10:15:00.005-04:00

Oh Lord, here we go again. WUC-gate2, the sequel

There is something rotten going on again in the Windsor Utilities Commission, or perhaps in reality somewhere else this time, that needs investigation.

Don't expect the Windsor Star to do it. They're too busy talking about Monopoly and other Children's games to be concerned with important matters in the City. The responsibility lies with the Chair of the Commission to start it at least. Is he up to the job?

Ken Lewenza Junior is an interesting character.

The story about him is that he would probably be first in line to replace Joe Comartin when he decides to retire some day. Accordingly, one would have thought that he should "play it safe" and not rock the boat too much. Why jeopardize his future chances.

Instead, he leads the charge in the ridiculous CUPE dispute and tries to explain to the public what really happened, why a strike was not necessary and how much it cost us all. Unfortunately, the Messenger decided that it needed to protect the hard-liners, especially our Mayor, and refused consistently to report anything that Junior had to say. Not only that, they perpetuated the myth that the hard-liners won when instead they cost the city taxpayers millions of dollars.

Now we have the matter involving water rates. The Councillor could have played it safe and played the Mayor's game of keeping rates down before the election and then hammering taxpayers after the election as was done before. Instead, the Councillor took the unheard-of action of telling citizens that a 10% rate increase was required and then took the rate increase show on the road to demonstrate why that was needed and to listen to the reaction of citizens to what was being said.

I think it can be said that the general reaction of citizens who attended all of these information sessions was to support what was being proposed by WUC ie the large increase.

Lewenza learned from the earlier WUC fiasco and took the career chance to get his lumps from the public and see his political career go down the tubes if he failed at his task. In fact was congratulated by his colleagues on Council publicly for his actions and taking the steps he did. Hmmm, that says something about his colleagues too doesn't it.

Of course, Council Colleagues who are running again are afraid of what the reaction of citizens would be. They voted on a 3% increase for water rates, something that the Commission has never supported. Yet now we learn that the Commission will be going ahead with 5% because after all they have the rate setting ability. That should lead to a nice confrontation

Why was that done... Junior has the perfect line and probably the true explanation:

"Lewenza said sarcastically that his colleagues could now tell voters they fought for cheaper rates and “all go to sleep at night knowing the five per cent per year was going ahead.”

There is no doubt in my mind that we will see a column by mini-Gord expressing outrage, an editorial or two denouncing the actions of the Commission and who knows what Gord will say in his column protesting what is going on.

Naturally the Mayor will also speak out loudly about protecting the interests of poor citizens who are under so much pressure these days paying out money. I could see him attacking his fellow Commission colleagues for their actions defying Council. Doesn't this sound like the Library Board as well?

It would not surprise me if Commission Board members resigned also. That would hardly break the heart of Council who would then replace the members with more compliant individuals who knew how to take and follow orders. Shades of the Undevelopment Commission.

This action by Council is no different than the Mayor suggesting several years ago that water rates perhaps should be reduced at a time when it was clear that a massive amount of work would be necessary to fix up the water system.

However, there is something bizarre going on at the Commission itself. Is the Commission completely out of control? Do the Board members have the faintest idea of what is going on? The Chair needs to discover what is happening or else it looks like the Minister may have to send in another team of auditors to try to piece together if his City is being well served by the people who are running the Commission.

Consider this. Why would anyone in their right mind after a proposal was rejected by the Board, put forward that proposal to be considered by Council. I'm talking specifically about the 3% solution. That was presented as Option #2 at Council.

There is no doubt in my mind that Councillor Lewenza was trying to prevent the Board from being embarrassed when he said:

"Coun. Ken Lewenza Jr., chairman of the WUC board, said Tuesday the cheaper option presented to council “wasn’t an option … it was out there for discussion purposes...

Asked to explain why councillors were given WUC documents providing two options, Lewenza said Tuesday: “I’m completely perplexed.”

There is no doubt in my mind that he was protecting his Board and his people.

At no time as far as I understand it did the Commission ever support such a low number in any of their presentations or public discussions or conversations with citizens. Why have Council even look at it if it would be irresponsible to support it.

Yet Ms. Zuber could write in her report:

Who instructed her to add that option and why and then present it to Council? How can she claim it is financially viable as well if it is inconsistent with what the Board voted on? Pay as you go for major improvements....oh please! That payment philosophy was never intended to used for large-scale, long-term debts unless it is a pet project such as an East End arena.

Councillor Dilkens asked the right question

"Why send us a second option when you’re not even going to consider it?” said Coun. Drew Dilkens."

Then Councillor Gignac, who surprisingly has not gone to have tea with the Queen again was able to say:

“They gave us those two options — they were there in black and white,” said Coun. Jo-Anne Gignac."

Even the Chair of the Commission, Councillor Lewenza was forced to say:

"Asked to explain why councillors were given WUC documents providing two options, Lewenza said Tuesday: “I’m completely perplexed.”

Well Councillor, it is up to you now as Chair not to be perplexed but to find out what is going on. How can both options be financially viable when you claim:

"While the difference doesn’t appear large for the individual water customer, Lewenza said it adds up to about a $15-million difference over the five-year period and would have meant delays for a number of needed watermain projects...

Lewenza told reporters that the lower spending would eventually put Windsor’s water system in jeopardy...

Lewenza said WUC needs the higher income for necessary watermain replacements and system upgrades."

Without sufficient money to run the system properly, how can it be financially viable? That is absurd.

Wow, wasn't the Mayor lucky that he was in Bahrain doing an unneeded, two-hour presentation. Or rather it was necessary to for him to be away from the Council meeting where this fiasco played itself out so he could say he was not there and had no role in it. I wish next time he would try and promote something closer to home so that when he leaves town he does not have to spend the money to go overseas.

By the way, who gets the air mileage points when he travels?

I believe that the Chair needs to bring the Board together immediately to try to figure out what is going on.

Naturally of course the Blogmeister can be of tremendous assistance to the Councillor because I have a suspicion of what is really happening. I believe that a deliberate attempt is being made to discredit the Commission in the eyes of the public. Who did it and why, one can only guess at this point in time.

Why do I say this? There is a survey being circulated right now online to selected residents by a firm called Vision Critical. The questions asked are very specific to the City of Windsor so obviously somebody locally is sponsoring it. The questions have to do with our Mayor, what kind of a job he is doing, the CUPE strike and then specifically to privatization of garbage, parking enforcement and child care. Surprisingly though, two other items were added under privatization: sewage and water.

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that someone wants to gauge how well or poorly the Mayor has done with respect to privatization of the three services that we know about and if he has a chance of being re-elected using CUPE-bashing as his platform. If the results are positive, and they have to be due to the terrific work of the Messenger, then there is no doubt that privatization of these other two services would become so much easier. Especially, if it can be alleged that the Commission is overcharging consumers and improperly ignoring the wishes of Council.

I think each member Council should asked if they know who is responsible for this survey being undertaken and if it is being paid for by the City. Wouldn't you like to know the results? I sure would.

More importantly I would like to know if the City is paying for information for incumbents to be re-elected so that the election campaign can be directed at specific items that will resonate well with citizens. Hasn't this game been played once before with a survey taken before an election?

Remember as well but I predicted that a number of the City's assets could well be P3ed. Along with the Tunnel, especially if Windsor had taken over the US half, Enwin is a perfect candidate. If you are going to get rid of electrical, one may as well get rid of water and sewage at the same time in one big gigantic P3 package.

It of course will be sold as bringing in tons of money for the City--- when it really is the opportunity for Edgar (aka Eddie) to get his hands on millions of dollars to fritter away and waste on frivolous mind's eye visions--- and hammering those greedy CUPE workers who deserve what they get.

As I have explained to you before, nothing goes in a straight line in the City of Windsor. Why have the discussion honestly and openly about privatization and P3ing assets when games playing and hiding the truth from citizens is so much more fun.

Let's see what Councillor Lewenza does now.

More Windsor Shorties

2010-06-30T00:01:00.003-04:00

A few thoughts for you to consider.

CONSERVATIVES TAKE WINDSOR'S IDEAS

Now it can be told since we had the "fake" concept down first:

Venetian canal system downtown

Mount Francis during the garbage strike

Toboggan hills from DRIC dirt

"Asked about the local lack of elevation to host many winter sports, the mayor responded: "We can build mountains."

Truck tunnels to the border with Greenlink

So it is hardly a surprise, given our Mayor's relationship with the Feds that the Conservatives built a phony lake in Toronto right near Lake Ontario:

"A fake $2 million indoor lake by the Gardiner Expressway is the latest example of the Conservative government’s summit spending spree that some say could hit $2 billion by the time world leaders fly out of Toronto on June 27."

SWIMMING POOLS ARE EXPENSIVE

When I was President of a Condo in Toronto, one of our biggest expenses was for our indoor pool that few ever used.

It is no different for a City who wants to build a pool for Children's Games:

"The big question mark remains the lack of a competition-sized swim facility.

Backers are hoping the Windsor games can serve as catalyst for a 50-meter competitive pool facility, something Francis said could serve as a “legacy” project for the games.

Preliminary costing peg such a facility, including seating for up to 2,500, warm-up pool and diving well, at between $28 million and $35 million, said Don Sadler, executive director of Windsor’s parks and facility operations. Another ballpark figure is the estimated annual operating cost of $1.5 million, he added.

“The key is, it’s going to cost dollars to operate year after year after year — is this community willing to accept that cost?” said Sadler."

From a Report done in Halifax:

All 50 metre pools in Canada receive substantial subsidization. Only 1 pool multidimensional facility has an operating subsidization rate lower than 10% of total gross revenue. The identified normal grant of operating subsidization rate ranges from $350,000 to $500,000 per year. Financial support is provided by the owner, sometimes with support of a third party (operating endowments from Games as an example or other levels of government).

50 meter pools across Canada consistently lose money. The multi-dimensional facilities that have the capacity to generate revenue from a variety of sources perform better than those with smaller alternate amenity spaces designed to attract on-going public utilization. Those facilities that included large fitness centres always had greater capability of reducing the subsidization required to operate the aquatic complex.

The level of subsidization varies from approximately 8 % of gross revenue to a high of in excess of 80% (communities that choose to offer swimming for free or with deep discounts).

A realistic subsidization level for operating a 50 metre pool in conjunction with a multipurpose facility could be approximately $350,000 to $500,000 per year.

How much money is our Arena making us compared with projections?

Has anyone figured out yet where a pool would be built? Any guesses?

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE RED BULL HIGH-FLYERS

"Largest Aerospace Manufacturers Sign Up For Windsor Aerospace Event

KITCHENER, ONTARIO - Global aerospace leaders Boeing, EADS and its Divisions Airbus and Eurocopter, Bombardier, and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) are sending executives to On the Wings of Innovation 2010, an exclusive VIP global aerospace symposium organized by the Ontario government and the Ontario Aerospace Council, in Windsor on June 4-6, 2010. More than 40 organizations have currently registered for this event including the global aircraft manufacturers, a dozen of the world's leading systems integrators, Ontario companies in aerospace and other advanced technology sectors, representatives from three universities and colleges, as well as federal and provincial government officials."

Here is their Windsor program:

Friday, June 4, 2010 AFTERNOON
1:00 pm Registration desk opens
2:00 pm The Hon. Sandra Pupatello-Welcome
2:15 pm Vision for the Future of Air Travel
A World-renowned, visionary speaker
3:30 pm Networking, Refreshments
4:00 pm Guests check-in at Caesars Hotel, Windsor
5:30 pm Cocktail Reception in Ballroom

Not much business going on there

Friday, June 4, 2010 EVENING(continued)
6:30 pm Seating commences
6:40 pm Presentation by Minister Sandra Pupatello
7:00 pm OAC Presentation; dinner service begins
7:20 pm Ministry Official Presentation
8:00 pm Draw for Theme-related Door Prize
9:30 pm After-Dinner Lounge Reception
11:00 pm Opening day concludes

Not much business going on there

Saturday, June 5, 2010
9:00 am Buffet breakfast
9:45 am OAC conducts ‘Speed Dating Show & Tell’
with OEMS, Tier 1 & Tier 2 Suppliers
11:30 am Networking Break / One-on-ones
12:30 pm Pre Show, Side Acts (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
2:00 pm QUALIFYING STARTS (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
2:00 pm Qualifying 1 (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
3:45 pm Qualifying 2 (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
4:45 pm Results, Summary, Interviews, Highlights of the Day (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
5:30 pm Hospitality Airport Pit Lane Walk
6:00 pm Doors close. Guests get ready for evening program

Some business here, mostly contact making that could prove fruitful

Hosting in the Red Bull VIP Hospitality Pavilion

•Reserved private “Lounge-Unit” with seating, tables and sun umbrellas
•Corporate branding of the reserved area
•Dedicated hostesses
•Souvenir Red Bull Air Race Commemorative Book
•Dedicated Hospitality Pit lane walk at the Temporary Runway, depending on the location
•Welcome Area with Hostesses
•Unique premium viewing of the Race Track
•Limited seating area or grand stand seating for best views of the race (depending on race location)
•Lunch snacks
•Open buffet with extensive selection of international and local delicacies
•Complimentary bar including wines, beers and selection of juices and soft drinks
•Privileged view of the video wall
•Sound system to fully experience and follow the race
•A chance to win a “Red Bull Air Race passenger Flight” (raffle draw)
•Exclusive Red Bull Air Race magazine with stories and background information
•Personal hospitality package with access pass and information booklet
•Access to the Red Bull Air Race Interaction Zone, featuring a Flight Experience Game, a display racing aircraft and possibility to download special mobile features via Bluetooth

Not much business going on there

Saturday, June 5, 2010 EVENING
Guests will be shuttled to the Princess Riverboat for a plated dinner cruise along the river.
The dinner will take place on a private deck of the riverboat. Tier 1 and Tier 2 companies will be seated based on matching need to capability.
A Motown Band will be performing for this private function.

Sure, lots of business being done over dinner

Sunday, June 6, 2010
RACE DAY
9:00 am Networking Breakfast
11:00 am One-on-one meeting opportunities
12:00 noonPre Show, side Acts
1:00 pm RACE STARTS (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
1:00 pm Wild Card Session (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
2:00 pmTop 12 (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
2:30 pm Super 8 (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
3:15 pm Final 4 (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
3:55 pm Award Ceremony (VIP Hospitality Pavilion)
4:15 pm Results, Highlights of the Day
5:30 pm Event ends

Not much business going on there

I hope the participants enjoyed the races. I still wonder if Sandra made a few quiches for the party.

SHOWCASING OUR LEGACY

When you cannot justify it, showcase it and call it world-class or for our legacy so that all is forgiven:

"Gordon Orr, marketing and communication officer for the City of Windsor, called the news tremendous.

“This is a major coup for us, to bring in a signature sporting event like this to Windsor and Essex County,” Orr said. “We have demonstrated in the past that we can host events of this magnitude in our city. And we hope to do it again in the future.”

“The media attention we will generate by hosting the games will be monumental...”

“I am thrilled that Windsor has been chosen host city for the 2013 International Children’s Games,” local MPP Dwight Duncan said. “This is another opportunity for Windsor to showcase itself to the world and bring visitors to our great city.”

"Canada is hosting the most important summits back to back that we've ever seen in the country, and we're using this opportunity to be able to showcase Canada…," Cannon said. "Because ultimately what we're looking for here is to find opportunities for people to come and invest in Canada after."

When pressed on the issue of the fake lake, Cannon replied: "These are marketing techniques that have been put forward by our best people to be able to showcase Canada, and that's what we all want. We want to be proud of what Canada represents and what we can do."

"Francis made no effort to mask his enthusiasm over the return of the air races to Windsor.

'INTERNATIONAL STAGE'

"This is a major event that not only puts Windsor, as the host city, but Ontario, as the host province, on the international stage," he says. "There is a legacy that will result from this relationship with Red Bull.

"This race is not only an economic development tool for Windsor and Essex County, but it is also a tourism tool and a marketing tool," Francis adds. "Many companies from out-of-town come here to take in the race with their company presidents, CEOs and other decision-makers and this race is an outstanding opportunity to us to show off what our region has to offer."

"Persichilli described as "critical" the message WestJet's decision sends out to the business community. "You can't pay for better marketing," he said.

"From a community perspective, this is a momentum-builder for us. It's a strong signal that investors are seeing positive signs," added Francis.

Mayor Eddie Francis leaves behind his strike-bound city this week for Athens, Greece, Frankfurt, Germany, and an undisclosed third location to attract foreign investment and chase Olympic dreams for Windsor.

Francis said he's flying to this year's International Children's Games in Athens to lobby to bring the event to Windsor, perhaps as soon as 2013. An estimated 1,500 athletes aged 12 to 15 -- including two local teams of 12 swimmers and four track and field athletes -- are taking part in this year's 43rd event sanctioned by the IOC.

On Monday, the mayor bid farewell to the local athletes, coaches and parents heading to Athens in time for Wednesday's opening ceremonies.

While Francis is missing the opening, he'll be leading the local delegation along with a member of his office staff.

Luring a future Children's Games, as Hamilton, the only previous Canadian host managed to do in 2000, would have a large economic impact and bring prestige to Windsor, said Francis.

"It would be significant in size and scope," he added.

Leaving the city as it enters the 11th week of a protracted and bitter strike by 1,800 municipal workers, with no new talks in sight, was "something I considered significantly," Francis told reporters after announcing his trip at the end of Monday night's council meeting.

But he said city business has to go on and "we can't miss opportunities."

Francis said he'll be meeting with University of Windsor, St. Clair College and other officials in the coming weeks to prepare a submission to host a future IOC-sanctioned children's games, which would include 1,500 young athletes and 2,000 additional delegates.

"It was very positive," Francis said of his meeting in Athens with the games' German president, whom he hopes to host on a visit to Windsor once the city completes a report on what it has to offer. The mayor said securing the 2013 games is still a target.

"The legacy would be significant ... people who have never heard of Windsor will be in Windsor, and those opportunities open up doors for future economic possibilities," Francis said.

Windsor will have a component to honour Canadian war veterans -- something every host team has done for its Memorial Cup, first awarded in 1919 to commemorate the dead from the First World War.

"I think it will be a distinguishing factor in our bid," said Mayor Eddie Francis, who is accompanying the Spitfires representatives to Toronto. Dobrich said there will also be a legacy project -- a non-hockey investment in the community so the 2011 Memorial Cup will be remembered for years to come. There will be an array of outside-the-rink events for visitors and Windsorites to attend. (The Barrie bid includes concerts, cruises of the bay, tours of the nearby military base, mountain biking and a NASCAR race.)

The 18 best men's rinks in the world will take to the WF-CU Centre ice Nov. 3-7 for the Grey Power World Cup of Curling.

The event is the season's first of four Capital One Grand Slam of Curling bonspiels.

The Windsor event will offer the premier players on the planet $100,000 in prize money.

"It's a marquee event with national prominence," Windsor mayor Eddie Francis said at the press conference Tuesday at the WFCU Centre announcing the successful bid.

"To bring it here allows us to showcase the local community, but also allows to showcase the facility and the local community groups that participate."

RIP COUNCILLOR POSTMA'S BLOG

Too bad. So many juicy items were printed there.

AIRPORT NEWS

We better have more good news stories about Windsor Airport.

Can't come soon enough:

"London International Airport will undergo a $6.5-million expansion to create more room for passengers and accommodate more jets, Steve Baker, airport chief executive, said Wednesday.

Passenger traffic has increased 58% over the last six years. Last year, as the recession hammered the economy, 480,000 passengers filed through the terminal, a jump of 6%, Baker said.

“We have had tremendous growth, we have upscaled our aircraft to jets, we have a lot more passengers...

The airport terminal last expanded in 2004 and since then, much has changed :

WestJet Airlines added direct jet service to Winnipeg, Calgary, Vancouver and Orlando;

Air Canada operates direct jet service to Calgary;

United Airlines offers direct jet service to Chicago;

Delta Airlines upgraded to jet service to Detroit;

The airport offers seasonal traffic to Montego Bay, Jamaica, Cancun and Cuba.”

Remember this story

"Windsor Airport might see new Sunwing flights

Windsor’s airport is among the new travel gateways listed as a result of a partnership between Signature Vacations and Sunwing Airlines.

The announcement could result in new direct flight destinations from Windsor...

“We did receive some preliminary indication about a month ago that things were looking very positive for two destinations from Windsor,” [Nazzani] said."

Unfortunately, a reader sent me this note:

"Thank you for contacting Sunwing Vacations.

During the coming Winter from Windsor, we will only offer flights to Cuba."

HAVEN'T WE HEARD THIS BEFORE

What, no STOPDRTP2 for Councillor Brister! At least there won't be trains:

PRESS RELEASE

Hilary Payne, candidate for councillor in Ward 9 in the October municipal election, is proposing a Rails to Trails to Waterfront as a concept to convert the existing little used CN/CASO railway right-of-way from Walker Road to the International Garden at Riverside Drive into a landscaped recreational trail similar to the Ganatchio Trail. This would provide a people-friendly facility giving non-vehicular green access through the City to the Waterfront for pedestrians ,wheelchair users and cyclists Removal of the tracks easterly into the County also would permit the proposed trail to link up with the trails which have been developed in the County on former railway rights- of- way.

The removal of the CASO/CN tracks as noted has already been proposed as part of Phase3 -Modal Integration- of the Implementation Strategy for the Community Based Strategic Rail Study completed for City Council in 2008 and would require political will and the cooperation of various entities especially the railway companies involved but would appear to be a worthwhile concept for both the citizens of South and Central Windsor and also in relation to the recent news item entitled "'City lacking bike lanes". It would also help as the Rail Study points out to transform" Windsor into a more environmentally friendly and walkable city "

Hilary would intend to pursue this concept further if elected to Council in October."

Perhaps he could also pursue who would pay for keeping it up and policing it! Probably the same people who will cut the many acres of grass on the DRIC Road tunnels at whose expense.

International Children's Games: Why Windsor Really Won

2010-06-29T10:15:00.003-04:00

No, it was not because of the solo, 2-hour pitch made by Mayor Edgar (aka Eddie) that Windsor won. Did he think he was talking to Council about Greenlink when he spent all of that time boring people when Windsor had won already?

It appears that a HUGE mistake was made by the Organizing Committee of the Games which they subsequently had to rectify. They thought that Windsor was in Australia and that is why we won. Read on if you think I am joking. The mistake becomes apparent when you learn who won the Games hosting in 2014.

There was mass confusion it seems. The Committee thought that it was awarding the Games to a town outside of Toronto. They did EXCEPT the Toronto they thought about was Toronto, Australia, not Toronto, Canada!

How could that mistake happen? Toronto, Australia is within an area of about 200,000 people, a population number similar to that of Windsor. Edgar must have talked about our population demographics and threw out that number too.

Edgar must have talked also about our economy which is similar to that of the Australian area:

"Industry within the city is diverse, with over 12,000 existing businesses, and approximately 2,000 businesses entering the market each year. There has been strong growth over the last five years in the health, community service, and construction industries. Knowledge and technology-based industry is also exhibiting particular growth."

So what if most of our IT jobs are minimum wage call centres ones after all.

The Australian area is close to an international airport (We are near Detroit Metro) and both of us have rail connections and good road connections all over the continent.

But here is the clincher. Both areas have a connection with Macquarie! And that is why the mistake was made.

A Macquarie group, part of the big Australian Bank, for years was involved with the Tunnel, running it for both Windsor and Detroit. Macquarie Bank is a possible bidder on the DRIC P3 too. Toronto is on Lake Macquarie in Australia.

Who is the 2014 winner to make up for the big error:

"Lake Macquarie wins bid for International Children's Games
Posted June 29, 2010

Months of lobbying has paid off for Lake Macquarie Council, which has secured a global sporting event.

Lake Macquarie was last night named the successful bidder for the International Children's Games in 2014.

Mayor Greg Piper was in Bahrain for the announcement and says it is the first time the event will be held in Australia."

See what I mean!

PS. In case you don't get it, this BLOG is meant to be satirical.

Odds And Ends

2010-06-29T00:01:00.000-04:00

Just some stories that interested me

DRIC-ITES BANNED FROM CONVENTION

"Mensa convention begins Wednesday in Dearborn

The upcoming 6-day Mensa convention in Dearborn includes testing days for people who want to find out whether they've got what it takes to be a member of the high IQ group...

The American Mensa admission test will be given Wednesday and Saturday and the Mensa Canada test day is Friday...

the Annual Gathering is Mensa's way of strengthening that network — bringing together intelligence from across the globe."

No wonder there is no welcome mat for DRIC-ites

They have a terrific slogan for their convention however. "The Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau was behind the slogan, which is part of a series of self-deprecating ads that reference Detroit's image problems:"

"Who's the Genius Who Picked Detroit?"

WILL THE US FEDS COME TO THE RESCUE

The DRIC-ites like to believe that if Michigan decides not to move forward with the DRIC project, then the US Federal Government will.

I'm not so sure. I saw this story published recently without a word about our border crossing:

"LaHood: Bolstering trade with Mexico, Canada essential to meeting Obama export goals

Bolstering trade with Canada and Mexico, the first and third largest trading partners with the U.S., will be an essential part of an effort to increase exports, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told the North America’s Superhighway Coalition (NASCO) recently...

“But we’re just getting started. And as we move forward, we’re leveraging our transportation investments to help meet President [Barack] Obama’s goal of doubling U.S. exports within five years. Bolstering trade with Canada and Mexico will be an essential part of this effort,” LaHood said. “So, we’re making it safer, easier, and more efficient to move freight from one border to another. We get it: international goods movement is part of a larger system. In the 21st century, companies need end-to-end logistics solutions. They need infrastructure that is intermodal and multi-modal.”

The better connected ports, highways, railways, and airports are, the better-off the system is as a whole, LaHood said.

“All of this reflects and reinforces the already great partnership among North America’s three nations,” the secretary said noting that he’d met personally with Mexico’s Secretary of Communications and Transportation Juan Molinar and Canada’s Minister of Transport John Baird. “Our departments are working together on measures ranging from vehicle and railroad safety standards to information-sharing about freight flows along major trade corridors like NASCO. And our planners and policy-makers — the U.S-Mexico Joint Working Committee on Border Planning in the south and the Transportation Border Working Group in the north – are ensuring that our borders are as efficient as they are secure. Intelligent transportation systems are — and will continue to be — part of this work.”

ANOTHER WSA PROJECT BITES THE DUST

Looks like Wilbur Smith was off the mark again in this project"

"Greenville SC Southern Connector toller files for bankruptcy

Connector 2000 Association developer and operator of the Greenville Southern Connector tollroad filed for bankruptcy today in US Bankuptcy Court in nearby Spartanburg, South Carolina. The filing done under chapter 9 of the US Bankruptcy code that handles broke government entities has been expected for some time...

Revenues from the Southern Connector are not sufficient to service the debt, the Connector 2000 Association toiler says in its US Court filing because actual traffic and revenues are "substantially less than projected."

"The debtor is insolvent" their lawyers say bluntly in the Ch 9 filing. $500m was borrowed. Equity was zero.

Court papers note Wilbur Smith Associates projected 21k/day in the opening year but fewer than 7.5k showed up.

Traffic and revenue has remained about a third of that forecast by WSA when the association launched the tollroad project in this small South Carolina town in the late 1990s. The highway on the southern/southwestern fringe of the city only made sense as an access and development road. The road is too indirect to provide any time savings for long-distance traffic which has stuck to the free interstates."

CAN ONTARIO AFFORD TO BUILD A $2 BILLION DRIC ROAD

Expect a cheaper solution with the route going north, right to the Ambassador Bridge on Huron Church Road

"407 stalled until 2017

It seems the provincial and federal governments were a little ambitious when they announced in 2007 that they would extend Hwy. 407 east to Hwy. 35/115 by 2013.

Now the province aims to extend it to Simcoe St. in Oshawa -- not even halfway to the 115 -- by 2015. Stage 2 of the project, under a separate contract, would be the extension to Hwy. 35/115...

The government remains committed to extending Hwy. 407 to Hwy. 35/115 with the entire project expected to be complete in 2017, Peterborough MPP Jeff Leal said on Friday."

Remember that this highway is a P3 deal and is the Government happy with it or could it be that no one would finance it just like with respect to the service centres on Highway 401:

"It's the only toll highway in the province. The previous Progressive Conservative government sold the highway to a private-sector consortium for $3.1 billion in 1999.

The provincial government would own and control the tolls on the new section of the highway."

RON GAUDET IS STILL HERE

Unbelievable. He still is in town although seemingly invisible to mere mortals like taxpayers:

"Development, tourism agencies narrow locations for new offices

The region's economic development and tourism agencies have narrowed the list of potential new locations for their offices to three.

"We're getting close," said Ron Gaudet, CEO for the WindsorEssex Economic Development Corporation."

WEEDC has been consulting community leaders and hopes to have the draft version of its economic road map for the region posted on its website by mid-July for public feedback, Gaudet said."

I trust that this effort is better than the Ph.D. thesis that set up the Undevelopment Commission in the first place. You remember the one:

"Because of the nature of the region’s strategy, traditional performance measures such as the number of new plants attracted, or the number of jobs retained, albeit significant, should not be the primary indicators of success. These could actually be counterproductive by driving the wrong behaviour."

By this measure, the Undevelopment Commission has been singularly successful.

DISAPPOINTING NUMBERS

This has to be disappointing considering the collapsing Red Bull numbers and the less than busy Summerfest

"A myriad of onlookers from both sides of the border gathered along the river for the 52 annual Target Fireworks display. While an exact number is difficult to determine, Windsor police Sgt. Jason Crowley said attendance was smaller than years past."

Then we read this nonsense from Gord Orr who may have forgotten that he does work for the Tourist Group anymore:

"This is a major coup for us, to bring in a signature sporting event like this to Windsor and Essex County,” Orr said. “We have demonstrated in the past that we can host events of this magnitude in our city. And we hope to do it again in the future.”

World-class, monumental media coverage, millions will be spent... blah, blah, blah.

IT'S NOT THE HST OR TRAFFIC LIGHTS

Ward 10 candidate Jeff Gaudette announced this interesting program for residents and he has not yet been elected. It's not the kind of thing that a politico would normally do is it. His opponent, Dwight-Lite, is off visiting in Asia: China, Singapore and Japan so far.

"Free Tutoring Initiative Unveiled

Windsor - Dr. Andrew Allen, Coordinator of Urban Education Partnership at the University of Windsor and Jeff Gaudette, candidate for City Council in Ward 10, today announced a new joint venture to assist students seeking educational assistance and helping parents save the cost of hiring tutors.

"This is a Win-Win situation for all those involved," said Andrew. "Students enrolled in the Faculty of Education at the University of Windsor will be getting practical hands on experience as they assist children who are in need of extra help outside of school in the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic."

Jeff Gaudette said, "many families seek assistance for their children outside of the school system at a great expense to them. We hope this will help families during these difficult economic times when many are facing a multitude of other financial burdens."

This exercise will be unveiled this fall at four locations throughout Ward 10 and is to be decided shortly. This is just the first step in Jeff's vision of "Together for a Better Tomorrow."

WHY DO WE NEED A NEW BRIDGE

If more cars go through faster, hasn't capacity just been increased at a cost of less than $5.3B:

Ambassador Bridge Launches Fast Lane

The Ambassador Bridge started a three-month pilot program Monday morning with a lane dedicated to those with the enhanced driver's license and other forms of ID with a chip.

According to Chief Customs and Border Protection Officer Ron Smith, the fast lane has an antenna that can read your ID before you talk to an agent.

"The information that we need - your name, date of birth, citizenship, residency - is going to be on the computer screen for the officer to review before they ever say hello to you," Smith said.

Theoretically they'll be able to call you by your first name when you come up to the booth, Smith said.

Detroit and Del Rio, Texas will test the lane for the next three months to see if it reduces delays."

Would DRIC Availability Payments Be Illegal

2010-06-28T11:00:00.000-04:00

Forgive me but unless you are a lawyer or wannabe Perry Mason, you may find this BLOG difficult to read. Perhaps "boring" is the better word to use since statutory interpretation is required. However, trust me, you will find the discussion fascinating and the end result a shocker.

A Reader gave me some material to read that opened up a whole new dimension for me about the issue of financing the DRIC project. It is no wonder that the DRIC-ites want no questions asked about the toll revenue financing and why they really do not want to get into the question of "availability payments." It is no wonder that no financials have been provided either.

As you shall see, it is much more than whether or not the toll revenues will be sufficient. The fundamental question is whether or not the P3 Bill permits any kind of financing other than toll revenue financing. In other words, is a project built on availability payments illegal under the P3 bill?

It's so much fun trying to figure out what Transportation Minister Baird says he is doing. In Ottawa for the Canadian taxpayers who have to put up the cash, what he is doing is loaning money that has to be repaid.

In Michigan though, he claims it is NOT a loan but still the money has to be repaid

A DRIC loan by any other name is still a loan even if the Minister talks about "availability payments"

Here is what was said in a California Project about availability payments and loans

"A project structured with availability payments from future state funds is, in certain respects, similar to a loan to the State with de facto loan payments that include interest cost over a period of time, in this case 30 years (recognizing that availability payments are only payable to the extent performance measures are met). As such, future availability payments inevitably create new commitments of state transportation revenues. Although discounting future payments to present value is a reasonable approach to comparing the economics of different implementation approaches, it does not negate the fact that new commitments of state transportation revenues are being proposed."

And what is the difference between toll charges and availability payments

Although a toll charge could be considered a type of user fee, strictly speaking it could also be used to generate revenues in excess of the cost of making the facility available. What tolls and user fees have in common is that they are paid by someone using the service that is provided. Before the money is used to pay the toll or fee, it belongs to a private person. In other words, it is not paid out of public funds in competition with other possible public uses for such funds.

An availability payment is a payment in consideration of a facility of some type being made available for use. The Federal Highway Administration provides the following definition:

An availability payment is a periodic payment made to a concessionaire by a public authority for providing an available facility. Payments are reduced if the facility is not available for a period of time, or not being maintained in satisfactory condition. Using an availability payment structure eliminates the need for the concessionaire to assume any traffic risk and protects the interests of the public by giving the concessionaire a financial incentive to maintain the facility in satisfactory condition and operating at a specified level of performance.

Thus, unlike revenue from tolls or user fees, the amount of an availability payment generally does not depend on how much the facility is used. “Rather than relying on achieving certain levels of traffic and revenue, the concessionaire receives a predictable, fixed set of payments over the life of the agreement.” “[A]n availability payment is a payment for performance made irrespective of demand...

The amount of use of the completed project generally has no bearing on the amount of the availability payments. By contrast, toll and user fee revenues depend directly on the amount of usage of the facility, and only indirectly on how well the facility is maintained.

Thus, a very important distinction between tolls and user fees and availability payments has to do with how risk is allocated. As noted in the Federal Highway Administration’s definition set forth above, with availability payments a concessionaire does not assume any traffic risk. “From the private sector's perspective, availability payment transactions are attractive because they provide a more predictable payment stream, with nearly all traffic and toll-revenue risk and upside potential held by the public sector. The concessionaire and its lenders rely on the agency's credit rather than an often unpredictable toll revenue.” With availability payments, “the public sector takes [the] revenue risk”

In addition, availability payments come from a different source than do tolls and user fees. Availability payments come from public funds. A commitment to make availability payments thus has a direct potential impact on funds that could otherwise be committed for other public purposes."

So whatever it's called, it is in effect a loan that has to be paid back by the public over time. The end-result is a scheme that takes away from other State projects since funds have to be committed for the pay-back.

Humour me in this BLOG. Yes, yes, yes I know that the MDOT Director and the Transport Canada Minister have all said that the project is economically viable. By that they mean that toll revenues will exceed costs over the life of the project. However, neither of them have produced any records whatsoever to demonstrate that. My spreadsheet shows a blimp payment of billions of dollars being required at the end of 50 years. Accordingly, let us draw the inference that availability payments have to be made, as the vast majority of the RFPOI responders stated. After all, they ought to know more than the Blogmeister about things like this... or MDOT.

We know that the State of Michigan does not have $84 million to undertake 243 road and bridge projects and has had to postpone them. I believe that we can therefore draw the conclusion that the State cannot afford financially to make availability payments on the DRIC project.

We know as well that Canada is not being generous in giving money to Michigan. Rather, any monies given out have to be repaid. Even if one uses the Blue Water Bridge analogy, and the way it is being described in Michigan and by the Transport Canada Minister is not correct according to the BWB Authority, the money put up by the United States for that bridge eventually was paid back.

Accordingly, the question to ask is whether the P3 Bill allows for availability payments or is the only way that a project can be built is through user fees.

The answer in my opinion is that only user fees may be charged. No project that provides for "availability payments" is legally permissible.

Since the DRIC project will have revenue shortfalls because user fees are not sufficient, is the Project now dead? The answer is yes except for one unlikely scenario as I shall describe given what a rational banker would do and what Canada has said it would not do.

Let us look at the proposed P3 Bill in detail. Yes, I know it is boring to read statutes but you need to do so unless you want to take my word that user fees must be charged. And remember, we must assume that the Legislature is familiar with the difference between toll revenues, user fees and availability payments.

The people of the State of Michigan enact:

An act to… authorize public-private agreements relating to ... financing... charging user fees, or other arrangements for the creation and operation of public transportation facilities that may be financed by user fees, charges, and other revenue.

[The Act is very specific about "charging user fees" since Legislative authority is needed constitutionally to charge tolls. A strong argument can be made especially using the language of "other arrangements" that only a user fee regime is permitted. The only weasel word out is the word "financing" and I will show you what that means subsequently and why we know that this can never happen.]

"Public-private agreement" means an agreement between a private entity and the Department or between a private entity, the Department, and 1 or more other Instrumentalities of Government that relates to researching, planning, studying, designing, developing, financing, acquiring, constructing, charging user fees, operating, or maintaining a public transportation facility, or any combination of those activities.

[As above re "charging user fees" and "financing."]

A public-private agreement may contain terms and conditions that the Department may determine or negotiate to facilitate the researching, planning, studying, designing, developing, financing, acquiring, constructing, charging user fees, governing, operating, or maintaining of a public transportation facility in the public interest.

[As above]

A public-private agreement shall provide for the terms of the use and operation of a public transportation facility by a concessionaire for a period the Department determines is necessary for the development and financing of a public transportation facility and the economic feasibility of the public-private agreement.

[Note that the P3 must be economically feasible. That has to mean if it is a user fee regime that revenues will exceed costs. Obviously, the State does not want to have to finance the shortfall because that would take away from other projects such as the 243 road and bridge projects that have to be deferred for lack of money. There is supposed to be an end date to the P3 project. That can ever happen if the bridge financing can never be paid off. The State is not granting operations to a private party in perpetuity.]

The [Public-private] agreement may provide for an initial operating term not exceeding 50 years from the later of completion of construction or commencement of collecting user fees if user fees are collected unless a longer term is required for the economic feasibility of the public-private agreement as determined by the Department and approved by the commission.

[The outside period is normally expected to be 50 years from the date of the first collecting "user fees." A longer period may be granted but there does have to be an end date. The test for the extension is again "economic feasibility" which must mean that at some point in time tolls will exceed costs. If not, how can the project be feasible economically or otherwise.

There may be a case where user fees are not collected and the P3 Bill provides for that. No one however has ever suggested that no user fees would ever be collected for the bridge.]

No provision of a public-private agreement shall allow the public to be deprived of the use and benefit of a public transportation facility except as necessary to implement user fees or ancillary charges authorized by this section.

[Again strong evidence that user fees must be charged or else people can use the new bridge for nothing]

A public-private agreement may provide for the charging and collection of user fees and ancillary charges for the use of a public transportation facility.

[Specific authority is granted to collect user fees]

For any international bridge crossing that does not exist as of the effective date of the amendatory act that added this section, a public-private agreement for any such international bridge crossing shall include risk allocation provisions specifying the risk assumed by the concessionaire and each Instrumentality of Government that is party to the public-private agreement related to the public transportation facility, including the risk relating to construction cost overruns and, as applicable, toll revenue shortfalls.

Before approving and entering a public-private agreement for any international bridge that does not exist as of the effective date of the amendatory act that added this section, the Department shall ensure these risk allocation provisions provide for the most economically beneficial way for this State to perform the project, while minimizing liability for construction cost overruns and toll revenue shortfalls for which this State could be held liable, and the Department shall submit a report to the governor explaining how this mandate was fulfilled.

[There is recognition that there may be "toll revenue shortfalls." Note that the only parties who are to assume the risk are the concessionaire or the Instrumentality of Government, not the State. And again, clearly there is recognition that no project may go forward unless user fees exceed costs. Or unless that risk can be allocated to a third party.

The Department must show "the most economically beneficial way for this State to perform the project... while minimizing liability for toll revenue shortfalls for which the State could be held liable."

The only way you can be economically beneficial and minimizing liability is if some third-party assumes that business risk.]

The Department shall consider all of the following factors in evaluating and selecting a bid or proposal to enter into a public-private agreement:
(a) the proposed cost of and financial plan for the public transportation facility.
(c) the proposed design, operation, and feasibility of the public transportation facility.

[The Director is being disingenuous by not providing financial costs because of this section and the need to show "feasibility." That is why the inference must be drawn that this project will have user fee shortfalls. If that is the case, then this project is not feasible. Except for one situation that I will describe below.]

The Department may issue and sell bonds or notes for the purpose of providing funds to carry out the provisions of this act with respect to the development, acquisition, construction, financing, maintenance, or operation of a public transportation facility provided for by a public-private agreement or the refunding of any bonds or notes, together with any costs associated with the transaction.

A bond or note issued under subsection (1) is payable solely as to both principal and interest from revenues generated from use of the public transportation facility authorized by the public-private agreement,

[The money must come from project revenues to pay off the bonds and not from State funds. Again, confirmation that user fees must exceed costs.]

The Department may accept from any source, and use for supporting a public transportation facility authorized by a public-private agreement, any grant, donation, gift, or other form of conveyance of land, money, other real or personal property, or other item of value.

[Here is the only exception in my opinion to a user fee regime. Canada or a banker or a Concessionaire would have to agree upfront to either make a donation or gift to Michigan or perhaps forgive the user fee shortfall.]

A public transportation facility authorized by a public-private agreement may be financed in whole or in part by contribution of any funds or property made by any person or entity.

[As above]

The Department may combine federal, state, local, and private funds to finance a public transportation facility authorized by a public-private agreement.

[As above]

In my opinion, it is absolutly clear that the State has recognized that it understands the difference between user fees paying for a project and availability payments being the basis for financing a project.

It has made the choice that a P3 project must be paid for by the users and not by taxpayers. After all, isn't that the basis of how the riskless, no-brainer offer made by Canada? If it did not make that choice, then monies in the future could be taken by the availability payments from the State Budget so that other projects could not be undertaken.

While it would have been better if the State had not used the word "financing" because that could give rise to the idea that availability payments could be made, in my opinion that word "financing" must be narrowly interpreted. That word cannot be used as the basis of supporting an availability payments regime in light of the specific sections quoted above.

However, the State recognized that there could be any shortfall in toll revenues but that the project could still go ahead if some third-party made up the difference. In the DRIC bridge case, obviously the State has no money to make up that difference, no rational banker would give the State billions of dollars of freebie gifts and donations for the shortfalls to which it was entitled and Canada has made it clear that any monies that it pays out have to be repaid.

Since the payment scheme for the P3 project must be a user fee basis in which the user fees exceed financing costs and there is no reasonable possibility of anyone making up that shortfall, the DRIC project is dead.

The verdict: DRIC Case dismissed.

Ripping Canada's $550M DRIC/P3 Deal To Shreds

2010-06-26T08:30:00.002-04:00

I have had enough. I am going to rip apart in this BLOG Canada's Transport Minister, the Michigan P3 Bill and the DRIC project by reviewing Minister Baird's Senate comments in great detail.

They are really all part of the same process....a power grab by Canada to control US trade in the centre of North America but have been badly disguised as an infrastructure project to fool Americans.

It still is mind-boggling to me that the Michigan House could pass the P3 Bill with so little information given out considering how poorly written that Bill was and how detrimental to taxpayers. Even with a supposedly UP TO $550m offer from Canada designed to do so, and successfully too, that in reality is only a non-legally binding 2-page letter..

Now the Michigan Senate has to make a decision about what it should do. It has forced some information kicking and screaming out of MDOT/Transport Canada. That information only demonstrates what lack of legislative oversight would mean with a bureaucracy that has proven to be incompetent, or worse, in being able to demonstrate how a P3 project would work successfully on the DRIC project. It cannot.

More importantly, with respect to DRIC itself, that project is a disaster waiting to happen. We know now that there has never been an investment grade straffic study undertaken in either country or at least never revealed. The reports released publicly are suspect since the RFPs were rigged to get the results desired and in Michigan, did not meet legislative requirements at all. There are no profit and loss numbers and most of the responders to the RFPOI want "availability payments" since there will never be enough toll revenues to make the project financially viable. They are worried that low traffic numbers and Ambassador Bridge competition might mean bankruptcy.

And while this is going on, the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement project is being kept in limbo to the region's detriment with thousands of jobs NOT being created as the Governments, especially, Canada in its 50-year quest, are doing everything possible to force the private owner of the Ambassador Bridge to sell out so that the Governments can give over his bridge and the new twinned bridge to another private party for 50 years or more!

Let's have a bit of fun today. You will understand after you read this BLOG why the Minister's presence in Lansing received so little media coverage. It was embarrassing!

Let's take Transport Minister Baird's speech that was crafted by a group of Bureaucrats in Ottawa. They are part of the legacy of civil servants who have been working on the real project--- to take over the Ambassador Bridge---for a generation or two according to the Minister, especially hard in the last decade.

Let's demonstrate that it is so confusing that the Minister had no clue what he was saying OR there is another hidden gotcha in what he says that we have to try and figure out.

Let's demonstrate that the project is NOT financially viable, that it will likely go broke and that Michigan IS at risk.

Let's show that there is no legally enforceable deal now and that Terms and Conditions still have to be negotiated. And that it is all talk, talk, talk.

Let's then conclude that Canada is suckering Michigan, not putting up a cent and will get extra-ordinary and unheard of sovereignty over Michaigan assets even if no P3 for the DRIC Bridge is ever signed

I will give the Minister credit. He is at least admitting that the $550 million offer is a scam. It cannot be anything else.

Canada will never put up a penny. The money comes from the US Government or the P3 partner. It is to be used for project components only, nothing else.

And what are project components. Here is what the 3-page Summary handout said.

Oh don't be fooled by Canada's $385.9M. That comes from a private party too as the Minister told us in the letter to the Governor.

Canada does not care. It puts nothing up! The whole thing is financial make-believe and the DRIC-ites want us to fall for it. No wonder they don't want anyone asking questions.

Canada gets whatever it wants for Nothing, Nada, Zippo, Zilch. They get the "Canada provisions" for free.

Oh come on Minister. You called it a loan in Ottawa. You are caught on video. They were your words. Call it whatever you want it has to be paid back.

Future toll revenues. If that was true, then MDOT would have shown the financial data including costs.

Hey I just figured it out. There is no financial data. Your 2008 report is not an investment grade traffic survey either. There is probably no financial information that is relevant in that report.

In fact, you don't need it. That is because the DRIC project is never going to be built. It was never going to be built. The object of Canada's lust is the Ambassador Bridge as we know from the secret mandate letter of the Prime Minister. Accordingly, who needs financial numbers on a project that is never going to see the light of day!

I am fascinated by the concept of the Bridge Authority that someone just threw in. Clearly, somebody got a brain wave and figured out that the Authority could be a shield to protect Michigan taxpayers from liability. And it is true, it could be in certain cases.

So taxpayers would not have to spend any money to pay the tolls if there was a deficiency but they would lose the asset when the bankers took over, or the Canadian Government, because of the default. I wonder why no one has talked about this. Probably too embarrassing

Of course the reality is that no one would invest in the project in the first place. We found that out from the RFPOI proponents who mostly wanted availability payments because there is not enough money in toll revenues.

The most likely approach would be that Canada and/or Michigan would have to guarantee payments to the P3 partner. If there was a deficiency, then the payment would be made on the guarantee and not on the toll revenues.

Do you see how easy it is to get around what the Minister said!

In any event, there is no deal that is legally binding now anyway and once the P3 bill is passed, then MDOT, Canada and the private partner can do anything they want including the section 7(B) 14 “availability payments” to minimize losses.

Note again that Canada's payments are for components only. No money would be used for toll shortfalls.

This is a very interesting provision. It is interesting because it does not include the word “financing.”

I must admit I cannot figure out why it was dropped unless it is sheer sloppiness because it is added in later.

There may well be some kind of the financing trick that someone will try and pull down the road but right now, I am not sure what it is.

Here is what should trouble everyone. “The specific nature of the transaction has not yet been determined.”

So what is Michigan being asked to do now? Pass the P3 Pill without knowing anything and with nothing legally binding in the two-page letter and the words of the Minister. Why not just sign over a blank check and make it easy.

This is not something that anyone would do with even the simplest of transactions and yet the Legislature is being asked to do this on a $5.3 billion project. Is someone mad?

Note again the word “financing” is not used.

I am so happy that the Minister gave us a lesson on “availability payments” since the MDOT Director was so positive that everyone would follow a toll revenues regime. It is just not going to happen.

Just so that everybody understands, the Minister told us that the payments have no relationship to what the tolls are whatsoever.

Now the word “financing” is thrown in. Bizarre.

Why was it omitted before and inserted now? As I wrote above, either it is sheer sloppiness or a different kind of financing that somehow will be used to reduce toll payments but perhaps result in that big balloon or "blimp" payment at the end that our grndchildren will have to pay.

Responsibility is put on the Bridge Authority to make the fixed payments i.e. the availability payments. While it keeps the revenues, all of the traffic risks are on it.

Someone needs to explain how the Authority will find the cash to pay the P3 partner if there is a total revenue deficiency since it has no other significant source of revenue.

Aren't you pleased to know that the financial transaction is so well considered that the Minister does not know what the term of the agreement will be" 30 or 50 years. It will probably be a lot more as the P3 Bill allows.

Again the Minister keeps throwing in the Bridge Authority to make everyone feel better. In the normal case it might.

However with the control of the Government over the Authority, I wonder if the Court in certain cases would pierce the corporate veil.

In any event, forget the Bridge Authority. It would be in default within one year because tolls would be insufficient to pay the financing costs, never mind the operating costs and profits expected by the P3 partner.

Perhaps accurate but narrow. No one talks about the other billion dollars that has to be financed for the P3 bridge. No one talks about what happens once the US side defaults and the bankers take over.

No risks... how about these as just a few examples

The big risk is what happens if the P3 project goes broke as in California or South Carolina. Michigan may have to take it over when they had no intention of doing so and could be in a big jam if it has NOT been completed. eg Port Mann bridge.

The DRIC-ites claim that if there is a default then the bankers will take it over and complete the project or operate it. Yup, I sure would want a banker to run the most important border crossing in North America. Heck their interest in getting their money out may NOT be the same as the Governments or the users. What would ultimately be the biggest irony, as Toll Road News once wrote, is that Matty might buy the crossing from the banks at pennies on the dollar!
Usually P3 operators want a monopoly and prevent the Government from building or improving competitive facilities. Now you know why Windsor tried so hard to buy the Detroit/Windsor Tunnel at such a high price or why Canada may want to P3 the Blue Water Bridge. There is a need to control pricing at all border points to protect DRIC's financial position.
What if tolls were increased to levels that the public could not tolerate---MDOT might have to buy out the project at a premium.
Re Section 7f, the reason the State has to do it is that the private operator cannot raise the money theses days eg Macquarie's Port Mann bridge in British Columbia or $200M for the service centres on Highway 401. Private investment was the reason for P3s in the first place...who needs them when the State can borrow at a lower cost and use the same contractors to build the road----that is exactly what happened in BC where the Government was forced to take over the project and actually saved a billion dollars!
If the P3 contractor went broke and MDOT raised money under Sec 7f, then it would be a horrific mess---MDOT would have to pay back the money but may NOT be able to do so if revenues were less than the financing costs. It might not be able to afford to pay back the financing so that a third party takes control of a State asset.
There was a provision to make the separate P3s into a private entities. We have that experience in Windsor where our airport and the Tunnel were "privatized" into City-owned private companies. Our Mayor kicked out reporters and the public from meetings that were previously open to the public but now were not since it was a "corporate" matter. That means there is NO legislative control at all just like with the Peace Bridge Authority in Buffalo. Check out as well the stories about public authorities and corruption http://windsorcityon.blogspot.com/2006/06/more-on-public-authorities.html
"Contract default by government could result in substantial cash payment to concessionaire and stress to government rating

A default by the government on the terms of the concession, on the other hand, could result in a substantial termination payment equal to the fair market value of the concession at the time of the termination. In the case of the Chicago and Indiana concessions, events of default by the government include a failure to abide by the terms of the concession, payments due from an encumbrance on the toll road created or incurred by the government, or an inability of the government to pay its debt or a filing for bankruptcy protection—a remote risk in Moody’s opinion. Termination payments could necessitate a use of reserves, a bond sale or both; and these actions could have a negative impact on a government’s credit rating."

This may turn into an accounting mess as well if the components are all dealt with by different P3 partners separately. How will costs and toll revenues be allocated? That should take a roomful of accountants to figure out.

Do not feel too sorry for Canada that comes at the end of the chain for getting revenues for its $550 million offer. Canada isn't putting up a penny anyway.

Note again the word "financing" is thrown in.

Excess revenues... my calculation shows about $12 billion owing at the end of 50 years on the $550 million transaction due to all the shortfalls being capitalized.

"Belief"...how about facts. Be careful here Minister. You don't want your nose to grow. If you "believe" that the project would be financially viable, where the numbers? Produce them or admit that this is make-believe finance.

If those figures are available, then why weren't they included as part of the WSA report. The only inference that can be drawn, since everybody has been asking for them for months, is that either they don't exist or they are so bad that no one would ever put them forward because the project would die.

Please Minister, you offered nothing but pretended to offer something. You said it yourself. The money was offered to help influence the House members to pass the P3 Bill. And you said that it helped achieve that task.

It's a shame for you that the Governor could not do her job and have the Bill passed in the House without the offer. We all suspect now that the offer was meant to be put later for the Senators, to put pressure on them. How disappointing it was to see you in front of the Senate Committee with nothing to give to them to help influence their vote either.

Here is the reality about what this is all about. Baird's job was to make it happen. That was his mandate from the PM as he told us:

CANADA NEEDS THE P3 BILL PASSED SO THAT IT CAN PRESSURE MOROUN TO TRY TO TAKE OVER HIS BRIDGE CHEAPLY.

If you want further proof that there is no deal. Here it is. There are so many key matters that still have to be negotiated.

In all good conscience, how could anyone approve a P3 Bill and a multibillion-dollar DRIC project on this basis? How could anyone give over sovereignty to a foreign jurisdiction and control over their most important border crossing and not even receive one cent in return.

At least with Manhattan, $24 was paid.

Congratulations to VP John Fairley

2010-06-25T15:00:00.000-04:00

NEWS

For Immediate Release:

June 25, 2010

ST. CLAIR COLLEGE introduces two new Vice presidents

St. Clair College President, Dr. John Strasser has announced the appointment of two new Vice Presidents at the college.

Mr. Ron Seguin, as Vice President, Global Education and Training Services, will assume responsibility for Contract Training and Continuing Education and Summer Camps or Institutes at all campuses, the Employment Ontario Centres, the Self-Employment Assistance Centre and International Education.

Mr. John Fairley, as Vice President, College and Community Relations, will assume responsibilities for Alumni Relations, Human Resources, the St. Clair College Foundation and the St. Clair Centre for the Arts as well as the food services at South and Thames Campuses.

St. Clair has experienced more than a fifty percent growth in student enrolment in the first decade of the new millennium.

The construction and capital acquisitions that accompanied this phenomenal growth have spanned the breadth of College offerings from technology and trades (the Ford Centre for Excellence in Manufacturing and the Centre for Construction, Innovation and Production) to applied arts and hospitality and tourism (the St. Clair College Centre for the Arts and the MediaPlex).

The new Applied Health Sciences building will soon add additional educational capacity in a growing job sector.

Student Residences in Windsor and Chatham, a Student Centre in Windsor and a HealthPlex in Chatham are now providing the complimentary facilities that allow the College to reach out to the world to provide quality education and training.

BLOGexclusive: MDOT DRIC RFP--- Should Heads Roll

2010-06-25T10:30:00.000-04:00

Senator Cropsey in the Michigan Seante made this comment on Thursday about MDOT

"The department has failed to do its job. It needs to be held accountable."

Wait until the Senator reads this BLOG! I wonder what he will say then.

I did a BLOG the other day "How To Cook The DRIC Traffic And Revenue Books" that disgusted me about the manner in which I believed that the criteria were so set up to get the answer that Transport Canada wanted.

If I thought that was bad, then you can imagine my apoplexy when I read what the requirements for the RFP for MDOT were for their so-called investment-grade traffic survey.

There comes a time when someone has to take responsibility for giving the orders to tell the Legislature of Michigan to get stuffed. MDOT has already refused to provide relevant cost numbers so that Legislators are unable to make an informed decision. Accountability time is now in my opinion.

If I was in charge, I would repeat the words of the Queen of Hearts: "Off with their heads."

Section 384 is pretty clear isn't it? I thought it was written in plain English. MDOT is required to comply with it I assume. Here are the relevant parts again if you have forgotten what the language is.

Section 384 (1) The department may continue with preliminary legal, financial, traffic and revenue study, permitting, engineering, and other ancillary work for the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) so that it can solicit from the private sector, requests for proposals for public-private partnership to construct the bridge, plaza, and related infrastructure. The department shall submit proposals to the legislature by May 1, 2010. Those activities associated with the DRIC project shall not bind the state in any way to construction.

"(2) The department shall submit an investment grade traffic study to the legislature by May 1, 2010 from a reputable traffic company with appropriate experience intended to provide a detailed traffic projection for the ensuing 10 years, taking into account projected infrastructure modifications, expansions and improvements announced.

Here is how MDOT complied with those sections:

Where does it say that the work required was to prepare an investment-grade traffic study? Now we know why the word "refresher" was used. The task assigned was to "refresh and update or review and evaluate the current draft study conducted on the traffic."

Right off the bat, there was a violation of section 384.

The start date was in November with significant work to be completed by mid-December. Didn't the WSA Rep at the Senate hearings say that an investment-grade traffic study would take a year to accomplish. This was in effect a 39 day job not a one year task.

I also wonder why the completion date was June 30, 2010 when the document had to be submitted by May 1.

Don't you find it ironic that the project manager involved was on the rails side considering how much Bridge traffic could be taken away by the various rail projects proposed in Michigan. Where did DRIC consider that as they were required to do about "improvements announced?"

Obviously, the Department knew what investment-grade studies are. They did NOT ask for one in the RFP. Interestingly, as shown above, what they were seeking was a "Comprehensive Traffic and Toll Revenue Study," whatever that is.

Oh, now we know where that term came from. It came from the Canada study in 2008. No 2009 refresher was to be considered although WSA was supposed to do one for Canada.

How lovely that the "secret" Canadian study could be offered to WSA and to MDOT but when I asked for it in my Access to Information request, it was denied to me. I do not understand the reason now why not.

Was MDOT aware of its contents and does it have a copy of the Canadian report done in 2008? If so, then they and Canada deliberately chose not to allow WSA to do a refresher on the 2009 Canada refresher and refused to give the Legislature a copy.

If MDOT had no idea what that 2008 report said, then how could they present material to the Legislature and not know if it was right or wrong because they had not seen the basic report. They would have no idea what the assumptions were. Frankly, it seems negligent to me.

Was there political interference to prevent disclosure to me. That has been a concern before:

"Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE) is concerned by reports of political interference involving an Access to Information request made by the Canadian Press. The interference from the Public Works department resulted in delays and the delivery of a heavily censored version of a report on Public Works' real-estate portfolio."
"A top political aide who blocked the release of a sensitive report requested under the Access to Information Act has acknowledged his error - and has been stripped of his duties reviewing such files, says his boss.

"What my employee tells me here is that he really lacked judgment," Natural Resources Minister Christian Paradis said in an interview Tuesday with The Canadian Press."

Do that the Deliverables bear any relationship whatsoever with what is required in section 384?

What does a report dealing with a time period 50, 60 and 75 years in the future have to do with the 10 year time period set out in section 384?

Wow, that investment-grade traffic study that was not an investment-grade traffic study was done awfully quickly.

I really would like to know who was on the Selection Team. Did it include Canada?

I would be interested to know as well how many bidders there were and who they were and how the RFP was advertised. Were all of the bidders qualified?

Can we really take this RFP process seriously if the consultant was supposed to look at the 2008 Canada report which was produced by WSA as well? Would Canada allow a consultant other than WSA to look at their supposedly confidential information?

One can suspect that if WSA became the MDOT consultant then their report had to be consistent with what they said for Canada in their report. It would make no sense otherwise. Would another consultant have done the same as well? Fortunately, WSA was picked so this question never had to be answered.

Let us see now. I like the concept of objectivity but how can WSA even claim to be objective considering that they signed a DRIC advocacy advertisement supporting that bridge. Are they really going to produce a report that would kill that bridge?

Can a consultant who acted at the Blue Water Bridge project and at the Peace Bridge one, especially if these projects are competitive with a Detroit/Windsor bridge, be without a conflict of interest and remain objective? I wonder how MDOT can justify spending a half a billion dollars in Port Huron for a new plaza when the DRIC project according to WSA will take a chunk of their truck traffic away from them. Why are they spending the money if traffic will be reduced?

And I mentioned the fact that a source told me that WSA did a traffic study for the Mich-Can people. If that the bridge had been built, I was told that it would be in receivership today because the traffic forecasts projected and actual are not the same because of the economic meltdown that apparently was not contemplated.

Clearly, this is not my call. However, when has that stopped me before? I'll tell you one thing; I would have a great deal of difficulty believing the MDOT people who are involved in the DRIC file in anything that they have to say after looking at the RFP.

I just do not believe that people should be allowed to get away with it as if there is no accountability or responsibility. Something needs to be done and the Senators should do it.

It begs the question of what else may not be as it appears to be. Such as P3 legislation for instance and everything told to us about how riskless it is to Michigan Taxpayers.

As far as I'm concerned, anything that MDOT tells us should be dismissed out of hand.

It is no wonder that the DRIC-ites tell us to "ASK NO QUESTIONS." They already know how bad the answers would be.

Can Baird Fool All Michigan Legislators All The Time: More DRIC Math

2010-06-25T00:01:00.000-04:00

Seriously, would you buy a used car from John Baird? Or a bridge in Windsor/Detroit?

I had to do the above spreadsheet to try and figure out what Transport Minister Baird was telling us. It sounded too good to be true .

You may check it out here as well. http://www.scribd.com/doc/33518770/Baird-DRIC-Math

I did an edit of the DRIC-ite video so that you could see and hear what the Minister said. If you can figure it out, then explain it to me.

We used to have a political party in Western Canada that advocated a theory nicknamed "Funny Money." The Conservative Party had its roots in Western Canada as well. Listening to Baird's financial explanation, I can only call this "Hilarious Money economics."

Here is what Baird said. I fisked it too:

Canada will provide up to $550M [only for "components" as Baird's letter sets out, nothing else]
to a Bridge Authority [not mentioned in the Baird letter so someone dreamed this up at the last minute]
Bridge Authority will be responsible for paying any shortfalls between toll revenues and availability payments [so this is an "availability payments" regime after all. HUH...if the only revenue of the Authority is toll revenues, how can it pay any shortfalls. It will be in default after the first payment . Then what?]
funding is not a loan BUT is repaid solely from future toll revenues [Sure looks like a loan with the repayment requirement. As the spreadsheet shows, there will always be a deficiency]
Canada will be repaid by the Bridge Authority from future toll revenues [I still cannot figure out how this works with a $12B deficiency after 50 years]
Since it is not a loan there is no obligation on Michigan or Michigan taxpayers to repay the Government of Canada [But it s a loan and there is a shortfall. How is that handled?]

This is a make it up as you go along piece of financial nonsense. It is not believable. How can the DRIC-ites say what they do? Do they not respect the facts at all?

Anybody who can do basic math understands that this loan, which is not a loan, can never be paid back.

Do you think any rational investor would be interested in making a payment in these circumstances? Do you think that any rational investor would make a loan to a Bridge Authority whose only revenue to pay back the money is toll revenues which will never be sufficient? Do you think that any rational investor would have any interest whatsoever in doing this deal without an absolute guarantee of payment from the Governments involved including Michigan?

This could be the Baird stratagem in the end---Michigan does not pay money to Canada directly but rather pays the money as a guarantor of the Bridge Authority! Smart eh!

This is nothing more than trying to pull the wool over Michigan Senators' eyes in order to get the P3 Bill passed. It is nothing more than to get the "Canada provisions" into law especially the section that makes Canada an "Instrumentality of Government of Michigan" that can deal with every significant transportation facility in the State.

Once the Bill is passed, Canada and the private party can negotiate anything they want with no legislative oversight whatsoever. There is nothing at all that prevents Minister Baird changing the deal completely at that time. MDOT has built in conveniently section 7B (14) that CAN put the State at risk for "availability payments."

Baird's letter and what he said at the hearings are NOT legally binding whatsoever.

This is absurd. This is insulting. This is nothing more than an attempt by Canada to put Moroun out of business.

Does the Minister believe that everybody is stupid?

As the Better Business Bureau has said: if it sounds too good to be true, chances are it is.

PS.

Now about that other billion dollars of P3 money for the bridge, who pays for that? And how?

Brister Announces Mayoral Run And Other Stories

2010-06-24T09:40:00.003-04:00

Here are some thoughts I had about recent news stories:

EDGAR'S REVENGE

Edgar (aka Eddie) likes to get even, no matter how long it takes. He also learns well from other people and is not afraid to take the ideas of others and use them to his own advantage. After all, why re-invent the wheel. He also likes to one-up others.

Those are just some of his characteristics I noted when I worked for him, to my regret, during his first mayoral run.

So do you like the game that he is playing now... keeping on not announcing whether he is running for Mayor or not. It has to be so much fun for him to keep everyone guessing. What an ego trip---as if anyone really cares. The ABEs have their plans already set up about what they are going to do in the election whether he runs or not

"It will be at least next month before Eddie Francis announces whether he'll seek a third term -- but even July is not a sure thing.

"I haven't made a decision," he told The Star.

Last month, it was suggested he'd have an announcement by mid-June. As far back as December, Francis said that he'd be sitting down with his family over the Christmas break to discuss whether to pursue a third term in the mayor's chair, contrary to a pledge made in 2003 that he'd vacate the office after two terms.

In his annual state of the city address May 14, Francis gave 50-50 odds that his name would be on the Oct. 25 ballot.

Coun. Bill Marra, considered the likeliest candidate among 10 council incumbents to bid for the mayor's post, announced last week he'll be satisfied with a return to the council table.

Francis said this week he would have preferred to have made an announcement by now but that any consideration of his political future has to await completion of several important economic development files he's been working on full-time for months."

He is such an important man after all. Everything depends on him personally. Well one big plan that he worked on full-time for months is done. We are on the Monopoly Board!

All that he is doing is that he is merely pulling a Mike Hurst in his last term when he announced finally that he was not running during a River walk. It was so dramatic.

Don't expect that Edgar will announce anything until the absolute last minute. That should keep most of the people who want to run against him off balance. But of course there is one person who I think may know what is going on. Maybe. Because there is no doubt in my mind that he is being used by Edgar as well.

We now know that the Councillor formerly known as Councillor Budget aka Councillor STOPDRTP has said that he is not going to run for Councillor again. Which obviously left open the fact that he could run for Mayor.

Readers of the Star obviously have to be impressed about what Gord and mini-Gord said about him in their columns when he announced he was not running. What great and free public relations support that he can use down the road.

Do you think in one of those cell phone calls between the Mayor and the Councillor, a plot was hatched whereby the Mayor would agree to keep everything in a holding pattern, then at the last minute decide not to run so that the Councillor would then run because his family agreed that it was so important for him to do so. He would have everything lined up during the interim... signs, brochures, platform website etc. etc. He would be a shoo-in with all of the Star support.

Now that wouldn't surprise me at all.

However I told you that Edgar likes to get even and likes to one up. I remember him telling me about something that the Councillor did during Edgar's first run that absolutely annoyed him.

How about this for a twist. Edgar does decide to run for Mayor again after all because he could not complete all of these important deals for Windsor before the next election. Brister would not dare run against him because he would suspect that he would lose and he has said he would never run as a Councillor. In this way, Edgar gets rid of Brister from Council without anyone being the wiser. And gets his revenge too. He also turns the Hurst not running on its head.

Moreover, if the Arena audit turns out badly, guess who is the scapegoat. Yeah, former Councillor Brister who is no longer on Council. We saw that played out very well on the 86% WUC increase matter and on the 400 Building audit where people not on Council were blamed.

Perfect. What a plan.

DO NOT OFFER ME A STAR SUBSCRIPTION

Well, Marty Beneteau has no power at his own newspaper. One minute he praises Councillor Lewenza and then his Editors slam him in the usual Star fashion.

I wonder if the Mayor called in his Chief of Staff and complained about how Marty treated him so badly. I wonder what words of encouragement she used to try to brighten his day.

I just do not understand the Star. On the one hand Marty agrees with Lewenza on the need for open and transparent government and then they slam him for political posturing. DUH... if the Councillor did not act in the way he did, then the meeting would not have been made available to everyone in Windsor.

The whole point why the Councillor acted the way he did is precisely because of this sentence in the Star Editorial:

"we anticipate would be covered by all the city's media outlets."

That is the point isn't it. Most people get their news, if it is not available to them firsthand, from the Windsor Star. The Councillor has already had the experience with the Star with their non-reporting of his Ward 4 meetings where he explained how the hardliners lost the 101 days labour dispute with its workers. The Star could never report that because it would mean citizens would know that the hard-liners cost them millions of dollars extra in taxes.

We already know how the Star is going to report the issue from the Editorial even though most of the attendees at the WUC rate increase meetings supported what the Commission wanted to do:

"Francis seems to prefer a more modest increase than the six years of annual five per cent increases proposed by Lewenza."

That smacks of the Edgar pre-election political posturing previously that resulted in an 86% water rate increase. But nothing can be done after he is elected.

I liked how the Editorial continues on with the Star tradition not to report key facts such as the Commission asked the Mayor to be put on the June 14 public Council agenda and he refused. Councillor Halberstadt was right about Edgar controlling the Agenda.

I liked the fact as well how the Editorial makes a big point of Edgar not being around on June 28 but did not state that Edgar missed a key Commission meeting when he was out of town again:

"Mayor Eddie Francis, also a WUC board member, missed Thursday’s meeting because he was overseas"

Perhaps if the June 28 meeting was scheduled and is so important, Edgar could skip his trip to Bahrain or defer it or perhaps send someone else in his place. Sure he won't get all the glory, but after all he is paid to be Mayor and a member of the Commission not a pitch man.

However, the real reason that the Star is so mad at the Councillor is because he decided to have the Commission make its presentation NOT because the Star is going to stream the meeting on its website but because CKLW agreed that it would broadcast the Council meeting live.

WE SHOULD LEARN FROM PORT HURON

They seem to have problems as well with homes being purchased and not torn down by the Government who wants to build a plaza for the Blue Water Bridge. They have a novel approach that perhaps Windsor Council might want to consider:

"Matt Webb, MDOT's project manager, seemed especially eager to hear our concerns. So, it is more than a little disturbing that MDOT seems ambivalent about the messes it already created -- and not bothered to clean up.

We are talking about the acquisition and demolition efforts now under way -- clearing out 125 homeowners, 30 businesses and one church.

There are too many houses that already have been purchased -- and then left to rot. They are eyesores as ugly as those you'll find in the inner city neighborhoods of our metropolitan areas.

Boarded up houses. Weed-filled yards. Broken windows. They all become magnets for trouble and result in safety issues for neighborhoods.

MDOT officials are quick with bureaucratic answers -- most of which ring awfully hollow...

Once MDOT closes on the sale of a home, the structure should be torn down -- completely down. The ground should be leveled. And there should be an ongoing program to clear the weeds."

Gee, doesn't the Bridge Co. want to do that with their homes and don't the citizens in that area also want that to be done? The only one that it appears who does not want it done is the City. I wonder why not.

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO IN PERPETUITY

Has Councillor Jones changed his position? I did not see him requiring the Bridge Company to agree to do something forever with respect to tearing down the homes on Indian Road.

"I'm always interested in looking for a solution that everyone can live with," Jones said. "I'm asking the people to come forward and I will help to see that those boarded-up houses are addressed."

DUH Ron, you know already what the people want. There is a lawsuit going on for heaven sakes. Perhaps you could ask the Mayor for a copy of the claim and read it.

Don't you find it strange as well that the Star did not interview Councillor Postma who seems to be the one trying to facilitate a deal between the Bridge Company and the City and its residents. Oh I forgot, she is a nonperson now.

WILL GORD PUBLICIZE THIS AWARD

We know that Gord liked rubbing into our faces all of the prizes that Greenlink won. Will he tell us about the one that the DRIC engineers won for their project:

"10 Canadian projects honoured in global infrastructure report

Ten Canadian projects have landed in a new report to be released Thursday that showcases 100 innovative infrastructure projects from around the world.

Ranging from unique hospital projects in Central Canada, to border-crossing infrastructure work linking Windsor, Ont., and Detroit, to public transit, new schools and construction in Western Canada, the Canadian investments are sharing the spotlight with dozens of other high-profile initiatives around the world...

two projects in the Windsor area to improve traffic to the border: The Windsor-Essex Parkway and the Detroit River International Crossing.

"I think we're seeing governments on both sides of the river and both sides of the (Ontario/Michigan) border coming to terms with the need to do it and then finding the will to act, and I think it's actually a success story because it's multi-jurisdictional and multi-functional," said Beatty."

Here's the funny part. Gridlock Sam won an award for his Greenlink work and that project never went forward. The DRIC gets an award and all that we will get if we are lucky is a below grade road straight to the Ambassador Bridge and the Enhancement Project bridge.

The tearing down of the Ontario tourist centre building means that from E C Row north, the road to the border is the west side of Huron Church Road. The new bridge will be the bridge right beside the Ambassador Bridge. We know that from the Prime Minister's secret mandate letter to buy that bridge meaning that the intention of Canada was always to twin it as it did in Port Huron and wants to do at the Peace Bridge.

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO TODD PEPPER

"Mayor to Introduce New EWSWA General Manager

Media are invited to a news conference at 11 am, at which Mayor Eddie Francis will introduce the next General Manager of the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority."

Remember this back in May:

"The absence of general manager Todd Pepper -- on leave now for 11 months -- is holding up discussion of major issues like a new business plan for the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority, says Mayor Eddie Francis.

After an hour-long in-camera meeting Tuesday, Francis declined to explain the reasons for Pepper's absence.

"It's a personnel matter," said Francis. "There's nothing I can say."

Should MDOT's Captain Kirk Resign

2010-06-24T00:01:00.000-04:00

Frankly, does he have any other choice? It is the honourable thing to do.

Hey, didn't I just start off another BLOG this way the other day? Amazing what is happening on both sides of the border.

The MDOT Director's position has been completely undercut by Transport Canada's John Baird's attendance at the Senate hearings. The Minister made a complete fool out of Director Steudle on several key isssues that Senators were interested in. I was in shock listening to what Baird had to say and felt sorry for Director Steudle. His credibility on the border crossing topic in my opinion has been severely damaged.

Given what I write below I would think it that it would be impossible for him to appear in front of Legislators again and expect to have the kind of relationship he had before with them.

1) VIOLATION OF SECTION 384

That section was very clear:

"(2) The department shall submit an investment grade traffic study to the legislature by May 1, 2010 from a reputable traffic company with appropriate experience intended to provide a detailed traffic projection for the ensuing 10 years, taking into account projected infrastructure modifications, expansions and improvements announced."

I have written enough times that in my opinion MDOT did not comply. All that MDOT did was submit a refresher of a 2008 Canadian report that has never been released publicly. That was no investment grade traffic study except to the Director who kept saying that it was.

At the hearing, Canada confirmed that it was only a second level report prepared by Wilbur Smith, not an investment grade traffic study. That kind of a study would only be issued immediately before a Request for Proposal would be sent out to possible investors.

The Director did not tell the Legislature this fact. The WSA report did not meet the requriements of sec. 384. There is no excuse for his non-compliance.

2) TOLL REVENUES

Did you ever hear the Director tell us that availability payments would have to be made? My goodness gracious, there was certainly enough money according to the Director to pay off all the costs including financing cost from toll revenues.

"MDOT officials argue that under legislation currently pending in the Senate, the state would sign a public-private partnership (P3) agreement with a third-party investor who would upfront the cost of construction on the pledge they could recoup their costs over time with the toll money.

If an investor doesn’t believe he or she can make the numbers work to take the risk, they argue MDOT would not get any bidders, but the interest they’ve received to date would not indicate that is the case."

DUH... the vast majority of the RFPOI responders said they wanted availability payments because toll revenues would not cut it.

However, the overly optimistic Director expected that the couple of potential investors who said that toll revenues would be sufficient would force the other respondents to change their minds

Remember this:

"Two of the interest bidders on the project said tolls could finance DRIC, and Steudle believes that is enough to get other companies to... [Crains story did not complete the sentence online]"

Presumably the sentence would have said something along the lines of "change their position."

Well, availability payments are in and toll revenue payments are out. Notwithstanding the convoluted remarks that the Minister made, it was very clear that Canada believes that availability payments are essential. Remember, the Border Authority makes the profits and is responsible for any shortfalls.

Canada should know the financial results because the Minister claimed that the project was financially viable. He must have the figures but it does not appear that he ever shared them with Captain Kirk or the Senators. Or is that viability based on the overly optimistic WSA traffic numbers and unrealistic costs so that is why they are not being released?

3) WHO WILL PAY FOR THE OTHER BILLION DOLLARS

I'm so pleased that Canada's $550 million is all accounted for but what about the billion dollars to pay for the US half the bridge that is also going to be P3ed. What is the arrangement for that and is Michigan at risk? I wonder why no one has talked about that including the Director, or should I say, especially the Director.

Canada's contribution only applies to one third of the cost of the project.

Has the Director done the calculations to ensure that there is enough money in total revenues to pay off the $550 million as well as this $1 billion? If not, why not and why has he not talked about it?

4) TOTAL COSTS OF THE PROJECT

What are they? Financing, maintenance, HR, operational, reserves etc etc etc

Transport Canada must have the cost figures because the Minister said very clearly that the project is financially viable. Does Captain Kirk have those numbers? If so, why hasn't he released them? Why has he only released the revenue numbers? It appears to me that the only inference that can be drawn is that costs are higher than revenue as I showed in my spreadsheet. If they were not, don't you think that they would be shown to everyone by now?

What if Captain Kirk does not have the numbers? Did he ever ask for them? If he did and his request was refused, don't you think he should have told that to the Senators so that they would be fully informed? If he did not so advise them, is that proper on his part?

What if he never asked for them in the first place nor did his own calculations? If that is the case, then how can he possibly say that toll revenues would exceed costs? He has no basis for doing so. Would that be improper in saying that without information that supports his position? He would not be fully informing Senators so they could make an informed decision.

5) BRIDGE AUTHORITY

What Bridge Authority? Where did that come from all of a sudden? I don't remember the Captain talking about that in media reports in such detail. Is it a done deal already without discussion by the Legislators? Is that how the P3 Bill will work in future?

Obviously, that was a big deal for the Minister because presumably that is how Michigan is going to be shielded from liability and at least with respect to the $550million. Why the Minister even told us how that Authority would be structured.

Now I am very suspicious about that so called Authority. I did not hear the Director talk about it with the specificity that the Minister did. Or was he hiding that one as well to be brought out as required, or if required? Moreover, the Baird letter states that the future private party has to be involved in governance issues.

The reason I'm so suspicious about it also is that I did not see one word about such an Authority in the Minister's letter. Look for yourself.

Did the Director know that the Minister was going to talk about this at the heaing? Frankly, what the Minister said was so confusing I don't think that he understood either what he was saying as he was reading the speech himself.

Note that there was a suggestion that any revenue shortfalls might be paid by Canada but presumably the maximum amount that Canada would contribute would be $550M. What happens after that? Did the Director tell anyone what the consequence would be, especially if there was a default?

I am not sure though that Canda will pay for "shortfalls" in any event since the letter talks about payments for "components" only and a shortfall is NOT a component.

6) MAKING IT UP AS THEY GO ALONG

To be direct about it, that is how I feel. Canada, MDOT have no clue what they're talking about right now. They will say and do anything to get the P3 Bill passed even if it makes no sense whatsoever.

That is not how a Government Department that spends so much money annually and has major contracts should be operating.

A loan not a loan but must be repaid,

increased participation not a loan but must be repaid,

equity position not a loan but must be repaid,

similar financial arrangement to the Blue Water Bridge although that is not what the Blue Water Bridge Authority claims,

toll revenues turning into availability payments payable by an Authority whose only revenue comes from tolls,

no liability on Michigan other than for the other 2/3rds of the cost of the project that has NOT been discussed or seeing its assets going to default and losing them,

Instrumentality of Government of Michigan in which Canada seemingly says there should be no sovereignty concerns yet the section was added in the Bill after Canada made its $550 million offer.

When one considers the above and the waste of time and money over this project over the last eight years, the Legislators need to reassert their authority.

Someone unfortunately needs to take the fall for this Departmental mess. It is unconscionable what has happened. Director Steudle as Head of the Department must bear that responsibility. He should take the honourable action and go.

STOPDRTP2

2010-06-23T10:15:00.000-04:00

What impeccable timing. The Councillor formerly known as Councillor Budget a.k.a Councillor STOPDRTP announces that he is not running for Council again and then all of a sudden DRTP errr CRG, or whatever they are called, comes to life.

Imagine that, the Councillor star of stars, at least in the eyes of mini-Gord, the man who dreamed he could become King, or at least Mayor of Windsor, decided to give it all up.

But we know why he made that big sacrifice don’t we, dear reader. Yes, forget about promises to family… he did it so that he could start up again STOPDRTP2. The fight was not over and he knew it. He had to come back to help out his old community against the evil and pernicious DRTP. Then he can use his massive victory as a spring-board to run for Mayor after Edgar (aka Eddie) leaves. As he told Gord:

"Been there. Done that. Absolutely. I'm not going back to being a councillor again and that's solid," he insisted."

The precedent has been set. He used STOPDRTP as a springboard to Council. Why not use STOPDRTP2 since he was going to have a tough time being re-elected with all of the enemies he has made due to his divisiveness. Go out as a so-called winner rather than as a loser against tough competition.

Yes, dear reader, that one, the DRTP/CRG. Instead of thousands of trucks moving through the CASO corridor to the heart of the city, we would now have thousands of rail cars barreling down the tracks day and night to use a double-stacked rail tunnel.

I can just see the old signs being dusted off, the old gang being contacted to line up people to distribute materials and to plan strategy. Hmm, I doubt if I’m going to be asked to be General Counsel this time around if Dave is involved.

I never did like DRTP and after I found out that a similar proposal to theirs was rejected years before by MDOT, I never took them seriously again. When I tried to figure out why anyone took them seriously given their rejection in the past, the conclusion I came to… whether right or wrong… was that they had become a tool to be used to try to force the Bridge Company to sell out.

They were very successful until STOPDRTP arose. They convinced a lot of people, many of them interestingly DRIC supporters today, that they had a proposal that would work and that it had the ability to take away perhaps as much as 50% of the Bridge Company border traffic.

However in the end, no matter how many times they changed their spots or their name or their pitch to fit the mood at that particular moment, they were unable to beat our very effective grassroots citizens movement. As the Star said without giving us credit, no politician could have been elected in Windsor who supported DRTP.

So now they are back again with many of the same cast of characters. I still don’t take them seriously now. I certainly do not underestimate them I just don’t believe that the project will ever move forward successfully.

This time around they’ve added in the Windsor Port Authority as one of the participants. Frankly, it troubles me. Not because the Port wants to be involved in something that might actually be good for the community but rather by the way their role has been portrayed. I believe that the Members of the Opposition owe it to the public to raise this matter in Parliament to get a proper answer.

Here is my concern as described in both Crains Detroit and in the Windsor Star. It was presented so nicely in the Star:

 “The port authority is a welcome addition to the CP-Borealis rail tunnel team because it provides a local connection and also a public body that can help guide through the government approval process. The port authority is not a financial partner, but will provide support and assistance, Cree said.

It was presented not so nicely in Crains:

 “The port authority will take an equity stake in the tunnel, but Byington declined to say how much.

Talks to add the port authority to the project began after a May 2009 multi-model conference in Windsor, Byington said. It’s participation in the effort is expected to ease the regulatory and financing process, she said.”

Isn’t that fascinating. The Port is not a financial partner but gets an equity piece for “easing.” Does this give anyone some heartburn? Is this what the function of the Port is? Should it be taking such action especially when it is the judge and jury of the Ambassador Bridge’s Enhancement Project, the competitor of DRTP?

The approach is so similar as well as to what was done before by DRTP. Do everything in stealth mode, get some key leaders onside and make a big announcement about what you are going to do especially about environmental assessments. Make sure of course that everyone is told that everything can be done almost immediately so that we are forced to hurry on up to give the approvals required.

It sounds most impressive with all the money to be spent and all of the jobs to be created. Who is going to put the money this time around? OMERS or will OMERS act as the fund manager of the project and make their money through fees. What is CP Rail going to contribute especially since they sold a big chunk of their interest in the Tunnel back to OMERS?

A couple of years ago CP Rail said that they had very little interest in a double stack rail tunnel. All of a sudden do they have one now? I don’t think so if what their spokesperson tells us is true

"It's a great development for us," said Mike LoVecchio, spokesman for CP. "From our perspective, this would enhance our operations. We will be able to run all rail cars through the new tunnel. The existing tunnel is fully functional, but cannot accommodate double-stacked containers. This gives us more flexibility so there is merit there."

But it was premature to estimate how much added business might be created, he said.

LoVecchio could not say where the project ranks on CP's list of infrastructure priorities. The railway will spend $750 million on infrastructure improvements in 2010.

"Every project we do is driven by demands," he said. "The fact that it's on the list means it's a project of significance."

Back in January we saw this:

 “The companies behind a $400-million proposal to build a second Detroit River rail tunnel have issued a pre-bid notice -- a call for companies to prove qualifications -- to conduct the environmental assessment for the project.”

Who won?

We were told:

 “The notice appeared on the Windsor Construction Association's website and indicated final scope of work for the project will be released sometime early this year.”

What did it say?

Last September we were told

 “Richard Blouse, president and CEO of the Detroit Regional Chamber of commerce, says he expects CP officials will give the green light before the end of the year to dig a large-diameter tunnel big enough to allow double-stacked railway cars to pass under the Detroit River.”

Dwight-Lite better get that traffic light fixed pronto if he gets elected.

A year ago, we read:

 “The Detroit River Tunnel Partnership will launch its environmental assessment for a new Windsor-Detroit double-stack rail tunnel in the next few months, said a spokeswoman for the group.”

We just learned that

“An environmental assessment description has been filed with the federal Transportation ministry.”

At the HUB conference here in May, 2009, the CP Rail rep said

"We need government support through the (Ontario-Quebec Continental) Gateway initiative to make it happen," he said.

Minister Baird said

“But federal Transportation Minister John Baird, who was also at Wednesday's conference in Windsor, said it is not on his priority list…

CP was told the earliest funds will be granted through the gateway initiative is 2010, he said.”

Why it’s 2010, should we get excited now?

I’ve been scratching my head again trying to figure out what’s happening and all I can think about is that this is so familiar. This has a 2003 ring to it.

DRTP pops up out of the blue, with Minister Baird’s Windsor Port Authority going along to ease things to make it appear as if Transport Canada is on side now while at the same time, pressure is being put on in Michigan to build the DRIC Bridge.

The DRIC bridge is forecast to take a big chunk of Matty’s car and truck business and he will see his income pretty much cut in half. Rail can take up to 44% of his business. In effect, he could be almost completely wiped out.

Do you think this is a two-pronged attack to try to convince Moroun to sell out now while the selling is good and there is still value in the bridge.

It would not surprise me one single bit.

If you think I am kidding, mini-Gord explains how this will be played out as a huge public relations exercise:

"The announcement was about half a year later than expected, but Canadian Pacific is finally pushing ahead with plans to bore a new $400-million railway tunnel under the Detroit River.

However, the news could be coming at the perfect time, with Michigan's state senate poised to vote on the DRIC road project next week. Perhaps the threat of rail competition will knock some sense into opponents of the international bridge.

It would be ideal if both projects are approved so that all of Windsor's main gateways can be replaced at the same time. In fact it would be fantastic -- and not just because of the construction jobs that would generate.

Can you imagine the energy and excitement that would be injected back into Windsor and Detroit's economies? With more than $5 billion worth of infrastructure work all going on at the same time, can you imagine how much attention we'd get?

And what better signal could a battered and bleeding region send to the world than simultaneously building two new international crossings -- again?

It would be a 21st century echo of the roaring 1920s, when both cities were ground zero for the economic explosion that was the birth of the automotive industry.

We were the envy of the industrialized world back then, and nothing signified that more than the competing bridge and tunnel construction projects.

But just as a few cranks in the Michigan senate continue to block the DRIC project, a few major hurdles still stand in the way of the new rail tunnel. Unlike DRIC, money is still a big question mark for the renamed Continental Rail Gateway."

In any event, I think I will give some of my former colleagues a call. I hope this time around if we have to put signs in the ground it will be in the summer not in the middle of winter as before.

Lewenza Won: Should Mini-Gord Resign

2010-06-23T09:55:00.000-04:00

Frankly, does he have any other choice? It is the honourable thing to do.

The man writes one of the most ludicrous columns that I think that I have ever read in my life. It is about as anti-democratic as it gets:

"For years some experts have argued that it's a bad idea to allow cameras of any kind into the meeting rooms where our politicians make decisions.

You don't want to encourage these hams to mug for the cameras, the argument goes.

More proof of this wisdom surfaced Monday when Windsor's attempts to set new water rates took a farcical turn before nosediving straight into chaos."

Openness and transparency, something that his newspaper advocates, what's that?

Then came a vicious and uncalled for attack on Councillor Lewenza whose crime was to go to the public to try to explain the reason for the water rate increase and to get public reaction and input:

"Lewenza Jr. is looking confused, vain and foolish in his attempts to manipulate the dates and coverage of this debate, thwart deadlines, and bully WUC staff.

It's all more ammunition for anyone planning to run against him this fall."

He does everything he possibly can to support a Mayor who has tried desperately to keep the matter off of the Council Agenda including to mis-state what the Procedure is and ignore relevant facts such as the request by Lewenza to have the matter heard on June 14 in a public Council meeting.

Then to have Marty Beneteau undercut him and demonstrate a complete lack of confidence in what he had written:

"The Star webcasts most Monday night council meetings, and the special meeting to deal with water rates certainly merits this enhanced coverage," said Beneteau. "Viewers are keenly interested in policy decisions that impact their monthly bills."

Beneteau said he agrees with Ken Lewenza Jr., city councillor and Windsor Utilities Commission chairman, that transparency is key in the discussion over WUC's proposed rate hikes.

"This is a role the media can and should play in a democratic society," said Beneteau. "We now have the technology to apply our reporting prowess to a live medium. It's exciting."

Junior won. He stared down the Windsor Star and the Mayor. He beat Edgar (aka Eddie) at his own game. Effectively, Beneteau's action was a slap to the Mayor and his childishness and his secrecy and failure to allow the Public to know what is going on.

If Beneteau keeps this up, who knows, I might even subscribe to the Star again.

The Baird DRIC Loan Which Is Not A Loan But Must Be Paid Back Clarification

2010-06-23T00:01:00.000-04:00

Now we know. The DRIC Bridge is an "availability payments" scheme. Forget the toll revenues will pay for it BS spewed out by the DRIC-ites. They tried to get away with that, as they try with everything, and were proven wrong. Again.

What a huge concession. Listen below as Transport Minister Baird tries to twist and turn to confuse the matter totally especially since no financial deal has been worked out.

But that is OK Senators. Sign here. DO NOT ASK ANY MORE QUESTIONS!

Ooops. Canada confirmed to Michigan Senators also that the WSA material presented by MDOT did NOT meet section 384 because it was not an investment grade traffic survey. In fact neither was their report on which the WSA Refresher was based. That, a 3rd level report, would only be prepared right before the RFP was issued and who knows when that will be done. Senator Cropsey was right again too.

MDOT's Director was wrong on this. It is clear that he did not give the Legislature the true facts. In what else was he wrong? And what else is he hiding? Say financing costs for instance?

We got nothing from Baird on that subject today either even though he told us that Canada thought the project was viable financially. Where was the proof and why didn't he present it?

Heads should roll at MDOT for this.

Nice to see Transport Minister Baird in Lansing being as sweet as Mom's apple pie. No nastiness from him.

I was shocked and disappointed: no more money from Canada to Michigan. Nothing changed except for badmouthing the Ambassador Bridge Company even more. Now we know why they cannot get EA approvals.

Baird was there to clarify everything and to tell us (and Michigan) how everything was going to be set up. You see, Canada has 50 years experience with P3s supposedly and we have all kinds of deals respecting other crossings that we can use as a precedent. EXCEPT one of the purposes of the International Bridges and Tunnels Act was to standardize all of the arrangements that Canada had since there was no set structure.

That small detail aside and notwithstanding lawsuits and NAFTA claims, work could begin right away and jobs created if only the Senate would pass the P3 Bill.

How nice for Baird to tell Michigan what the structure operating the bridge will be whether Michigan likes it or not. You see, poor people have no say. He who has the gold makes the rules.

Oh and Windsor got some bad news too. No wonder the City supported the DRIC bridge. We had NO choice. Support it or else: No DRIC bridge, No DRIC road we are told by Baird. We'd be stuck with the old road and 17 stoplights. Hmmm I wonder what that kind of tactic is called. EXCEPT that is NOT true. Here is what the Infrastructure Ontario Head said:

"It may end up as a road to nowhere, but the $1.6-billion Windsor-Essex Parkway is going to be a reality -- and very soon, the president and CEO of Infrastructure Ontario said Thursday.

Whether a new international bridge in Brighton Beach ever gets built or even if Michigan backs out of the proposed $5-billion border infrastructure effort, construction will start "almost immediately" in Windsor on a new border highway in the Talbot Road-Huron Church Road corridor, said David Livingston.

"The road is going ahead," he said."

We know now the real route---right to the Ambassador Bridge. Therefore it is NOT a road to the new DRIC border crossing after all. Why else would $1.6B be "committed" according to the Minister. EXCEPT I have only seen $400M committed by the Feds in their Budget for the road.

One funny remark occurred when a Senator asked what would happen if the Government changed and Baird gave his non-answer (See what the Liberal's Transport Critic said about the Government's waste of money in a previous BLOG of mine. I am not sure that he is onside with a waste of $5.3B as Baird hopes.) A Senator then mentioned that Baird was a politician talking to politicians. I am not sure that he took Baird's assurance seriously either.

However, here is the clarification on the $550M. Listen to it yourself. It looks like a Bridge Authority is being thrown into the picture supposedly to shield Michigan from liability. Lots of jobs for ex-politicians on that Board I bet, even term-limited or former ones too perhaps!

Now the Minister confirms that the "specific nature of the transaction has yet to be determined" when "availability payments" were mentioned so that should give Legislators a lot of confidence. He was forced to concede that availability payments would have to be made NOT toll revunue payments.

Now those availability payments to the private partner will be "performance based."

What the heck does that mean? If the Concessionaire private party are good boys and girls they will get their shortfalls paid for? Those sums are NOT tied to revenues apparently. The Bridge Authority has fixed payments we are told for 30 to 50 years for constructing, financing, operating and maintaining the Bridge. It is strictly toll revenues since where else does the Authority get its money. But the Minister said we have an availability payments regime. Are you confused? I am.

The Authority makes any profits and is responsible for any losses. The Minister did a fabulous job of mixing everything up until it was completely incomprehensible so any one could say anything and be right.

How will the Authority cover shortfalls if there is insufficient toll revenue? Default? That was not dealt with.

Seriously who would loan money to a Bridge Authority without money to pay down the financing with questionable amounts of toll revenue especially because traffic is at the 1990's level and with Ambassador Bridge competiton without a guarantee of payment from the Governments.

Oooops, it is NOT a loan although in Canada Baird said it was. Rather it is an increased equity positon for Canada that has to be paid back. HUH!!! What kind of corporate structure is that where an equity position is paid back? A loan by any other name is still a loan.

Listen to Baird for yourself and YOU try and figure out how he talks out of all sides of his mouth at the same time and what he means. I cannot.

Did you hear that little nervous cough too at the start of the recording. A give-away. I would be choked up if I had to say what Baird was saying. Remember his smile in the video when he talked about the 2-page letter. He could not hide that embarrassment either.

All I know is that most P3 proponents have already said they want "availability payments." That means Government is on the hook in the end regardless or lose the DRIC components to the bankers. That is what the P3 Bill allows in section 7(b)14!

Is Baird saying that Canada will bear the liability for availability revenue shortfall? That is a new one if so. Except that there is a cap of how much Canada will pay out even if true: the $550M. My spreadsheet shows that would be eaten up within 5-6 years of opening. Then what?

And if Baird has no interest in having a share of Michigan sovereignty, he should tell Michigan Senators that they can remove that section from the P3 Bill and some other ones as well as I dealt with in the "Canada P3 provisons" BLOG. Of course, he cannot.

What a mess. Baird just ensured that the Senators are completely confused. Who could in all good conscience approve the P3 Bill now.

BLOGbreakingnews: Windsor Is In

2010-06-22T11:10:00.002-04:00

Wow, we made it it to the Monopoly Board, one of 22 Canadian cities that were voted onto the new MONOPOLY: Canada game board.

We are in a YELLOW city spot

Hmmm how appropriate.

We are a world-class City now!

Except for Chatham-Kent which is #1

WUC Water-gate2

2010-06-22T10:30:00.000-04:00

Mini-Gord ends his column this way today:

"And two years ago the people at WUC had their butts handed to them on a platter for an outrageous 86 per cent water rate increase."

He forgets what was the role of Edgar (aka Eddie) in that fiasco or rather wants us to forget that.

Now that WUC has gone to the public to get their views and wants the public to have input, know the results and hear Council debate it, mini-Gord wants to prevent that from happening. He tells us what Edgar wants us to hear.

I wrote this back in WUC Water-gate1 in August, 2007:

"Is WUC Windsor's WATER-Gate

It's an old political cliché that can come back to haunt people:

"It’s not the crime- it’s the cover up."

Do we have an element of this in the whole mess around water levy and sewage levy rates?

Oh not that kind of a crime but has the effort of the last few days been designed to hide matters from the public? I'll let you be the judge after reading this BLOG!"

Here we go again. What is the Mayor and the Messenger afraid of this time around?

Someone has to start fact-checking mini-Gord's columns.

The Star needs to do a clarification story to insert information that mini-Gord left out of his column. Perhaps if the information that I have been given is true, the Mayor did NOT tell him during their phone calls about the request of Ken Lewenza for the WUC item to be put on the Council public agenda on June 14.

Mini-Gord does need to let go already of the CUPE strike and "move-on." He is not helping his journalistic career at all.

Did you see one word in his anti-democracy, anti-Lewenza diatribe about the June 14 request by Lewenza to have the WUC meeting on the agenda? Neither did I.

Check out the Line of sight BLOG on this matter for a good explanation http://lineosight.blogspot.com/2010/06/water-water-everywhere.html

In particular, read this:

"The Provincial deadline is approaching but nothing is happening at council regarding the WUC proposal to raise the rates for the provision of water to consumers. By July 1st WUC has to be in compliance with the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act and provide to the Ontario Government a plan for cost recovery, but there is nothing on the 14 June Council Agenda.

However, WUC has been ready to go with a presentation for Council, with options and recommendations for the increase, after extensive consultation with the public, for a few months. Why have they not been allowed to present to Council? Who is ensuring that WUC's report doesn't make it onto the agenda where councilors can debate it and obtain clarity on the issues? Is it politically motivated?"

In a separate Star story we learned:

"Francis said the issue wasn’t put on the June 14 agenda of council because WUC had only approved three days earlier a plan calling for a 30 per cent increase over six years. He added next Monday’s council meeting was a non-starter because he would be in Bahrain on city business and that at least two councillors rearranged their schedules so the special meeting could proceed Thursday."

So there is the confirmation that Francis kept it off of the agenda even though Lewenza asked for it to be put ON the agenda so that the public could hear the debate.

Here is just one example of an email sent out in May. Note the City wanted the meeting date on June 28 yet now Edgar says that day is NOT satisfactory.

"17/05/2010 12:30 PM
To svlachodimos@city.windsor.on.ca

Subject Re: City Council Agenda

Hi Steve,

In speaking with Ken Lewenza this morning, he advises that the 28th of June is not an option. May we please be listed for June 14th?

Thanks,"

Yet mini-Gord could state only:

"After that vote, Lewenza Jr. asked for a special meeting of city council this Thursday to ratify the rate increase, as required by law."

He also knew that Lewenza only agreed to that date because he was told that Cogeco would broadcast the meeting publicly:

"But at the last minute, Lewenza Jr. discovered the special meeting would not be televised by Cogeco cable. He had been counting on this, apparently.

Lewenza Jr. told people in an email that he was looking forward to the TV debate because he was "sick and tired of the mayor and The Windsor Star," according to one source who read it."

Why couldn't Council have scheduled a regular Council meeting today? Why does the world stand still while Edgar is overseas playing Children's Games which he has already obtained I am told?

Mini-Gord is pathetic:

"For years some experts have argued that it's a bad idea to allow cameras of any kind into the meeting rooms where our politicians make decisions."

Sure, let's keep everything "in camera," in secret, behind closed doors so no one knows anything and there is no accountability or responsibility." Heck, who needs Councillors since Edgar does everything anyway and Chairs just about every Board, especially those that pay extra amounts of money that he does not have to share with his colleagues. Let's protect a possible corrupt Councillor as mini-Gord has done.

After all the Mayor pointed out that:

"media outlets other than Cogeco, including The Star, would likely cover Thursday’s meeting."

Oh, only just "likely" eh? And we should be satisifed with the Star version of the truth as we can see in the mini-Gord column! Just like the non-reporting of the Ward 4 post-CUPE Ward meeting.

"WUC left the job a little late."

Darn, learning from your past mistakes and going out to the public city-wide to explain what you are doing is so inconvenient and time-consuming. Except that WUC was ready to present on the 14th! Edgar (aka Eddie) admitted that WUC had already approved their plan. So what was the big deal?

And now mini-Gord is a lawyer too:

"Sadly for him, procedural rules -- which have the weight of law -- mean the special meeting of council must go ahead."

Huh. Procedural rules can be waived; it's done all the time. Or the meeting can be deferred to the following Council meeting on the 28th whether Edgar is there or not. Even Edgar agrees:

"From: mayoro
Sent: June 21, 2010 2:19 PM
To: Vlachodimos, Steve; mayoro; City Council
Cc: Reidel, Helga; Critchley, Valerie; Wilkki, George
Subject: RE: URGENT NOTICE - Council Meeting of June 24

Public notice has been issued both verbally and in print and procedurally this meeting MUST be held. In the event a member of Council chooses to request a deferral that can be done at the meeting."

There is a Council scheduled meeting after all. Why did Edgar have to schedule an overseas trip for that day?

It's all part of the Star attempt to smear anyone who might be anti-Edgar. If you understand that then you know why I cancelled my Star subscription:

"Lewenza Jr. is looking confused, vain and foolish in his attempts to manipulate the dates and coverage of this debate, thwart deadlines, and bully WUC staff.

It's all more ammunition for anyone planning to run against him this fall."

Yes, we dare not have anyone on the new Council oppose Edgar's absolute rule.

Funniest Corrections, Clarifications Ever By The Star

2010-06-22T00:05:00.000-04:00

This is so hilarious I cannot stop laughing. The Star claimed first on their cell phone story:

"The mayor didn't return The Star's call seeking comment Friday."

If true, that would have been a hoot. Imagine, a Mayor with a cell phone not responding to a reporter's question about cell phones.

However, the Star did publish a correction:

"A story about city council's use of cellphones on A1 Saturday incorrectly said Mayor Eddie Francis could not be reached for comment. The mayor was reached Friday."

If that is true, then did someone at the Star try to embarrass the Mayor? How could such a mistake be made? Or perhaps, after the story was written, did someone then try to reach the Mayor at that time to get a comment so that a correction could be made subsequently?

Don't you wish that we knew the answer. It sounds pretty juicy to me given the Mayor's relationship with the Star.

However the interesting part of a Correction is how long it was and all the details it gave. Why, it was almost a news story in itself.

What a little whiny baby the Mayor sounds like.

"If he doesn't want to talk to me ... he's not calling me, not emailing me, not coming into the office. He's clearly saying, 'Hey, we're done.'"

And then this brilliant comment from the Mayor of a City and how he deals with his Councillors:

"While Francis agreed that strike issues led to the breakdown, he said it was Lewenza's choice to allow those issues to affect personal relationships. "I'm able to put that behind me, and I'm able to move on. Coun. Lewenza, unfortunately, has been unable to move on."

What an immature comment. They do not have to be friends but the Edgar (aka Eddie) is obliged to deal with him as a Council member as the Head of Council. He has to make the move or else this Council can be torn apart.

Except, dear reader, there is more to it than that. As you will read in mini-Gord's column on Tuesday, if the information that an inside mole gave me is true that he and the Mayor have been on the phone all day, there is a major breakdown between the Mayor and Councillor Lewenza as Head of the Windsor Utilities Commission. You will be able to read about it first in the Messenger (except for my BLOG readers) before the special Council meeting so Edgar's position gets out there first

The Commission through the Councillor specifically asked to be on the Council agenda on June 14 to discuss an item upon which the Commission needed a decision by the end of the month. I don't know all the gory details of that but it doesn't matter. The Councillor wanted a public meeting so that those people who attended WUC information meetings on the water rate increase would have their chance to let the Mayor and Councillors know what they thought the rate increase should be.

Our Mayor wants to keep the rates low in a move that smacks of political opportunism that we've seen him pull before that resulted in an 86% rate increase. The Councillor has a different perspective and several different alternatives to offer Council so that the Commission can properly finance itself without the need of going out and borrowing huge sums of money for which interest would have to be paid.

In an action that confirms Councillor Halberstadt's need for a second pair of eyes for agenda setting to take it out of the Mayor's control, as you know it was not put on the June 14 agenda. Instead, a special meeting is to take place on June 24, naturally without any television coverage so that the only information that the members of the public will get will be the news as the Windsor Star wants to present it. Naturally, there is an in-camera meeting first and nothing yet for the public to read!

Guess whose story will be told and praised if there is a conflict between the Mayor and Councillor Lewenza.

My understanding is that Councillor Lewenza has now said that he does not want Thurday's meeting to take place because of the lack of public coverage.

Presumably, it could take place on June 28 except guess who's not going to be there because he is off in Bahrain I'm told. Another inside source has also told me that the Children's Games are Windsor's for the asking so I do not understand, if true, why the Mayor feels the need to go overseas. Couldn't he just send a fax or make a cell phone call?

Oh my what a silly question to ask. He is going there all by himself we are told. Naturally if the games are announced for Windsor, who gets all the credit?

No wonder our Mayor is acting so childish and playing such games. He's preparing himself for his trip and for the big Monopoly announcement today.

Illegitimate Questions And Objections

2010-06-22T00:01:00.000-04:00

Want to read something funny although very sad at the same time for Michigan taxpayers. It comes from Representative Opsommer of Michigan who is making a name for himself fighting for taxpayers on the P3 file. It comes from MIRS in Michigan:

"Rep. Paul OPSOMMER (R-DeWitt) is accusing the Gov. Jennifer GRANHOLM administration of "treating the legislature like mushrooms" in regard to the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC)issue.

"This administration is treating the legislature like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed garbage information," Opsommer said. "They've evidently found an alternative to Canadian trash."

This DRIC file cannot get any more ridiculous can it from a Governmental perspective alone. No one can make this stuff up! Unless they are DRIC-ites who can make up anything.

First the DRIC-ites demand: "it’s time to stop asking questions on the DRIC forecasts." Obviously because MDOT and Transport Canada have no answers as shown by the disgraceful Wilbur Smith performance in the Senate hearings. Relevant information on traffic numbers and revenue forecasts are being hidden unless Canada gives its permission to reveal something.

Then the Detroit Free Press chimes in with an Editorial:

"Senators will likely hear nothing new from opponents on Tuesday -- just the same old litany of dubious objections. Traffic won't support the building of a second bridge. Canada will have undue influence over the project. The public-private partnership created by the legislation would give too much power to the Michigan Department of Transportation.

It's all just spin...

In truth, there really are no more legitimate objections to the project. It has been studied ad nauseam, and taken through a careful, thoughtful process."

Hmmmm, Represntative Opsommer seems to have a problem understanding this:

"State Representative Paul Opsommer (R-DeWitt) announced today that he has been forced to write another letter to Canadian Transportation Minister Baird seeking answers to important questions concerning the DRIC, all because MDOT has been unwilling to provide it's own legislature with the information it needs in order to make a decision regarding HB 4961.

"It is sad commentary that we have to look outside the State for information our own Michigan departments should be able to provide us," said Opsommer. "I simply refuse to believe that Canada is the only one that knows the answers to these questions, but after the legislature has gotten stonewalled here I'll turn to our friends across the river because getting this settled is quite simply in everyone's best self interest."

So he wrote to Minister Baird asking these "illegitmate" questions:

" If the loan is to be repaid by tolling proceeds on the Michigan side, who will determine what those tolling rates will be? How long do we have to pay off? What is the interest rate? Would it depend on whether Michigan guarantees payments if not enough people use the bridge?
- Is the loan contingent on the Ontario pension fund OMERS, or another Canadian private partner?
- How long would the agreement be for, and who would own the bridge at the end of the contract?
- What will the governance structure be? Will it be structured so Michigan could be outvoted, and could decisions regarding eminent domain on the Michigan side of the bridge ever be made by the authority? What specific powers and limitations would the authority have, revenue or otherwise?"

Imagine the nerve. Wanting answers before signing a blank cheque to give MDOT complete power over billions of dollars of projects without legislative oversight.

Of course the Minister cannot answer those questions either, or at least not at this time. It is because some P3 operator has to be part of this and no one has been picked yet. As Baird's letter clearly states:

This is about the clearest example of how the P3 Bill will work. MDOT merely ignores the taxpayers'representatives:

"despite MDOTs assurances I think we are seeing firsthand exactly how all this will play out in the future with other P3 projects if the bill is passed," said Opsommer. "My amendments on this were clear that the process needs to be transparent, but more importantly up-front and before a contract is signed."

Water Just Too Good To Drink

2010-06-21T12:30:00.000-04:00

From a reader: Beware. Contact WUC to find out if there is a concern or not. Before you spend thousands!

There is a water treatment deal being offered it seems in the Windsor area these days. The targets range from senior citizens to the average homeowner, preferably one who is married since both partners must be present.

It all starts with the phone call:

"Hi is this Mr. X? This is __________ calling and we wanted to inform you that you have won a great prize! When will you be home for someone to give you your complimentary 8 free movie tickets and 2 large pizzas? All you need to do is let us test your water. It will only take between 8 and 15 minutes. Will you and your wife be home at 2:30 today? Yes, that’s great to hear. My manager will call you back in a few hours to confirm. Thank you!"

The rationalization that goes through your head: Wow, what a deal! 15 minutes to do a simple test and I get 8 movie tickets that normally cost $10.00 each PLUS 2 large pizzas?

You’re still a little unsure so you ask again: “Are you sure it’s free?”
Response: "Yes of course. Someone will hand you your free coupons at the arrival at the door and there is no obligation to buy.”

You are now sold!

The salesperson arrives at your house after the confirmation is made that both you and your significant other are home.

They walk in and greet you like you’re long lost friends. The small talk begins of “it’s a beautiful day out!” or perhaps if it’s a lousy day “Oh I just hate this weather, don’t you?”

The briefcase goes onto the counter and you’re ready to rock n’roll!

First, it’s the three glasses setup placed on your kitchen table: one with tap water, one with boiled water (microwaved for 1 minute) and the other with the company’s “special additive” water. Using fancy equipment like the TDS, which measures the amount of Total Dissolved Salts in the water and then the scary Precipitator *cue eerie music* that shows the difference between high and low levels in your water. One at a time, each device is plugged into your wall socket and the salesperson waits for that pivotal moment to see your facial expression go from intrigue to horror. Almost immediately the tap and boiled water start changing colour.

So you ask: “Oh no, what’s that colour mean???” The response: “Well let me just get my briefcase to figure out what is happening to your water sir/ma’am.”

The delay creates fear in the potential consumer as he/she watches the water become like sludge. That’s when you are shown a chart with the list of possible colours that range from problematic to “uh-oh, you better get your water filtered fast before you die!!” The beauty of the test is that when the salesperson puts both glasses into the Precipitator, it will ALWAYS change colour. (You can feel free to research the reason for that result and anything else pertaining to the specifics of water testing) The comparison is shown with the company’s water glass that stays perfect in the original state it was in, when it’s poured into the glass.

Not impressed yet? I bet. The salesperson knows you’re still skeptical and have more questions.

Let’s start with a little small talk before we get into what your water results show, shall we? The company trip to the water treatment plant usually comes up where the back area shocks everyone because they notice it’s filled with used condoms and soiled diapers. The look on the salesperson’s face is one of disgust, and so you can’t help but cringe either and say “I didn’t know that was in our water supply!”

So let’s get to the good part; the results. No? Not quite yet… The test is half way completed by that point and you’re told of more stories that the water you are drinking could be toxic. You may even get lucky enough to actually get a story from the salesperson telling you about how they were drinking bottled water until this wonderful product came out and demonstrated its effectiveness to take away all impurities. It’s such a relief as most people have loved ones that they would never want anything to happen to them.

More often than not, your heart is beating a little faster now, after contemplating whether or not you are putting not only yourself but your entire family in danger! You’re shown a laminated list of just about every single disease possible, from cramps to cancer. Then you are presented with a list of chemicals that are in the water system which you cannot even pronounce, nor can the salesperson, who sheepishly admits he/she is not able to even say half of them either. So now you’re on the same wave length. He’s just your average human being too, not some advanced technical or scientific professional.

Before the salesperson even needs to say anything else, you ask the most important question: “How much does this cost?” Be prepared to be told that every other company with similar systems is at least double or triple the price. This particular company is the only one that offers a “special additive” in the water.

You: “What is that?”
Salesperson response: “Well you know i’m not really sure, (insert a little chuckle of embarrassment) I’ve only been in this job for about a year and so it sounds pretty easy to assume that it’s _______ from the sea.”
You: "Ah yes, that makes perfect sense.”
The salesperson is off the hook with mentioning about that obvious answer now, right?

So back to the price of the system which I’ll tell you right now costs pennies…yes, only a mere couple thousand dollars for a filtering system. There is that wonderful down payment option though or monthly payment plan. You are told that “These systems are flying off the shelves pretty much with everyone buying them lately because they are concerned about their family’s health and wellbeing.” The guilt you feel now sets in. If everyone has one, why shouldn’t you protect your family too?

It’s still too expensive and you can’t really justify the extra expense. So that’s when the good part comes. “Oh okay, that’s no problem. I do understand. I just want to let you know that I have to phone my manager and let him/her know that I didn’t make any sales this time.” The forlorn look will either make you want to reconsider or to allow the call to happen. Fumbling with the phone, the salesperson has a Eureka moment! “Hold on a second, let me call my manager and see what I can do for you.” It just happens to slip out that their manager is willing to give you a few hundred dollars off but this is only a limited time because you agreed to see the demonstration.

At this time, you either wonder to yourself how they were able to give that information without making the phone call or perhaps they’ve pulled this rabbit out of the hat trick before.

You’re not sold on the product due to its high cost, you’re a little freaked out by this overload of information and all you want now is your damn free gifts and for this person to be on their way!

So you ask about the gifts for allowing this water testing to be done. It was made clear that regardless if you purchase a system, you get 8 free tickets and 2 large pizzas. So you are handed a coloured 4-page brochure with information. As the salesperson is getting ready to leave, you are informed that “You MUST follow the instructions to a T.” If the salesperson thinks you’re hard of hearing, perhaps he/she may tell you again and once more just for good measure.

Now you are left with a copy of the Pizza and Movie Rebate Offer to sift through.
There are the “Terms and Conditions” with 14 (yep 14 steps which will seriously make your eyes buggy!) steps to follow, plus a survey that must be mailed in. The kicker, you have to send a copy of your ID showing date of birth to some unknown company in the United States! “Red flag, red flag!!” Can you say possible identity theft??

So it looks like you wasted a half hour of your time if not more (15 minutes might be for the actual demo itself, but not the scare tactics and wealth of misinformation) you’re still hungry because the pizza deal fell through and you can’t even find 8 people to join you at the movies.

In the end, a valuable lesson learned. There are no free lunches in this world, or in this case, pizzas.

Why P3s and DRIC Make No Sense

2010-06-21T10:00:00.000-04:00

Ontario has to come up with money and Michigan has trouble finding it and may lose Fed financing help too by being cut off.

Two news stories that tell me that P3s and a DRIC bridge are sheer folly.

In the first story, the Ontario Government, a DRIC partner, has to save the P3 deal by financing it while the private partner makes the cash, $100M a year in revenues, $9B over the term of the agreement.

Why is the noney needed---capital markets do not have the cash and "Responses to the tender indicated that operation of the centres was not as financially viable as initially estimated,"

Now you know why DRIC P3 RFPOI responders wanted "availability payments." They are telling you us that there is NOT enough money in tolls. That is why the P3 Bill has section 7(B) 14 that allows taxpayers to be hit with costs. And Legislators have no control over it

In the second story, Michigan cannot keep up with its existing bridges, and risks losing federal funding. It is way behind on bridge inspections with many bridges in poor condition yet will be forced to make "availabilty payments" to finance an unneeded DRIC Bridge that will take more money out of the sytem.

Can you understand this? It is sheer madness:

"401 rest stops to cost taxpayers $200M

TILBURY, Ont. -- Two Tilbury service centres are to open July 1 but those and the 18 others under construction now come with a $200-million price tag for taxpayers.

The lengthy process of closing down and remaking stops along Highways 401 and 400, many of which date back to the 1960s, has closed some local stops since spring 2008. In April, Host Kilmer Service Centres signed on to modernize the gas stations, washrooms and restaurants and agreed to pick up $100 million of the $300-million cost.

Originally, the government said public money would not be used. "The province (will) not have to invest taxpayer dollars into redeveloping and maintaining this vital government service," a question-and-answer section on the ministry's website said earlier this year.

But that changed when a 50-year contract was signed with the private vendor.

Negotiations with bidders "were undertaken at the height of the lending crisis," which made operating the centres less attractive, Bob Nichols, Ministry of Transportation spokesman, said in an email.

"Responses to the tender indicated that operation of the centres was not as financially viable as initially estimated," Nichols said.

Public money will now cover $200 million of the cost. The province hopes to recover its costs over the 50-year duration of the contract with Host Kilmer, he said...

Transportation critic Gilles Bisson (NDP -- Timmins-James Bay) called the public-private partnership "stealthy" and "not very transparent."

"We're not getting the deal we thought we got," he said.

Bisson only found out about the public funding two-thirds of the project this week.

"We're having to pay twice in this case," Bisson said.

"We're giving the private sector money in order to invest in some reconstruction there and then they're allowed to make a profit through the sales that they make."

Host Kilmer estimates making $100 million a year, or $9 billion over the 50-year contract, when the centres are up and running, the company said in an April news release.

Nichols said the government will be repaid over time, but since sales fluctuate it's unknown how much the province will receive on a yearly basis.

"The sad part of what's happened is that the government seems to have picked the worst of three options," Bisson said, adding that two better choices would have been a strictly public or private partnership."
State has Dec. 31 deadline to report on bridges
Supports in water are biggest concern

Michigan’s inability to ensure all of its bridges are inspected properly has landed the state under federal scrutiny.

The Michigan Department of Transportation has been working with local officials to catch up on late inspections on bridge reports — tardiness that put the state out of full compliance with the federal regulations, the Free Press has learned.

The Federal Highway Administration said that by law, MDOT must inspect all highway bridges that are 20 feet or longer at least once every two years, or make sure that local governments do the inspections as required.

The administration put MDOT in conditional compliance last summer — around the time a state audit determined that about 10% of bridge inspections were overdue, some for 36 months or more.

The feds ordered the state to complete hundreds of crucial bridge inspections by Dec. 31 or risk losing highway funding, a last-ditch punishment that MDOT says it will avoid...

MDOT spokesman Bill Shreck said...“Under the present funding situation, those things will start happening in the future,” Shreck said...

Ted Wahby, chairman of the State Transportation Commission, said the delayed inspections are troubling.

"We're always concerned when we see stuff like that happening," said Wahby, Macomb County treasurer. "You don't want that kind of deterioration to go unnoticed. The inspections should catch that and get it corrected..."

"But this points to the fact that you need to keep up with maintenance or you do run into trouble," Gilbert said...

Nancy Singer, spokeswoman for the Federal Highway Administration, said states that don't comply with National Bridge Inspection Standards risk sanctions, including loss of federal road money...

A state report in 2009 found more than 10% of routine inspections weren't completed as scheduled in a two-year period the Michigan Office of the Auditor General analyzed. More than 1,000 inspections were late; 102 were three years or more overdue, the report said. It covered October 2006 through September 2008...

MDOT said dwindling road money makes it hard for state and local road agencies to keep up with maintenance.

"It points to the challenges we have under our current funding," Shreck said. "The situation will continue as the money we have for transportation buys less and less."

Keith Ledbetter, legislative affairs director for the Michigan Infrastructure and Transportation Association, called the state's troubles with bridge inspections symptomatic of "a highway and bridge system that's starving for additional dollars."

"We cut corners to make ends meet, but it's not a very good long-term strategy," Ledbetter said."

Who needs Matty's toll credits anyway.

Michigan Senate's Attitude To DRIC

2010-06-21T00:05:00.000-04:00

In case anyone wondered:

"The version of HB 5889 passed by the Senate on 17 June 2010 contains the following boilerplate language regarding DRIC:

Sec 384. On or before March 1, 2011, the department shall report to the state budget director, the house and senate appropriations subcommittees on transportation, and the house and senate fiscal agencies on department activities related to the Detroit River International Crossing. The department shall not make any expenditure, commit to an expenditure, or bind the state to an expenditure, related to the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) unless the legislature has enacted specific enabling legislation to allow for the construction of DRIC."

The “Canada” P3 Bill Provisions: Why Canada Has To Up The Ante On DRIC

2010-06-21T00:01:00.000-04:00

The Michigan P3 Bill is a subterfuge. A simple loan from Canada would have provided the $550M. However, the P3 Bill is absolutely needed by Canada to make it an “Instrumentality of Government of Michigan” or its 50 year long lust for the Ambassador Bridge would never be satisfied. After all, in the original Bill, the definition was simply the following:

"Instrumentality of government" means a legal public entity created or empowered to carry out functions commonly carried out by units of government.”

There was NO mention of Canada whatsoever in the original Bill. “Canada” just appeared in a subsequent revision with no real explanation given why it was needed and why the change was made. No wonder.

That is one of the many provisions in the Michigan P3 Bill that Canada desperately needs in order to achieve its 50-year objective of taking over the Ambassador Bridge and then twinning it. Nothing can stand in Canada’s way because it is feared that if Moroun beats them again, Canada will never have another chance to take over the Ambassador Bridge. That is why Transport Canada Minister Baird had to make it happen, and had to make it happen now.

It is my greatest "conspiracy theory" BLOG ever. Except, it is no longer a theory, in my mind at least. It is fact as I shall demonstrate conclusively to you.

And it all came together in a flash because of the tearing down of an Ontario tourist bureau office on Huron Church Road near the Ambassador Bridge. That move made no sense given the huge volume of traffic that goes over the Bridge and the need to provide tourist information to tourists about Windsor. The new location of that office is now 45 minutes east of Windsor at a service centre on Highway 401, something that is absurd if one wishes to build up tourism in this region. There had to be a rational explanation for this incomprehensible move and there was but it had nothing to do with tourism.

Sit back with a lemonade and relax on this hot, steamy, almost summer day and read on.

It is a long read but one that I think will be worthwhile for you to take a look at. It provides lots of background information and an explanation about what has gone on over the past year or so in order for you to understand why everything is coming to a climax shortly.

It shows the extent to which Governments will operate to crush their opponents instead of dealing fairly with them. To be blunt, if they can try to do this to a person like Matty Moroun with his powerbase, imagine what they are doing to us every single day with impunity. It is mind-boggling to me how much Governments are out of control.

It's a good story. It involves huge sums of money, power politics at the highest levels of our Governments, stratagems, deception, moves and countermoves that no Chessmaster could ever hope to do plan against. Demonization and vilification become the norm to eliminate any hope that the opponent can obtain support from the public or decision-makers.

I will explain to you what Canada's and Ontario's real plan is for the border road and bridge and how the P3 bill is being used to give Canada complete control over the central North America corridor. On both sides of the border. It will help ensure that any new jobs are created in this country and not the United States and that trade into and out of the US is controlled by us. I do not mean infrastructure jobs either but jobs in manufacturing and distribution.

To put it bluntly, as we know now from the Prime Minister's secret mandate letter, Canada wants the Ambassador Bridge, not some ridiculous DRIC bridge 2 miles down the road at a cost of billions of dollars which will then go broke because the toll revenues cannot support it. Who is going to take the chance to build a bridge over salt mines and brine wells where there have been sinkholes? Canada will twin that bridge as it has done at the Blue Water Bridge and is proposing to do at the Peace Bridge.

Forget some superduper, expensive, partially tunneled DRIC road to the DRIC bridge. Ontario cannot afford to make the "availability payments" necessary on a multibillion-dollar road. We are going to get the equivalent of a cheaper, below-grade DRIC road right to the Ambassador Bridge. Take a look at Chris Schnurr's BLOG to read about it in more detail.
http://chrisschnurr.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/twinning-by-stealth/

The final 2 kms to the Ambassador Bridge are being built right now even though no one knows it and the cost will certainly not be $550 million either. The Tourist bureau office will be removed and as you will note there is a huge strip of land to the west of Huron Church Road that will be used to as a continuation of the DRIC road right to the Ambassador Bridge. ("GD1.1is defined as a Green District and this 40-45 meter strip goes down the entire length, generally speaking, of the western side of Huron Church Road to EC ROW – with a few commercially zoned sections.)

That is the new border crossing route between Canada and the United States. It will be our Highway 401 connection that will eliminate the infamous traffic lights. It has always been the route since the Ambassador Bridge was built almost 80 years ago and will continue to be the route. Why else was the land set aside!

That road will connect into the existing bridge plaza on the Canadian side that will flow right into the Ambassador Gateway project on the American side which connects to the US Inter-state system. The Americans don't need to wipe out Delray and build a duplicate plaza there. That is completely absurd.

What we will see on the US side is exactly what Michigan and Congress intended when the Ambassador Gateway project was approved and financed and designed to accommodate a second span. The only difference will be that Canada will own it and be in complete charge of the corridor between Canada and the US, something no one ever expected from America's friendly neighbour.

Oh don't worry, security and redundancy will no longer be a concern because we will either have reverse customs or Shared Border Management, something that Canada would not allow as long as Moroun owned the Ambassador Bridge.

Remember my BLOGs on P3 cocaine. Well you are seeing a prime example of it in action in Michigan right now. Politicians and bureaucrats are being hooked on P3 cocaine by dealers who bair(d) financial offers to make anyone drool:

Watch as

 Michigan gives over a piece if its sovereignty to a foreign jurisdiction.Canada, at NO cost
 The cost to buy the entire State is set at only UP TO $550M and in fact the real cost is the cost to fax a 2-page letter to the Governor
 Michigan gives control to its prime border crossing to a foreign country thereby harming severely its economic future as jobs are created in Canada, manufacturing jobs similar to the "foreign trade zone-type” program arrangement that Canada is developing in Winnipeg as we speak. [“The Manitoba government continues to support CentrePort Canada, which will provide a competitive advantage and help make our province the location of choice for industries and manufacturers looking for new and innovative ways to get their goods to world markets,” said Premier Selinger.]
 Michigan's main transportation connections---international highway, bridge, tunnel, ferry, airport, port facility, locks rail facility, intermodal or other public transit facility --- can be controlled by a foreign country who is an "Instrumentality of Government of Michigan" under the P3 Bill
 P3 money distorts the governmental system where the Bureaucracy is being given power to ignore the Legislature.
 The Governor who has failed in her eight-year term tries to build a legacy for which she will be remembered and tries to divert attention from having one of the highest unemployment rates in United States by screaming "jobs, jobs, jobs."
 MDOT sees the way to get as much money as possible from the private sector since the State does not have the cash and without legislative oversight, never mind what it does to taxpayers down the road.
 Legislators are given incomplete information and expected to "ASK NO QUESTIONS" as money is thrown in their faces.

It really did come together at the wrong time. The announcements about DIFT, DRTP and the tourist office closure were supposed to have happened after the P3 Bill was passed. It would have been game over for Moroun by then it was expected.

Unfortunately, the persuasiveness of the Bridge Company representatives meant that votes were not taken on the P3 bill in the House and Senate when they were supposed to have done so. Accordingly, the "rail" and closure announcements make a mockery of the need for a new $5 billion DRIC bridge.

With all of the traffic being diverted to rail there is no possible justification to spend $5 billion on a new bridge. Naturally, Canada knows that since it never had any intention to spend that kind of money. Try and find that sum budgeted somewhere in Canada’s Economic Action Plan. I could not find the $550M because it is not there either. Some P3 operator has to put up the cash, not Canada.

Nevertheless, Canada will up the ante to keep on exerting pressure on the Michigan Legislature in order to beat Moroun. It has no choice. It is a foregone conclusion respecting a "generation or two effort" that was really worked on hard during the last decade as John Baird told us.

Canada has to offer more money, a ton of it, or at least to pretend to do so to sucker the Senators. It will follow the precedent of the UP TO $550 million loan as Canada's Transport Ministers said it was in his press conference but which is not a loan as the DRIC-ites claim so it does not run afoul of the Michigan Constitution but which is a loan because it has to be paid back. Canada will merely send an amending letter to the breathless Governor which will add on enough money so that the Senators cannot say no.

However, the question that has always bothered me is why is there this push on to build the DRIC bridge with a P3 if in fact Canada's Prime Minister sent out a secret mandate letter that was disclosed by the media to buy the Ambassador Bridge. If Canada really wants the Ambassador Bridge then why is it focusing on DRIC so hard.

Of course, I have given you my explanation: DRIC is nothing more than a tool to try to force the Bridge Company owner to sell out cheaply.

That is clearly the obvious reason to do so but why is there the need for the P3 Bill? That is the real puzzler. Canada does not need that Bill. It merely needs to set up a simple loan which would be paid back by tolls. Nothing complicated needs to be done, no P3 is needed and everybody would live happily ever after if that took place.

I know, I know, I know. The Legislators are all upset over legislative oversight. No one wants to give this Department under Director Steudle the power to do anything.

Ahhhh, dear reader, remember that when dealing with Canada one must never take anything at face value. We are being distracted by all those terms and conditions dealing with P3's. That is deliberate so we will not focus on the real issues. We are falling into Canada’s trap. That is not the real reason for the P3 Bill as you shall see.

It is obvious by now that the Governor and MDOT screwed everything up.

It is pretty clear that Jennifer needed to be breathless because she could not line up ther votes to get the P3 bill passed by the House. Accordingly it was necessary for the $550 million offer to be made by Canada. My speculation is that the money was designed to be offered to Senators if it seemed that they would not pass the P3 Bill given their opposition to it.

MDOT was supposed to slide through the lack of proper revenue and cost figures by holding out as long as they possibly could. Unfortunately, for them Senators did not back down. First came a three-page memo prepared by Transport Canada that achieved nothing. Then came a "lawyering dump of documents" of hundreds of pages that achieved the same result because no cost figures were provided.

It appears now that this P3 Bill will be lost. Exactly how no one knows e.g. it may never be voted on, it may be voted down, it may be rewritten... who knows what will happen.

Canada does not want to take that chance. It cannot have that happen. If it does, all may be lost, forever, other than to run to the US Feds and have them take over the file from Michigan if that is possible. What a real slap in the face that would be to the State and to Jennifer’s chance for a good job after her term ends.

That is why we have NAFTA-gate Jr. Transport Canada Minister Baird's job is to make it happen as he told us. He already informed us that it must be done now because matters could be delayed for two years otherwise. What he means is that there could be an unfriendly Governor, House and/or Senate that could prevent things from happening until the next election two years from now in Michigan. So he has to butt in with money to change the dynamics of the election in Michigan.

That is a similar stunt Canada pulled respecting Hillary Clinton and then on President Bush when the Conservative Government of Canada was afraid that President Obama might be elected. He was viewed after all as a risk to NAFTA.

Expect John Baird to make the appropriate announcement at the right time with big bucks being thrown around. It might come as early as this week since the Senators have asked for a representative from Canada to attend the hearings. Wouldn’t it be a shocker to have the Transport Minister attend. What a platform for him to make his pitch of more big money to generate headlines. Who could resist then?

But why does he want a P3 Bill if a simple loan can provide the financing. Let me point out the relevant sections of the P3 Bill so that you understand. Consider these sections the real reason why Canada will pretend to offer huge sums of money to Michigan:

(E) INSTRUMENTALITY OF GOVERNMENT ADDITIONALLY MEANS THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA OR A PUBLIC AGENCY OR PUBLIC AUTHORITY CREATED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA OR ANOTHER STATE OF THE UNITED STATES OR A CORPORATION WITHOUT SHARE CAPITAL CREATED AND EMPOWERED UNDER THE CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL BRIDGES AND TUNNELS ACT TO CARRY OUT FUNCTIONS COMMONLY CARRIED OUT BY THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA.
(G) PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT INCLUDES AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND 1 OR MORE INSTRUMENTALITIES OF GOVERNMENT IF THE AGREEMENT IS RELATED TO A PROJECT THAT HAS OR WILL HAVE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OR AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF GOVERNMENT AND A PRIVATE ENTITY.
Sec. 6a. The director may do the following:

(H) ACQUIRE INTERESTS IN REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING BY CONDEMNATION.

K) ENTER INTO PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENTS UNDER SECTION 7B
SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSION.
Sec 7 (2) (2) The commission may do the following:
(a) Delegate to the director, or any subordinate, any powers, other than the power to establish policy, vested in the commission as it considers necessary and permit the director to delegate any powers delegated to him or her by the commission EXCEPT FOR THE POWER TO APPROVE PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENTS UNDER THIS SECTION.

(b) Acquire, AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT TO ACQUIRE, own, and
hold INTERESTS IN real and personal property in the name of the THIS state or the commission DEPARTMENT and TO sell, lease or otherwise dispose of, or encumber, ANY INTERESTS IN the same in connection with, and in furtherance of, its duties and the purposes of this act, SUBJECT TO RESOLUTIONS OF THE COMMISSION.
SEC. 7B. (1) THE DEPARTMENT MAY ENTER INTO PUBLIC-PRIVATE
AGREEMENTS AS PROVIDED IN THIS ACT.

A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITY SHALL BE PUBLICLY OWNED
AND SHALL BE DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC USE AS A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITY AS PROVIDED IN THIS ACT.

THE AGREEMENT SHALL PROVIDE THAT THE OWNERSHIP OF A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITY WITHIN THIS STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN THE DEPARTMENT OR A PUBLIC ENTITY CREATED UNDER MICHIGAN LAW.
(5) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF A PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT, THE DEPARTMENT OR AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF GOVERNMENT SHALL OVERSEE THE ACTIVITIES OF A CONCESSIONAIRE CARRYING OUT THE TERMS OF A PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT.
13) A PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT SHALL NOT DELEGATE THE POWER TO CONDEMN PROPERTY TO THE CONCESSIONAIRE. ALL RIGHT OF WAY ACQUIRED THROUGH CONDEMNATION THAT IS USED FOR A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITY SHALL BE AND REMAIN PUBLICLY OWNED DURING THE TERM OF A PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT.
SEC. 7F (5) THIS SECTION DOES NOT LIMIT AN INSTRUMENTALITY OFGOVERNMENT'S AUTHORITY TO ISSUE BONDS OR OTHER FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS UNDER OTHER LAWS.
SEC. 7G (4) THE DEPARTMENT MAY ACCEPT 1 FROM ANY SOURCE, AND USE FOR SUPPORTING A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITY AUTHORIZED BY A PUBLIC PRIVATE AGREEMENT, ANY GRANT, DONATION, GIFT, OR OTHER FORM OF CONVEYANCE OF LAND, MONEY, OTHER REAL OR PERSONAL PROPERTY, OR OTHER ITEM OF VALUE
A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITY AUTHORIZED BY A PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENT MAY BE FINANCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY CONTRIBUTION OF ANY FUNDS OR PROPERTY MADE BY ANY PERSON OR ENTITY.
(7) FOR ANY INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE CROSSING THAT DOES NOT EXIST AS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AMENDATORY ACT THAT ADDED THIS SECTION, PRIOR TO RELEASING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR A PUBLIC PRIVATE AGREEMENT, THE DEPARTMENT SHALL ONLY ACQUIRE PROPERTY NEEDED FOR THE INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE CROSSING IN THIS STATE THROUGH VOLUNTARY ACQUISITIONS FROM WILLING SELLERS EXCEPT THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY EXERCISE ITS POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY IF IT GIVES NOTICE TO THE LEGISLATURE AT LEAST 30 DAYS BEFORE FILING CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS.

Pure and simple, these are the “Canada provisions” needed to control the Central North American corridor. The Canadian Atlantic and Pacific Gateways are already in operation. All that is needed is the Ambassador Bridge corridor and the job is done.

If you read these sections very carefully, Canada becomes an Instrumentality of Government of the State of Michigan. Just consider all of the sovereign powers that Canada obtains as a result and not just under this statute either. It cost Canada nothing to accomplish this in the House vote except for a two page letter delivered by a breathless Governor that will be probably amended to increase the amount for the Senate to pressure the members.

Note as well the very broad delegation powers, which powers could be granted to an Instrumentality of Government. Canada wants that too since it then can obtain control over Michigan’s “international highway, bridge, tunnel, ferry, airport, port facility, locks rail facility, intermodal or other public transit facility.” Talk about over-reaching to control another country’s trade routes! Everything is included, everything

The Director is permitted to condemn property [Note that NO Commission approval is required.]. In fact, property can be condemned for “for any international bridge crossing that does not exist as of the effective date of the amendatory act that added this section” just so that there is no doubt.

There can be a so-called P3 agreement even if there isn’t the one in existence but one may happen down the road.

An Instrumentality of Government has very broad financial powers even if there is no P3. It could even give to the State “any grant, donation, gift,”

Consider as well the number of times that the facility is said to vest in the State and to be owned by the public.

These “Canada provisions” is what Canada wants out of the P3 Bill. What the bill does effectively is allow Canada and the MDOT Director on their own to do whatever they want including condemnation of property, P3 or no P3. Just say there is going to be one.

I think this is a neat way as well around the provisions of Michigan’s condemnation rules. There are no “funds have been appropriated by the legislature to a state agency, a division of a state agency, the office of the governor, or a division of the office of the governor for the purpose of acquiring lands or property for a designated public use, “ Again, another way to eliminate legislative oversight.

It is certainly a brilliant plan conceived by brilliant Canadian bureaucrats. No offense but this is way out of the league of MDOT people. I know that that is not fair since Canadian bureaucrats have had about 50 years to plan this.

Why is all this necessary? One reason became clear during the Senate hearings. Dan Stamper made the comment that the Canadian Government has effectively admitted that the FIRA settlement with the Bridge Company precludes them from taking the kind of steps that they would like to take against Moroun. Accordingly, the International Bridges and Tunnels Act (“IBTA”) was introduced in Canada and directed specifically at the Ambassador Bridge to take the place of the Foreign Investment Review Act legislation under which Moroun beat/settled with the Canadian Government.

That was step one but it was only on the Canadian side. How then could something similar be done on the US side without creating a storm since Canada had no legislative authority there. Become a Michigan surrogate was the answer, an Instrumentality of Michigan. And rub it in the face of Moroun’s position as a “federal instrumentality.” And you thought Bureaucrats had no sense of humour.

Someone figured out that the way to do so was to bury what Canada wanted in another piece of legislation. That is what the IBTA was all about as well. It was supposed to rationalize oversight over bridges and tunnels and to show the US that we are serious in security matters. In reality, the Ambassador Bridge was the target.

A step two was needed therefore for the US side. Canada knew that there was no way possible that the State of Michigan or the US Government would ever pass anti-Moroun legislation because it would mean wiping out an American company. This kind of treatment only takes place in Cuba or Venezuela.

There was a need therefore to try to pass legislation similar to the IBTA in its end result but to disguise it. There was no way that Canada could allow the Michigan Legislature to vote the DRIC bridge “up or down.” They expected to lose that battle because all other justifications have proven to be phony as well as the costs of the project mean that Michigan taxpayers are on the hook. The Senators were not going to go along.

Accordingly, P3 legislation was introduced to divert everybody’s attention away from the real purpose of what the Act is designed to do. Everyone focused on the defective P3 sections and pretty much ignored the “Canada provisions.” Tie it in with DRIC and everybody would be completely confused so that Canada’s needed provisions would be passed with no one the wiser.

The effect of passing this legislation as well as the IBTA would mean that Canada could exert tremendous pressure on Moroun legislatively on both sides of the border to sell out or else. Canada as an Instrumentality of Government of Michigan as well as with its Federal Powers in Canada would be able to browbeat him.

Moroun would be the piece of wood between the 2 jaws of the vise being pressued as it slowly screwed tighter. Canada would expect that he would get the message very quickly knowing he has one foe after him on both sides of the river with all kinds of legislative power and would sellout before the value of his Bridge was decreased tremendously.

With the IBTA in Canada and the “Canada” provisions in the Michigan P3 Bill, Canada would be all set. That is why a simple loan transaction was not something that Canada was interested in. It needed a P3 bill to give it .the sovereign power on the US side of the river to go after Moroun.

There you have it: the border route, the objective to destroy Moroun and why, the plan of action, the real reason for P3 legislation in Michigan. And the over-riding Governmental need for Canada to control the trade corridors into and out of the US and why. The conspiracy theory is now a “fact.”

It has nothing to do with Matty Moroun except that he is the owner of the Ambassador Bridge. Canada’s actions started long before he was the owner. His mistake is that he did not read the script. He was supposed to have sold out cheaply by now. He has to be punished for that.

WindsorCityBlog

The Governerd's Bill---It's Just Like Granholm's But More Refined

Zero Taxpayer Dollars, Not A Single Dollar For DRIC

Meet Me At The Square

Meet Me At The Square

WindsorCityBlog Is Moving to Windsor Square

The Anti-Bridge Company Conspiracy Revealed

Windsor Tales

The Real Border Issue: The Corridor Not The Bridge

Border Banter

DRIC Road/Bridge Beauty Contest Winner Announced

Survey Results: Most Expect Edgar To Break His Promise

Unanswered Questions

Tip Of The City's Litigation Iceberg

Last Chance to Vote

Whatever Happened To The Integrity Commish And His Final Report

Our State Of Emergency Is Over---Why

BLOGExtra: Will Harper Survey Windsor Damage

Will Edgar Break His Promise

More Fascinating Stories

BLOGexclusive: Is This Edgar's New Job

The Early Edgar Returns

The Survey: Will He Or Won't He

The ABEs Are Having Fun

Should The WUC Board Resign

Giving Taxpayers The Business

The Something Need Your Help

Will Homeland Security Investigate The Michigan/Canada Relationship

Another WUC Investigation Needed

More Windsor Shorties

International Children's Games: Why Windsor Really Won

Odds And Ends

Would DRIC Availability Payments Be Illegal

Ripping Canada's $550M DRIC/P3 Deal To Shreds

Congratulations to VP John Fairley

BLOGexclusive: MDOT DRIC RFP--- Should Heads Roll

Can Baird Fool All Michigan Legislators All The Time: More DRIC Math

Brister Announces Mayoral Run And Other Stories

Should MDOT's Captain Kirk Resign

STOPDRTP2

Lewenza Won: Should Mini-Gord Resign

The Baird DRIC Loan Which Is Not A Loan But Must Be Paid Back Clarification

BLOGbreakingnews: Windsor Is In

WUC Water-gate2

Funniest Corrections, Clarifications Ever By The Star

Illegitimate Questions And Objections

Water Just Too Good To Drink

Why P3s and DRIC Make No Sense

Michigan Senate's Attitude To DRIC

The “Canada” P3 Bill Provisions: Why Canada Has To Up The Ante On DRIC