Circling Round The Undevelopment Commission

No, no, no. You thought I was talking about circling the wagons. I'm talking about the vultures circling overhead because they know what is about to happen with this Commission.

It’s been a good week for Grace Macaluso of the Star. Two Page A3 columns for her.

I really chuckled at the last line of her first Column about the breast-feeding episode with respect to Facebook:

• “Facebook execs should rethink rules that could only be conceived by a bunch of boobs.”

Then she did the column about the Windsor Essex Undevelopment Commission and the fees charged to WEUC by the Chair. She missed a perfect opportunity for a punchline:

• “the Development Commission is bust-ed!”

Have you ever seen such a farce in your life about the group that is supposed to convince outsiders to come to this area? Here are a number of points that I want to raise for you to consider:

1) It would appear that a 10 month CEO search is “horrible” according to the Professor from the Business School who was quoted in the Star article. While Mr. Mancini as the Chair would deserve a good part of the blame for that, unfortunately he ought not to receive all of it. He has made the point several times that other members of the Board are members of the search committee as well

• “But anyone taking issue with his role on the search committee or his salary should remember there are four other strong voices on the search committee and several others among the 12-member board, Mancini said.”

Nice, spread the blame around. Just like someone else would do if the finger was pointed directly at him!

It seems to me therefore that there may well be the need to replace the entire Board of Directors of the Commission if they all participated in this horrible transaction.

2) I wonder who chose Patrick Persichilli as the new Vice President of the Undevelopment Commission. That search seemed to be carried out very quickly and without much fuss or muss. I wonder if the Vancouver headhunter was involved in this process as well. If he was not involved, then why aren't we using the same process to try to find a CEO.

Was there a Board search committee involved, was it done by the Chair himself or by another member of the Board. I do not remember reading how that process worked.

Congratulations to Patrick in his new position. Perhaps!

I did notice an omission from his background history as outlined in the Commission press release. It failed to mention as I saw on his Blogsite:

• "He is also the President of the Windsor-West Provincial Liberal riding association."

I am certain that he and Sandra can work together very closely.

And you thought that there was a real fight between the City and Province over Greenlink/DRIC Road. Don't be silly. That is just drama for the masses.

3) The Undevelopment Commission has failed us more than anyone knows. The Mayor stated

• “There are four or five economic opportunities or investors in the wings where “a negative attack on the commission would be hurtful to attract those prospects,” he said.”

Yet in their advertisement the Undevelopment Commission said:

• “the WEDC has close to 20 projects in the pipeline”

Clearly, in a matter of a few weeks, this farce involving the Undevelopment Commission has cost us 15 or 16 possible new business ventures in this City. How many more can we afford to lose? If this is true, and how can I disbelieve our Mayor, why would anyone want to have an Undevelopment Commission like this around at all.

4) Mayor McNamara of Tecumseh must be furious. He had difficulty getting any information about who was on the CEO search committee and yet our Mayor knows exactly how many economic opportunities there are in the wings. Did our Mayor sign a confidentiality agreement? Does he know who these investors are? If he knows, then why doesn’t Mayor McNamara know everything as well?

By the way, aren’t you sick and tired of the “confidentiality” defence being used every time someone on Council does not want citizens to know something.

5) There is the negativity word being used again. Thank goodness Bloggers and naysayers are not responsible this time:

• “we cannot afford negative perceptions or publicity.”
  
• “a negative attack on the commission would be hurtful to attract those prospects,”

The Mayor must live in a bubble away from the real world. The Commission has created this mess, no one else. If the Mayor does not believe that the Economic Development Commissions of our competitors have not put these negative stories in their scrapbooks already to show potential investors then he has no concept of how will the real world works.

Circle the wagons. Pretend that this mess has not happened. Keep on wasting taxpayer and Credit Union money.

6) I wonder if someone is going to ask for an audit of the books of the Undevelopment Commission to see how they spent their money. After how many trips to Europe and other locations, expenses for legal fees and severance payments, cost for the creation of the prize-winning website and creation of the brochure plus their mammoth $350,000 promotional and advertising campaign, I wonder how much money there was actually left to do development work.

7) The guy with the best timing of all is clearly Councillor Marra. I am sure that you saw this small story in the Star a few days ago and wondered what will it was all about:

• “Councillor urges forum on economic development
  
  Coun. Bill Marra asked city administration Monday to work out the details of a public economic development forum within the next month or so that would gather leaders from the region's various sectors.
  
  While short on details, Marra said he feels the session would be a good first step in developing long-term plans to get the community on the right economic path.”

I am not clear about his purpose but it seems much broader than what the Undevelopment Commission has been doing so far. I suspect that the Councillor is really reflecting the concerns of the business community expressed to him about the lack of action. It is probably a good venting session at the least to demonstrate discontent! Who knows however, may come out of it!

I wonder if our Mayor will consider this an attack on the Undevelopment Commission and will try to kill it. For our sake and for the economic well-being of our region, the Councillor cannot allow that to happen.

8) I do not know the gentleman at all because I do not really follow County news closely but poor Warden Santos. I am surprised at his strong defence of an Undevelopment Commission that seems to be going nowhere. He has been made to look very foolish by events.

9) Don’t you just love the comment of Councillor Halberstadt:

• “It's becoming an autocratic situation.”

I can hardly wait for the Mayor’s counteroffensive. It certainly will be.

10) The best line of all in the Battagello story has to be this one that came from the Chair:

• “the board and commission are striving to move away from “a CEO-centric organization,” he said.”

I agree. We are trying a new model in Windsor… no CEO at all. How many CEOs have we lost in the last few years either through resignation or termination. I have lost count.

Undevelopment Commission Update

There is something very strange going on at the Undevelopment Commission. A panic mode has set in. Someone has decided that there is now a need to try and bury their short-comings for some reason, to get their story off the Front Page.

We now have 1-800-Call-Eddie and Nelson instead of Sam to the rescue.

The odd thing is that we have heard nothing from other Board members. Have they been silenced? Have they agreed to be silenced? I cannot believe that if this was a Board of a listed company on the Stock Exchange with shareholders that they could seemingly be so invisible. What gives?

Doesn't this sound so similar to what happened with WUC?

Except for a few negative comments from some spoilsports from the County, I thought the joint City/County Councils pretty much agreed that the Undevelopment Commission was doing a great job.

No one seemed to be too concerned about the 10 month CEO search and that it was starting all over again. No one even questioned the Chair if he was getting any payment as interim CEO. If they did, I certainly don’t remember him telling them that he was getting $1,200 per day through his consulting company.

I am not sure what changed but all of a sudden Windsor’s Mayor and the County Warden want to be put on the Board of the Undevelopment Commission. Obviously, it is an exercise in damage control since these two people for some reason still want to preserve the Undevelopment Commission in the form that it is in. Presumably as well the Chair remains the same as do the Board Members.

Here is the first page of a letter sent out to Council members. The way I read it the reasons that they want to go on to the Board are twofold:

• 1) the problems around the CEO search
  
• 2) no significant number of jobs have been created and no significant new investments have been made after all this time and after so much money has been spent although they did not say this as bluntly as I have.

I trust that two new positions will not be added to the Board but rather the CAOs of the City and County will be removed. In this case, I wonder if Eddie and Nelson will agree that they will not be the recipients of Board money from the Commission. I would hate for people to think that they are profiting because of the problems of the Commission.

There is a problem as well that no one seems to want to deal with or even to acknowledge. What have the two CAOs been doing while they were acting as Members of the Board?

•  Were they at all troubled by the two issues that the Mayor and Warden seem to be concerned about now? If they were troubled, what did they do about it? If not, in my opinion their judgment needs to be questioned
  
•  Our two senior leaders now want to involve themselves in order to engage, review and report back to their respective Councils. Wasn’t that the job of the CAOs? Did they do that or didn’t they?
  
•  I assume that the CAOs had enough sense to report but to whom? If they only reported to the Warden and Mayor, these two Officials certainly let the Undevelopment Commission slide and I hardly think that they ought to be made members of the Board now.
  
•  Were the Councils ever made aware of what was going on either by the Mayor and Warden or by the CAOs? If so, then both Councils are well aware of what has been going on so why is there the need now for them to panic? They did not seem to any panic at the Joint Councils meeting. If not, why not?

It is another mess again. At a time when we should be focusing on economic diversification and creating new opportunities to help people find jobs, we are instead worrying about a 10 month search of a CEO of an organization that has achieved little after spending millions of dollars.

Instead, we heard that after 24 months:

• “the new WEDC is still taking shape, growing and changing”

It is not fair to take out all of the abuse on the Chair since it appears, according to him, that many of the Members of the Board have been fully involved in what has been going on. What excuse do they have for their action or inaction? Is this how they would run their businesses?

To be direct about it, this organization does need to be wound up and started all over again with the correct focus. Putting two political officials on the Board achieves nothing. They have already failed us in not having proper oversight of the Commission!

The Undevelopment Commission was going to fail right from its outset. May I remind you again what was written and why they have not achieved:

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

A Greenlink Ad Again

I have heard from a number of people who are absolutely offended about the latest City Greenlink ad. They consider the advertisement to be patronizing and condescending.



What an insult they say. The Mayor and Council must think that citizens of Windsor are absolutely stupid.



The advertisement gives us the four easy steps to write a letter in support of Greenlink. It even tells us in Step 3 what is very important and what we must put in. It is as if they believe that we are not smart enough to know what is going on.



I believe however that this advertisement is much better than a previous draft that I heard was circulating. In that advertisement, I understand that the entire letter was written out with no word being longer than five letters. Presumably, people were supposed to copy it out word by word and forward it on.



In Step 4, where it now reads



“Include your signature at the end of the letter”



it said previously:



“Place your “X” at the end of the letter”



I do not understand why it is so difficult for the Mayor to learn. I wonder if the story that I have heard is true that the Premier’s Office called the Mayor after he spread the news about Red Bull, furious that the $3.2 million from the Province was disclosed and that Eddie was getting all of the publicity.



No wonder that Eddie looked beaten up in the Star video about the press conference. I wonder if the Premier’s Office or our two Cabinet Ministers threatened to pull the funding.



In any event, what does the new ad do? It attacks the Government that just backstopped the Air Race. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.



Of course, the ad asks the Premier to get involved to stop the DRIC Road. I wonder what kind of a lawsuit that would start if the Premier followed this advice and got involved politically in a process that already is a mess according to our Mayor. Is Eddie really trying to sucker the Premier so that Council can have our weapon of mass destruction sue the Premier?



Apparently at Council on Monday, there was some kind of a discussion about who reads my BLOGs. I can just picture a certain Councillor bristling as he heard my name being mentioned. Just to make it clear, I am certain that the Mayor must read what I BLOG. That should permit Councillors Jones and Gignac to send me an e-mail asking me to add them back onto my list. After all, if the Mayor reads it, then they should not be afraid to acknowledge that they read it too. They do want to improve their position in my next survey don’t they?



How do I know you might wonder that the Mayor reads my BLOG. Remember when I wrote about the previous advertisements:



“If someone follows his advice and the battle cry and sends something into the Ministry of the Environment, does Eddie want to know about it?



No, dear reader, he does not. Copies are to be sent only to the Premier and local MPP. He does not want to see, nor does Council, what anyone has written.”



This new ad changed. Now you are supposed to send a copy of whatever it is that you write to the Mayor.



What a mistake that was. We can measure the success or failure of the Mayor’s performance. Now the Mayor will have to tell us exactly how many letters were sent in. How many people followed his battle cry! He will have the numbers.



In passing, this is the second time that the Mayor has made this blunder. We will be able to measure how well he does with the Red Bull Air Race sponsorship money. Will he be able to reach $3.2 million on his own or will the Province have to provide backup support.



The question that I have is how do we measure success in this latest advertising blitz by the Mayor and Council that is costing taxpayers around $60,000 and is helping the bottom line of the Windsor Star as well. Given Canwest’s financial problems, I am sure that they are grateful.



Apparently there were something like 16 to 18,000 postcards sent in during the first campaign, a rather dismal percentage after spending several hundred thousand dollars in taxpayer money. I would expect therefore that all of these people would be quite happy to send in a letter.



With the new campaign, the editorials and columns in the Star, the harangues by the Mayor, Estrin and his colleague at Council about health, children and death, we should expect thousands more people to inundate the Province with letters.



Accordingly, I would think that unless there are at least 25,000 letters, this campaign would have to be considered another failure. I do not mean just signatures on a petition, but actual letters as set out in the advertisement prepared by citizens individually and mailed in by themselves.



I just had to add this. A letter from a reader. It was hilarious!



"It is amazing - the strong language aside (talk about insulting a governmnet that continually gives the community money) but the virtual comtempt that the city has for its residents. It is almost like saying "you are too stupid to know what to complain about so we will tell you"



Here is an idea - you have to find some seed money to replicate this ad



"I suggest:



"How to write an effective letter to Windsor City Council"



The Mayor and Windsor City Council have contravened their committment to an open and transparent municipal government and they still refuse to release pertinent information about the 400 audit, the tunnel deal, GreenLink and many more.



Write a letter today and follow these four steps:



1 - indicate your displeasure

2 - tell them that they suck

3 - warn them that if they don't change their ways, they will get a beating at the next election

4 - send a copy of your letter to Ed Arditti"

Are Mayor Cockrel and Detroit In Trouble

Is it history repeating itself? Should Detroit Mayors understand that they ought to be extremely careful in dealing with Windsor with respect to the Tunnel deal?

Ex-Mayor Kilpatrick certainly has learned that I would think. Just before his campaign to be re-elected for Mayor, our Mayor was very concerned when it appeared that Kwame was prepared to enter into a transaction with the Bridge Company over the Tunnel. Events took place that were certainly helpful to Kwame’s opponent, Freman Hendrix, and could have cost Kwame the election.

I need not discuss what happened with respect to the Tunnel Deal between those two Mayors afterwards because that should be fresh in your memory.

However, are Mayor Cockrel, and the City of Detroit as well, now facing the wrath of Francis because of recent events? Could it mean not only the end of Cockrel’s career as Mayor but also the financial distress of the City of Detroit?

Lest you think that I am being overdramatic, let me remind you what our Mayor said:

• “Detroit seeks $100M for tunnel agreement
  Grace Macaluso, Windsor Star, Tuesday, February 03, 2009
  
  The cost of entering into any kind of a tunnel agreement with the City of Detroit has soared to US$100 million under a new proposal unveiled by Mayor Ken Cockrel Jr…
  
  Anthony Neely, spokesman for Cockrel, said Monday.
  
  "It's not proposed as a deal with the City of Windsor. It was proposed as a deal with an outside, private business that would operate our end of the tunnel for us and and pay out that amount of money to the city in exchange for regular collection of fees from the tunnel…"
  
  PRICE QUESTIONED
  
  Mayor Eddie Francis questioned how Detroit arrived at a $100-million price tag for control of the U.S. side of the tunnel.
  
  Windsor has gone through an "exhaustive process" to arrive last year at a $75-million value, he said.
  
  "That was the number we were prepared to pay back then, but economic conditions have changed considerably and are very different than five or six months ago."
  
  The mayor said 2010 toll revenues for the Detroit side are projected at about US$11.5 million, but the city has no way of knowing exactly since it is controlled by Alinda, a private company which holds a lease until 2020.
  
  "Does the tunnel have revenues to support $100 million on the American side? I'd be interested in looking at their numbers," Francis said.”

There, do you understand what I mean? If not let me take you through what is going on.

Detroit has a budget deficit of about $300 million. Mayor Cockrel, as did the previous Mayor of Detroit, wants to help solve that deficit by doing a deal involving the Tunnel, whatever the type of transaction may turn out to be. The assumption everyone was making is that the deal would be with Windsor. Eddie certainly expected it. A Tunnel deal is a fundamental plank of what has to be done for Detroit. Kwame wanted $75 million while Cockrel wants $100 million to fill the Budget hole.

The little wrinkle that makes this more interesting is that there will be an election on February 24 for Mayor of Detroit because of the resignation of Kwame and Cockrel is running as well as Freman Hendrix who also ran against Kilpatrick. The actions before the last Detroit mayoral election would have helped Hendrix. Will Eddie’s comments hurt Cockrel and help Hendrix and Cockrel's other opponents this time around too?

The comment from Cockrel’s spokesperson effectively means that Eddie cannot get the Tunnel. Is Eddie a gracious loser? Is he thankful he is out of a bad deal? Does he contact the Detroit Mayor and say instead let us talk again to see how we can help you and do a deal? No, he lashes out and in doing so undercuts Cockrel and Detroit.

Effectively, our Mayor has said that the Tunnel is not worth more than $75 million. He should know shouldn't he because he operates the other side. After all, we went through “an exhaustive process.” Eddie also questions whether the Tunnel can support a $100 million deal. And everyone always, that Eddie is never wrong.

Accordingly, we know that the maximum price is $75 million which would leave a $25 million shortfall for Detroit. But does Eddie stop there? Oh no. He now reveals as if it is new news what the Blogmeister and other Bloggers have been saying for a very long time and which made this transaction nonsense from Windsor’s perspective:

• “economic conditions have changed considerably and are very different than five or six months ago."

Eddie has been listening too long to Harper/Flaherty about our economic crisis that suddenly appeared after the last Federal Election it seems.

I assume that he is not just talking about the decline in traffic but the DRIC challenge of taking 25% of the Tunnel traffic away in the event of a new DRIC bridge.

Let us do some rough math and say that that would result in a $25 million decline in the value of the Tunnel making its worth only $50 million now.

Oh my goodness… Cockrel’s Budget does not work. There is a $50 million hole there that cannot be filled. No one would bid more than $50 million when the Mayor of Windsor is telling everyone what the price of the Tunnel should be publicly. And he is the expert remember.

There goes Cockrel’s credibility as a financial manager who can help Detroit get through its economic crisis. Cockrel obviously has no idea about what the Tunnel is worth. Had he known, he would have understood that more action needed to be taken on the Budget. He has left Detroit in a jam!

Hendrix and the other candidates now can attack Cockrel mercilessly based on what Eddie has said. The beauty from their position is that they have the word of the Mayor of Windsor on this, obviously someone who has no interest in the outcome of the campaign.

What about the City of Detroit? What are the bond rating agencies going to say now and the holders of existing bonds when there’s a $50 million hole in Detroit’s budget that no one has contemplated. Could this push Detroit’s financial position over the edge? There are very delicate negotiations going on with respect to Detroit and its creditors. Could this result in more onerous terms being Detroit being imposed on Detroit or perhaps the creditors pulling out of any further negotiations. Could that result in the economic collapse financially of the City?

Perhaps I am overreacting. Perhaps I am not. In my opinion, our Mayor should not have opened his mouth the way he did. He should have thought through the potential negative impact of what he was saying.

This is the future of a City at stake and a mayoral career. Depending on what happens, will Eddie and Windsor be blamed?

Red Bull-ogna

Those poor people at Red Bull. They are used to dealing with big cities, not small towns. It should be a learning experience for them since this is Windsor, not Detroit.

Of course, I am sure that you are trying to understand what is going on considering that this seemed to be an Eddie Francis event that has suddenly turned into a Province of Ontario extravaganza.

I wrote yesterday:

• “That press conference must have been hastily set up. Dwight was not around and had to be conferenced in. Interestingly, his name was plastered all over the Star story but Sandra was not mentioned although we did see her photgraph.”

I was proven correct!

Consider this. Here is the media advisory that was sent out about the press conference to be held at four o’clock on Tuesday.

Looks very professional don’t you think. I found it interesting that the Provincial Ministers’ names are listed first but perhaps that is protocol. Guess what time it was sent out? In the morning, so that the various editors could arrange for a reporter to be there? If that is what you guessed, you would be wrong. According to my information, it was sent out from the Mayor’s Office after 3 p.m.

Poor Sandra. I wonder where the MITI Minister was when she got a call from someone telling her that she better attend that Press Conference since Dwight obviously was out of town.

Clearly, there was a need for a Press Conference pronto after the Globe story! It would be pretty hard to slam CEOs for waste in bailouts after the Province was giving away more than $3M, especially to help sell a popular stimulant energy drink.

Look at what happened to the Bank of America and the criticism they received:

• "Despite a near collapse that required $45 billion in federal taxpayer bailout funds, Bank of America sponsored a five day carnival-like affair just outside the Super Bowl stadium this past week as President Obama decried wasteful spending on Wall St. "

Wasn't Dwight Duncan the guy who:

• "criticized Detroit auto executives Monday for flying in separate private jets to Washington last week, where they were seeking financial aid for their struggling companies.
  
  "I was just astounded at the Detroit three CEOs flying in on private jets to Washington. Talk about out of touch in terms of what's going on," said Duncan."

I sure hope that she was in her car on her way to Windsor at the time so that she did not have to go too far out of her way or was forced to make a special trip. I would hate for Gord Henderson on Saturday in his first new column to accuse her of paying so much money for airfare to come down just for this Press Conference.

When you listen to the video that I posted the other day it is pretty clear that Sandra and Dwight did not get their stories straight. I wonder who briefed her. Sandra talked about “backstopping.” the project while Dwight never used that word. He talked about providing “Host City funding.” In the Star, “Finance Minister Dwight Duncan pledged $3.2 million to sponsor the event. “

There were three versions. Which one is it: providing the balance outstanding only, giving the money or merely pledging it.

I suspect that Sandra did not know much about the transaction at all until she got her phone call. It was interesting that the Star chose not to talk about her in their news story at all.

This reminds me of the $500 million Gong Show story a number of years ago where Ministers Dwight Duncan and David Caplan promised us money one day and took it back the next. It was very clear in that story that Sandra was out of the loop. In fact, she was not even present when the announcement was made.

Is someone out to get her within her own Party? I have seen that happen before to a Liberal in this area.

Finally, here is a copy of the Press Release.

A Provincial Government Insider (no, not Gord’s friend who may be looking for a new home in order to spill leaks now that Gord does not have a regular 3 times a week column) suggested to me that you

• “can tell by the formatting of the release on the website that it was done by a provincial government person.”

Perhaps this person was being unkind since presumably the Mayor’s Office would know how to do a Press Release properly.

If you were a Martian, and I showed this Press Release to you, which Government would you think is in charge of this Project? Yes I would agree with you:

•  Province Partners with City
  


•  McGuinty Government Supporting Tourism to Windsor
  


•  Members of Provincial Parliament Dwight Duncan and Sandra Pupatello announced today that the Ontario Government will support
  


•  More details on the Air Race and the government’s participation will be announced in the coming months
  


•  Dwight quoted first, then Sandra and our Mayor bringing up the rear.

I hope that the sale of tickets on our side of the river goes better than it did last time when the US media had to tell Americans that tickets were still available in Windsor or else we might have been left with a lot of unsold ones.

So welcome to the world of Small-town Ontario, Red Bull. This fiasco is what happens when a Mayor of a little burg gets too big for his britches. He has a habit of grabbing glory. You just need to cut him down to size as the Ministers did.

Enjoy!

"We did things that newspapers can do to bring about change, positive change."

That is a quote from Marty Beneteau, Editor of the Star.

In my opinion, this one newspaper town is being badly served so far by our newspaper. Or perhaps I am condemning them prematurely. Perhaps they are working on a massive series about the evils of public-private partnerships: P3s, AFPs as Ontario calls them or 3Ps as Michael Kergin did. Anything to confuse the public!

Bridge and road Megaprojects are running amuk in Canada and more are to come. The Danish Professor who writes on this subject should be offered a Chair at the University of Windsor so he can write about this. Or perhaps I will do my Doctorate on the subject about how taxpayers are being fleeced.

Here is what the Star's sister newspaper in Vancouver has been telling its readers about a massive bridge project that has gone hugely over-budget. Have you read about it locally? It is only a $3B+ project that doubled in price in a year. Does that scare you about DRIC's true cost? It ought to!

Is DRIC going to be our Big Dig too!

Moreover, the winning P3 partner, the Australian company Macquarie---are they MDOT's Australians---almost had to back out because they could not raise the money required with the economic melt-down. Instead the Province will have to put up one third of the huge amount required.

Did you see any of this in the Star? Nope we saw instead the Editorial today between the love-in between Eddie Francis and Dwight Duncan over Red Bull:

• "When Finance Minister Dwight Duncan promised $3.2 million from the province to sponsor the event, organizers signed on the dotted line.
  
  "Without Dwight's involvement this event would not be coming back -- period," Francis was quick to say when the big news was announced on Tuesday.
  
  Duncan's commitment sets the stage for a series of unprecedented opportunities."

Oh my goodness. What was discussed in that car trip to Toronto airport between the two of them.

Oh Lord, please save us from the opportunities I am thinking about and with whom! No wonder we have not seen Dave Cooke's Report yet and we have just heard about the West End brownfields!

How much will all of this cost taxpayers at all levels just to stop the Ambassador Bridge Company!

Obviously, much more to come in subsequent BLOGs.

• Four-step program for buying a bigger bridge blows the budget
  
  Vaughn Palmer
  Vancouver Sun
  
  
  Thursday, February 05, 2009
  
  
  Premier Gordon Campbell proudly took the wraps off the design for the new Port Mann Bridge project Wednesday, declaring, "A picture is worth a thousand words."
  
  A thousand words? Try more than three billion dollars.
  
  For $3.3 billion is the B.C. Liberal government's latest estimate for the "all-in cost" of its plan to double the carrying capacity of the Port Mann and widen the adjacent stretches of Highway 1.
  
  The new price tag is a shocker, to put it mildly.
  
  As recently as last June the government was still maintaining that the project could be completed for a capital cost of as little as $1.5 billion.
  
  As to how we got from what now looks to be a bargain-basement estimate to today's stratospheric rendering, the premier and Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon described a four-step escalation.
  
  Step 1: The raid on contingencies. At some point last year, the government realized that the project would be more expensive than initially estimated. So the Liberals took $230 million from the contingency funding for the Gateway project (which includes the Port Mann), boosting the budget to $1.73 billion from the initial allowance of $1.5 billion.
  
  Step 2: Inflation takes its toll. The preceding numbers were in 2005 dollars, a caveat that appears in some government documents though not invariably. In order to give a more complete picture, the Liberals switched to 2013 dollars, that being the year when construction is scheduled to be finished and the new bridge and road open to traffic. Eight years of inflation (by the government's reckoning) transforms the $1.73 billion construction cost to an estimated $2.1 billion.
  
  Step 3: Buying a bigger bridge. In the initial tender call, the Liberals asked for bids on construction of a new five-lane span downstream from the existing Port Mann plus all the related highway widening and improvements in intersections.
  
  They also wanted the builder to retrofit the existing span, bringing it up to modern-day standards for earthquake-proofing and safety. The winning bidder would then be contracted to maintain the entire project for 35 years of operations.
  
  But the bidders balked at tackling the old span on those terms, believing it wasn't worth it to try to extend the life of a bridge that was already 45 years old and costly to maintain. They "didn't want the risk," according to Transportation Minister Falcon.
  
  The winning bidder countered with a proposal to build a new 10-lane bridge on the downstream site, then demolish the old one. Cheaper to maintain and more reliable in the long run. But more expensive up front.
  
  The one-bridge solution boosted the price tag (remembering that we are in 2013 dollars now) to $2.46 billion, a jump of $360 million.
  
  Step 4: Everything including the kitchen sink. The province is also required by the auditor-general to tally up a number of ongoing costs, including maintenance, rehabilitation, operations and interest charges. The running tab is calculated to be $840 million, boosting the all-in cost to -- well, here's the relevant passage from the government press release:
  
  "The total cost will be released when the contract is finalized but is expected to be approximately $3.3 billion."
  
  Give or take? The Liberals didn't say. But the working estimate is onerous enough, particularly as the province has agreed to finance one-third of the total through its own borrowing power, meaning taxpayers will be ponying up $1.15 billion.
  
  Repayable at commercial rates, insist the Liberals. And the government can back out as early as 2010 if a bank or pension fund is willing to take its place as an investor in the project.
  
  Either way, the full cost of the project is supposed to be repaid through tolls, which will be collected throughout the 35-year life of the operating agreement. Starting toll is $3, which should yield an annual take in excess of $100 million.
  
  The projected long-term stream of revenues from the tolls must be lucrative, given that they are expected to repay the escalated cost as surely as they were going to cover the original low-ball estimate.
  
  Other details will be made public when the deal is finalized, which could happen as early as next month, according to Campbell and Falcon.
  
  The Liberal duo spent much of the press conference one-upping each other on the merits of the project, describing it as the biggest infrastructure project in provincial history, the greatest relief to traffic congestion, and so on.
  
  But one superlative that isn't likely to crop up in their boasting is the one suggested by what happened to the estimated cost of building the thing. From the $1.5 billion minimum last June, we're now at $3.3 billion and that still may not be the end of it.
  
  Sure, a lot of factors contributed to the increase: overruns, inflation, scope changes, carrying charges. There's nonetheless a jump of 120 per cent or $1.8 billion in a mere eight months, surely a record for a provincial project of any kind.
  
  And they've just started putting shovels into the ground.

Survey Fallout

“No one loves the messenger who brings bad news.”

How true that statement is. Now I know how the messenger feels after he has been shot!

For a guy who is as sensitive as I am and who wants to be loved by everyone, this is been a very traumatic week for me.

First, a couple of my readers made some nasty cracks that really had nothing to do with the municipal political survey that I prepared but were personal to me. If that was not bad enough, now this:

• ----- Original Message -----
  From: Gignac, Jo-Anne (Councillor)
  To: windsorcityblog@yahoo.ca
  Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 3:46 PM
  Subject: Re: Mister Softie's lament
  
  Please remove me from your email list.
  JAG

Then this:

• ----- Original Message -----
  From: Jones, Ron
  To: WindsorCityBlog
  Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 10:19 PM
  Subject: RE: Busy weekend of border stories
  
  Please remove my contact from your mailing. Thank you. Ron Jones

How polite even as I heard the "bang" go off.

I knew that these two Councillors could not have been the authors of those nasty comments. But their request for deletion from my BLOG e-mail list hurt all the same.

One right after another. After all of this time too on my list. On the same Monday too, Council day. I wondered if this was a subject of an in camera meeting discussion. I had better check the Minutes when they come out. Who is going to be next to go? Could this be a plot to see which Councillors actually read BLOGs so that they can be re-educated?

I did not understand. These people are elected by the Taxpayers of Windsor. I am a Taxpayer. Don’t they want to know what I think about what is going on in this City? I know that I am not always in favour of what they are doing but is that a crime for which I should be so punished?

It especially hurt about Council Gignac since I praised her recently for her foresight on the Cleary transaction about being the only Councillor who voted against it. I guess it is what have you praised me for lately that counts.

Seriously, do Members of Council only want to hear from YES-men and women? Are they afraid of hearing criticism, especially constructive criticism as I set out in my BLOGs?

Perhaps they did not want to be part of a small group. After all, Councillor Hatfield recently said that only 20 or 30 people might read a BLOG.

A Star writer in a BLOG said before that:

• “Ward 1 candidate Coun. Dave Brister is not a fan of blogs.
  
  “I don’t read blogs,” he said recently.”

It was also said about him:

• “Brister said all the criticism directed at council over the last year about secret deals and secret meetings has only been an issue for two or three people in the community — “two or three people out of (a) 200,000 population.”

I wonder if I am classified as one of those two or three people.

I get it, perhaps the Councillors want me to do charitable work instead. The Councillor formerly known as Councillor Budget said to another BLOGGER in town in a not so polite way:

• “Remove my name from your mailing list and find a charity to which you might devote your time.”

I scratched my head trying to think of what I had done wrong. Then it came to me. It had to be the survey. They were upset at the results. I guess they did not want my readers to know what other readers thought about their activities as Councillors.

But why were they taking it out on me? I did not make it up. I did not fill in all the surveys. I did not make all of those comments. All I did was report how my readers voted.

It is not my fault that Councillor Jones has a disapproval rating of over 70% and an approval rating of just over 7%. How can I be responsible if Councillor Gignac’s disapproval rating is almost 40% and her approval rating is under 20%.

They are responsible for what they do on Council, not me. I cannot help it if people think that they are doing a very poor or poor job. Perhaps they are and it should be a wake-up call for them.

I would have thought that the Survey results were like a report card that a Councillor would have received as a student in school. After all, they are used to be treated at Council like Kindergarten students by the Mayor/Principal. They have been scolded enough times by him publicly and did not run out of the Council Chambers crying.

It is just a mid-term report card, not the final one. They have not done better than the last report card. In fact, they did worse. However, they do have time to improve between now and the next municipal election.

Hopefully, at that time Councillor Jones will not be voted as the Worst Councillor on Council. I know that Councillor Gignac must be upset that she did receive a few votes saying that she was doing the worst job. Perhaps she might try and learn from her peers, such as Councillor Dilkens who received no negative votes, probably because he is a proponent of open and transparent Government.

I know that both of the Councillors did not receive a single solitary vote as being the Best Councillor but if they are re-elected perhaps it is due to them doing a better job after seeing their poor results. Do you think that they would write to me and apologize and thank me for helping them do better? Do you think that they would want to be added back onto my e-mail list. Hardly.

Then I wondered if there was a different explanation.

Is Councillor Jones really mad at me, not because of those survey questions, but because I did not list him as a possible mayoral candidate? I might have done so except I did not think he wanted that job.

Look at how much time and expense I saved Councillor Gignac. She might have thought that she had a chance to be Mayor and might have spent some money on a mayoral campaign. She would not have had a chance and would not have been on Council at all if she ran for Mayor and lost. At least now, given the past history of her Ward, if she works diligently, as I know that she can, then she has a good chance to be re-elected as a Councillor.

I thought some more about it and perhaps the explanation is that the Councillors are not suited for the job. They do not have the disposition for it. Perhaps they are not very happy at what they are doing and are taking it out on me. If that is the case, then they should remember what ex-President Truman said:

• “If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”