The Estrin Lawsuit

The Windsor Star stated in their story:

• "The city is not named in the lawsuit, so there are no financial implications for local ratepayers."

How wrong they are!

My first reaction in reading the story was that Eddie Francis had totally miscalculated.

He had forgotten his roots and thereby did not understand the Bridge Co. at all. He must have believed that the Bridge Co. was part of a huge, faceless corporation run by a bunch of managers whose only function in life was to earn more and more money.

He had forgotten that it was nothing more than his pita business only on a much larger scale, a "family" business run by a father and son. It was not a "public" corporation owned by shareholders whose only interest was seeing the Dow Jones index going higher but a "private" one whose owners wanted to ensure the future of their children and grandchildren.

Someone deep in his inner circle had told him that the Bridge Co. would never react. They dared not do so. They were too secretive. They would be pilloried in Windsor.

Eddie must have assumed it was a GM. He forgot it was still a Ford.

These are fundamental errors that will cost the City of Windsor dearly and I do not just mean financially in the long run. It will be what Eddie Francis is remembered for, part of his legacy I am afraid.

How can I be sure of what I am saying? Dan Stamper stated:

• "I don't care that they work for the city, but when they take out a sword and try to hurt us there is a problem."

Remember what Matthew Moroun said at the House of Commons hearing:

• "We are asking this committee, and especially Transport Canada, to please put down your sword, set this legislation aside, and instead engage in meaningful dialogue, not just at a very formal hearing to discuss the legalese of this legislation, but rather to discuss and brainstorm and cooperate with one another toward an even more successful Ambassador Bridge for the advantage of the operation, the government, and the public."

There clearly is a lot more going on in this story than has been reported. I want to think about it before I write more.

Interestingly, the lawsuit was started in November but not reported until today. Given the close relationship with the Mayor--after all the Star sees materials that even Councillors do not get unless they go public and even then may still not have seen it--I am curious to know when the Star first learned about it. Assuming it was shortly after the lawsuit was launched, why did it take so long for the Star to report it.

I wonder if the Casino wants to take a bet about how many Councillors were told about the lawsuit by the Mayor before it hit the pages of the Star. In my opinion, each Councillor must tell us publicly if and when the Mayor told him/her about it. We have open and transparent Government in Windsor don't we? If they were not told or were told very late in the game, then what are they going to do about it

One final question. Will Mr. Estrin be let go? Now a couple of Star stories make sense to me. Eddie had to protect himself against charges that he wasted taxpayer money using a law firm that may be conflicted and which he may have to let go before the issue arose. So the spin-doctors were out there in advance justifying Estrin's retainer:

1. "Legal bill to top $3.2M for city's border battles January 09, 2007
   
   "These costs are very small when you consider what's at stake," said Mayor Eddie Francis. "When you consider what we are up against, we have to continue to do what we need to in order to protect the city's best interests.
   
   "It's unfortunate a local government has to be put in a position of having to spend funds on something like this. But what choice is there? Otherwise we might as well fold up our tent and put up a For Sale sign."
   
   The city has been put into a position of defending its interests in the border battle against the deep pockets of private business interests, Francis said...
   
   None of the funds have been wasted given how the city has been able to fend off the use of E.C. Row Expressway as a truck route, prevented the DRTP from becoming reality, slowed the bridge company and also steered government into building the next bridge in an industrial area off Ojibway Parkway (as recommended by Schwartz), Francis said.
   
   "Those making a case that the city should not be spending this are those who want to see the city go away so they can advance their interests," Francis said."


2. "Consultants bill city $5.2M million; Roseann Danese Windsor Star January 17, 2007
   
   $1.7 million spent on border file went mainly to lawyer, traffic expert
   
   Mayor Eddie Francis spent $1.7 million on border issues, according to a list of expenditures attributed to his office. A big chunk of that money went to Toronto environmental lawyer David Estrin and New York traffic consultant Sam Schwartz.
   
   The payments include fees incurred by Estrin's Gowling law firm for OMB hearings, interim control bylaw preventing non-railway use of railway land, legal advice regarding E.C. Row expressway, the regional transportation master plan, Ambassador Bridge issues, rail issues, DRTP issues, bi-national review and the environmental assessment review.
   
   The documents show Estrin received three additional payments that are not included in the figure provided by the mayor's office. He was paid an additional $374,214 in 2004, $443,781 in 2005 and $648,115 in 2006.
   
   The total amount that went to Estrin's law firm was about $3.2 million...
   
   Skorobohacz said it has been money well spent and not "out of the ordinary" compared to other cities. "Windsor has challenges because of its location," Skorobohacz said. "Is the investment of a David Estrin warranted? Yeah, it's more than warranted" to make sure the city's interests are protected."

If the Star knew about the lawsuit when it published these statements, then I am very disappointed in it.

Let me think about this turn of events some more. I promise to try and give you a view of this matter that may be a bit different than one which you might expect. Stay tuned.

Is A New Caesars Windsor Expansion Planned

Rumour has it that there is talk that when the new operators take over, they will expand the Casino dramatically again!

They have to. There are so many things to bet on in Windsor that the Sports Bar needs new space, a whole new wing perhaps! Here are a few obvious examples:

• when will Eddie announce that he is running provincially or federally
• for which party
• if Eddie chooses not to run which big Toronto law firm will he work for
• who will be our new appointed mayor
• will the Ambassador Bridge finish its new enhancement project before the DRIC bridge is even started
• when will DRTP officially close its doors
• will Project Ice Track or the East end arena be built first
• will the Penguins move to Tecumseh?

But the heavy betting today, if it were allowed, is whether City Council will help save the Capitol Theatre on Monday.

Just as in NFL betting, there are sites that give you all kinds of information that will help you pick the winners for the games by giving you the inside scoop and tips, I am going to do the same today for Capitol betting.

The first big hint, the City's website. Normally reports are attached to agenda items that can be viewed by opening up a PDF file. In this way a delegation knows what is being proposed and can prepare arguments for and against. But not for the Capitol.

Here is what the City website says:

• "Item -- Capitol Theatre - Request to Transition (available on Supplementary Agenda)"

In other words, it is not going to be posted! Why bother speaking as a delegation if one does not know what is going to be proposed except in the last minute. Obviously then, most of the delegations will speak in favour of the Capitol!

But here is the big give-away as to what will happen, an email from the Arts Council - Windsor & Region that I received:

• "Looking Forward: Windsor's Future in a Changing World
  
  What is our place in the global economy? What must we do to attract new business and industry?
  
  Mayor Eddie Francis will host a thought provoking and inspiring evening with Diane Francis and Glen Murray.
  
  Diane Francis, broadcaster, best-selling author and editor at large for the National Post, advises several corporations about the pitfalls and opportunities facing Canadian businesses in the global economy. She skillfully interprets the impact of national and international events on the business community.
  
  Glen Murray, urban strategist, consultant with AuthentiCity and Chair of the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, works with businesses and governments. He will show how strengthening the links between the arts, culture and the economy enhances our creativity and quality of life, creating a more attractive city and urban wealth.
  
  Together they will discuss our strengths and weaknesses and suggest how to secure a stronger presence in the national and global economies.
  
  When:
  Thursday, March 8, 2007
  7:00 p.m.-10 p.m.
  6:30 reception
  
  Where:
  Capitol Theatre, 121 University Avenue West
  Tickets $10, available from the theatre box office, 519-253-7729
  
  For more information dial 311 or email at 311@city.windsor.on.ca"

Now seriously, do you really think that the Mayor would have these big shooters from Toronto come to the Capitol Theatre if it is going to be closed down. Get real...do you think he wants to be booed and jeered by Arts types in front of out-of-towners? Naaaaaaaaw, he has to be introduced as the saviour of the Arts in Windsor.

Bet on it!

Just to give you some more hot tips for your betting pleasure, don't you think that this is a weird session anyway. It costs us $10 to learn about our future? And why would the Mayor merely be an MC of the session? Didn't we have a world-class guru brought in by the City at no cost to taxpayers before?

Let's see....Diane Francis journalist, small "c" conservative in Canada, author, Editor-at-Large for the National Post, well-known in Toronto having worked for the Toronto Star, Toronto Sun and Macleans as well.

Glen Murray, from Toronto, Ontario, "is a partner at Navigator Limited as well as a Visiting Scholar & Urban Policy Coordinator at the University of Toronto. He is former Mayor of Winnipeg, best known for his vision to build culturally dynamic urban centres."

Interesting, wasn't Navigator a firm that provided advice to the City during the border issue. And part of the "strategy" for Navigator is AuthentiCity.

Hmmm strong Toronto connection, strategic firm known to the Mayor, good publicity in Windsor and elsewhere about Eddie's forward thinking...bet on a Provincial cabinet position too for our Eddie!

PS. Remember how bad Eddie's meeting planners were. I think they messed up again.

Was Eddie scooped by another small town in Ontario?

If you just cannot wait to hear Glen Murray in March, he will be speaking on "AUTHENTICITY, CREATING URBAN WEALTH" in Chatham on January 24. I guess he must have a standard "urban wealth" speech that he uses. Cost is $35 but you get a continental breakfast, a networking coffee break, hot lunch, not just a cheapo reception for $10.

PPS....One other thought----AuthentiCity, SimpliCity Hmmmmm I wonder.

How Good Are Consultant Traffic Projections

Do you remember these graphs I posted once before? They were presented by the Bridge Co. at the Senate Bill C-3 hearings.

Just this once, humour me. Would you please assume that the Bridge Co. actually knows what it is talking about, being the most succesful bridge operator between Canada and the US. What they said and what the graphs show is the huge variation between projected numbers by consultants and the actual traffic volumes at Sarnia and Windsor.

Aren't the upward consultants' lines very similar? Would you have liked to have been an investor in Sarnia based on these projections? Where would your investment be today? Would you invest in Windsor based on actual vs. projected?

Numbers are significant. They are the basis upon which projects are built and financed. In Windsor, the huge volume of traffic projected in the future is one of the main reasons supposedly why we neeed a new crossing and why someone might want to finance the project in a P3.

If the Bridge Co. is right, and the numbers seem to show they are, especially as evidenced by DRIC revising them downwards several times already, then why do we need another crossing costing multi-billions?

There seems to be available capacity even now when DRIC itself said that the bridge was operating at under 60% capacity. If the volumes aren't there, then who but taxpayers could afford a project that can cost as high as $6 Billion? Can you figure out as well the millions in operating losses that crossing would have that taxpayers would have to pay out every year.

If the projected numbers are right, no problem. As I have Blogged before, if they are wrong, what are the potential consequences:

1. Bankruptcy of the new crossing
   
2. Someone buys the new crossing for pennies on the dollar in a fire sale
   
3. Government forced to take over the project and bail it out
   
4. Lawsuits
   
5. Bankruptcies of some or all of the Ambassador Bridge, Detroit/Windsor Tunnel and the Blue Water Bridge

Go back and read my BLOG on April 18, 2006 "Machiavellian Megaprojects" where we learned that

• "Which projects get built? We found it isn’t necessarily the best ones, but those projects for which proponents best succeed in conjuring a fantasy world of underestimated costs, overestimated revenues, undervalued environmental impacts and overvalued regional development effects...
  
  In fact, there seemed to be a formula at work: (underestimated costs) + (overestimated revenues) + (undervalued environmental impacts) + (overvalued economic development effects) = (project approval)

This is not a mere academic exercise. The NATIONAL FEDERATION OF MUNICIPAL ANALYSTS in its article, Recommended Best Practices in Disclosure for Toll Road Financings, stated:

• "While issuers generally provide significant disclosure for toll roads, the disclosure is not necessarily adequate. Higher quality disclosure must be provided to investors in both the primary and secondary markets...
  
  The feasibility study is the investor’s primary consideration when assessing the economic viability of a toll road and its ability to produce adequate and timely toll revenues to meet financial obligations. To date, many of the feasibility study’s projections for stand-alone start up toll roads have overly estimated traffic and revenue performance."

In an article, "Expert Forum on Road Pricing and Travel Demand Modeling," a commentator stated:

• "Despite the enormous sums of money spent on traffic and revenue forecasts, there is growing concern about the accuracy and reliability of these expensive forecasts."

Another report by Halcrow Fox stated:

• "With large infrastructure projects, the Danish Transport Council state that:
  • Cost overruns of 50 to 100% in real terms are common; overruns above 100% are not uncommon;
  • Traffic forecasts that are off by 20 to 70% compared with actual development are common; and
  • Forecasts of project viability are often over-optimistic to a degree that such forecasts correspond poorly with actual viability"

One of the key ingredients for an "investment grade" traffic and revenue study according to the Washington State Comprehensive Tolling Study is "an objective assessment of the local economy and growth potential." After reading the latest Gord Henderson Economic Statement for Windsor, can anyone legitimately argue that there is economic growth potential to support an investment of billions in a border crossing?

This study continued:

• "In 2002, the bond rating agency Standard & Poor’s (SP) published a report on toll forecasting performance. The basic argument in this report, and in three annual updates, has been that there is a considerable amount of optimism bias in toll revenue forecasts around the world... The point of the SP’s work was that there was a considerable trend towards the overestimation of traffic and revenue, leading to their conclusion of an optimism bias.
  
  S&P suggests that first-year toll revenue estimates have been overestimated by an average of 20 to 30 percent over the sample of projects that they studied. In the 2005 update to the study, they tested traffic performance through the fifth year, and did not find any marked improvement. They also looked at truck forecasts in particular, and found that these were a particular concern, because trucks typically pay considerably higher tolls than light vehicles, and variation in this forecast can have a much bigger effect on actual toll revenues."

A GAO report in 2004 discussed problems with major toll-roads it studied:

• "Four of the five toll roads have faced an additional barrier to financial success because they were or are being built in anticipation of future growth and development... each has struggled financially because the expected level of traffic has not been achieved.
  
  [As an example] SR 125, is also a stand-alone toll road that is being built in anticipation of future growth and development and is scheduled to open in 2006. According to an FHWA official, the traffic studies for this project may be optimistic because, while they are based on anticipated development in San Diego County, they are also based on traffic from Mexico that may not materialize if anticipated development south of the Mexican border does not occur."

The importance of the Ambassador Bridge's testimony and the Danish Professor's thesis as well as these articles was brought home to me recently when I found on the Internet a story written in Forbes magazine a number of years ago. I think you may find it enlightening:

• Roads Less Traveled
  Kelly Barron, Forbes Magazine, 09.03.01
  
  New toll roads have been a bonanza for consultants, but not for bondholders.
  
  
  Florida Governor Jeb Bush's recent veto of a $1.4 million bailout of the Garcon Point Bridge spanning Pensacola Bay was the final indignity in the troubled history of the controversial toll bridge.
  
  A pet project of former Florida House Speaker Bolley (Bo) Johnson, recently released from jail for tax evasion, the bridge was partly built on land he once owned. The builder was charged $4 million in fines and restitution for violating federal environmental laws. Adding to the folly, the toll bridge was built parallel to a nearby free bridge.
  
  But the bridge likely would never have been built at all were it not for the seal of approval it received from URS Corp. of San Francisco, one of a handful of consultants that specialize in traffic projections for public projects. Using URS' 1992 projections that 6,500 cars would drive over the bridge daily and pay what is now a $2.50 toll, promoters flogged $95 million in bonds to finance the project. Today only 3,500 cars a day use the bridge.
  
  "The bridge is an Edsel," sighs Joseph Mooney, a financial adviser who resigned in 1993 after a dispute with local officials over the numbers from URS, a publicly held engineering company whose largest shareholder is investor Richard Blum, otherwise known as the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
  
  They should have listened. It has become painfully clear to bondholders and politicians that many of the public toll-supported projects built in the past decade, the majority blessed by URS and its ilk, have become financial albatrosses. The Garcon Point Bridge bonds, for instance, trade at 71 cents on the dollar, following multiple downgrades to junk status by the ratings agencies. Local officials will likely have to tap a reserve account next year to meet debt service.
  
  URS defends its record in Florida as solid. But the company has overestimated revenue projections on toll roads elsewhere in the state, including the Seminole Expressway, the Polk Parkway and the Suncoast Parkway. On the 15-mile Veterans Expressway in Tampa, annual tolls are $15 million, barely half what URS projected in 1992. Tolls from the main portion of the state's profitable turnpike go to subsidize those clunkers.
  
  "Many of these deals shouldn't even be brought to market," says Robert Muller, a managing director with J.P. Morgan Chase, who has researched toll-road feasibility studies. Muller figures that at least half of the traffic projections for toll roads--mostly performed by URS, Wilbur Smith Associates in Columbia, S.C. or New York-based Vollmer Associates--vastly overstate the potential.
  
  But that hasn't stopped politicians, bond salesmen and contractors from relying on them. "It's almost an accident if the projection comes in perfectly," admits Edward Regan III, a Wilbur Smith senior vice president. For its part, Wilbur Smith's initial projections in 1992 for the 15-mile San Joaquin Hills Toll Road in Orange County, Calif. were 40% above actual traffic counts. By 1997, $1.1 billion in bonds had to be replaced with lower-rate bonds or risk default. Still in need of riders, the local toll-road authority recently handed out discount coupons.
  
  Despite their mixed track record, the consultants who do the traffic projections have a nice little business, yielding upwards of $500,000 per study. Although traffic studies for revenue bonds probably brought in less than 5% of URS' $2.2 billion in revenues last year, the stock is still doing better than the average revenue bond these days--it's up 239% in the past five years.
  

Before billions are spent on capital costs, before millions are spent on annual losses, doesn't it make sense to look at actual numbers for a change? Isn't it time to revisit traffic volume projections to determine how good they really are?

When we have a private enterprise solution with required Government oversight, once Bill C-3 passes, and an almost 80 year "public/private partership" between the Bridge Co. and Governments, I am having difficulty understanding this desire to waste money on something that may not required based on projections that may not be valid.

If there is a "hidden agenda", it is time already that it see the light of day so we taxpayers can determine its legitimacy. After all, it is OUR money.

What The Truckers Say

We can debate all we want about numbers and traffic volumes but what do we really know? How about listening to the people whose business it is to cross the border daily carrying goods and see what they say about the economy.

Trucknews.com ran an article on "Insights on the economy from our Shipper-Carrier Issues Roundtable."

It's not a pretty picture if one looks at the carriers' views, especially for cross-border traffic.

If one reads their opinion about the economy into traffic projections, then how can one realistically support the DRIC numbers that shoot upwards so dramatically? They bear no relationship to reality now

And in case you have forgotten, the Bridge Co.'s parent company is a major trucking company so I would think they understand the border as a carrier and as an operator, something very few can say!

Here is an excerpt:

• Smyrlis: How do things look from the carrier side?
  
  Einwechter: If you single out Ontario and Quebec, they have been more dramatically hit. The west is buoyant and our east-west traffic is relatively strong. But the manufacturing sector, at least as it pertains to outbound traffic from Ontario and Quebec has been hard hit. You read about the pulp and paper mill troubles in Quebec and trucking happens to be the largest service provider to that industry. There has definitely been a negative shift there. If the high dollar means that exports are in decline, by default that would mean imports would be cheaper and there would be more demand for them. That means rejigging the hauls, so things are in a state of flux.
  
  Gagnon: Quebec was one of the first provinces to be hit by the slowdown because of what happened in the pulp and paper industry but I think right now the impact is in manufacturing across Ontario and Quebec and the States also. The economy is still growing but what we are transporting is changing. We are not carrying as much freight between the two countries as we have in the past. And, I don’t know if everyone will agree with this, I don’t think this will come back to the same level as in the past. The growth in the flow of traffic is moving east-west now. Over the past 20 years the growth had been in the north-south direction and now it is becoming more regional. There is still a lot of demand but it’s in consumer goods that come in to ports and then have to be moved to major cities. Freight is coming in from overseas to the big ports in Canada and is being distributed cross-Canada via rail and truck. The same is happening in the US, with the freight coming into the big ports and being distributed throughout the US. We will see more truck/rail combos in the future. The big change we will see is that we will become more regionally focused carriers rather than longhaul. The length of haul and where we are going will be different.
  
  Einwechter: I think we can be too narrow focused about what has happened the last six months. We do need to consider that maybe exports won’t continue to increase at the same rate we’ve been accustomed to but we are also looking at a period where a lot of bad things happened to the manufacturing base in Ontario and Quebec. Next year will be better in relative terms. We are in a trough right now but we need to think longer term and I still think the longer-term looks pretty good.
  
  Tanguay: We started out as a regional carrier but in the late 80s we became an international carrier. We are probably 80% international today. We’ve looked at our business and said as a small carrier how are we going to grow? We feel we compete with the large carriers yet we are also stuck competing with the smaller carriers in the regional business and the rates seem to be a lot lower. The smaller carriers don’t have the infrastructure and so don’t have the costs and yet they are able to get the freight out of the backdoor shipper. A regional shift is not necessarily a benefit for us. We’ve also seen TL freight shrink to LTL shipments. As demand is reduced it switches from TL to LTL. You speak to some of the LTL carriers and they seem to be doing quite well.
  
  Smyrlis: Rob is your outlook any different since Bison does a good chunk of its business in the west?
  
  Penner: The west is fairly buoyant but the demand is consumer-driven. There’s not a lot of export coming out of the west and east-west freight is not balanced freight. Alberta is probably the major influence on east-west traffic and that is purely consumer driven. Stuff is going in there but little is coming out that goes on a truck so we’ve had to be very creative in how we compete in the marketplace. The east-west trade will certainly impact trucking – containerized, intermodal or multimodal moves. We continue to look at and regionalize our operations where we can.

More Shorties

Here are some more interesting items that I found over the last few days about which I thought I would write a short note.

DUMBSET

I see that Smart Set is closing down on Tuesday and that downtown business owners are demanding the City take action to stop the bleeding.

Haven't they figured it out yet that the City is the problem. Haven't they figured out yet that the downtown is moving eastward toward the Casino and where the new City Hall is going to be built.

Why waste money on streetscaping and talking about what can be done in the "old" downtown. No one is listening or interested.

And if the Psychic quoted today in the Star is right, things can only get worse for the downtown while the story by Trevor Wilhelm should make the business owners cringe as Windsorites get more reasons to stay away!

WHERE WERE THE WARD 2 COUNCILLORS

I figure that Councillor Postma was off shopping in the US again so she could not make it but where was the West End booster, Councillor Jones. He was probably out watching the demolition of homes on Indian Road to ensure that City by-laws were being complied with.

I am totally shocked that the 2 West End Councillors missed the opportunity to enlighten us with how important Sandwich is to Windsor again. Imagine allowing Avi Friedman, "the internationally acclaimed architect and proponent of livable and sustainable communities," to walk around Old Walkerville and Ford City and not Sandwich.

Imagine all of the lines he could have made that the Star could have published attacking the border ideas of certain unnamed parties. Imagine how he could have waxed poetic about Sandwich's proposed Historical Designation.

They blew it big time!

WRESTLEMANIA

I am pretty disappointed in how our Superjock, Mayor Francis, is handling the WWE extravaganza. Just because Eddie cannot chum up with Roger Penske does not mean that the event should not be promoted heavily as Super Bowl was by Windsor.

Now Eddie is making sure that his name will be known with the wrestling crowd. I read that "WWE will be conducting a Wrestlemania press conference on 2/2 in Windsor, Ontario at the Silver City movie theater at 11:30AM. Among those scheduled to appear include Windsor mayor Eddie Francis" but I have not seen any Windsor build-up as for Super Bowl.

And just so that you know how big a deal the WWE is:

• "WWE fans had made WrestleMania 23 at Ford Field in Detroit, Mich., the highest grossing live event in World Wrestling Entertainment history.
  
  With tickets still available, WWE has already grossed more than $4.35 million in ticket sales for WrestleMania 23, shattering the company’s previous record of $3.9 million for WrestleMania X-8 at the Toronto SkyDome on March 17, 2002...
  
  Almost 50,000 tickets are now in the hands of fans for WWE’s annual pop culture extravaganza, putting the company on pace to achieve its objective of entertaining more than 78,000 fans at WrestleMania 23 on Sunday, April 1, 2007, which would make it the largest number of fans ever assembled in the history of Ford Field."

SELLEBRATORY PUCKING

A reader asked "do you think you could ask the mayor for an extra sellabratory puck for me? Since my grand kids will likely still be paying for the arena it might be nice if they get a valuable hand me down remembrance of this historical event.

CAPITOL IDEA

It should be interesting how Council deals with the Theatre's request for money.

If the City can spend all of that money to help out the Spitfires (What's a few extra millions in interim financing to get it done more quickly to help out a private business), one would think that there should be a few hundred thousand taxpayers dollars lying around somewhere to help out a cultural institution.

The Mayor is in a difficult position. He won't want to antagonize the Star who did not favour helping out Brentwood. Yet he said during his Inaugural Speech:

• "Reports and surveys have shown that a critically-important factor in attracting the knowledge-based jobs and workers we need, is to have a thriving arts and cultural community.
  
  We have such a strong arts and culture foundation."

Eddie won't be able to draw any more call centre jobs here, or doctors, if, only a few weeks after telling us how strong our arts foundation is, the Capitol goes into bankruptcy.

Oh well, perhaps we can give that away to St. Clair College free too. We can justify giving it away since otherwise, the City would have to deal with its "long-term sustainability." That is assuming of course that St. Clair completes the Cleary deal.

A FARHI TALE

Remember what the Star's City Hall reporter gushed in her BLOG about Shmuel Farhi, the London developer who exchanged land with the City for the East end arena deal.

• "Windsor city officials are right to be rolling out the red carpet for people like Farhi. Anyone who thinks Farhi will negatively impact anything should think again."

Here's a recent story about him. It looks like he plays hardball if he has to do so. I wonder if our Mayor and Council are in his league:

• "Farhi rejects parking plan for core area
  The developer insists a proposed garage on Queens Avenue "is not going to help."
  By JONATHAN SHER , FREE PRESS CITY HALL REPORTER Jan. 8, 2007
  
  You might think a city hall proposal to spend millions to build parking garages in the core would be backed by downtown's biggest property owner.
  
  After all, it was Shmuel Farhi, owner of more than 80 properties downtown, who has demanded more parking before he'll rehabilitate heritage buildings and secure tenants.
  
  But Farhi says he's upset with a city plan to seek a private partner to build a garage at 185 Queens Ave., next to the London Club.
  
  "A parking (garage) is not going to help rejuvenate this area . . . Parking is not needed there," said Farhi, who owns about 250,000 square feet of vacant space downtown.
  
  "I want to work with the city but I'm losing my patience," Farhi said yesterday.
  
  When Farhi speaks, city hall listens, as was the case 10 weeks ago, when he told politicians to step up with plans for parking or he'd raze or let rot some heritage properties.
  
  "Literally, I can knock down 20 buildings tomorrow," he said then.
  
  But while Farhi wants parking, he doesn't want a parking garage on the city-owned lot at Queens Avenue.
  
  With the downtown so much in need of residents and key services such as a supermarket, the city shouldn't commit key real estate to a stand-alone garage, he said.
  
  Instead the city should partner with a developer who could build parking underground, a supermarket on the main floor and residential apartments above, he insisted.
  
  The city also needs to stop renewing temporary permits for parking lots such as the one at the old London Mews, which has been a lot for seven years and is seeking another three years, he said.
  
  Temporary lots do nothing to fill vacant office space because those seeking to develop those spaces need permanent parking.
  
  "I have four heritage buildings within a block (of the London Mews) and that lot does nothing for long-term development," Farhi said.
  
  Farhi also contends the city examined the Queens Avenue location and rejected it for a parking structure.
  
  "Why are they bringing this dead horse out now?" he said.
  
  E-mail and phone messages detailing Farhi's concerns were sent last week to city finance head Vic Cote.
  
  A divided city council voted last month to seek a partner to build a parking garage at the Queens site, the first step in a plan that could cost taxpayers as much as $5 million.
  
  Deputy Mayor Tom Gosnell later said if the venture succeeds the city should spend up to $20 million to build more garages."

PS...London had a Capitol Theater too. Perhaps we should sell it to Farhi if the St. Clair College or the University have no interest in it and the City won't advance any funding. Here's what happened in 2006:

• "One of London's longtime downtown landmarks, the Capitol theatre on Dundas Street, has been sold to local developer Shmuel Farhi, who says he plans to turn it into a parking lot.
  
  The owner of Farhi Holdings Corp. said yesterday he desperately needs the 50 or so potential parking spaces at the Capitol site to accommodate his downtown tenants...
  
  Farhi said he plans to preserve the streetfront facade of the Capitol and will likely demolish the rear of the building soon.
  
  He added the Capitol is "an eyesore" that blighted the area.

Note, just recently according to the London Free Press

• "Downtown London's largest landowner has backed off a threat to demolish two Dundas Street buildings . . . for now.
  
  Shmuel Farhi said yesterday he'll wait eight months for the city to come up with a plan -- including a parking garage -- aimed at revitalizing a troubled, nine-block section of downtown that includes 204 and 206 Dundas St., the old Capitol Theatre and former Bowles Lunch Counter.
  
  But Farhi also wants council to back off efforts to designate the Capitol as a heritage building.
  
  "I don't need anyone designating those properties, putting a gun to my head," Farhi told board of control this week.
  
  "I (own heritage properties) because I believe in heritage. Designating that building will not bring it back to life."

Elevated Road: Take Your Pick

What do you think of the idea of constructing an elevated road for trucks along Huron Church and/or E C Row? Here are three readers' points of view:

1) Ed... that elevated highway concept is without a doubt the most logical, cost effective idea I have heard to date regarding the Border Crossing Issue. How does one sell it to the "grand Poobahs?" If it sounds logical and common sense to me, I would think it should be an easy "sell" to the politicians ..... errr.... logic, common sense......second thought... maybe not.

2) I've got a great idea. Windsor was willing to buy a dilapidated arena concept from Port Huron I wonder if Windsor would like to buy the Gardner Expressway from Toronto. I know the Mayor real well and would gladly open some doors.

3) Elevated expressways a la the Gardiner in Toronto, the 40 through Monteal, and others... the debate is how to tear these things down, not build them up. They have been proven to be very expensive when life cycle cost analysis is done...

Florida and other parts of the world have a long history of causeways and other elevated road systems. We do not. They might be used to the sight of freeways in the air, we are not...

Below grade freeways are the best option. Period. E C Row already splits the city. Use it. Sink it.

Slowing Down The Bridge

It appears that our Fearless Leader, Mayor and Chair of the Windsor Tunnel Commission, Eddie Francis, has been very successful in his Detroit/Windsor Tunnel PLANS.

The Star on Saturday ran a City advertisement for the next public open house to see what is proposed to be done for the Tunnel Plaza improvements. Of course the selected alternative is a massive amount of expropriation of land downtown. I believe that a lot of what may have to be taken is owned by the owners of the Duty Free Shop and by Burger King.

No half measures when the Feds and Province are paying 2/3 of the cost ie $10 million each!

Now some of the Mayor's comments are starting to make more sense.

REVERSE CUSTOMS

Remember when Eddie came back from the Mackinac Conference, he briefly made a comment that he was in favour of reverse customs. Previously, ex-Mayor Hurst

"who sits on the tunnel commission, said such plans are not feasible at the tunnel.

"It creates some real difficulties because as you know there is not a lot of plaza space available on either side," he said."

Now with this expansion, there is space. If Eddie had advocated for it years ago as Mayor, then he would have hurt the Tunnel of which he was Chair since the Bridge Co. had the space to install it. (They have advocated for reverse customs for years). The bridge would have had a huge competitive advantage that would have cost the Tunnel dearly. Of course, it might have attracted more business and tourists to Windsor but that does not count I guess.

SLOWING THE BRIDGE COMPANY

We also understand now why Eddie had to spend so much taxpayer money in legal fees. It may not have been just for trucks:

"The city has been put into a position of defending its interests in the border battle against the deep pockets of private business interests, Francis said.

Among those are the Ambassador Bridge and its billionaire owner Matty Moroun.

The bridge company is pushing for permit approvals to twin its span, which the city claims will cause environmental harm along the Huron Church corridor and to the west end...

None of the funds have been wasted given how the city... slowed the bridge company."

Was this merely part of it? Was Eddie as Mayor defending the commercial interest of the Tunnel as well since it is a City asset? Were his actions designed to help out the Tunnel's commercial interests against its competitor?

CAO John Skorobohacz echoed these comments when he said

"it has been money well spent... "Is the investment of a David Estrin warranted? Yeah, it's more than warranted" to make sure the city's interests are protected."

JAMMED STREETS

Remember how bad traffic was downtown with tie-ups at the Tunnel blocking Goyeau and Wyandotte thereby necessitating all of this Tunnel improvement work. You remember why don't you as I wrote before


"To ensure the safety of all their customers, the BTOA members unanimously agree to strict traffic management protocols. ..all members will continue to restrict bridge/tunnel volumes to levels that can immediately flow across facilities. The goal is to avoid having vehicles sitting on bridges or in tunnels."

What that exactly means is obviously open to interpretation. Because of the mess downtown, WTC has been forced to rethink its interpretation. I wonder if the City-retained Gridlock Sam whose City, New York, runs tunnels would take the same position as did the WTC in restricting traffic? I wonder if the WTC interpretation there would have meant traffic gridlock in NYC. If it was not the NYC view, and they are at ground zero for risks, then one has to wonder about Windsor's position and the reasons for it."

You will recall as well that, the Tunnel is now going to allow vehicles to queue inside the Tunnel to take the pressure off of City streets. It makes a joke of the Tunnel Improvement Plans which build nothing more than a parking lot on the Canadian side and don't move a single vehicle through the Tunnel more quickly.

In fact, as I also wrote, NO IMPROVEMENT PLANS ARE NEEDED AT ALL FOR TRAFFIC CONGESTION!

"You know that the new $30M Tunnel Plaza Improvement project was designed supposedly to get cars off of City streets ie it was for a giant parking lot that would be achieved by expropriating all kinds of property downtown. I was told at the last meeting held about the project that the new Tunnel Plaza area would hold about 165 vehicles.

So I did some math. I took the length of a 2007 Cadillac Escalade at 222 inches (I figured that was a big vehicle) and multiplied it by 165 and got an answer of 3052.5 feet. Considering that the Tunnel length is 5160 feet (which means it can hold about 279 vehicles), I figured that our Tunnel problem is now solved without spending $30 million of taxpayer money."

I also figured that the Tunnel volume in 1999 was 50% higher than it was today and the Tunnel functioned. Since the Tunnel Plaza improvement project was to allow 50% more vehicles to be processed, we were ok too. In other words, 50% more traffic using today's numbers would equal the volume that was handled in 1999. No need to build more when we know that the Tunnel can handle around 10 million vehicles, not the 6 or 7 million today.