JANUARY 9, 2008 IS TAX CUT NOW! DAY

In case you missed the announcement, WeACT will be promoting January 9, 2008 as

TAX CUT NOW day

I thought the budget was supposed to be finished in December. For some reason, it was said recently that the budget will not be completed now until sometime in February. That would give Windsorites lots of time to make the Mayor and Council aware that we want a tax reduction and not a tax increase.

Then I saw the story in today's Star that now says that Council has wrapped up their budget sessions. What gives? Wow, is it now February? Or were Windsorites lulled into thinking we had 2 more months?

Several members of WeACT were giving out TAX CUT NOW stickers last weekend around the City. My understanding is that they ran out of the several hundred that they had produced within a very few short hours. Apparently the response was more favourable than anticipated, and why not since our tax rate is so high. The WeACT people underestimated the large number of people who were eagerly prepared to show support for what WEACT is trying to accomplish.

If you want a copy of the sticker or want to assist in distributing them, then just drop me a line at my yahoo e-mail address. You will have to wait however until the next batch of stickers is produced.

Interesting too that right after the WeACT announcement, the tax increase rate is now said to be 0.95%, a significant drop from the 2%+ it was before. A co-incidence...I hardly think so. The Mayor and Council are scared of angry citizenry! They actually read BLOGs and forums where they can see the anger being expressed.

Here is the press release announcing TAX CUT NOW day. Let's see how much lower we can go

JANUARY 9, 2008

Join WeACT members and Wear the Sticker. Give it out to 10 of your friends, family and colleagues. Help Spread the Word!

The Windsor Association of Concerned Taxpayers (WeACT) is announcing that Tuesday, January 9th, 2008 will be observed as "Tax Cut Now" day in Windsor.

WeACT spokesperson, Chris Schnurr, said that the purpose of the day is to send a message to City Council that any tax increases given current economic conditions are simply unrealistic. Taxpayers expect that Council will reduce taxes - not increase them.

"While some believe that taxes in Windsor are below average, the overall tax burden -especially on working families, seniors and the unemployed - is high compared to other Ontario cities."

Volunteers will hand out "Tax Cut Now" buttons around the City to promote the day. Buttons can also be obtained by emailing a request directly to WeACT via the WeACT website www.weact.ca

WeACT is a citizens' group dedicated to promoting accountable, transparent and efficient municipal government and opposing unnecessary taxes and user fees.

"We are asking that Council seriously consider the ramifications of further tax increases on residents and our ability to compete for jobs with other jurisdictions."

Given that utility rates are increasing dramatically, especially water and levy rates, rather than attempting to have a tax increase even if close to zero, WeACT demands that every effort should be made to realize a tax decrease by focusing upon core municipal services.

"The city may have wants, but we need to focus upon delivering our needs effectively and efficiently," said Schnurr.

Denounce The Star Writers

Where is the Star Editorial? Why hasn't Jason Moore done another CKLW commentary yet? I can hardly wait until Gord Henderson calls him a naysayer and whiner. As for the Mayor, he will dismiss him out of hand.

Of course I'm talking about Dave Hall the business writer of the Windsor Star. How dare he write a story about the Conference Board of Canada Report in the Star telling us that

"Windsor performs badly in six other categories and is ranked 23rd overall in a report released today."

It's another one of those ridiculous think tank type stories to try to show us how poorly this City compares with others across Canada. What hogwash!

How dare he tell us how Windsor ranks:

• "Windsor's smog days hurt its environmental ranking. A shortage of residents in the 25-34 age category -- considered the most mobile and educated -- low voter turnouts and low usage of public transit hurt the city in the society category.
  
  In the report, Windsor's highest marks are for innovation (7th) and the city ranks in the middle of the pack for environment (17th) and society (17th), but falls behind in housing (21st), economy (23rd), education (24th) and health (25th).
  
  In the sub-categories that influenced rankings in the larger categories, Windsor was first in immigrant population growth, had the third best climate and the fourth lowest labour cost growth. But it was at or near the basement in such sub-categories as disposable income (26th), medical specialists per 100,000 people (25th), general practitioners (26th) and adult literacy (27th)."

Oh he is one of them all right. He tried to hide it by writing that Windsor "Ranked seventh for innovation" and by featuring Scientist Roman Maev, the founder of Tessonics, in his story. But it didn't work. He showed us his true colors by not being positive and pointing out the flaws in the City. He could have said something negative about the Conference Board too but didn't!

Oh you think his crime is minor don't you but it's not. He didn't have to report the story. He could have talked about it a bit so the Star could pretend it covered the news but not gone into the gory details. After all, if one wants to see a copy of the report, one must pay $2400 to the Conference Board. We don't have to do so now that we know how badly off Windsor is thanks to Dave.

Come on Jason... it's time that you can get back at the Windsor Star for all the scoops you lost out on. It is not just Bloggers who are reporting reality.

But the naysayers I'm afraid are getting a lot bolder even though they're trying to be clever about it.

Take the story written by Marty Gervais. He thinks he's being very smart too and that he can outmanoeuver the cheerleaders and sycophants. He can't. They are on to him now also.

Look at the story he wrote about William Phillips, a former economics professor and head of that department at Assumption and later the University of Windsor. It's a prime example. At the beginning, if one reads the story, one would think that Marty is part of the crowd that sees nothing wrong with Windsor:

• "Doom and gloom.
  
  The sky falling.
  
  Now 50 years later, one man, at 86, remembers vividly what it was like back then.
  
  It's on his mind because the chorus of doom and gloom is being heard again.
  
  Layoffs, plant closings, and forecasters are predicting the worst is yet to come.
  
  William Phillips, a former economics professor and head of that department at Assumption and later the University of Windsor, has seen it all before.
  
  He recalls the whining naysayers claiming Windsor was "at the end of the line."

Gervais knows since Windsorites are 27th in adult literacy that few people in town will ever read to the end of his story. Accordingly, he can appear to be a "good guy" while he really is not. One has to read the last half of the story to see what he is getting at.

• "The judge told me his father's real interest was getting the message out that all this current talk about the bleak outlook for the future of this city, and this country, is much the same as what was faced in the early 1960s. He also told me his father wasn't all that keen on making himself the focus of any story.
  
  Too bad.
  
  The message Phillips felt needed to be delivered was good 50 years ago.
  
  It's also good today.
  
  It doesn't mean sugar coating anything, or covering one's ears and eyes in hopes that trouble will disappear.
  
  It means hard work.
  
  It means facing realities.
  
  Phillips knew what that meant in the 1960s. Canada was then in the throes of a recession, and the doomsayers were chanting much the same thing as they are today.
  
  He got on his typewriter and drew up a call to arms. The slogan he drafted was simple and effective: Yes, Windsor Is Moving Again.
  
  The thrust of it was to mobilize those in business, labour, education and the professions to pool their talents to embark on projects to help the city.
  
  This was organized under the auspices of the Greater Windsor Foundation, which was created in 1961.
  
  Phillips, as its president, called for "a sober and realistic assessment of the positive points of this community..."
  
  But Phillips was clear in his message that it would take more than a spirit of boosterism to get Windsor moving in a new direction.
  
  In one speech in April 1964, he said: "If any city is conscious of its shortcomings, from having seen them paraded before itself and before others, it is Windsor.
  
  "The city has come to grips with stark reality too often to be moved by flag-waving or booster club tactics.... The day may come when we can wave flags, but not yet."
  
  True enough. We're there now. Again. We need this kind of leadership again. We need this kind of vision."

What a nerve. Who does he think he is... is Gervais giving a boost to the Tony Toldo initiative and giving it his approval? Toldo recently called together a group of business and union leaders in Windsor to see what could be done. Hmmm not a word of praise for whatever it is that the Mayor is doing with his secretive conference to which Councillors are not invited.

What utter gall. Pointing out how Phillips did not need a team of PR flacks costing $250,000 and did not spend $900,000 on branding of the City but merely banged out a new slogan on a typewriter. Imagine, shunning boosterism and cheerleading.

I'm afraid that the Thought Police will have a much bigger job than was considered if this kind of activity by two senior Star writers is allowed to continue. I know the regular police force cut their $60+M budget by 1% but there is no doubt that the budget of those who want to close down anyone who says anything negative will have to grow exponentially.

And today in the Star, we have read the ultimate heresy. I wonder if you know to which story I am referring. I will wait a day or two in case the writer may have second thoughts. He may have to get a job in Calgary ASAP once his words get out.

Another Ambassador Bridge Video

You may have already seen this video since it was blogged first by Chris Schnurr. Thanks to Chris for providing me with the software that allowed me to convert it from from DVD mode and to upload it to my BLOGsite.

The video was shown at the recent press conference where the Bridge Co. announced their next step in the Environmental Assessment process in Canada.

Take a few minutes and listen to it. I think that you'll find it very interesting.

For those who are in Government on both sides of the border I would suggest that you listen to the video at especially around the 3:50 minute mark. To me, this is a way out for everyone to provide for immediate needs and those in the future. It is quite consistent with what the Governments have been saying as well, especially in the last few months.

Each project has its own purpose and they are NOT mutually exclusive.

All that needs to happen now is for someone to set up a meeting between the Senior Levels in Canada and the United States and the Ambassador Bridge Company and the borders crossing issue is solved. It really is as simple as that.

The Arena's New Parking Lot

There is something very strange going on but I don't know what it is.

Are we being set up again with the good news story before we hear the bad news?

I am sure that you saw the story in the Star

• "Arena cost saving eyed
  
  The Spitfires’ new hockey home could cost almost $1 million less than budgeted, Windsor’s chief financial officer told a city council committee Friday.
  
  An anticipated savings of $962,000 is being projected on the total $64.9million price tag for the WFCU Centre, said city treasurer Onorio Colucci. Construction of the multi-ice pad facility is still on track and expected to be completed by the end of 2008."

On track, on time and on budget...didn't we hear something similar before with respect to the funky bus terminal and the Windsor/Detroit Tunnel renovations. [August 23, 2007 "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics"]. Now I am really getting worried. As I said at the time

• "Effectively what this means is that there can be no lies. It also means that there can be no truth. Lies and truth are now flexible concepts depending on what someone chooses to use as the starting and finishing point. Those points are determined by what one wants to achieve."

If I were the Mayor, I would be shouting the savings from the rooftops. If I were the Councillor formerly known as Councillor Budget who is responsible for ensuring that the project stays on budget, I would be taking credit especially if I was going to make a run to be the next mayor of Windsor.

So why did they let the CFO take the credit instead? Why were the names of politicians conspicuous by their absence?

Perhaps this is one reason. I do not know if this is true or not but a reader sent me the following note:

• "I thought that you might like to know that the tender for the new arena closed last week, estimated cost another six million dollars. They still have to build the road and the bridge over Little River. The tender was for the parking lot, concrete sidewalks and electrical lighting for same."

I think will be considered extras and not part of the $64.9 million arena cost although the Star should say to be consistent that they should be included based on their Editorial that they did about the LaSalle arena.

But here's something else. We all know that the number of parking spaces for the East end arena is inadequate. You don't really think that people who go to Spitfire hockey games are going to be happy to take a Windsor Transit bus after the game to some off-site location to pick up their cars do you.

Obviously then a solution is needed to find more parking spaces nearby. Let me suggest an alternative and help save the City a couple of hundred thousand dollars so that they can use that money for the crossing guards.

Did you see this story in the Business Section of the Windsor Star as well:

• "City mulls testing at Wickes site
  
  Windsor city council is considering spending $200,000 for an environmental assessment of the contamination levels on the former Wickes Manufacturing property at 9082- 9152 Tecumseh Rd. E.
  
  The 8.89-acre property was recently listed as part of the city’s annual property tax sale valued at $2.66 million, but there were no bidders, largely because of the potential contaminants that remain in the soil.
  
  City deputy treasurer Janice Guthrie said the assessment will also help the city decide whether to assume ownership of the property.
  
  Under legislation, the city has two years to decide whether to assume ownership. If it does, it then has the option to use the property for municipal purposes or sell it on the open market.
  
  Wickes, which manufactured bumpers, vacated the site in 1990 and left behind chromium, copper and nickel deposits."

Now isn't that plant near the location of the arena? The land may be contaminated and so no one is going to buy it. Why spend $200,000 when the City can turn it into a parking lot for the arena.

Here is a news story back in 1987:

• "It has not been a good week for Wickes Manufacturing Co. Ltd., which owns Windsor Bumper.
  
  ..the company appears disheartened by a "high risk" label pinned on it last week after two years of trying to clean up its act.
  
  A report commissioned by the Environment Ministry released last Friday said Windsor Bumper posed more risk to human health than 112 other waste sites on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes between Amherstburg and Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.

The Ministry went on to say that

• "the risk posed by the ponds ended with their removal, and that the reaction to the study has been excessive, since it was almost 18 months old by the time it was released last Friday."

Notwithstanding what the Ministry said, that quick search of my database ought to be enough to justify that the land may have serious problems. Now we can do a "signature" Brownfields redevelopment, have parking for the arena and keep the crossing guards working at least for the next six months by saving $200,000 on another consultant's report.

So that may be why the Mayor and Councillor Brister are keeping their heads low. Save a million here, spend millions there.

The More One Learns, The More One Wonders

I really cannot understand the reason for all of us forgetfulness. Has the Windsor amnesia disease spread throughout the entire region on both sides of the border?

To be honest, after all of this time, I would have thought that I and others who are so involved in the border matter would have uncovered by now most of the relevant documentation that would deal with the border crossing issue. Unfortunately, the answer is that we have not.

I am sure that there are still tons of information buried in the files of the Ontario Transportation Ministry and MDOT as an example that would be very helpful in understanding what the issues in the border crossing matter really are. And would save time and money too.

We should not have to search to look for this documentation. Rather it should have been presented to us by the various Governments involved as part of the overall information package. Why have they been hiding this data from us? The clear answer has to be that if we had known about the information presented then it might have deterred the politicians from doing what it seems the bureaucrats want to do regardless of how much it costs.

Remember my BLOG [February 22, 2006 "A Waste Of Three Years"] where I discussed the 300+ page "Michigan-Ontario Railroad Border Crossing Infrastructure" Report. I wrote at the time:

• "I am shocked that MDOT has been sitting on a document that effectively killed a DRTP-type project in 1991! If this kind of a project made no sense, then why was this not brought forward right away. Why did DRTP have to be examined and only now eliminated?"

I found another article over the weekend and it troubles me greatly. What bothers me even more is that the consultant involved in this article is also the US consultant on the DRIC project. The MDOT person has also some involvement in the DRIC project. If one goes to the article, the first question that immediately jumps to mind is why is anyone talking about building another border crossing. The second question is what other information is there in the Gateway and other files that we ought to know about.

The article is: "Ambassador Bridge/Gateway Project Major Investment Study: The First Application in Michigan" by Andrew J. Zeigler, Michigan Department of Transportation; and Joseph C. Corradino, The Corradino Group. It is a description of how the Ambassador Gateway project was carried out. Doesn't this sound like DRIC:

• "This project is unique for several reasons: (1) it represents a cooperative effort with a privately owned international bridge; ... and (3) it involved a consortium of state, local and federal agencies and the private sector represented by a Steering Committee that provided guidance throughout the project.
  
  The project included an intense public involvement effort. Public meetings were combined with numerous one-on-one outreach efforts. Alternative access design concepts were progressively developed both in number and scope from illustrative concepts, to practical alternatives, and finally resulting in a preferred alternative. Item after item was debated at the Project Steering Committee meetings, which the public was invited to attend, and did!"

One notable exception however is the following:

• "The resulting MIS was completed months ahead of schedule; with public support and a community that endorsed the project openly; and a package of $100 million in highway access improvements without displacing any buildings within an urban setting."

We are still dragging on with the DRIC process with a seeming lack of support by the public and it looks like there will be major disruptions on the US side of the border at least and perhaps on the Canadian side depending upon where the new DRIC bridge and Plaza are located.

Here's the problem that the Ambassador Gateway project was designed to solve:

• "The problem being addressed by the MIS is the need for improved access at the United States end of the Ambassador Bridge. Access improvements are key to accommodating future border crossing traffic which is growing exponentially and is stimulated by trade among the United States, Canada and Mexico."

The issue in other words was traffic capacity at the Ambassador Bridge and improved flow-through. Interestingly, once the final solution was reached (after 15 alternatives were considered)

• "The most significant aspect of this proposed $100 million project is that only one residential unit will be taken by its construction."

Isn't it amazing that hundreds of homes and businesses have to be taken now in Delray and no one thinks twice about it.

Here though is the key sentence in the article:

• "Other positive effects of the project are increased safety through better access to the Bridge to handle almost twice as much traffic in the next 20 years as is present today; improved air quality, as Bridge traffic is not interrupted by stop lights."

The article was written in 1997. 20 years from that date is 2017. The volume in 1997 was 2.7 million trucks. Doing the math, the Ambassador Gateway project was designed to handle 5.4 million trucks. And that is before all the significant changes with respect to Customs that have been taken and the new booths that have been added. The article was also written just before the height of the truck volume in 1999, which volume has never yet reached that height again. The Bridge volume in 2006 was 3.64 million trucks with the Bridge at only 50-60% capacity today. Does this mean that the Bridge can now handle over 7 million trucks?

The article, it should be pointed out also, did not state that the Ambassador Gateway project was designed to accommodate another bridge. In case you have forgotten as well, US DRIC said that is preferred crossing location was the Ambassador Bridge site.

Please explain to me therefore how DRIC can suggest going forward knowing that the Gateway project can handle 5.4 million trucks, without another bridge, a volume that may not be reached now for decades as both MDOT and Transportation Minister Cannon have acknowledged recently.

Does any of this make sense to you? Why have millions been continually spent when there is no justification for doing so? When it was clear that traffic volumes have decreased significantly, why the push to go forward? Why haven't the consultants and the MDOT representative revealed this information?

While I am sure that the P3 conference in Toronto was very interesting, did the Transport Canada officials warn investors that they might not be able to recover costs for decades to come, especially given the competition from the existing bridge? Please tell me who is going to invest in the new bridge without a huge subsidy paid for I assume by the taxpayers of Canada and the United States. If I am right in my analysis, how can this new bridge be paid for and what will happen to the existing crossings in southwest Ontario and southeast Michigan if they have to compete with a taxpayer-funded crossing?

The DRIC process is out of control. Our politicians are acting like fools "respecting the process" as millions are wasted and relevant information is not provided.

There is more too in another article that I found on the Blue Water Bridge. I've mentioned this fact before but I thought that it was worthwhile mentioning it again given the huge amounts of money that had been spent on trying to figure out where a new bridge should go to duck the salt mines and brine wells.

The article is "A Tale of Two Bridges, Spanning Blue Waters." The relevant section that I think is important is the following:

• "[In the 1920's] With politics heavily influencing the decision about where to place the bridge, all four proposals called for it to extend from downtown Sarnia to downtown Port Huron. City officials in both municipalities feared economic damage to their central business districts if the proposed bridge were located away from the downtown areas...
  
  In the 1970s, increased traffic volume inspired bridge planners to begin to study the need for a second bridge. Similar to the situation fifty years earlier, the politically sensitive issue of where to locate the bridge preceded who would build and pay for it. However, the established bureaucracies of the 1970s were familiar with transportation planning and had the experience to conduct the needed studies.
  
  The Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communications (OMTC) and the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) assembled an international team of engineers and transportation and environmental planners to direct the St. Clair River Crossing Study. The team selected three locations to examine: one adjacent to the existing bridge; another to the south that would link Marysville, Michigan, and Sarnia; a third location between Marine City and Sombra, Ontario. The study team wanted to learn if a new bridge at any of these three locations would divert enough traffic from the Blue Water Bridge to significantly extend its life. The study also looked at a tunnel option, but exorbitant costs quickly caused the team to drop it...
  
  After holding public meetings and studying several alternatives recommended construction of a second bridge just south of the existing bridge.
  
  The Canadian Blue Water Bridge Authority, which owned and operated the existing bridge, had already purchased right-of-way immediately to the south side of the bridge. A new bridge located there would require less displacement of property and homes than one to the north. A southern location would accommodate the expansion of the bridge plaza on both the American and Canadian sides of the bridge."

Do you see what I mean, again. Please don't tell me that the ideal location is not right beside the existing bridge. Please don't tell me that the DRIC people don't understand that. Please don't tell me that the decision-makers don't understand that a new bridge is not a financial go for years because of a lack of volume and will not be a go for years to come.

Please don't tell me that this entire process is not designed to force the Ambassador Bridge to sell out and to sell out cheaply so that the Governments can do what the Ambassador Bridge Company wants to do.

Or have a whole bunch of people suffered a memory lapse!

Stage-managed Grandstanding

None of the City Hall Insiders that I talked to could figure it out.

Why would Ward One's Councillor formerly known as Councillor Budget stand up at the end of a Council meeting and out of the blue tell everyone how generous he was and that he was not going to receive a CPI salary increase. That was a 2% increase on his Councillor salary I believe.

Of course, not accepting the thousands of dollars in the Boards salaries he receives as an extra would have been more meaningful but, hey, let's not carry the Christmas spirit too far.

Everyone assumed that it was part of it his mayoral campaign and it probably is. But there was more to it than that as we are finding out.

I wondered about Councillor Lewenza and his sudden desire for openness. There was more to it than that as well as we are finding out:

• "The public should know our tough decisions," Lewenza said. "I disagree with meeting in camera on these issues. The public needs to know services we might be eliminating and the tough choices that are being made."
  
  Lewenza will bring forward a recommendation at the next budget session on Monday that council take the critical discussion of employee layoffs out into the public venue and not remain in camera as they have done for the past two weeks.
  
  "I have to cut things this budget year, I couldn't agree to last year. We are now going to be cutting services I didn't have the appetite to cut the year before...
  
  Mayor Eddie Francis said Lewenza brought up his suggestion of bringing the debate from out behind closed doors on Tuesday.
  
  "He raised the issue with me. I think it's good idea, we just have to make sure we are not violating the municipal Act," Francis said. "As long we are not violating rules, I'm OK.
  
  "We might need a legal position on how to do it. It's not possible to do in all areas. I told (Lewenza) to bring it up on Monday see what what the response is of others and administration. I just encouraged him to do it."

I thought that this was the way that the pro-union Lewenza would put pressure on his Councillor colleagues to do the job cutting in public thereby forcing them not to do so. I was wrong.

Oh, and as for openness and transparency... Councillor Lewenza voted against the Motion of Councillor Dilkens so that did not last very long.

Now we see what the stage managed grandstanding was for. Just read the recent Henderson column and especially its last two lines:

• "These folks need, and deserve, a city hall as cost-efficient and business-minded as any corporation fighting for its survival.
  
  So spare us the collective hysteria over relatively modest municipal job cuts."

That's what it's all about. Finding two suckers, three if you include Councillor Halberstadt whose name was plastered all over the column, to take the hit for "Francis Days" and the big job cuts that are about to come at City Hall.

Councillor Lewenza is such a loyal Eddie-Councillor. He discussed his issue with the Mayor in advance and received permission from the Council Principal to do so. He doesn't have the nerve to raise issues the way Councillors Marra and Dilkens did without telling the Mayor. After all he did not want one of those stares and a scolding or to be kept after school with a detention. What will his union buddies say now? You see, it will not be so tough for him to have union workers fired too when WUC goes P3. After all,

• "I have to cut things this budget year, I couldn't agree to last year. We are now going to be cutting services I didn't have the appetite to cut the year before..."

As for Councillor Teacher's Pet... well he did the dirty work before for Eddie on the arena and earned a pat on the head from Gord. He just received another one.

• "We can't expect employees to make sacrifices if we don't."

You can imagine the loyalty of these two Councillors to the Mayor:

• "There aren't many issues Brister and Coun. Ken Lewenza agree on. But Brister endorses Lewenza's call for public budget sessions over staff cuts."

That's how stage-managed grandstanding is done. When something out of the ordinary happens at Council, expect something behind it. The end result always is that the Mayor finds someone else to take the hit if it goes wrong and the praise if it goes right.

Fighting Like Cats And Dogs

I rarely watch Council "live" anymore. To be honest, I can't stomach it. It just makes me so angry. The games-playing, the posturing, the lack of discussion about key issues in the City, and the lack of respect and civility. You can almost feel the tension in that Council Chamber every Monday now, even watching it at home.

What I do is tape it and playback any interesting parts. This also allows me to play a specific portion of the tape several times if there is something that I need to Blog about.

So imagine my surprise last night when I played the tape and saw the bickering between the Mayor and Councillor Halberstadt. It got quite bitter actually when the Mayor interrupted the Councillor's speech with another one of his "clarifications." He especially likes to "clarify" when he might be blamed for something. I guess the Mayor just cannot hold himself back but must butt in right away. Of course that also breaks the train of thought of the speaker and also doesn't allow the listener to hear the complete message in one complete statement. Is that a debating trick learned too?

I must admit that in going through the tape quickly I could not find a reason for the animosity between the two last night. I thought maybe it had to do something with the proposed Pet Shop issue. Then I read Councillor Halberstadt's BLOG this morning. No wonder there were fireworks.

Councillor Halberstadt revealed that the Mayor and all of his Council colleagues are prepared to spend $900,000 as part of the Capital Budget for a branding exercise. You read it correctly. At a time when we are pennypinching every dollar, we're going to rebrand the City. According to the Councillor

• "$900,000 off the 2008 capital budgetcould lower our tax rate, now at around three percent, by one-quarter of a percentage point."

I am not sure if this is meant to be a sick joke or not but it is certainly not something that I'm laughing about. Is this another of the issues that the Mayor wants to throw out like cutting the school crossing guards to see if anyone is listening? I know that he has not yet been able I believe to get his $250,000 to hire a bunch of PR flacks but is this another way to do it?

Now I personally am tired of being criticized for what I say about Windsor. Councillor Halberstadt added a new negative term in his BLOG "Windsor basher." I certainly do not want to be categorized in this fashion so I am going to do something positive to help out the Mayor. I'm going to suggest a slogan for the City, will prepare a speech for him to publicize it and do it all at no cost to taxpayers. In fact, I will even suggest bringing in a private enterprise partner to help out and an event whwere the public can be involved. Now if that is not being positive, then I don't know what is. Here goes:

• "I want the spirit that we showed during the Super Bowl … to live on.
  
  It was about us discovering ourselves.
  
  Believing in ourselves.
  
  And proudly showing off our city.
  
  Attitude matters. The way people talk and act is contagious. People’s attitudes impact the way cities thrive and grow, or wither and stagnate.
  
  You can feel a new attitude walking the streets of Windsor today. You can feel it.
  
  We felt it during SuperBowl week.
  
  That attitude is making a tangible difference to the quality of life in our city.
  
  The time has come, to embrace this new attitude. To show it. To live it.
  
  To love it.
  
  That’s why tonight, I’m sharing a new idea that captures our new attitude.
  
  We’ve been calling it … “Love this place”.
  
  “Love this place” is about Windsor’s new attitude. It is about the better future we’re building together. It is about the positive, roll-up-your sleeves approach that is seeing things get done in this city.
  
  And it is about all the reasons why we love Windsor.
  
  Like our symphony.
  
  Our downtown.
  
  Our parks.
  
  And our art gallery.
  
  Our neighbourhoods.
  
  Our friends.
  
  And for those of us who are here at the Cleary tonight, I need your help.
  
  I need you to sign the “Love this Place” banner we have outside this room and write down the things that you love about Windsor.
  
  Now, “Love this Place” and the new attitude we’ve got in this city, deserves to be celebrated.
  
  As does our City.
  
  A century ago, Windsor’s birthday was an important event that brought the whole town – as it was – together.
  
  Yet over the years, the celebration of our birthday was forgotten.
  
  It’s time to bring it back.
  
  And tonight, I want to invite everybody to come together – as we did during the SuperBowl. This time, we’re celebrating our birthday – just like it was years ago.
  
  We will be holding a birthday party for the City of Windsor on May 24th weekend.
  
  I want everyone to come down to the riverfront, and have a good time. Meet new people. And enjoy what our city has to offer.
  
  There is one other exciting new way we can celebrate Windsor.
  
  For years, Roots clothing has symbolized what’s great about being Canadian.
  
  The spirit of outdoor adventure. The beauty of our land. And the effort and perseverance that it takes … to be an Olympic champion.
  
  And now … Windsor has its own line of clothing designed by Roots.
  
  It is cool … modern … and proud – and so is Windsor.
  
  We will be the first city associated with the Roots brand.
  
  Those of us at the Cleary tonight will be able to see the new Roots wear in the Canadian Club room during the reception after this speech.
  
  Let us know what you think before it goes to Council for final approval."

Oh you caught me, dear reader. You are a lot smarter than I give you credit for. I should know never to underestimate my readers. I did not plagiarize this language. I took it and copied it right from the Mayor's 2006 State of the City speech.

You see we already spent a ton of money on branding in Windsor for the "Love This Place" slogan. Whatever happened to it? Didn't anyone love us? Did we put the slogan into the trash bin? Does anyone remember actually seeing a branding campaign based on that slogan?

What I find interesting is that the Mayor gave us this positive message in 2006 and he still giving it to us. Don't you find it strange that nothing has happened to make things better? In fact all we get is slamming of those who aren't looking at the world through Rose City-coloured glasses.

So there you have it... being positive... doing all of this work for the City for free to save capital dollars on sloganeers who create logos that do nothing for us.

Okay, if the City wants a new slogan and logo I'll give you one. It's one that my son created a long time ago as an idea for the Downtown business group:

Windsor is Electri-City