data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b9494/b94940a9d39ae002309bf9d59f36ee572b00c5d5" alt=""
Sec 16. An exemption from disclosure of a record ... does not apply if a compelling public interest in the disclosure of the record clearly outweighs the purpose of the exemption.
Thoughts and Opinions
With all of the noise about getting vehicles off of City streets, we are not being told how the Tunnel Plaza is being expanded on the Canadian side and the reasons for it.
Our attention is being diverted away from what is really important and what the Tunnel improvements are all about. Just like with the infamous Agenda Item #5
Once the Senior Levels commit to paying for the changes, then action will be started on the other side but after DCTC is no longer involved with Windsor ie when their deal expires in 2007. The Tunnel Plans will not be completed until 2009 with final construction in 2011. Remember that DCTC had plans for the Detroit side including the expansion of truck traffic that would cost only a fraction of the $30 million that Eddie wants that would get trucks THROUGH the Tunnel and off City streets ie not building a parking lot as Eddie is supporting.
I wonder if the thought is thanks for the ideas DCTC but the cities can do it on our own. We do not need you.
Windsor and Detroit are doing some negotiating over the Tunnel right now. That will make an interesting story for a BLOG another time.
I wonder if, in the end, Eddie agrees with the phrase attributed to PT Barnum considering how he treats his electorate: "There's a sucker born every minute...and two to take 'em."
I do not need to list more items. You can add ones you remember too.
Fulvio’s words still haunt me. I just wondered what it will be like for the City if we continue our past practices for the next four years. I just wanted to ask the question and have you think about it too.
I like this letter sent out by the Public Advisory Council (PAC) of the Detroit River Canadian Cleanup to the Mayor and Council. So polite but with a strong undertone for the November 13 election.
The Mayor really put his foot into it with his remark didn't he. He better not cross the environmentalists now.
But I am confused. Was it even necessary for PAC to send the letter in the first place?
In their press release, it was said that "The Project Ice Track Team has sent a letter to Mayor Francis clarifying that the Tom Joy Woods lands were never requested for the footprint of the new arena. The letter also reconfirms that the land necessary to accommodate the Project Ice Track arena utilizes existing Windsor Raceway land."
But then the Mayor replied that "Francis said the Toldo-Rosati group initially asked for the city to throw in 50 acres for the arena, but withdrew the request after the city refused to agree to it."
Which party is telling the truth? It should be easy to determine that if the relevant documents are produced! It is important for us to know the answer before decisions are made on the Arena.
I challenge both the Mayor and the Toldo-Rosati Group to make available to the public the documents so we can judge.
The law is designed to facilitate the disclosure of government-held information. As such, a member of the public need not demonstrate why a particular record or information should be disclosed. The onus is on the government body to establish why a record should not be released, otherwise the presumption of disclosure prevails.
As such, institutions (the term used in the Act to define public bodies) are strongly encouraged to provide routine disclosure of information on an informal non-statutory basis, and to proactively disseminate information to the public even in the absence of a formal or informal request. In many cases, an institution will provide the information in accordance with a routine disclosure practice, or simply because it can see no reason to withhold it. The statute recognizes that these dissemination practices existed long before the law came into effect, and should continue to exist, unless personal information is involved.
Well the Mayor and Council keep on having those secret, in camera sessions. It's not what you think though. It's not about the border or the arena or city finances. it is much more important than that. Here is a hint from Halifax.
I should have guessed. First there were two pro-Brian Masse news stories on Bill C-3 in the Windsor Star. Those stories were mere lead-ins to the Brian Masse Guest Column on the Editorial page. The news stories left a lot to be desired frankly. I wrote a Letter to the Editor of the Star about the first but it was not published. I did a BLOG about the second [June 30, 2006 "Brian Masse and Star Apology Required"]
Brian's Guest Column demands a response. I did consider sending it to the Star but then again, I have never been successful in getting a Guest Column published by the Star on border issues. So here is what I have to say about the Column by the NDP MP for Windsor West:
Mr. Masse discussed what "[he], joined by Joe Comartin's parliamentary expertise with the full support of the NDP caucus" accomplished with Bill C-3. They actually achieved very little.
The transcripts of the hearings, that are available to everyone including the Star, are clear about what really took place in Parliament and in the hearings. Mr. Masse introduced a considerable number of amendments that he and the NDP wanted and a number which were submitted by the City of Windsor and their legal experts through him. Some "parliamentary expertise!" Most were thrown out as "inadmissible" and he withdrew several others. Windsorites were poorly served by our NDP member.
The wording of the amendment Masse introduced is so weak that it is totally useless. It deals with the Minister consulting with other levels of government and with those with a direct interest. The Minister only needs to do so "if in his opinion such is necessary having regard to all the circumstances." That hardly gives us a voice on border issues when the Minister has so much discretion. Notwithstanding his spin, Masse’s amendment actually gives the Ambassador Bridge the statutory right to have a voice where they had none before!
It is shocking to see the Conservatives following a Liberal Party agenda dealing with Bill C-3. If this Bill is what a "rightist," supposedly pro-business Conservative Party in Government advocates, then the world is topsy-turvy.
Don't you find it amazing that everyone focuses on the "operations" side of what Bill C-3 is all about? No one argued against the safety and security aspects. But there is another more ominous side to the legislation that seems to be conveniently ignored that should send a chill to every business person in this country!
Few discussed the ownership provisions under the Act or that the Act is really directed against one company, the Ambassador Bridge Company, to force them out of business. If it can happen to them, and they are powerful, what about YOUR company? Is it safe from Government bureaucrats who think they know your business better than you?
Don’t worry though. The Government says its purpose with this legislation is pure and wholesome: "The proposed bill has become a high government priority to "protect public interest, safety and security," said Transport Canada.
To be honest, I can well understand the concerns of the Government. As its backgrounder points out, 22 out of 24 crossings are PUBLICLY owned. The Ambassador Bridge and one in Fort Frances, which is for sale, are private.
Given the poor way some of these "public" bridges operate and their weak financial position, no wonder they need oversight. Interestingly, a US Government study stated that the "private" Ambassador Bridge was the best operating border crossing in North America. Now I am NOT picking on the Peace Bridge but wasn't that the model that Brian Masse wanted us to consider for a "public" bridge here. Here is what the study said comparing the two crossings:
While it may have some good intentions, Bill C-3 is a very Draconian piece of legislation. When you understand that the key provisions can put the Bridge Co., its real and obvious target, into serious difficulty financially while it builds up their competition at the Bridge Co's own expense, you will know what I mean. The Bill can destroy a business in the name of the "public interest" it appears and without compensation.
Please tell me of one single business person who would stand for this kind of Government action! This legislation goes much further than we ever should allow our Government to go "for the general advantage of Canada" merely "to ensure the efficient flow of traffic."
Here are some examples:
No wonder others have not directed your attention to these provisions. Think about them but applied to your company or employer. Be honest. Would you tolerate Government intervening in your business in this fashion?
All may not be lost. Bill C-3 still has to be passed in the Senate. Hopefully, the Senators will show their usefulness in providing a "sober, second thought" to legislation that no business person should ever have to tolerate even in the name of public security.
If Brian Masse and the Government truly believe that the private ownership of the Ambassador Bridge is an "anomaly," then they should have the courage of their conviction. All that they need do is open the Government cheque-book and spend billions of taxpayer dollars to buy the bridge. As Matty Moroun, the bridge owner said in his Windsor Star interview, "If the offer is right we would consider it. We would be foolish if we didn't. It's a business deal."
But why do that when they can try to force him to sell out using Bill C-3!
Let me give Presidents Paul and Strasser some free advice. Now is the time to go to Council.
President Strasser has an agreement in principle with the City about the Cleary. It will take the lawyers several months to cross all the T'sand dot all the I's so that a final agreement can be prepared. Remarkably, that means that a signing ceremony could take place in the media spotlight very close to the date of the election. However, what would happen if St. Clair refuses to sign because of "irreconcilable differences." It happened before when St. Clair backed out of the "Income and Security Building" in City Hall Square at the last minute. If President Strasser decides to walks away again, then there goes the downtown strategy of Eddie and Council.
Ahhhh, but President Paul is in an even better position. He has a ton of free money to invest in Windsor. Eddie will be forced to grovel to get him to do it at a time when Eddie is desperate for a win to help get him re-elected!
As I understand it, the University hired a financial firm out of Toronto to look at their financial position. They suggested amongst other things restructuring of debt to take advantage of lower interest rates which will save the University millions. They looked at their working capital position and made suggestions to improve it. They put forward a brilliant financial structure that, in effect, repays the outstanding bonds when they come due by setting up a sinking fund which, when invested over time, will equate to the bonds outstanding at the due date and at the same time gives the University money for major capital projects.
Here are some juicy details:
Critical is that this is a non-amortizing bond (thus the sinking fund). The University doesn't have monthly principal repayments and saved a lot of interest payments by paying off inefficient debt. Thus the new bond does not cost the University a penny more to carry than the existing $29 million in debt.
The University is also re-structuring its working capital which will free up about $30 million in additional capital for our building projects.
With all of the financial zigs and zags, the University will have a huge multi-million dollar pot to spend in the City! They will also start an aggressive fund-raising program which will also raise mega-millions for more work in the City. (The University will only have to raise somewhere between $25 and 30 million from the community instead of $120+ million.)
The University Capital spending will be over $120 million over the next five years. This is the one of the largest current capital expenditure program in Windsor and will provide hundreds of real construction jobs and completely reposition the University within Ontario. The centre pieces of this investment will be a new engineering building focused on Automotive and a new medical school to feed physicians to the City. Music will likely be part of this as well but has not been formally approved.
Ross Paul will have a legacy of which he can be proud when this comes about. [See my BLOG about Ross Paul's Vision which may now come true unlike the dreams of certain politicians! October 13, 2005 "Pipedream Or Usefully Provocative Idea"] It is also pretty clear that the University Board is no slouch at financial activitites.
In their positions, I am sure Ross Paul and John Strasser understand how power politics is played.
Ross and John need to understand that they need some "momentum" to get their fundraising drive going. After all, look at the good things they are going to do in the City that will cause these terrific positive spin-offs. Wouldn't you think that a $5 million and a $3 million gift to our educational institutions may be something that the Mayor and Council will consider in a new light if they are approached before the November 13 election!
An insider told me however that the price has been increased. As he/she said
If the Mayor and Council want their hand on the shovel at the groundbreaking of some of these projects," I was told, "all they have to do is come up with about $10 million and the University will gladly allow their photos to be taken for their re-election brochure." I wonder how much more St. Clair will want too. Perhaps a Capitol Theatre and former Salvation Army building thrown into the Cleary mix.
Those ivory tower academics, they sure know how to give our City leaders a good lesson in politics and high finance right before an election, don't they!
BACKGROUND
FACTS
RANDOM THOUGHTS
OK....now that I have done the work, get going and write a BLOG!
Then on February, 18, 2006 Henderson wrote:
Henderson, unfortunately for Eddie, spilled the beans. He called the Mayor a "a legal technocrat who is obsessed with detail, due process and getting all the T's crossed no matter how infuriatingly long it takes."
Exactly. He is a bloody bureaucrat not a leader. He dithers and wastes time and money studying issues to death. He seems almost paralysed, afraid to decide anything in case he is wrong (Gee Eddie, after going to the baseball game the other night, you should learn that you can be a multi-millionaire super star by getting a hit, on average, just over 3 times out of 10 trips at bat!). The border, the urban village, economic development, even the Youth Council, to name a few, are examples of "pretend" action for almost three long years under the Francis administration. The arena, frankly, is the best example of a Mayor who is incapable of making a decision and acting on it.
I said it before "That is our Mayor: all talk and no action on anything. He is a true bureaucrat, process oriented not action oriented. He studies but never executes."
The Toldo-Rosati families should throw in the towel now. Henderson has just set out in detail what is wrong with their project. Some of the problems he set out were new ones to me but will prove fatal to the deal in the end and act as justification for approving Eddie's East End arena.
From what I heard through my contacts, the reason the families went public was out of sheer exasperation! Do you really think that a Tony Toldo would have to use the pages of the Windsor Star to negotiate a deal. The fact that he went public speaks volumes about this Mayor.
There was the warning again---keep your mouth shut before the election if you want to get anywhere in this City :
As for me, I think that this deal just cost Eddie the election. You just don't cross Tony Toldo twice. How many recall the first time?