Stream International, Spitfires and Ken Lewenza

Spitfires reject mediation

According to a telephone conversation with mediator Brian Bisson, the Windsor Spitfires did not return phone calls regarding mediation over access to the contract between the City of Windsor and the Spitfire, in essence rejecting mediation. The next step in the process is adjudication, whereby the Privacy Commissioner, based on evidence presented and case files of similar nature, will order a decision.

Glen Murray and Diane Francis to cost taxpayers $20,000

Kudo’s to Councillor Ken Lewenza for standing up at council Monday night essentially asking who authorised this expenditure and, since the city is sponsoring this event, does it reflect the opinion of the City. Mayor Eddie Francis stated at the council meeting that the Planning Advisory Committee had recommended this in the fall of 2006. Upon searching the council minutes I could find so such reference to this at all, but frankly, more research is required, unless someone can point me to the reference.

Which brings me to a statement I made in an earlier blog on April 4th:

“In times of budget cuts, elimination of job training and counselling for the unemployed, cut backs in transit funding, and layoffs at city hall, this event is FREE. I had heard rumours that last time the speakers cost $25,000 - is that the case this time?”

Although I appreciate Councillor’s Lewenza’s concern, we’ve known about this since April 4th. Why bring it up on the night before the event is supposed to take place?

Stream Job Fair

According to Fernand Atieh, a former Casino Windsor employee, he was hopeful his bilingual skills would help him land a job. But he doubted the pay would be comparable to the $20 an hour he was earning at the casino. “I’d be happy with starting rate of $14 an hour with benefits, and the promise of career advancement,” said the single father.

Well, I did a little research on Stream and found out what the requirements they’ve been seeking of their applicants:

• Must have 12 months working knowledge of Desktop PC’
• Excellent Spanish and English language skills both verbal and written
• Must be a self motivated individual able to work independently
• Ability to take on multiple assignments
• Basic knowledge of telecommunications, networking and Internet essentials
• Basic knowledge of network access server functionality & troubleshooting
• Experience of Windows 2000, Sun Solaris, Linx OS (Desirable)
• Working knowledge of mobile devices and web protocols (SMPP, HTTP, etc) (Desirable)
• Working knowledge of SQL (Desirable)
• Experience with UNIX/Linux command line interface (Desirable)

According to David Raposo, site director for the Saint John call centre in September 26, 2006 New Brunswick Telegraph Journal, C1, “We do train, however, we definitely prefer somebody who maybe has one at home and uses one on a regular basis,” he said. “It doesn’t have to be somebody who can tear (computers) apart and put them back together blindfolded.” Well with the above requirements for the Spanish position, I wouldn’t qualify for that job (language issues aside).

Another interesting tidbit, fDI Magazine, the magazine that labelled Windsor as THE place to invest in North America did a story on call centres, which included Stream in 2002:

“Stream International, a Massachusetts-based firm and part of high-tech manufacturer Solectron, chose La Coruńa on the coast of Galicia for its call centre. It wanted to take advantage of competitive labour costs and the availability of a young and educated workforce.”

So forgive me as I hesitate to jump on the enthusiasm bandwagon regarding call centres. We have cheap labour, which fDI confirmed when they stated our high unemployment was attractive for investors. According to Mike Meloche in the April 27 Star article: “We saw them (Moncton) go through an economic transformation, just like Windsor is going through now. They were a one-industry town until CN Rail moved out. Now, they’ve got more than 30 call centres.”

Mmm, sounds like they are still a one-industry town. Don’t get me wrong, these are jobs which we sorely need, but I concur with Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley, who stated:

“I don’t believe that the Call centers have brought additional development outside of their own investment. Our efforts focus on attracting green jobs, etc are at the UWO Research Park that is leading the way on Bio Innovation and alternative fuels. I would highly doubt a call center cluster would have any impact in secondary job creation.”

Perhaps this story in the Chilliwack Times may be a reason:

Randy Pratt, a board member with the B.C. Association of Call Centres, argues communities and government shouldn’t be complacent that once a centre is settled it won’t leave... People in the business and government do not understand how fluid capital is and how Canada is not only competing with the U.S. now these call centres could end up anywhere on the planet.”

Stream’s site director Mike Robinson declined to offer comment on Stream’s Chilliwack operations or its future saying: “Given the timing that we’re in right now with the divestiture going on and things I would prefer not to get into a discussion on the business right now.”

Now Mayor Bradley’s words reminded me something I stated during the municipal election, in this blog:

“4. Capitalise on our strengths.

Health sciences, pharmaceuticals, new green technologies and research/development. Promote it, and target firms to tap into this vast resource. These are areas I would like to focus on if elected to council.

Diversification also requires cooperation of councillors, the mayor, business and labour together to make it happen - for the best interests of ALL in Windsor. Through these proven methods, jobs that pay wages to support families will come. All we need now is the leadership and courage to do so.”

But more on that for another day.

Is Tunnel Plaza a risk to St. Alphonsus Church?

		“According to Kennedy, vibrations from trucks are causing plaster to fall from the church’s ceiling, forcing the blocking of certain pews. “You’re literally destroying a 150-year-old church that we dearly love,” said Kennedy, 49″ (Windsor Star, Apr. 18).If this is an issue for Assumption Church, what about St. Alphonsus Church downtown?
Located in the shadow of the city owned tunnel is St. Alphonsus Church. Kennedy’s comments regarding Assumption Church alerted me to a potential issue for this 136 year old church built in 1871 and its future with regards to the proposed tunnel plaza expansion with a predicted 40% increase in truck traffic.Upon reading Kennedy’s words, a thought occurred to me, what about the vibratory effects of tunnel traffic? Could the traffic on city streets, both around and under, as well as the effects of air-borne pollutants originating from the tunnel ventilation building a few blocks to the north, as well as the tunnel plaza itself, be negatively affecting the structure? In fact, according to the City’s own environmental master plan (page 9), “Ten year trends consistently place Downtown Windsor’s pollutant concentrations as the highest in the Province (1994-2003).” Cracks in the pavement, such as these on Park Street, could increase vibration intensity. I also wondered what the impact of traffic traveling over cracks and potholes on Goyeau and on Park Streets had on vibrations? Could they amplify the effects of vibrations? Could these negatively affect the foundation and structure of St. Alphonsus Church? If Kennedy is correct, what would the impact of a 40% increase in truck and automobile traffic at the tunnel have on this historic landmark? According to findings at the 2006 Annual Conference of the Transportation Association of Canada: “The condition of the pavement surface is the decisive contributor to ground-borne vibration..Specific pavement surface irregularities, such as potholes and stepped transverse cracks, can significantly increase the force of the tire striking the pavement. Compared to the static force, the dynamic force may be up to 50 to 80 percent higher. The higher dynamic forces result in proportionately higher ground borne vibration.” So could the poor road conditions around St. Alphonsus Church in fact be akin to fault lines transporting traffic vibrations literally to its doorstep? And what about noise induced vibration? Unlike Assumption Church, there are no trees surrounding St. Alphonsus that could mitigate the impact of vehicular and truck noise emanating from the plaza, city streets and the underground tunnel itself. In fact, the tunnel plaza proposal could be an intensified source of pollution, noise and vibration. As you can see by the picture, St. Alphonsus Church is surrounded and within 50 meters of both trucks and cars traveling over uneven surface roads as well as their emissions (coupled with the emissions from the tunnel ventilation building). In fact, I wonder if these vibrations were responsible, in part, for the restoration that occurred in 1999 on the church’s bell tower in addition to its age? So could the Tunnel Plaza and expansions as well as local street traffic be posing a threat to St. Alphonsus Church? If Kennedy’s claims are correct, then I believe they do.  Tunnel Plaza Alternative 2A Alternative 3A

Marketing Sandwich Towne, Ward Two Councillor Style

There will be no blog entries for the remainder of the week. A final paper and final exam require my attention. Blogging will resume on Monday, April 30, 2007.

As always, please visit the blogs on the right side navigation panel.

____________________________________

The more things change, the more things remain the same it seems.

On November 20th, 2004 the Windsor Star boldly proclaimed:

“Another Soho - as in New York City? Maybe a Beaches - like Toronto? New investment and development have quietly begun in Sandwich, and now city council has approved a measure used extensively in the United States to revitalize blighted inner-city neighbourhoods.”

In 2004 we heard about how investors were flocking to Sandwich Towne; how doctors and lawyers were buying up houses waiting for values to increase and about the tremendous amount of history in Sandwich. Mayor Eddie Francis said:

“Council, from Day 1, the key focus in strategic sessions was we have to look at economic development not just in one part of the city, downtown,” said Mayor Eddie Francis. “We have to look at how we promote economic development, how we promote community-building, across the city.”

With regards to the new Sandwich Towne corporation? Our local politico’s said the following:

“Windsor has committed its planning and legal services and assistance applying for grants, but it’s too early to talk about money, Francis said. MPP Sandra Pupatello and MP Brian Masse are keen on the corporation, but warn there are no guarantees regarding money.”

Gee, this sounds eerily familiar - almost Delray-esque.

Ron Jones promised in his 2003 election campaign a bank for Sandwich (Jan. 26, 2004). Caroline Postma said that the “main priority” for Sandwich was to find “a financial institution” (March 9, 2006). Apparently Windsor Family Credit Union (Jan. 26, 2004, Windsor Star) sent a survey around to 13,000 residents in Sandwich, but according to my sources, very few surveys were returned. I guess residents didn’t “respond favourably and honestly to this survey.” I guess seniors were “comfortable using ATMs or with making a journey to the closest banks” contrary to Councillor Jone’s claims.

So, imagine my surprise with Councillor Jone’s statement over the pending closure of the Shoppers Drug Mart in Sandwich Towne:

“We have been in preliminary discussions with alternative chains and if Shoppers has given up on this neighbourhood, the least they could so is give someone else an opportunity to serve the needs of seniors and others who do not have the means to get to another store.”

Gee, why would a drug store sell their property to a competitor? Oh yes, I forgot, business is to provide a service, not make a profit. I’ve got it! Perhaps the City could take over this drug store as well? We’ve built an arena for a private firm, taken over an airport and are negotiating the purchase of a tunnel - why not a drug store?

But business concepts do not seem to be the forté of our Ward Two Councillors. I would suggest Marketing 101. Some classics:

“…and essentially, when you look at it, it will take out 1/3 of Sandiwch Towne” (Councillor Postma on Face-to-Face).

“We also have, your Worship, some sacred territories there, some aboriginal terrorities and I hope that this council will see that we stick together and protect all the heritage of Sandwich Towne.” (Ron Jones, City Council, Jan. 8th)

You know, I can just see investors and developers flocking to Sandwich now with all this talk of heritage and aboriginal land, buildings and impending doom. And we can’t forget about that anti-Ambassador Bridge by-law which essentially freezes development in all of Sandwich for up to two years.

It’s sad too, really. Imagine the opportunities that could’ve benefited Sandwich by approaching the taxpaying businesses in and around Sandwich Towne. Imagine the opportunities that would abound for renovation of heritage properties or even opening a bank in Sandwich to handle their accounts. If our Councillors were open to negotiation, anything is possible.

But no, our councillors have their very own and, I might add, unique marketing strategy.

Henderson ‘bering’ down on tunnel debate

Gord Henderson could not be more correct in highlighting the Bering Strait Tunnel proposal announced on April 18th in his Saturday column. In fact, the project is the perfect financial model for us to consider in Windsor.

The project:

According to a feasibility study, “Russia plans to build the world’s longest tunnel, a transport and pipeline link under the Bering Strait to Alaska, as part of a $65 billion project to supply the U.S. with oil, natural gas and electricity from Siberia.”

Now its no secret that North America (the US specifically) needs oil, but also requires new sources of electricity, as outlined in “Water Wars” a book by Diane Raines Ward, that I’m currently reading. The project includes plans to build 2 tidal plants, each with a capacity of as much as 10 gigawatts to supply the new rail links and also export to North America.

20 gigawatts would power perhaps 6 million homes in North America, but this is enough for these private investors, OAO Russian Railways, national utility OAO Unified Energy System and pipeline operator OAO Transneft which, according to their calculations, will “save North America and Far East Russia $20 billion a year on electricity costs.”

Although deemed a “public-private” partnership, “Russia and the U.S. may each eventually take 25 percent stakes, with private investors and international finance agencies as other shareholders.”

So yes, for the above stated reasons, a tunnel should be built in Windsor. Think of the amazing opportunity for private investors to fund the $3.8 billion project. We could tap the hydro-electric power of the Grand Marais drainage ditch and export this power to the US. Perhaps we then could approach Borealis (who has interests in electricity) to utilise this hydro-electric potential of the Grand Marais ditch and fund the entire tunnel project.

The Bering Strait tunnel, however, is not without its critics who claim, “This will certainly help to develop Siberia and the Far East, but better port infrastructure would do that too and not cost $65 billion,” Trust’s Nadorshin said. “For all we know, the U.S. doesn’t want to make Alaska a transport hub.”

Mmm, sounds sort of like what the Ambassador Bridge Company has been doing to improve its infrastructure - 4 additional customs booths greatly reduced traffic congestion on the Canadian side - and for the fraction of the cost of building an entirely new border crossing. Imagine the impact of doubling this, in conjunction with the impressive results achieved with “pre-clearance.”

But hey, if we can find private investors who will fund construction, operations and maintenance of this $3.8 billion tunnel and tap into the Grand Marais Drain’s hydro-electric power - I say go for it! (We’ll just conveniently forget about the security threats a tunnel poses for cross-border trade I brought up in this blog as well as the simple fact that tunnel ventilation systems in North America do not scrub their emissions).

Dinosaurs dine on gazelles

In Gord Henderson’s column today we read:

“Elfio Toldo, a retired provincial industry ministry representative, said Windsor will “go through some tough times for a few years” because it’s so hard to compete with low-wage economies, but he agrees it has great potential and sees hope in a CAW that’s showing signs of evolving and becoming flexible.”

I sure hope the CAW is flexible enough - to the tune of $10-15 an hour. Because yes, it’s hard to compete with “low-wage” economies - unless of course you become one.

You see, I believe the perverbial economic “reset” is going to be pressed in Windsor very soon. Keep these two words in mind “gazelles” and “Foreign Direct Investment” - otherwise known as fDi Magazine.

Recall, Matthew Fischer, our new economic development guru stated:

“Gazelles are small or mid-sized companies that experience 20% and more growth each year…In response to this new information, the economic development community is developing a new approach to job creation. One of these is called “Economic Gardening.’

In this new concept, gazelles are identified, cultivated and encouraged to thrive in the community.”

New approach, eh? Well, digging through the achaelogical internet past, I found article from Perspective section of the San Jose (California)Mercury News on October 23, 1994, describing this “new” approach which:

“calls into question the efficacy of economic development strategies which explicitly target SMEs [gazelles]…Citing the propensity of SMEs to provide lower wages and fewer benefits and to make greater use of contingent (i.e., part-time and temporary) labor than larger firms…economic development strategies which single out small firms for special treatment could “actually contribute to a worsening of the national average standard of living.”

Well, this was in 1994. This article is too old. Things have changed. Hey, I’m with you there until I found this article from 2005. Véronique de Rugy states:

“Also, not all small businesses create a lot of jobs. We know that some of them do — they’re called “gazelles” — they are highly entrepreneurial and create economic growth. The problem with targeting subsidies is that [they are] difficult to implement because the only way to identify the gazelles is after they have become successful, high-growth businesses.”

Now, entrez-vous, fDi Magazine and Windsor’s recognition. What exactly is Foreign Direct Investment? Well, in a nut-shell it is attracting multi-national companies (foreign) to operate in Windsor. But I do not think that Mayor Francis’ eyes were “big and sparkly” over potential job benefits. Allow me to explain.

There are different types of FDI - resource seeking (cheap labour, natural resources), market seeking (mergers and acquisitions), and efficiency seeking (exploiting benefits of common ownership, usually following resource and market seeking). There are two types of FDI - Greenfield where profits flow back to the foreign country, in contrast to local industries whose profits flow back into the domestic economy to promote growth. The other type are Mergers and Acquistions which have no long term benefits to the local economy.

The picture is becoming clearer now isn’t it?

“The city’s high unemployment rate — over 10 per cent in March — was also viewed as a positive.” Why else would our high unemployment be a good thing? High unemployment drives down wages. But I began to wonder…what resources does Windsor have to offer? Ah yes. Airport. Tunnel - Infrastructure!

Now, remember what April 10th’s Editorial in the Star stated:

“Neither is limiting the search for economic opportunities to North America. Pupatello’s trade missions to such far-flung regions as Japan, Pakistan and India are exactly what a minister of economic development and trade should be doing — drawing investment from emerging economies to Ontario.”

But then something dawned on me - our falling reserves, rising debt, and shrinking tax base. And then Councillor Halberstadt’s comments on March 22, 2007 came back to me:

“I’ve always suggested we should continue to review our assets and if they’re competing with what the private sector is doing and the second strike against them is they’re not even providing us revenue, then I think we have to look at whether we want to retain them or not.”

Is our city in that much financial dire straits? This fDi recognition isn’t a last ditch attempt by our Mayor and provincial representatives to raise some serious cash by selling off all our assests to foreign investors is it? Didn’t our Mayor say, on December 8, 2006:

“Three years ago, when we had predicted we would reduce our debt and that we would hold the line on taxes, everyone came out and said ‘they’re going to cut programs, they’re going to cut services and there’s no way it can happen.’ I think we have a solid track record where we’ve demonstrated through strong discipline and fiscal prudence we can achieve what we set out to achieve.”

He didn’t say anything about not selling our house and home. Oh and if we can get a few thousand low-paying jobs in return, great, but something tells me the urgency behind all of this is cold, hard cash.

The most irritating thing about all of this is that sure, Mr. Henderson, we could “quibble” over our less than stellar “business friendly atmosphere”, but I think Beztek, Toldo & Rosati and the Ambassador Bridge Company may beg to differ.

Furthermore, these are the very “gazelles” we should have been nurturing last term to avoid the obvious financial crunch the city finds itself in. But instead, years later we’re out hunting dinosaurs that will only devour any gazelles remaining.

So all that said, I sure hope the CAW is flexible because in the words of Elfio Toldo, Windsor will “go through some tough times for a few years” as that great economic button is reset.

Ambassador Bridge Community Consultation Session

Resident demands study into impact of vibrations on the human body

 

How foolish of the Ambassador Bridge Company to hire expensive, well-trained engineers to design the enhancement project. Surely, the tens of thousands of dollars spent, if not more, could have been saved by consulting Mary-Anne Cuderman.

I attended this evening’s consultation session, which is part of the Federal Environmental process. People were genuinely interested in the project and were more concerned with traffic flow it seemed. The Ambassador Bridge made a very professional and informative presentation to address some concerns regarding the project. It was very similar to the consultations they have been undertaking to date with members of the community as outlined by this blog on March 6, 2007.

Leo Petrilli expressed dismay that the Ambassador Bridge had not provided an impact analysis of the project. He did however, proffer to assist the Ambassador Bridge Company in providing information as to how to do so - so kudo’s to Mr. Petrilli for offering to work with the Bridge Company.

However, the purpose of these consultations as defined by the draft environmental assessment guidelines, page 12 are:

“…that this plan be made available for the public for their review and input.”

Now Ms. Cuderman’s expertise is admirable as are Terry Kennedy’s lobbying abilities. Not only is Mary-Anne Cuderman a video specialist, who stated that the Ambassador Bridge’s fly-over “doesn’t look very professional at all” (March 19, 2007), she is also a trained highway engineer and customs expert. Tonight, Ms. Cuderman challenged these obviously undertrained engineers and Canada Customs agents by stating that the plaza, as approved, would not meet future capacity. Now I’m sure Ms. Cuderman has undertaken extensive research and will present her analysis forthwith.

In today’s well written and unbiased coverage of the Sandwich Towne segment of the consultation process in the Windsor Star, Mr. Kennedy expressed concern over the impact of vibrations from truck traffic. As a result of his lobbying abilities, the Ambassador Bridge’s enhancement project will be 100 meters further to the west of the existing span, thus mitigating any vibrations caused by truck traffic.

Ms. Cuderman also acknowledged tonight that pollution from trucks on the bridge is minimal as compared to cross border pollution. Well, this couldn’t be! We’ve been hearing all the negative stories about truck pollution in Windsor so I had to verify her statement and found out that she was correct! According to United States Environmental Protection Agency, many counties are exceeding particulate matter standards in the US, which are carried towards Windsor with south and south-east winds as demonstrated below:

But according the EPA, more stringent standards and emissions controls will significantly improve air quality in Windsor, Ontario by 2015!

Ms. Cuderman also expressed concerns and requested that the Ambassador Bridge Company undertake studies to determine the amount of vibration the human body can withstand. I’m assuming this is in reference to truck vibrations. I’m sure now that Ms. Cuderman will be requesting that a moratorium be issued for the use of the spin cycle in washing machines until such a time we can determine the impact of vibrations on the human body.

Now I presume that since truck pollution is minimal and that the vibrations caused by the existing span have been mitigated by the move west of 100 meters feet, that Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Cuderman support the Ambassador Bridge enhancement project? Or is this conditional support until the completion of the impact study of vibrations on the human body?

Tunnel deal questions have me scratching my head

According to a document obtained by this blog, Alinda acquired “the concession to operate the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel” in October 2006. We first learned of this deal on March 14, 2007, “The operator of the Windsor-Detroit tunnel also changed recently from Macquarie Bank to Alinda Capital Partners.” Well I suppose 5 months is recently.

Now according to the Star, on July 28th:

“Australia’s Macquarie Bank holds the lease for the Detroit side of the tunnel until 2020 and has been looking for ways to increase returns on its investment by adding more commercial truck traffic.“

But this was a no-go for our Mayor who stated, “From the tunnel commission’s perspective, we want the tunnel to be commuter- and car-friendly,” said Mayor Eddie Francis, chairman of the tunnel commission. “We are focused on that.”

Now according to the March 2, 2006 Star, “While Windsor pulled in about $9.2 million US in profits in 2002-04, Detroit earned $2.3 million, he said.”

Now if you recall, Councillor Dave Brister on May 12th, 2005 said, “he cannot provide any details but there are major issues pending involving the Windsor-Detroit tunnel and Enwin that will consume “a significant amount of taxpayer resources.”

Curiously, could the major issues be buried in this reference to a report:

“We carried out a due diligence study of the Detroit to Windsor tunnel for prospective senior equity partners, namely John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company and Hyde Park Holdings LLC. The objective was to forecast costs and risks associated with the operation of the tunnel to 2020...We also assessed mechanical and electrical systems, associated buildings and environmental aspects.”

I have to wonder what happens after 2020? All these lease agreements that expire in 2020 really have me curious - and concerned about future issues regarding the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel.

So forgive me as I scratch my head in confusion over Gord Henderson’s gushing over the proposed $75-million tunnel deal:

“You can bet your bottom dollar that the boards of these massive institutions, which have been pouring billions into a hot new field, longterm infrastructure investment, are asking themselves that awkward question following the revelation that Windsor has entered into a US $75-million agreement with Detroit to take full possession of the Detroit-Windsor tunnel.

They’ll be kicking themselves where the sun doesn’t shine for not recognizing, as the City of Windsor did, a once in-a-lifetime chance to purchase a safe and reliable revenue stream for the next century and beyond.

Luckily for Windsor, it was alerted to a unique opportunity, as well as grave risks, in October 2005 when news broke that Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick had signed a “binding agreement” with the Ambassador Bridge company that would give the cashstrapped motor city $20 million in exchange for control of the tunnel and the right to divert all tunnel traffic to a huge inspection centre near the bridge.”

It turns out the Ambassador Bridge Company was not the only company offering $20-million, according to a press release by Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick on September 27, 2005:

“The city has received three offers with a baseline offer of $20 million. To protect the integrity of the process, the City cannot release the names of the bidding companies.“

Now, if Detroit was going to take $20-million for 100 years for the tunnel from one of three bidding companies, why on earth is the City of Windsor paying $75-million for 75 years? Furthermore, if Macquarie Bank was seeking ways to maximise its profit, but obviously couldn’t since the lease was taken over by Alinda, what makes the City of Windsor so sure it can maximise profit?

Furthermore, if studies have been done to determine the “costs and risks associated with the operation of the tunnel to 2020″, how can Gord Henderson predict that we purchased “a safe and reliable revenue stream for the next century and beyond?”

What issues were identified in that report? What does the future hold after 2020?

Francis said the tunnel should be operated like a business and payments to the city should first take into account the tunnel’s needs. “I would never look at the tunnel as a cash cow,” the mayor said. “I look at it as a strategic asset” (August 23, 2006).

But the Mayor is “very proud of the revenue that it provides. Instead of us coming knocking on the doors of the federal and provincial governments for infrastructure dollars, those revenues and those dollars are redirected to our roads and our sewers and are less of a burden on the national provincial dollar.”

Now the Star alerted us that “revenues” were “plunging” (August 23, 2006) and on March 22, 2007 we were told, “Tunnel revenues will be reduced by nearly 70 per cent, with $1 million being sent to city coffers this year, compared to $3.2 million that was received last year.”

Mr. Henderson tells us, “From 1990 to 2004, the tunnel’s Canadian half generated about $200 million in tolls and other revenues. In spite of costly investments, including $21 million for a new plaza and , the city $35 million for a new ventilation system and other badly needed work the city received payments totalling $54 million.”

But on July 24 2006, the Star informed us that, “The tunnel commission is also facing costs from the $20-million replacement of the tunnel’s ventilation system which is near completion.” Did this increase by $15-million?

So a few questions for our Mayor and Mr. Henderson:

• 1. What does the future hold after 2020 insofar as the “risks and costs” of the tunnel?

• 2. What are the “major issues” facing the tunnel that will “consume a significant amount of taxpayer resources?”

• 3. If Detroit’s profit was only $2.3 million over 2 years between 2002-2004, what are they now if ours have plunged to $1-million from $3.2-million just a year ago? What are the combined profits?

• 4. And again, how is the City of Windsor going to pay the $75-million U.S? I mean, the Federal and Provincial governments are committed to the DRIC bridge, aren’t they? Our reserves are in the tank, our debt is rising, and we have a $65-million committment in the arena project.

But I guess I shouldn’t ask too many questions, because our Mayor has said that this isn’t a cash cow, but a “strategic asset.” But this $75-million “strategic asset” that private investors were only willing to pay $20-million for, does not build roads, sewers and other infrastructure.

Unless of course we go knocking on the doors of the federal and provincial governments for infrastructure dollars. Otherwise, how much more is this “strategic asset” going to cost we taxpayers, especially after 2020?

Councillor Postma’s solution for the border?

On John Fairley’s “Face-to-Face”, Councillor Postma stated she was “not interested” in discussing the plans proposed by the Ambassador Bridge because she has allegedly read “all the blogs out there.” Additionally, Councillor Postma said the following:

“You know, no, Schwartz didn’t want a bridge built next to the existing one. He said there are concerns with maintenance and that it should be fixed. He never said build beside it.”

Conveniently, our councillor did not share with viewers what Schwartz did say and recommend with regards to the Ambassador Bridge:

“The Ambassador Bridge has actively undertaken a number of projects to increase
capacity at its facility and consequently improve operations…In addition efforts will be undertaken to address the new federal (US-Canada) 25% efficiency challenge. The Detroit-Windsor Tunnel has studies underway to improve traffic flow.

We encourage and support the efforts at both facilities. (Schwartz Report, Page 28).

Schwartz also stated the following:

“We propose an early-action program which is needed before the outcome of the Bi-National process…But even with these actions the citizens should not be forced to wait until 2015-2020 before the truck impacts are abated.”

Since Councillor Postma is not interested in discussing and negotiating with the Bridge company, I have a simple question for her - what do you propose as the interim solution to the problem otherwise known as Huron Church Road? Or do you support forcing citizens to wait until 2015-2020?

Concerns with maintenance

As Councillor Postma pointed out, there were concerns with maintenance, so the obvious question I had was how does one go about repairing a suspension bridge?

This is what I found out:

“Few American cities can claim a landmark as distinctive as Cincinnati’s Suspension Bridge…The bridge will close in October of 2006 for a year of repairs and repainting…”

So, to repair this suspension bridge, Cincinnatti determined the best solution was to close the bridge for one year. In New York, they decided that closing the Williamsburg Bridge would be too disruptive, so opted for lane closures and a repair plan spanning over 15 years.

So, is Councillor Postma advocating that the Ambassador Bridge close for a period of a year? Or she advocating that repairs be undertaken over a period of 15 years? What would the outcome of this be? Well, if the Ambassador Bridge closed for a year, ALL truck traffic would have to find alternative means of crossing the border, and cars that use the Ambassador Bridge - some 14,000 per day, would have to use the Tunnel - congesting our downtown core and negatively impacting tourism and cross-border commuters. If the Bridge Company opted to shut down lanes, where-ever does the councillor expect the trucks to wait to cross?

Is this what Councillor Postma’s interim recommendation is?

Now I”m not sure exactly what repairs need to be done on the Ambassador Bridge, but I do recall that deck repairs have to be made. Now on a cable-stayed bridge, according to this report, deck repairs should be done symmetrically, which I understand to mean done to both sides at the same time. I would imagine that with a suspension bridge, this would also be required because of the unequal distribution of weight and subsequent stress on the suspension cables. But perhaps Councillor Postma could verify this.

The only responsible decision the Bridge Company can make, in my opinion, is to build a new bridge, and then, as they did in Sarnia, shut down the old bridge to make the necessary repairs. This would be least disruptive to our important economic trade corridor. The existing structure would provide redundancy to the new structure should it require repairs in the future, as described in the above mentioned report.

Even Sam Schwartz recognised the importance of the Ambassador Bridge and did not object to the “twinning” as Councillor Postma leads us to believe. He recognised the problems on Huron Church Road, which is why he proposed the ring-road - albeit an ineffective one. He stated:

“As designed, only the Ambassador Bridge provides direct access, with no traffic signals, from both Highway 401 and E.C. Row Expressway…the Ambassador Bridge Twinning…will reduce traffic significantly on local streets...Similarly, the two bridge proposals provide adequate long term capacity.”

The major problem was the city recommended WALTS road and its impact on Sandwich. However, if our councillor was interested in the Ambassador Bridge plans, she could demand that the city-recommended WALTS road be tunnelled - thus mitigating the impact on Sandwich Towne. Therefore, the DRIC route could be built, the corridor protected until traffic volumes warranted the construction of a third crossing, and the WALTS road, connecting to the DRIC road, be tunnelled in whole or in part. Truck traffic would be diverted to this DRIC/WALTS road, and cars could use Huron Church.

Insofar as redundancy is concerned, reverse customs would address this issue more than adequately. As I stated in a previous blog, Sarnia has two bridges side-by-side, and redundancy is not an issue there. Nor is redundancy an issue at the Peace Bridge facility.

If I were councillor, that is what I would recommend. Use the scarce tax dollars to improve access to an existing crossing, rather than spend billions creating an entirely new crossing that current traffic volumes will not financially support.

Oh and by the way, the Ambassador Bridge exceeded the 25% efficiency challenge significantly. According to the Journal of Homeland Security, they improved efficiency by more than 70%.

The “promises” not process are flawed

Delray at a glance (2005)			I have some serious reservations, from a social justice perspective for the residents of Delray in this border debate, especially in light of the latest public meeting organised by DRIC on March 21, 2007, Now, Windsor City Blog has already mentioned this in “Delray Shafted”, but I wish to re-iterate what was stated at this meeting:
Unemployment	9.9%
Average income	$18,111
*Median Home Price	$63,400
Air Quality (100 = best)	1
Water Quality (100 = best)	36
*Half the homes are above median, half are below. US median is $208,500.

“He explained that MDOT is a transportation agency, not a land use planning agency, but, realizing that transportation changes would affect land use, helped formulate the concepts shown in the meeting room….There are things like this that MDOT can do. This can complement activities by others. But, as time goes on, a partnership will have to be built with the City of Detroit and others to accomplish the redevelopment ideas shown.”

What does this mean? MDOT will simply purchase the affected residents’ homes, probably pay for moving costs and to make the redevelopment “concepts” a reality, the City of Detroit and “others” will have to step up to the plate.

The first question is what is the market value assessment of the affected homes and the next question is, is the City of Detroit financially able to undertake a large redevelopment plan and is this within Detroit’s planning?

With regards to the market value assessment, I found an article on Detroit Blog regarding Delray which states:

“Over the years, representatives of various industries looking to locate in the area have offered homeowners several times their properties’ assessed value to leave, but such offers are essentially meaningless in an area where homes are often assessed at $3,000. “

The article continues:

“The city says as much, having declared long ago that the future of Delray is industrial. No major new housing is planned.”

It would appear this is the case according to the City of Detroit’s website - Delray is not targeted for neighbourhood commercial revitalisation, nor is it targeted as a Renaissance Zone. It would appear that condominium development, riverfront housing and combating crime are Detroit’s priorities as outlined by Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick in his State of the City Address.

So for the folks in Delray, the “concepts” for redevelopment looks as if they will remain as such. But let’s pretend that redevelopment does occur, what would happen? Well, first, MDOT would purchase the homes for market value. Miraculously, these people will find similarly priced homes elsewhere in Detroit amidst this condominium boom. Now, the funny thing about redevelopment is that land values tend to increase, and when that happens so do the assessments of homes which in turn raises property taxes - an increase I don’t think the residents in Delray could afford. This process, incidentally is known as gentrification:

“Gentrification, or more specifically urban gentrification, is a process in which low-cost, physically deteriorated neighborhoods experience physical renovation and an increase in property values, along with an influx of wealthier residents who typically displace the prior resident.”

So, MDOT baited the residents with promises of what could be possible if the bridge is built in their community. A January 26, 2007 editorial in the Port Huron Times Herald proves that MDOT is not exactly to be trusted. Couple this with Detroit’s priorities, and I think the residents of Delray are in for a crushing revelation - that they will be either displaced by a bridge with market-value compensation; displaced by higher property taxes as a result of neighbourhood investments, or simply will have to live with a superhighway through their community.

Without a commitment of funds from the City of Detroit or the cash strapped state of Michigan - DRIC’s recommendation for land-use must be viewed through the lens of reality - and the same applies to our very own Sandwich Towne.

It is up to our community leaders to demand that, all “concepts” aside, firm commitments be made. We can “respect the process” but I don’t know, to me there is something very wrong with giving a family $3,000, $10,000 or even $30,000 for their home and expect them to uproot their life and carry on in another community.

Because surely, our community activists and city councillor Ron Jones do not support market value assessment as compensation or the process of gentrification?

Windsor taxpayers eliminate Detroit’s deficit

I think I’m going to cancel my subscription to the Windsor Star and subscribe to the Detroit Free Press and read blogs - heck, Caroline Postma on John Fairley’s “Face-to-Face” admitted she “read all the blogs out there. If you read certain blogs the [Ambassador Bridge] project is outlined very clearly.” Last time I checked, not one blog has claimed that, “when you look at it (the Ambassador Bridge’s plans) it will take out 1/3 of Sandwich Towne,” as Councillor Postma stated. If the councillor actually read the blogs, she would realise it was DRIC that claimed that, as WindsorCityBlog demonstrated in a letter from the Province of Ontario.

I’m wondering, did some rib sauce get in the councillor’s eye? Here is the Bridge Company’s plan again for your perusal.

But back to the story of interest here. Yesterday the Detroit Free Press revealed that the City of Windsor would be taking over operations of the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel.  The Free Press stated that Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, “made no reference in his address as to how it would be funded. Nor did he detail the 75-year joint operations and use agreement with the City of Windsor on the tunnel, which he has budgeted to bring in $58 million in the next fiscal year.”

How long has the Windsor Star known about this? Why is it taxpayers in Windsor hear this first from the Detroit Free Press, then on WindsorCityBlog and lastly from the Windsor Star?

In his budget speech to Council, Kilpatrick claims this will pay off Detroit’s deficit:

“As you all will recall, last year we had a lease agreement for the tunnel for $20 million and we a check in hand. But after completing our due diligence we found that by working with the City of Windsor, we can gain more dollars.

We are preparing to enter into a $75-million deal with the City of Windsor for 75-year joint operations and use agreement of the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel. We’ve made a conservative estimate and have only booked $58 million of that for this budget because there will be a number of costs and fees associated with finalizing the lease agreement. But that $58 million will be enough to eliminate our deficit.”

Then 24 hours later, according to the Windsor Star online story, the rest of Windsor learns about the potential deal:

“Moroun over a year ago made a US$20-million offer to Detroit for control of the U.S. side of the tunnel, but that deal was killed by Detroit’s city councillors following loud objections from Windsor and the Canadian government fearful of the bridge owner’s intentions.

Talks between the two cities soon after began to evolve and slowly the foundation for the agreement was formed. The agreement will give full control to Windsor for 75 years once it is finalized. The city owns the Canadian side.”

Then our esteemed mayor, with the utmost poise and statesmanship stated:

“If someone acquired the other half they could fill it up with cement and our investment would be lost,” Francis said.

In case you didn’t catch it, “the other half” is in reference to the Ambassador Bridge’s $20 million offer to Detroit last year to operate the Detroit side of the tunnel.

Is this where the $35.5 million went from our reserves - right into the City of Detroit’s budget? So while we in Windsor experience rising debt, rising taxes, and reduced services, the Mayor plays entrepreneur with our tax dollars and eliminates Detroit’s deficit.

But if the deal is worth $58 million to Detroit this fiscal year, where is the other $23-million coming from? Not from the City of Windsor - we potentially used up $35.5 million in reserves. This hasn’t been discussed in our capital budget. No new debt has been issued other than the $40 million for the water treatment plant.

Are these questions that Councillor Postma will ask? Or is she simply “not interested” as she stated in reference to having a look at the Ambassador Bridge’s proposal.

Is the Competition Act applicable to the Mayor and Council?

I believe Mayor Eddie Francis has laid the groundwork for the perfect legal case…against the City of Windsor. As a the sole border operator of the tunnel for the next 75 years, the City of Windsor is now a direct competitor with the Ambassador Bridge Company. If you recall, Senator’s grilled our Mayor for making representation regarding Bill C-3 as Chair of the Windsor Tunnel Commission:

“Senator Mercer: I suspect that the city of Windsor has more than a passing interest in this process or you would not be here.

You are chair of the tunnel commission, is that correct?

Mr. Francis: I am chair of the Windsor Tunnel Commission, yes.

Senator Mercer: Does that come with the title of mayor? Is the mayor always the chair of this commission, or is this something separate?

Mr. Francis: No, the mayor has historically taken on roles and responsibilities on a number of committees. In addition to the Windsor Tunnel Commission, I am also chair of the energy company. It is part of our job; our jobs never end. We work on committees.

Senator Mercer: I have bridges in my province that go from one city to another, not from one country to another.

Mr. Francis: It was established that, when the tunnel was created and then vested in the city of Windsor, a committee and a commission would be struck. The commission is an agency.

Senator Mercer: City council then chooses who the chair is, do they?

Mr. Francis: The commission does, yes.

Senator Mercer: The commission, but who appoints the commission?

Mr. Francis: The city council.

Senator Mercer: I told you he is a good politician.”

Does the Competition Act of Canada now apply, in particular Part VI, Section 45 of the Act? Could this section limit any actions by the City of Windsor against the Ambassador Bridge Company?

How does Bill C-3 come into play now? Could the very Act that NDP M.P. Brian Masse “fought” for with his two ammendments now make the City of Windsor (you and I) solely responsible for any costs associated with security issues? Maintenance? Access roads?

So many questions - but I guess I’ll have to keep reading the Detroit Free Press to find the answers.