What the Strike Minutes Show

I decided that I would comment briefly on the Strike Minutes after reading the Star story about them. I could not believe everything that I read. It confirmed to me again that I made a smart decision to cancel my subscription.

I cannot do a full analysis at this time because more facts are needed. Hopefully, we will get them in Junior's report.

I am no fan of Junior but I am so annoyed at the words used by the Reporter or Editor in describing him. The tactic is so obvious. Nothing like trying to discredit him in advance because there is obviously concern about what he will reveal:

• Lewenza on Tuesday pleaded for time


• he can explain how those votes prove his contention


• Asked to cite any examples among the motions debated and voted on that would help his point


• And he railed Monday night against media reporting


• “I don’t know what he’s getting at,” Postma said of Lewenza’s effort. As perhaps the councillor who sided most with Lewenza

As you will see in what I have outlined below, it could be dynamite!

The Star story started off this way

• "Coun. Ken Lewenza Jr. introduced the original motion to end post-retirement benefits for Windsor’s unionized workers, according to a document released this week revealing how council debated and voted behind closed doors during CUPE contract talks.
  
  The Sept. 15, 2008, motion, seconded by Coun. Alan Halberstadt and approved unanimously, was made seven months before mediated talks broke off and 1,800 CUPE workers began what became one of Windsor’s most protracted strikes."

Here is the Motion in case you have not read it. And by the way, you will read a number of Motions throughout
Find the words PRB if you can. The Star was WRONG. There was nothing there about PRBs and the By-law had nothing to do with them either! Good way to start wasn't it!

More importantly, on April 6, it looks like an effort was made to avoid a strike before the strike deadline but the Mayor opposed it. It gives you an idea of his attitude. PLUS there was hardly a strong anti-CUPE feeling at this time it seems and a desire to work out a compromise.

On the strike day itself, the City started caving in. The question to be asked and then needs answering is why this was not done early on. Moreover, the City backed off no PRBs for new hires:

What did Edgar say about job guarantees subsequently:

• "A new issue popped up and that is the union looking for guaranteed job security for its members," Francis said. "That's something that -- given the uncertainty of today -- the city cannot guarantee."

Here is what the City was offering on April 20, a long way from "Net Zero" but still no wages increase:

Where were all of the pro-CUPE friends on Council when no wages increase was offered:

Hmm, hadn't WUC settled just before this and they got a wage increase. Windsor Utilities Commission workers received a 7.5 per cent wage increase over four years.

• "On April 24, a week after the start of the strike, Lewenza moved another motion, this time seeking to reverse that earlier position and seeking to “remove the issue of ending post-retirement benefits … for new employees” as part of the city’s bargaining position.
  
  That motion, seconded by Coun. Ron Jones and also supported by councillors Caroline Postma, Percy Hatfield and Bill Marra, failed only after Mayor Eddie Francis broke a tie vote, siding with councillors Halberstadt, Dave Brister, Jo-Anne Gignac, Fulvio Valentinis and Drew Dilkens. "

I think Lewenza was right even if he was not a lawyer. As I read the City's By-law, there is a good argument to be made that there was no legal right to even discuss PRBs either on the Union's or City's part!

It is a shame though that the Star neglected to mention paragraph (b) which would have avoided a strike and would have allowed a negotiated resolution once the facts were well known as Councillor Halberstadt mentions re the negotiations with the garbage workers and also as I Blogged before about what happened at the Windsor Public Library.

Twice now that Eddie voted "on the record' supporting a strike in effect.

Yet a few days later, Council in effect supported the Committee concept:

With respect to the April 24 Motion, the Star quoted Francis saying:

• "Ken Lewenza is absolutely right … had I decided to cave and ignore the wishes of the residents of Windsor,” said Francis. “But you don’t go into a strike saying this is your core issue and then cave after a week,”

CBC quoted him saying:

• "Mayor Eddie Francis broke a tie by voting against Lewenza's motion. On Monday night, Francis acknowledged he could have ended the strike by voting the other way.
  
  "But it would have been counter to the position the city took," he said."

HUH...That is another Edgarism. That is the point of voting on a Motion. To be flexible to be able to change. If Edgar's argument is right, then there could never be settlement because every vote was counter to the City's previous postion.

• "Lewenza argued that revealing how councillors voted on various positions taken during the bitter strike would show how opportunities were missed early on in the process."

Lewenza is right!

Wage increases were finally discussed a month after the Strike started:

And on May 19, this startling resolution

That was the day when Mediation started again. It makes a mockery of what Edgar said doesn't it.

On June 17, an exchange of Motions that ultimately led to the Big Leak and more breakdowns in negotiations, this time, right after the Red Bull Races

Edgar again voted NO on the first Motion. Ultimately it did not matter since the Big Leak resulted in the breakdown of negotiations. By the way, the internal report and Integrity Commissioner Reports on the source of the leak are still not out. It is almost like the 400 Audit----never to be disclosed but then again, it diverts attention.

One more Minute of interest that dealt with the Back to Work Protocol. Council specifically said

So why then did Edgar provide one without Council approval, that led to a near-riot, that tried to screw Marra and that put off voting for another week! And then the CAO after the low point in his career received a nice chunk of change a little later.

Interesting I think so far and a precursor perhaps of what is to come. And that is the fear isn't it!

Poor Junior! His name will be mud if he does not get his story out soon. And then no one will read what he says or care either. Some people might not be too upset if that was the result.

UPDATE:

It will be so easy to discredit Junior now:

• "Coun. Ken Lewenza Jr. announced Tuesday night he will "absolutely" seek re-election to Windsor city council in 2010...
  
  His announcement to run again comes on the heels of his much-publicized motion Monday night to make public secret information dealing with Windsor's lengthy municipal strike.
  
  Lewenza insists the timing is coincidental.
  
  "It's got to do with clarifying the record long before [an election]... comes," he said."

Edgar's Mayoral Style

All sizzle but no steak.

When I first got involved in Edgar's mayoral campaign the first time around, I thought I was dealing with a man of substance who would do great things for my hometown. A true Leader around whom Windsorites could rally. Instead...well you know how I feel. I got the burger on the right.

And thanks to Dalton McGuinty, he is around for one extra year in a four year term with no right of recall.

Darn, close but no cigar. Yet.

As I predicted in my BLOG yesterday, here come the Editorials exonerating Edgar (aka Eddie) for his absurd Pelissier Street remarks. Oh, Anne Jarvis did a column too except it was about walking kids to school---the "see no evil, write no evil" approach like Gord's past Saturday column. I can hardly wait for mini-Gord tomorrow to ignore the topic too!

• "Make it the University President's problem to solve, not Edgar's. That's the idea. Have mini-Gord do a column along with Anne, Gord, an Editorial and a cartoon too. A full-court press."

I Blogged that yesterday. Nothing in the Editorial about it being the University students' fault and that the University President better do something about it so Edgar can go about handing out Keys to the City or have mind's eye visions. Not yet anyway. Perhaps Gord can help on Saturday.

But I really liked the Editorial today. It tells us exactly what Edgar's Mayoral style is and why this City is in such bad shape. Let me set out the relevant parts and I will fisk it. Forget the subject matter. It could be any topic. Just look at the concepts I will identify about his style of non-Leadership:

• "Mayor Eddie Francis is taking a lot of heat for his comments Monday about the dangers of being on Pelissier Street in the early hours of the morning, but we're not sure why. [Clearly, the Editorial group has a major problem if they cannot grasp such an easy concept. I wonder if they actually read any of the comments on their Forum. Actually, they probably did.
  
  But then again, the Star has to downplay the subject and take on the task to save Edgar from his own absurdity. Just like a good Messenger would do]
  
  The concerns are real and the evidence speaks for itself. There have been at least seven gun incidents on Pelissier Street since 2003. Three of them have resulted in death. All of them took place in an area that has become synonymous with brawling behaviour and illegal weapon use when patrons spill out of downtown bars just hours before sunrise. [The problem has been around for years and what has happened to try and solve it. Other matters like canal and airport visions or running a border operation are so much more interesting than solving civic problems like sewage into the river or fixing roads and sewers or people being shot and killed or badly injured. Being an entrepreneur at taxpayer expense is so good for career buiding too]...
  
  That's why it's difficult to understand why Chris Edwards, executive director of the Downtown Windsor Business Improvement Association, would suggest Francis's comments were unfair.
  
  "I don't think that's helpful to the situation," Edwards said of the mayor's warning to steer clear of the area at certain times. "That doesn't get to the solution."
  
  [Why is this unfair? Oh I get it, direct criticism at another. Edwards correctly points out that Edgar's comment is destructive of the Downtown he was hired to re-invigorate and no solution was offered]
  
  No, it doesn't, but Francis wasn't trying to offer a solution at that point. He was responding to the community's concerns and the fears of residents who live in the area. In doing so, the mayor was addressing the real and present danger that exists for those who choose to be on Pelissier Street between 2 and 4 a.m. Especially given the historical problems that have plagued the area. [Of course he could not offer a solution. He does not have one after all of these years of inaction. If he had, someone would have asked why it had NOT been undertaken already!
  
  Exactly the problem with Edgar's non-leadership. When the problem re-develops, a strategy is needed to divert attention away from the fact that he messed up and did not do anything and the problem came back. Say something controversial so people will deal with that rather than his failure! Does it matter to Edgar that the Downtown has been badly hurt by his fear story when his personal credibility is on the line.] ...
  
  Edwards was correct when he said the recent incident "gives us an opportunity to talk about our problems." We anticipate he and DWBIA board members will take a leadership role in working with the city to resolve the issue. It's in the best interest of everyone to make the core safer. [Ummm shouldn't the Mayor and the head of the Police Services Board be in the lead? That's why he was elected wasn't it? Excpet when there is a tough issue then he is just one of eleven on Council. In that way as well, he cannot be blamed for anything happening down the road. Put the onus on someone else when the going gets too tough and grab the glory if everything works out]
  
  One of the possibilities floated by the mayor is to turn a section of Pelissier Street into a pedestrian mall. Another suggested by Edwards is to flood the area with light when the bars close, making it harder to commit a crime under the cover of darkness. Those and other solutions should certainly be discussed in anticipation of the streetscaping that begins in March. ["Floating ideas" not solutions is what Edgar is good at. Greenlink, canals, cargo shanties. Solving problems is something with which he has difficulty. I bet he saw a pedestriam mall in his mind's eye too. Time for a consultant who lives more than 4-500 km away to be retained. Imagine that, something so simple as increased lighting was not carried out even with past problems. I am shocked that he did not mention increased policing too but then who would be available when there are frat parties to bust]
  
  It's important to note that despite Sunday's tragic murder, downtown is undergoing a welcoming transformation. Youth-oriented bars are being turned into themed restaurants that will entice more mature patrons to the core, and there's an opportunity for independent retailers to return and reinvest in the heart of our city. [Oooops. Got to save Edgar if I was right about Windsor's new East End downtown being created]
  
  But at the end of the day, we can't fault the mayor for speaking his mind; it would be wrong to try to sugar coat it. This is a serious problem that must be resolved, and we have every confidence that it can be." [Change the debate. Ignore why people are angry and confirm again why subscriptions to the Star have been cancelled. Set up a strawman like the good Messenger the Star is. The fault is not speaking his mind but being stupid and damaging a key area of the City that is being re-invigorated as the Star pointed out only days before. It will be resolved as the CUPE strike was once Edgar gets out of the way!]

Perhaps the Star could interview Councillor Halberstadt as they did in December, 2007 and he could repeat what he said then:

• "Coun. Alan Halberstadt said he supports closing bars at 3 a.m., though he's willing to look at other options -- such as restricting after-hours clubs to Ouellette Avenue.
  
  "I'm in favour of a 3 a.m. closing time, because trouble seems to brew between 3 and 6 in the morning," he said. "And I'd like to see a quick resolution to this.
  
  "But Pelissier seems to be the problem area. So maybe we could zero in on Pelissier."

Or perhaps the Star Editorial should have said this:

• "Saturday's shooting doesn't appear to be random act involving strangers. The victim and suspect allegedly knew each other. The community, and particularly council, needs to know more about factors that led to this murder, and what realistic measures can taken to prevent further violence -- not just on Pelissier Street, but all streets."

Actually they did. In December, 2007!

Welcome To Detroit South

Edgar failed. Again. What more can be said.

How dare he continue sloganeering rather than doing. Aren't you tired of hearing about "guns, gangs and drugs." As if that would scare anyone or solve anything!

The slogan was a good one mind you. It might have worked to make Edgar the Attorney-General if he ran provincially since Toronto was having similar problems. But not now, after Edgar demonstrated his inability to stop anything.

There is nothing that I individually or all the Bloggers in town collectively can do that will damage this City as much as Mayor Edgar (aka Eddie) Francis' ridiculous comment:

• "Mayor advises staying clear of Pelissier Street late at night
  
  In the wake of another murder on Pelissier Street, Mayor Eddie Francis warned residents Monday to steer clear of the area late at night if they value their safety.
  
  “If people are concerned, they should be concerned,” said Francis. “I would avoid that street. At 2 a.m., 3 a.m., 4 a.m., if you’re concerned don’t be on Pelissier Street on that corner.
  
  “Businesses continue to be open and residents continue to live without any problems for the majority of the day,” Francis said. “But in this particular location at a particular time there seems to be problems.”

That was another absurd comment by the Mayor, one of many, that will chase people away from this City.

Here is another

• "Francis, who chairs the police board, said the violence on Windsor’s streets still bears no comparison to other Canadian cities, but he said the incidents on Pelissier are painting the whole downtown in a poor light."

Actually, not. It is Edgar's mouth that is doing it. And his inaction is part of the problem.

What does this mean? What are the consequences for Downtown?

There is one obvious one. Mr. Farhi should be a happy man and so should the "shrewd investors" who bought land around the East End arena. Let me explain.

Edgar has just chased everyone away from downtown and out to the equivalent of our suburbs. Imagine a Mayor doing that. As I Blogged before:

• “the Farhi proposal. After all, it can change the face of this City rather dramatically don't you think:
  
   “East-side renaissance”
  
   "I can see eventually 60 acres being developed...the equivalent of an entire downtown…"
  
  Some members of the Downtown Business Association may now finally understand how bad the decision was for them to move the arena to the East End. I wonder how many will ask for the money that they paid to their Association to be given back to them. Their Chair at one time had said:
  
  "successful downtowns have a number of attractions, which include residential, retail and entertainment developments. Most urban villages have a "centre piece" attraction, such as an arena."
  
  It is too late now. The east end vision includes:
  
  "hotel, restaurants, retail outlets, apartment towers and senior-citizen residences."Why it sound just like what is being proposed at the canal urban village...
  
  That gasp you heard was almost the last one of our sick downtown. It is on life support with its condition critical after the front page Star story…
  
  Eddie made a very strange comment that is going to raise a tremendous amount of controversy and questions:
  
   “The entire Lauzon Road corridor is going to come to life again. This just adds to and complements the activity at the WFCU Centre. Shrewd investors are already picking up properties."

Imagine what Eddie has just said. Sure we have had some crime in one particular location. The solution of our Mayor and Head of the Windsor Police Services Board: Give up, the bad guys have won.

I am not going to offer a solution. That should be done by the Mayor and Chief of Police. If not, then the Premier needs to have the OPP come into Windsor immediately and take over the policing of this City.

There is something very wrong here and I do not know what it is. Why isn't the downtown being patrolled better, to prevent crimes such as this? It is not like we have screaming hordes of Americans coming over any more:

• "The typical Friday night of a few years ago that saw 10,000 or more young revellers in downtown Windsor streets has since seen a reduction to about several hundred young American visitors in the bar zone."

And all of this ruckus just as it looked as if the Downtown is going to be revitalized. Why just days ago we read:

• "Kiddie bars grow up
  
  Windsor’s downtown kiddie bar scene is in its death throes, according to a pair of nightclub owners cashing out on youth and going after an older and unplugged crowd...
  
  The kiddie bar has run its course … this is the ideal time to do this,” said co-owner Kevin Lafontaine...
  
  the new business will be the kind of place that is beginning to draw a maturer crowd, including their friends, to the downtown...
  
  While the news of Windsor’s economy and its downtown has invariably been gloomy of late, those who frequent the core are marvelling at what they say is a transformation underway."

That concept is dead before it even got started. No one in their right mind would go Downtown for entertainment. Our Mayor just told us so.

Why bother with a canal now? Who would ever visit it? Poor Mr. Farhi. He has to be furious. What will he do with that prime piece of real estate for a high end condo now since no one will want to live downtown?

Education...who would attend at a downtown campus now?

A cultural renaissance headed by our Symphony and Art Gallery. Sure, if you do not mind dodging bullets after parking at the City-owned garage..

Streetscaping, why bother if no one is on the street.

Wow is this City ever attractive now to seniors. Who needs the Retirement website since no one will be attracted to come here. If you want gangs, stay in Toronto.

As for new investors. The Undevelopment Commission does not need a CEO since no one would ever start a new business in this area.

Now, dear reader, we know this is NOT Edgar's fault. Who can we blame? I got it...University students! Let's have the Star run photos and show videos as they did during the CUPE strike to work up everyone too. Huge headlines required to make the point.

Make it the University President's problem to solve, not Edgar's. That's the idea. Have mini-Gord do a column along with Anne, Gord, an Editorial and a cartoon too. A full-court press:

• "And he wants the university to do more to rein in its students.
  
  The mayor said he'll be raising the matter with the university's president."

DUH....Off-campus? That is not his job Edgar, it's yours! You cannot pass the buck. But he sure can try.

Why not raise the matter with Councillor Jones? Chris Schurr's BLOG is a damning indictment of the City's failure to do anything: "Where’s the Town and Gown Committee?"
http://chrisschnurr.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/no-copy-of-signed-contract-and-west-end-keg-parties

If only the students could have held the frat party the night of the shooting it would have been a perfect answer for Edgar. Have they no consideration:

• " Frat party angers mayor
  Francis concerned cops diverted from other duties
  
  Mayor Eddie Francis is angry that all available city police resources had to be called out to deal with a frat house beer keg party gone wild on the same weekend as a man was shot and killed in the downtown."

There is something bothering me though. Edgar is too smart to be this stupid even though he panics sometimes and does dumb things a la the near-riot. We'll just have to be on our guard and watch how this plays out.

Remember, to get from A to B in Windsor, we have to go through the entire alphabet.

Perhaps this might be the first letter: "T" as in Tenant Tax as in London on small landlords to encourage large student apartments to be built instead. Of course it will be called "a measure [to] protect the health and safety of vulnerable tenants" especially of course student housing with absentee landlords similar to what was tried a few months ago in Windsor but failed:

• "Last night, City Council passed the Rental Residential Licensing Bylaw by a vote of 13 to 4. The bylaw will require landlords with buildings with 4 or less units to complete a checklist and pay an annual licensing fee of $25 per building. "

FHWA And Terrorism

The opponents of the Bridge Company are so stupid. Matty Moroun and his colleagues need not do anything and these people make the case for the Enhancement Project Bridge to be built immediately! They just need to sit back and relax and let these people self-destruct.

The US Homeland Security Department has no choice but to demand that President Obama take a hard look at the US Federal Highway Administration if they were so ridiculous as to consider the public release of a report containing details on the Ambassador Bridge. I know some at FHWA are supportive of a DRIC Bridge but seriously....

• "the report, which was written by the bridge company and submitted to the Michigan Department of Transportation...
  
  The office of U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., had requested the report from the federal department under the Freedom of Information Act."
  
  "DIBC was advised by counsel for the Federal Highway Administration on September 25, 2009, that the Federal Highway Administration intends to publicly disclose the 2007 Inspection Report, despite the threat to national security by the threatened disclosure,” the suit says.
  
  James Steele, FHA’s Michigan division administrator who is also named in the lawsuit, said his office was going to release the report because of a Michigan Freedom of Information Act request."

Interesting the circuitous route taken don't you think? Why not approach MDOT directly! Obviously, because MDOT would have had to say NO! Nice try though.

It even gets more curious:

• "The bridge company has offered to let Dingell see the report himself, but doesn’t want it released beyond officials.
  
  “Our concern is the secondary and tertiary distribution. This is the most confidential information about the bridge and its vulnerabilities and what we do to address them. That is confidential for a reason,” Blashfield said. “It doesn’t matter if it’s a congressmen, citizen or reporter, the information is confidential.”
  
  Blashfield said he didn’t know why the congressman requested the 2007 report and not the subsequent 2008 and 2009 reports."

But of course, we understand the reason for this happening at this time and getting all of this publicity: the Michigan Budget debate over whether money should be allocated for the DRIC project. The nasty Bridge Company must be stopped regardless and the DRIC Bridge allowed to go forward even if terrorists get information useful to them if the report was released publicly.

Of course the Bridge Company had to sue to stop this. Ergo the headlines.

The Congressman could have seen the report. In fact he did. However that would not do at all. Now the lawsuit allowed the Congressman's office to say in an anti-Bridge Company attack:

• "Rep. John Dingell received a copy early Monday of the 2007 inspection report from the agency following a February request, according to his chief of staff Michael Robbins in Washington. Staff are reviewing the document, he said.
  
  "You can look up the safety rating of a car before you buy it, you can look up the structural deficiency of a public bridge before you drive across it, yet the Ambassador Bridge does not have to play by the same rules," Dingell said in a statement released to The Star on Monday.
  
  "The safety of the driving public should be the top priority for the Federal Highway Administration and the Michigan Department of Transportation regardless of whether or not a bridge or its bridge operators are public or private.
  
  "Thousands of individuals and truckers use the Ambassador Bridge every day and I believe they are entitled to know the state of the Ambassador Bridge before doing so."

Ok, so much for political games. Now the reality. The Windsor Star claims:

• "Sources have indicated to the Star the inspection report pointed to a need within a couple of years for the replacement of the bridge's road deck -- a massive undertaking that threatens to disrupt traffic on the bridge and possibly force its closure if it is not addressed soon."

Isn't that exactly what the Bridge Company has been saying as one of the justifications for its Enhancement Project Bridge. It is cheaper for them to take the old bridge out of circulation once the new one is completed to do repairs than to try and do them with traffic. The savings alone in construction costs would help pay a good chunk of the money required for their new bridge!

The Bridge Company opponents have just demonstrated that the Enhancement Project Bridge must be built immediately to prevent economic devastation to the region and to Canada and US trade, especially since the DRIC Bridge has been delayed to 2015 or later!

Oh and in case you were wondering, Dan Stamper at the Canadian Senate hearings said that they had no objections to the security and safety provisions of the International Bridges and Tunnels Act. Moreover, it was Dan Stamper who told the MDOT reps at the Michigan Senate hearings, since they must have forgotten, that the Gateway Project Agreement required safety reports to be prepared! As I Blogged before:

• "Dan Stamper trotted out the legal Agreements signed between the Bridge Company, FHWA and MDOT respecting the Ambassador Gateway project that gave the Government oversight over the Company including the provision of information respecting the condition of the Bridge!
  
  Why didn’t the representative of MDOT know that? It is inconceivable to me that people being put forward as spokespersons for the Department would not know this fact and yet still make the outrageous comment they did. Why?"

So keep up the attacks on the Bridge Company, prevent them from doing what is required, cause a security risk, disrupt commerce...all to try to scare the Michigan Senators into allowing DRIC to move forward.

What fools we have around us! But then again, they are secure in their jobs and pensions aren't they!

Informed Consent

How can anyone possibly write a full-length column about our CAO leaving with all that taxpayer money in his pocket after he resigned, and was not terminated, and not mention Edgar's role in it once?

Just ask Windsor Star columnist Anne Jarvis. She accomplished that task in her Friday Star column. What an effort!

And so far, no thundering Star Editorial either. While Gord, he can write about Museums.

Was this all a game for some other purpose? Would any of this have come out but for Chris Schnurr asking for a copy of the CAO's employment contract?

Unless there is something new to add to all of this to provide justification, and that would beg the question why it was not revealed but kept buried until now, then one has to wonder if we can believe what comes out of City Hall!

Read on to see what I mean.

Simple questions. Was there a signed employment contract with former CAO John Skorobohacz or wasn’t there one? If not, why not and who is to blame? What about Dev Tyagi or other managers? No one has talked much about Dev's contractual relationship with the City. What is it? How can Helga be hired without a contract? Doesn't anyone learn anything?

Does anyone know what is going on, especially Councillors who keep voting one way in camera and then crying about what happened in public when it is too late? The questions are very simple but we do not seem to be getting straight answers.

Have taxpayers been sold a bill of good?

Was there with John

• a resignation
  


• a termination with cause
  


• a termination without cause perhaps because of SDR restructuring
  


• a threat of litigation because of "constructive dismissal"
  


• or what Councillor Halberstadt suggested "But he wasn't going to leave without a payout, Halberstadt told [Anne Jarvis], so rather than allowing a city in shambles to continue to "muddle through" with a reluctant leader, council decided to pay up and move on. Halberstadt said he didn't like it, but he voted for it."

The Councillor's remark sure does not sound like a resignation to me.

How can anyone justify one single penny being paid out based on the information given out to date? Are there secret letters or side-deals? Is relevant information being kept from the public?

Why is everything so damn complicated all the time in this City when the issues are so simple? Why can't anyone speak clearly and give us the straight goods the first time around?

Can someone please explain how these two comments can both be right respecting the former CAO:

Councillor Drew Dilkens

• “Dilkens said the matter was "sprung on us" without any prior notice at a Sept. 2 in-camera meeting when the mayor introduced Reidel as the new CAO. No other hiring options were put forward.”

Mayor Edgar Francis:

• “He bristled at any suggestion councillors were caught off guard or lacked information prior to making decisions regarding Skorobohacz and Reidel.
  
  “Members of city council were well aware these issues were coming and the reality is they had time to prepare to make these decisions,” Francis said.
  
  Starting at a special session on Sept. 2 he sought their direction and input regarding the CAO position, Francis said.
  
  “Now you have councillors attempting to characterize this as something that was dropped on them, when they gave direction on this all along,” he said."

They are both right of course. Councillor Dilkens talked about before the meeting. Edgar talked about “starting at” the meeting.

See how things are done. Accurate but narrow. It all depends where one starts doesn’t it to reach a conclusion.

Of course our Mayor is a very clever fellow isn’t he by making the issue what he wants it to be not what it is:

• “Mayor Eddie Francis said councillors have the power to defer an in-camera issue or request more information if they do not feel comfortable making a decision.
  
  “It’s a process they are totally in control of,” Francis said.
  
  If approving the motion by Dilkens makes council feel better about its options, then that’s fine, the mayor said.
  
  “But it doesn’t do much to add to what’s already there,” Francis said. “Nothing will change. They already control the agenda.”

It's a phony issue of course to distract us, to take the heat off of himself and to point the finger at Council. It is NOT a question of control over the Agenda at all. We know who really controls it don’t we considering that he can call a Special Meetings any time he wants under the Procedural By-law.

The question is what is provided to Councillors at a meeting, or preferably before it, so they can think about an issue in advance and know what questions they need to ask, if any, for clarity so they can make a proper decision in the best interest of the citizens of Windsor.

• "Currently, councillors are "just given a very, very generic discussion" ahead of time about the subject of closed meetings, according to Coun. Drew Dilkens, who will present a notice of motion next week to amend the city's procedure bylaw.
  
  "So we often walk into the room and we have absolutely no idea, specifically, what we're talking about," he said. "I think it's only fair, and a matter of good business process, that what we say is that councillors, the people who are going to be making the decisions, ought to know ahead of time, when the meeting is called, explicitly what the topic of discussion is."

I hate to disagree with Councillor Dilkens but I will strongly when he says this:

• "If it's more detailed than a property matter, tell me what property we're talking about. If it's more detailed than a human resources matter, tell me who we're talking about and what the situation is ahead of time," he said.
  
  "I don't need a full report, but certainly one or two sentences would give us a good idea to be able to zero in."

That is abolutely wrong! He must absolutely have a full report or we get into the CAO payment mess we are in now.

The issue is not consent either but “informed consent,” a topic that the Mayor should be very familiar with since he went to Law School and we know he is a lawyer. It is generally used in a medical context. One definition I saw was:

• “Informed consent is a legal term related to educating patients about the benefits, risks, and alternatives of therapeutic treatment.
  
  The patient's decision to consent to (or refuse) treatment must be informed; that is, the patient must receive information about the nature of the proposed treatment, its expected benefits, the material (common and serious) risks, special risks or material side effects associated with it, alternative courses of action and likely consequences of not having the treatment.”

Knowledge is fundamental so that a proper decision an be made.

Why should anything have to be deferred for heaven’s sake or more information requested. It would mean that John could still be our CAO and Helga waiting to be appointed.

When a matter is presented to Council in public, there is an Administrative Report prepared and delivered in advance that is supposed to be comprehensive and deal with all issues. It provides the background and the proposed solution with a reasoned argument for consideration.

Why can’t that be done by the Mayor as well when it is HIS issue to be discussed, especially if it is in camera? What is he afraid of? Losing control by sharing information? Having something in writing? Losing? Being blamed?

I have no idea what is going on about the former CAO's employment agreement and severance package. If there was an agreement and it said what the Mayor claimed it did, then everything is fine.

However, what if there was no agreement? What if there was no term about a termination package? Why then did Mayor Francis say there was a contract? Why then did Councillor Valentinis say there was one on Face-To-Face the other night? Why did the ex-CAO say:

• "He said the 10 months of termination pay was a key part of his contract because of the way he saw council treat former CAO Dennis Perlin, who was pushed aside after a couple of controversial years at the helm.
  
  "I wanted some assurances and protection for myself because I was leaving a full-time CAO position (in Innisfil)," he said."

What do we know so far? There was on Offer of Employment with these specific terms:

From Schnurr's BLOG we also know:

• "I am attaching the offer of employment for John Skorobohacz, as you requested. Please note that the offer of employment letter is the final document and as such there is no “formal employment agreement” as referred to in the attached documents. If you have any further questions about this matter please do not hesitate to contact me."

The City's Solicitor also told Schnurr:

• "In City Legal we do not have a signed contract authorizing the payment of a severance for Mr. Skorobohacz's resignation. Matters such as this are generally handled by external legal counsel and I am aware that this was also the case with Mr. Skorobohacz's departure."

In other words, nothing in the Legal Department to justify a payment to the former CAO for a resignation and outside Council handled the "resignation matter." I wonder if it was the same lawyer who was involved in giving advice around the time of the near-riot.

As a former in-house lawyer, I wonder how Mr. Wilkki and his Department feel to be slighted this way. Notice though how well Mr. Wilkki protected himself in case this this file blows up. Well done George!

Perhaps someone is smarter than I or the law has changed but I do not see any binding legal agreement between the parties. Accordingly, there was no contract at all.

Dealing specifically with termination packages, the Offer says:

Perhaps my eyes deceive me but I do not read anything like:

• "Under his work contract, Francis said Skorobohacz will be paid a severance of 15 months salary, 12.5 months if he finds a new job."

Where was that written in the Offer? The answer was it was not.

As for the "10 months of termination pay," as I read the offer, it only applied if there was a termination, not a resignation. That seemed to be exactly what the CAO wanted as stated in the quote above yet he received money when he resigned which was never part of the deal. How can that be done?

The Council Minutes are clear. John resigned:

• "a) THAT the resignation of John Skorobohacz from the position of Chief Administrative Officer of The Corporation of the City of Windsor BE ACCEPTED."

Compare that language with that involving Dev Tyagi

• "c) THAT the employment of D. Tyagi, General Manager of Public Works, be terminated effective immediately."

We also learned from the Council Minutes set out on Schnurr's BLOGsite who spoke at the meeting to give out information:

• "5. That the verbal report from Mayor Francis respecting personal matters about identifiable individuals BE RECEIVED

Presumably Edgar was the one who gave out information that resulted in this:

• I don’t like it, paying that kind of money when a guy wants to leave anyway,” said Coun. Alan Halberstadt. “My understanding it was in his contract. It’s unfortunate from a taxpayer point of view."
  


• “No, I’m not happy with what he is walking away with,” said Coun. Ken Lewenza Jr. “I was not happy as CAO you are out there doing job interviews the last couple years. When you are in that position, I would expect total loyalty and not focusing on his own intentions in terms of preserving his career.
  
  “But at the end of the day, council signed a contract. This was positioned to council as if there were no other options.”

I must assume that the Councillors would have talked about the "contract" if they had seen one and not just about an understanding and a positioning. So they must not have seen anything or obvious questions would have needed answering.

Interestingly, who was giving out legal advice? There was supposed to have been a contract drafted but it does not seem that it was done. Was that a consideration in the decision made? Was outside or inside legal advice obtained and was counsel available to answer questions or was it the Mayor only who spoke about the legal issues?

So what do we have?

• Our Mayor and a Senior Councillor both lawyers and both telling us we have a contract. Yet the City cannot produce one.
  
  
• Our Mayor telling us that money was be paid for a resignation. Yet the employment offer deals with termination only, exactly against which the former CAO wanted to be protected
  
  
• Our Mayor quotes numbers that have no relationship to the Offer
  
  
• Councillors who voted in camera based on positioning and understandings but no facts and yet complain publicly how they voted and then play to the crowds.

We hear one thing. The written words say another. We are told one thing. We read another.

We want to believe. But how can we?

Just think about it. If I am right, there was no justification for paying out any money since, on the information provided to date publicly, there was no contract, no termination, a resignation and no agreed upon amounts.

Will The Motions Pass

Two Motions to help make Windsor's failing Democracy work.

I wonder what odds the Casino is giving for either of them to pass. Imagine the odds for both to pass:

At the Monday September 21, 2009 Windsor City Council meeting, notice was given that two Councillors intend to bring forward motions for consideration by Council at the September 28, 2009 meeting of Council, specifically as follows:

• 1. Moved by Councillor Dilkens, seconded by Councillor ____________,
  
  Whereas, Windsor City Council strives to be an open, transparent, and accountable government; and
  
  Whereas, Members of Council can make better decisions by knowing in advance the specific nature of the topics to be discussed;
  
  Therefore be it resolved, that the following clause be added to the City of Windsor Procedural ByLaw 420-2001:
  
  3.3 (d) In the event that the subject matter to be considered at a Special Meeting qualifies to be considered in closed session pursuant to section 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, the public notice of meeting provided by the Clerk shall contain the general nature of the matter to be considered as required by the Act, and in addition, the Clerk shall provide to all members of Council a further notice which contains specifics of the confidential matters to be considered.
  
  2. Moved by Councillor Lewenza, seconded by Councillor ____________,
  
  That administration make public all failed and accepted in camera motions that are related to labour negotiations with CUPE 543 & 82.

How can the Mayor or any Councillor dare vote against them?

Let's see if procedural games will kill both or either of them.

UPDATE: Both Motions passed.

A love-in on the first with no one blaming anyone since they do it this way already don't you know. But if it makes taxpayers happy, then let's do it. Of course it had nothing to do with Edgar as Councillors were at pains to tell us even as Principal Edgar scolded them.

On the second, the real fun was watching the animosity during the debate between Councillors Hatfield and Lewenza. Surprisingly to me, Councillor Hatfield did not want the Motions given out---it might impact the next round of negotiations somehow---nor did Councillor Postma in the vote. Councillor Solidarity broke down amongst the left-wingers on Council it seems on this vote.

It became very personal for reasons that remain to be seen.

No need to be concerned though. The Mayor had the in camera materials all ready to be given out. Openness and transparency after all.

Anyway, watch for the hatchet job on Junior in the media over the next few weeks. He must be taught a lesson not to attack them.

More Windsor Marriage Bureau Stories

Still no investigation by the Windsor Star about what went on at the Marriage Licence Bureau during the strike. No point in embarrassing City Hall when the re-election campaigns are going to start soon.

I wonder if Edgar's 1000 page Strike manual covered a possibility of something going wrong there. No matter. Just gives me another excuse to write a Marriage Licence Sitcom BLOG.

These are real stories. Honest.

I just have to twist them around a little bit to fit into my proposed Sitcom to give them a Windsor flavour. What do you think?

I DO, DO, DO, DO

In Windsor, make all the women in your life happy!

Marry as often and as many as you want during a CUPE strike.

No one will ever know.

DID SHE GET A WINDSOR LETTER ABOUT HER MARRIAGE

I never considered movie star marriages for my Sitcom. How about this as a premise:

• "Drew Barrymore "doesn't know" if she is single
  
  Confused Drew Barrymore claims she “doesn’t know” if she is single.
  
  But the twice-married star, who has had an on-off relationship with actor Justin Long, does not want to have a baby as a single parent.
  
  Asked if she is single, Drew said: “I don’t know. I’m not anything."

Do you think she received a Windsor letter in the mail? Perhaps that explains her condition. Is she married now or is she single?

What a Sitcom episode this would make

BIGAMY LEGAL DEFENCE

If you think that story is a mind-blower, consider this:

• "Polygamy charges thrown out against B.C. religious leaders
  
  Criminal polygamy charges against B.C. religious leaders Winston Blackmore and Jim Oler have been thrown out.
  
  B.C. Supreme Court Judge Sunni Stromberg-Stein made the ruling Wednesday in B.C. Supreme Court, said Neil MacKenzie, a Crown spokesman.
  
  Blackmore and Oler filed separate court petitions seeking to quash the charges against them. Blackmore is the leader of the fundamentalist commune in Bountiful, B.C.
  
  Blackmore, 52, and Oler, 44, were charged in January with one count each of practising polygamy, charges that were recommended by special prosecutor Terry Robertson — the third outside counsel hired by the Ministry of the Attorney General to review evidence gathered during a two-year RCMP investigation."

The charges were thrown out on a technicality.

However, consider if they had received a marriage licence during the City strike and then sought to marry again.

Wouldn't their defence be that there was a screw-up in Windsor such that they were not legally married. Therefore, when they were married for the "second" time, it was really the "first" time because their other "first" marriage was not valid! Case dismissed!

DIVORCE AMERICAN STYLE

It's their fault for getting married in Vancouver in the first place and not Windsor. I have no sympathy.

• "Gay U.S. couples can't get divorces for Canadian marriages
  
  Some same-sex couples from the U.S. who got married in Canada are running into trouble getting divorces, according to an Oregon lawyer.
  
  Gay couples have been flocking to cities like Vancouver with its large gay community since same-sex marriage was first legalized in the summer of 2003.
  
  Several of those couples have since approached Oregon lawyer Beth Allen looking for a divorce, but Oregon doesn't recognize gay marriage, or divorce, so they can't get a divorce there, she said...
  
  Henderson has this advice for gay Americans looking to marry here: "I would say not to do it, because it is, at this point in time, such a procedural bar."

Pshaw..no worries in Windsor. Since they may not have been legally married, they do NOT need a divorce!

A NEW BOOK TO READ TO ANNE'S DAUGHTER

Anne Jarvis talked about reading the book, "The Paper Bag Princess," to her daughter at bedtime.

It was a book about a Princess who lived well, lost it all when a dragon destroyed her castle and took away her Prince whom she was to marry.

In the end, after the Princess saves him,

• "the ungrateful cad tells her she looks like a mess.
  
  Elizabeth lets him have it: "Your clothes are really pretty, and your hair is very neat," she says. "You look like a real prince, but you are a bum!"
  
  She doesn't marry him."

Hardly a good ending in this day and age. Apparently, there is a revised edition of the book for Anne to read.

In the revision, the Princess takes the Prince to Windsor to get a marriage licence here. At the wedding ceremony in the Royal Cathedral, just before the Princess is to say "I do" she says instead "The licence is invalid" and runs off with the stablehand!

You cannot make this stuff up. The Network Execs just won't believe it either. No one would! That's what makes it great TV folks!

MARRIAGE TV IS BOFFO BOX OFFICE

Oh, I see that some of you are snickering, thinking I have no chance. Well marriage shows are HOT now baby! Jerry Seinfeld is coming out with one called "The Marriage Ref."

It is based on a real situation just as mine is:

• "How did the concept of the show come about?
  
  This is straight from Jerry's [Seinfeld] mouth. The way the show happened, Jerry was with his wife in their apartment and they got into a difference of opinion about something and the usual thing starts. A friend of his wife was there. The friend was like, "Maybe I should leave" and Jerry said, "Nope. I'm glad you're here. I want you to referee the difference of opinion. I'll say my side of the story, my wife will say hers and you just call it for one side or the other and we're done with it." And the friend declared a winner, they were done with it and it was fantastic."

The envelope please. And the winner is...

Blouse Unbuttons To Reveal All

What's wrong with the Government of Canada? Oh I know, it is run by bureaucrats who have no problems at all putting taxpayers' money at risk, not their own, and have little business sense. Of course there is little accountability of them either from polticians who are more concerned about the next election.

That explains why they took on the Moroun family over the last decade and thought they could terrorize them into selling cheaply rather than offering them a fair price for their bridge if they wanted to buy them out.

They were afraid of Moroun who took them on over FIRA and forced them to settle with him. They figured that his ownership of the Bridge was important to him as his icon, for his family legacy so he might never sell voluntarily. However, they expected that when he retired from the business, his son would sell out "in a New York minute."

Oh boy, did they ever misjudge the man and his family!

Now a bottle of expensive bubbly may have to be cracked open as Richard Blouse, President and CEO of the Detroit Regional Chamber of Commerce, spilled the beans about what Canada has been trying to do for the last 50 years, and the last decade in particular. He let out the secret agenda just like Bruce McCuaig did too in his infamous speech.

By revealing all, he has improved Moroun's bargaining position dramatically by showing him what is underneath and virtually guaranteeing that Canada must come and talk to Moroun to work out a border solution.

Nothing can be done as the Lufthansa graphic showed unless he is onboard or decades of litigation are undertaken. Even then the Governments would lose in the end since no Court would ever allow the Government to force out one businessperson who has made his border crossing #1 just to put another in his place in an up to 99 year long P3.

And politically, do you really believe that the US Government would allow an American to be put out of business so Canada could control the entrance and exit of people and goods into and out of the US! Oh please! Such inaction would allow any tin-pot dictator anywhere in the world to destroy American businesses with impunity.

Can you spell P-R-O-T-E-C-T-I-O-N-I-S-M as the message to Canada for this and other sins like oil and energy blackmail. And NAFTA-gate.

Here is the relevant part of the Star story that tells what has really been going on over the past decade. What the plans were, what the end objective is and why Moroun had to be taken out of the picture. It tells us what DRIC is all about. Unless you were part of the inner circle, or a WindsorCityBlog reader, you would never know:

• "CP Rail has been quietly advancing its plans for a new $400-million rail tunnel under the Detroit River and will probably start digging two years from now -- around the same time work starts on a new bridge...
  
  CP and its partners have been quietly lining up Canadian political support for the rail-only project, although excavation probably won't start for at least two years, sources indicate...
  
  The century-old existing tunnel being used by CP "needs to be replaced," Rohrer said. "It's coming, but we're not there yet. Expect good news in the near future."
  
  While the construction jobs will be a godsend for the depressed region, Blouse told the Windsor chamber the best news about the rail-only tunnel are the opportunities it will open up for the region.
  
  When completed, the new rail tunnel will plug the largest remaining gap in the local infrastructure needed to help turn the region into an "inland port" and cargo hub.
  
  Coupled with a new international bridge downriver from the Ambassador Bridge -- plus a few port improvements, such as the addition of a some tower dock cranes capable of plucking containers off ocean-going vessels -- Blouse says "the Detroit region" will be poised to capture some of the "hundreds of thousands of jobs" up for grabs in the world's shipping business...
  
  They're even targeting major Canadian transportation players to help them achieve their goal, including CN and CP Rail, and the ports of Montreal and Halifax.
  
  In the next few weeks, members of Blouse's board will visit Halifax to figure out how Detroit can divert thousands of cargo containers from the current shipping route between Rotterdam and ports on the southern U.S. coast such as Savannah., Ga.
  
  Detroit wants to see more containers offloaded onto CN trains that originate in Halifax, bound for its giant Toronto yards and points West. Halifax is currently handling less than half the 1.2 million containers it is capable of receiving.
  
  "Time is money in the shipping business and using Halifax cuts two days off the trip" from Europe to most of the U.S. market, Blouse points out. "But we're not wedded to CN and Halifax."
  
  CP Rail's connection to international shipping lanes via the Port of Montreal could also be used to achieve the same goal, but not until the new Windsor-Detroit tunnel opens.
  
  CP's plans to acquire a larger tunnel to the U.S. has been around for more than a decade -- at least since CN stole a march on its smaller competitor by building its own double stack rail tunnel in Sarnia. The two companies shared the Windsor-Detroit route until Sarnia opened.
  
  The Windsor project was on hold for years while CP and its partners tried to raise money for the new tunnel by convincing governments to turn the old tunnel into a truck route. That bid, known as the DRTP, died when bureaucrats decided a new downriver bridge was the preferred solution to the region's international traffic problems.
  
  Blouse and his members agree completely with the border solution chosen by the bureaucrats. "We support a second bridge, and after 9-11 we support redundancy. Modern terrorists, the way they work today, they would easily blow up two bridges at once if they were side-by-side" -- as the Ambassador Bridge has long insisted it should be allowed to do exclusively. "We need two bridges."
  
  Blouse says getting into the logistics industry in a bigger way is the perfect fit for people in the Windsor-Detroit region, who have more than a century of experience shipping millions of parts for the automotive industry.
  
  "We have people who are the best in the world at moving stuff through a supply chain on a just-in-time basis."
  
  The region doesn't have a choice but to chase the shipping jobs, he said. "We've lost one million jobs since the year 2000, and they aren't coming back, folks."

Now, dear reader, a number of facts are becoming clearer:

• my theories were right, my theories were right, my theories were right
  
• now we understand the reasons that are still ongoing for the Moroun smear-job
  
• this has been a decade long effort [BLOG July 22, 2009 "The Speech That Gave It All Away"]
  
• the Bridge Company lawsuits are winners because they will reveal the Governmental plot against them as the evidence comes out as people will be compelled to testify under oath
  
• it is part of the Canadian Government policy for 50 years to take over the bridge
  
• the purpose of Harper's discussions with Bush and Obama was to get them onside to take over the business of an American firm so that it could be given over in a P3 to a "Canadian-friendly" source to circumvent a Dubai ports mess
  
• Thickening of the border arguments were used to try and accomplish this goal surreptitiously
  
• the Canadian Government has been trying for years as their Ultra-secret Playbook demonstrated to end-run the White House by trying to curry support of Governors and now with Congressional leaders as the desperate move by Harper recently proved
  
• CP Rail/Omers have still not learned that acting "under the radar" does not work if public interest groups want to stop you
  
• Was the DRTP truck road ever supposed to be built or was it nothing more than another way to try to pressure Moroun? Was it, in other words, the precursor to DRIC
  
• Was it always the CP/OMERS intent to build the rail tunnel but not the truck road
  
• Does this explain why OMERS wants the Ontario Government to force small pension funds under its Super-fund umbrella ie it needs the cash
  
• Does this all mean that OMERS already has been chosen the winner to manage the P3 for the DRIC Bridge and road if it ever gets done and that any RFP to do so is nothing but a waste of time for other possible investors unless they are part of the OMERS consortium
  
• Windsor Port Authority seems out of the loop worrying more about Ferries to Detroit and back with the WEDC worrying about finally hiring a CEO than about Highway H2O
  
• Now we know why there is a Minister for the Canadian Atlantic and Pacific Gateways and the PM has responsibility for the Central Canada gateway into the US
  
• Now we know why MDOT is part of this exercise
  
• Now we know why Transpot Canada issued its gateway and corridors policy
  
• Now we know why Edgar's air cargo shanty is a dumb idea when the keys are road, rail and marine and how we are continuing to waste time and effort on mind's eye visions rather than the real thing
  
• Now we know that we are getting an upgraded EC Row and a cheap DRIC road especially when the Ontario deficit has grown to $6.4B from an estimated $3.9B in 6 months
  
• Now we know why the redundancy argument is a joke as if a bridge a half mile away could not be destroyed at the same time
  
• Now we know that the traffic projections were always phony given the million jobs lost that are not coming back
  
• Now we know that my New Jersey distribution proposal made sense and should have been started years ago so that this region would not have the highest unemployment rate in Canada
  
• Now we know that my proposal that Windsor should partner with Moroun years ago to create a distibution network centred in Windsor was teh way to go

NOW WE KNOW THAT THE ENTIRE DRIC EXERCISE WAS A HUGE TIME AND MONEY-WASTING JOKE!

Take pity on Mr. Blouse though. There are a few Oooopsies that he seemed to overlook that will result in the well-laid plans going off the rails if I may put it that way if he and his friends are not careful:

• wishing and hoping will not make it so
  
• the DRIC bridge will not be built
  
• the Enhancement Project bridge will be built
  
• the DRTP Tunnel may not be built because of the Michigan Central Depot owned by Moroun [BLOG: May 21, 2009 "DRTP And The Michigan Central Depot"]
  
• Moroun has a major interest in the Detroit port
  
• Environmental Justice: DRIC + DIFT + DRTP = devastation of SW Detroit. No wonder MDOT treated them separately and not as one. Are you listening Council President Cockrel especially given his Council Motion and Mayor Bing!

Poor Mr. Blouse. He will be scolded for opening up and showing too much.

Take a look at how the Bridge Company has placed themselves strategically over the years and are way in front. While others are still talking concepts and mind's eye visions; they are doing since it is only their business and their future at stake after all.

Now Mr. Blouse will understand why Gord Henderson said:

• "I’m in awe of Moroun and his hired hands. These folks are the masters. They’re always two or three cunning moves ahead of the other players…"

More On Windsor's Cargo Shanty

Edgar is so completely predictable. I am almost embarrassed to point out what he said. Almost.

When the story came out about the problems at Willow Run Airport, it was hardly unexpected for our Mayor to react this way:

• "The closest air cargo facility to Windsor has seen such brutal cuts in business it's become a "financial disaster."
  
  But the mayor and city council members say that shouldn't detract Windsor from pursuing its dream of developing a similar operation of its own.
  
  If anything, Mayor Eddie Francis said the current woes at Detroit's Willow Run Airport could even translate into an added business potential for Windsor and its plans for a "cargo village."

And Councillor Gignac, is she afraid of doing her own thinking or too busy to do so or does she need a foreign consultant to do it for her at a cost of $500K:

• "With Windsor economically "on our knees," Coun. Jo-Anne Gignac said the city has a responsibility to proceed to the next stage and find out whether it's a good investment for its publically owned but under-utilized airport.
  
  If that next step concludes it's not a good risk, then "there shouldn't be any embarrassment saying it looked good but it didn't pan out," said Gignac."

Why are we spending anything. Councillor Valentinis should just show us the results of his work:

• "But Coun. Fulvio Valentinis said that, while the Willow Run experience "sends a signal that you need to be careful ... we need to proceed to the next step." Valentinis said his own research shows that air cargo facilities in other area airports, like Hamilton and Toledo, appear to be doing well."

Of course Edgar is an airport expert since he is Chair of the YQG Board:

• "Francis said he's "very familiar with the Willow Run situation" and that there are other issues that airport has to deal with, including the fact it is forbidden from hosting airline passenger services other than private charters and that that sector has taken "a huge hit."

Considering half of air cargo is carried on passenger planes, I wish he would get more familiar with Windsor's lack of passenger service.

• "To a large degree, air cargo traffic relies on scheduled, frequent passenger services in hub-and-spoke as well as in point-to-point traffic. YQG is presently suffering from a lack of scheduled uplift capacity."

Poor Edgar. He got so giddy with glee and jumped for joy too soon. It will be interesting to see if the Star reports this now since it shatters the Mayor's hopes:

• "Willow Run to stay open despite big revenue losses
  
  Willow Run Airport will remain open for the foreseeable future despite a sharp drop in revenue, the Wayne County Airport Authority said Thursday.
  
  News media reports this week highlighting the losses suggested that the authority might shut down Willow Run, which is used mainly by cargo carriers and private planes.
  
  To lay that to rest, Michael Conway, a spokesman for the authority, said Willow Run will operate on a smaller budget but definitely will stay open.
  
  "The airport authority for the foreseeable future has no intention of closing Willow Run," Conway said...
  
  After collecting just more than $5 million in revenue in 2007, Willow Run is expected to see its revenue drop by almost half of that this year, the authority said."

Seriously taxpayers, who needs Lufthansa when internet searches make valuable information available to us at no charge and readers send "heads up" emails pointing out useful information.

As an example, Lufthansa talked about Customs at the airport

• "Further, the establishment of an integrated Pre-Clearance Facility for cargo intending to cross the Canadian-US border will serve to significantly increase the air cargo opportunities."

Yet they did not mention an important factor in detail which undercuts the at comment:

• "Christopher Alf (Chris Alf), National Air Cargo (NAC) founder, and other transportation industry experts are speaking out to herald a supply chain solution to meet the congressional mandate of screening 100 percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft by August 2010. The original mandate is a result of the passing of the Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007, which requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a system to enable the industry to screen 100 percent of cargo transported on passenger aircraft commensurate with the level of security used for checked baggage...
  
  Christopher Alf is quoted as saying: "The current process is so time-consuming that it would be almost impossible to fully implement 100 percent screening in time to make the deadline. This is due to a lack of sophisticated screening technology being available and affordable across the states."
  
  Christopher Alf continues by stating that "many experts in the industry believe, as I do, that a better solution can be found by certifying trusted supply chain vendors and increasing the number of available screening options."

In other words, border pre-clearance to a large extent will be done at the point of shipment and away from the border as is being done now with trucks.

But here is something even better that was published over a year ago that a reader sent me. As he said,

"Except for the hills, this could be Windsor."

• "Struggling to Stay Aloft
  Small-City Airports Threatened by Carriers' Service Reductions
  
  By Sholnn Freeman, Washington Post Staff Writer, Wednesday, August 20, 2008
  
  LYNCHBURG, Va. -- American cities have long viewed a thriving commercial airport as a source of civic pride, a way to attract businesses and jobs, a selling point promising an easy connection to the outside world. Any community vibrant enough to support a respectable airport, the thinking goes, is a community that counts...
  
  Now Lynchburg and other small-city airports, which represent the majority of the nation's 524 airports with commercial service, are under threat. Airlines are cutting back service to keep their businesses alive as they confront economic contraction and volatility in oil prices. Smaller airports are vulnerable because they rely on smaller, more expensive planes and with fewer passengers have less economy of scale. Airports are putting together contingency plans for service cuts of up to 50 percent. They are halting expansion projects, freezing hiring and trying to preserve what service they've got.
  
  Despite millions of dollars spent to improve Lynchburg's airport, departures have fallen from 20 a day a decade ago to just six. Airlines are so reluctant to fly here that Lynchburg can't pay them to come. The airport is dangling a $405,000 incentive package to get an airline to connect the city to a big hub to the north, such as Dulles International Airport or Philadelphia International Airport. The largest part of the package is $250,000 from a small community air service grant from the Department of Transportation. Mark Courtney, the airport director, has met with three airlines to discuss the offer. So far, none has taken the bait.
  
  Passenger traffic continues to slide. The number of passengers boarding planes at Lynchburg in 2007 was 55,675 -- about half of the peak number in 1994, two years after the new terminal opened.
  
  "We've reached the low-water mark," Courtney said. "We can't afford to go any lower."
  
  Collectively, the major U.S. airlines lost $2.8 billion in the first half of the year, according to the Air Transport Association, the airline industry's lobby group. To stem losses, carriers have announced an 8 to 15 percent reduction in flights set to begin later in the year. Aviation analysts predict deeper cuts if oil prices start increasing again after falling over the past five weeks. Jet fuel prices have increased as much as 50 percent this year, compared with a year earlier.
  
  Even before this year's oil spike, airlines were hunkering down at the nation's 30 largest airports, which account for the majority of U.S. passenger air traffic. But most of the nation's commercial service airports are Lynchburg's size or smaller. They are the ones that will suffer.
  
  "If you have a 10 percent cut at a place like Dulles, the typical passenger doesn't feel it," said Keith McCrea, manager of air service and policy at the Virginia Department of Aviation. "If you have a 10 percent cut at a smaller airport -- all of a sudden, boom. It might mean one of their five flights is going, or two of their five flights is gone."
  
  For the nation's smaller commercial airports, he said, the situation is only going to get worse if oil prices stay high. "After Labor Day, it's no secret that we will be looking at another set of capacity reductions," McCrea said.
  
  The Lynchburg airport dates to 1931. It's right outside of town on the site of a former farm, one of the few flat expanses of land in the area's hilly terrain. Rex Hammond, president and chief executive of the Lynchburg Regional Chamber of Commerce, thinks the area has lost new business prospects as air service has declined.
  
  "For a business that wants to come to a community, it's not so much what they are looking for, it's finding a fatal flaw," Hammond said. "If you're knocked off the list, you'll never know it. A community that doesn't have a vibrant airport is operating under a competitive disadvantage."
  
  The biggest user of the Lynchburg airport is Areva, a French nuclear power conglomerate that has a U.S. subsidiary in the city. Areva employs 2,000 people in Lynchburg. Last year, it announced an expansion of 500 employees. A spokeswoman said the expectation of good service at the airport came into consideration when the company decided to expand.
  
  The airport is 25 minutes from the home of Reggie Pugh, a regional manager at Areva, whose work territory includes Missouri, Kansas, Michigan and South Carolina. He worries about the inconvenience of reduced air service in Lynchburg.
  
  He can still take a 6 a.m. flight from Lynchburg to arrive in St. Louis or Kansas City, Mo., by 9 a.m. But the dearth of flight options makes it more difficult to get back home. Pugh sometimes has to fly to Roanoke or Charlottesville, then rent a car to drive 60 miles home or wait hours to get the next direct flight to Lynchburg.
  
  "Our biggest reason for flying is to maximize face-to-face time with customers," he said. "If we're spending more time driving or going through security, we're minimizing that time."
  
  Leisure travelers have long since abandoned Lynchburg for the airports in Roanoke, Washington, Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham, N.C. Cindy Sober, a Lynchburg resident, said that when she flies, she drives to Roanoke, an hour and 15 minutes away.
  
  Sober said she's never flown out of Lynchburg. "Only for rental cars -- that's the only time I've ever used the airport," she said.
  
  Since 2000, about $32.8 million has been spent upgrading the Lynchburg airport, including $15 million to expand the runway. About $22 million came from airport improvement grants from the Federal Aviation Administration, $5 million from state sources, $2.2 million from ticket fees paid by passengers and $3 million from airport funds.
  
  In contrast to the hopes that the investment represents, the airport can be starkly quiet. No 737s roar. During long stretches of the day, there is only the overhead buzz of propeller-driven Cessnas.
  
  Gate agents can look out the airport windows to see regular customers pulling into parking spaces. The agents chat about the gorgeous mountain sunsets and talk about ever-expanding job descriptions.
  
  On a recent tour, Courtney, the airport director, swipes a security card and takes the back stairs to the empty jet ramp outside. Stepping onto the tarmac, he notes that the layers of reinforced concrete underfoot are thick enough to support jumbo jets.
  
  Courtney peers out to a clump of oaks and hardwoods. The long-term plan for expanding the airport has called for building cargo facilities in this "underutilized" space.
  
  Courtney thinks cargo might be a good bet for the airport and could offset declines in commercial service. The airport recently extended its runway by 7,100 feet to accommodate the take-off needs of planes loaded down by cargo. Courtney said the airport was beginning to explore options for attracting more air cargo traffic.
  
  "It's a real simple game," Courtney said. "The only way you can get in the game for some of the future growth is having a longer runway."
  
  But some analysts question the wisdom of allowing Lynchburg and other airports to keep bulking up while service slides.
  
  Former airline executive Michael E. Levine, a researcher and lecturer at New York University School of Law describes efforts to expand and bolster small airports as "pretty classic regional pork," especially when they are within a few hours' drive of bigger airports.
  
  "I would say I understand why everyone wants to be on the aviation map, but you have to ask, 'Is this the best expenditure of the public dollar?' " Levine said. "If Lynchburg has difficulty supporting service now, it will have difficulty in the future."