Detroit Freepress repost
I thought this article warranted reposting. Mr. Schnurr has argued in the past that our mayor is at fault for not sitting down and reasoning with Mr. Maroun. Recent events make the ABC seem like these people can really not be reasoned with proving our mayor right once again in his move to keep Windsor out of the fight and let the Province and Feds deal with it.
Couple of questions that I’ve seen asked but no one has picked upon.
1. How much of the Bridge’s value is due to it being protected by the government from the fully privately funded competition such as the DRTP tunnel being built?
If You get into a business that has a high degree of Gov’t involvement, aren’t you assuming the risk of gov’t competition along with the protection provided by the gov’t?
2. If Windsor had gotten more involved in this dispute, would a city run by a Lebanese Mayor also be sued for discrimination against an Arab American Businessman?
3. Gotta repeat out the fact that an immigrant who became a success is accusing another immigrant who became a success of being a double agent of their country of origin.
If our Mayor is not being proven right on this particular issue, what would it take? In this case for the mayor bashers, the enemy of your enemy is not your friend. Unless your the uniblogger, whose motives for fighting the DRTP are now called into question as I’d infer his original intentions were just consistent with his blog’s unipurpose support of the Bridge Company and not really to protect any Windsorite or neighborhood. Live by the conspiracy, you can now die by the conspiracy theory.
Oh, and by the way, I actually support the Bridge second span on the basis that NEXUS lanes need to be end to end if the program is to have any meaning. However once a second span takes trucks off the bridge maybe the truck lane could be converted to Nexus. I also believe it was wrong to end the DRIC Road at the expressway as I believe it should have been connected to Downtown by way of the Bridge and that the exit that takes you across all truck lanes out of the bridge to downtown is a hazard. I realize that this would disrupt the neighborhood but if your gonna have a border crossing, have it work right.
http://www.freep.com/article/20100501/OPINION01/5010322/1336/opinion/Borderline-silliness-over-new-bridge
Borderline silliness over new bridge
Michigan’s governor a Canadian double agent? It sounds like the premise for a good Comedy Channel spoof on “The Manchurian Candidate.”
But only sheer panic can have prompted Ambassador Bridge owner Matty Moroun’s spokesman to have lobbed the lunatic allegation that Canadian-born JenniferGranholm
is conspiring to sell Michigan’s border to her native country.
Moroun is upset because the Canadian government has pledged $550 million to fund Michigan’s portion of a second Detroit River bridge that would compete with his span for a share of traffic at the busiest crossing on the northern U.S. border. He’s prepared to challenge the offer in court on the grounds, his attorney says, that Canada is using its sovereign power “to discriminate against an Arab-American businessman.”
Ironically, that absurd insertion of Moroun’s ethnicity followed hard upon Ambassador Bridge spokesman Dan Stamper’s suggestion that Michigan’s governor, who came to the United States as a young child, is somehow betraying her country’s interest in favor of Canada’s.
That assertion would be merely silly if Stamper’s employer were not a longtime champion of hardworking immigrants. In that context, his spokesman’s remarks seem particularly regrettable.
Moroun’s real problem is that governments on both sides of the border are increasingly uncomfortable with his autocratic posture toward what is, whoever owns the steel, a profoundly public trust.
Granholm is only the latest in a bipartisan line of Michigan governors, including Democrat Jim Blanchard and her immediate predecessor, Republican John Engler, to enthusiastically support the construction of a second, publicly owned bridge.
Moroun’s problem is not that Canadians have hijacked Michigan’s sovereignty, but that he is losing the battle for public opinion in his own country.
Michigan’s governor a Canadian double agent? It sounds like the premise for a good Comedy Channel spoof on “The Manchurian Candidate.”
But only sheer panic can have prompted Ambassador Bridge owner Matty Moroun’s spokesman to have lobbed the lunatic allegation that Canadian-born JenniferGranholm is conspiring to sell Michigan’s border to her native country.
Moroun is upset because the Canadian government has pledged $550 million to fund Michigan’s portion of a second Detroit River bridge that would compete with his span for a share of traffic at the busiest crossing on the northern U.S. border. He’s prepared to challenge the offer in court on the grounds, his attorney says, that Canada is using its sovereign power “to discriminate against an Arab-American businessman.”
Ironically, that absurd insertion of Moroun’s ethnicity followed hard upon Ambassador Bridge spokesman Dan Stamper’s suggestion that Michigan’s governor, who came to the United States as a young child, is somehow betraying her country’s interest in favor of Canada’s.
That assertion would be merely silly if Stamper’s employer were not a longtime champion of hardworking immigrants. In that context, his spokesman’s remarks seem particularly regrettable.
Moroun’s real problem is that governments on both sides of the border are increasingly uncomfortable with his autocratic posture toward what is, whoever owns the steel, a profoundly public trust.
Granholm is only the latest in a bipartisan line of Michigan governors, including Democrat Jim Blanchard and her immediate predecessor, Republican John Engler, to enthusiastically support the construction of a second, publicly owned bridge.
Moroun’s problem is not that Canadians have hijacked Michigan’s sovereignty, but that he is losing the battle for public opinion in his own country.
Post Feedback
Mr. Maroun gives considerable political donations we know about to the Republican dominated Michigan Senate. He also gave $50,000 to Kilpatrick’s wife which was unreported because it was given to her and not him as a friend. This kinda calls into question how much he has really donated to the cause.
I think the republican senate will still rule in his favor without direct intervention from the Federal gov’t
Proven right!? Keep Windsor out of the fight!? What do you call the city’s bone-headed Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Plan carried well beyond anything of heritage value to conveniently control the properties acquired by the Bridge Co. on Indian Rd…. and many other unfortunate property owners caught up in it. This was a direct salvo aimed at Matty Moroun from our very naive mayor just as ‘GreenLink’ was aimed at the province…both of which landed with a thud.
Who would be foolish enough to accuse Eddie Francis of ‘restraint’.
I agree that they shouldn’t have used the heritage process as a weapon
however doug schmidt stated it well
“That’s because what might be a fine strip of proposed greenspace today (instead of all that boarded-up ugliness) might soon enough come under the traffic-vibrating shadow of a twinned Ambassador. Once that’s up, the promised park, now in the shade, could be converted quick enough into revenue-generating parking spaces for the adjacent parking-starved University of Windsor. For a glimpse of a possible future reality, visit under the belly of the current span and imagine that sight doubled.
———
Unless, of course, the bridge company takes its parkland plan to city hall and applies its signature to the written promise. (Under Windsor’s interim control bylaw, any demolition application must be accompanied by a stated future use).”
if the bridge is right they can easily call the city by writing the use.
I don’t agree with the heritage study. I also saw what happened to the homes in Detroit. How about we ignore both sides rhetoric and simply judge based on actions.
If the bridge wants to convince me they are a benevolent then they need to stop letting their properties deteriorate on both sides of the border.
Mark,
ABC was ready to present their green plan for the east side of Indian Road as part of the Custom’s plaza expansion site plan control application. Council balked at that, not wanting to be seen as supporting anything that would make it easier to construct the second span aka the replacement bridge.
Look, by no means am I exonerating ABC. They haven’t done a very good job of marketing the the replacement bridge. They have, for the most part, been reactionary. Understandable for a private company that, for years, didn’t have to do or invest much to earn billions.
Yet again, Mr. Boscariol distorts fact by imposing todays arguments on yesterday’s actions.
The bridge construction and the state of Indian Road are two separate issues altogether. The former - the city having very little control over; the latter - having all control over.
Furthermore, residents fed up with the antics that both sides, have taken matters into their own hands by one - appealing the Heritage Study to the OMB; and two launching their own legal challenge against the state of the boarded up homes and the impact of the city’s actions on their neighbourhoods. It’s now out of everyone’s hands save for the courts and OMB.
I will restate what I have written several times since back in 2006.
We missed an opportunity. Was there an opportunity? We’ll never know because no one tried. We do know what they tried and the rationale behind it as that is on public record.
What we do know, the actions of the Mayor and council majority have contributed to the state of this neighbourhood today.
As for tomorrow - the OMB and courts will decide.
I agree with Chris…if the second span is built will be decided by higher authorities and little influenced by whether it displaces a line of delapitated houses or a vacated greenbelt. But, I disagree with his contention that it’s too late. The Mayor and Council could fix the Indian Rd. problem tomorrow if they were willing to recognize their original misjudgements, put political principals aside and do what is obviously the right thing. Failure to do so should reflect on their merits for re-election in October.
Wow, another pro-Mayor gambit from Scaledown’s own version of Gord Henderson, Mark Boscariol. What a surprise.
Once again, you try to paint all of the “Mayor-bashers” with the same brush. You need to get out more. I believe the vast majority of people who oppose the Mayor (and their numbers are growing) have never heard of, or could care less about, the “uniblogger”. In fact, Mark, he seems to come up in every single thing you write about the border. Why is that? I think you give him credit for far more influence than he deserves.
As for the Mayor being “proven right” and “keeping Windsor out of it”…I guess the $7 million plus the Mayor spent on outside consultants and legal fees, all the while keeping his own administration, council, not to mention nosy citizens in the dark, is forgotten? The endless threats of suing the Province? The reckless exploitation of residents fears about air quality and disease? Also forgotten?
Personally, I was attending DRIC open houses and consultations pushing for mitigations (and ensuring citizen input was on the permanent record) during the era where the Mayor and council were encouraging people to BOYCOTT the DRIC process, calling it, in published comments, a “fraud”. Long before Greenlink, residents were pushing for tunnels, land bridges, trails, berms, you name it. Only when it was clear that the Mayor’s first “final position” on the border was dead in the water (the widely discredited Schwartz Bypass) did he have Estrin hire new gurus to devise Greenlink.
I challenge you to write something about the border without mentioning the uniblogger, and without revising history to prop up the Mayor. Whatever his successes may be, any long term view of the border file quickly shows the Mayor’s weakness: He tries to control everything, and is committed to good PR over principle. He is not accountable for what he said last year or last month, he just has something to sell you today.
Alan, ever hear the quote
The sign of the true intellect is he ability to hold two opposing thoughts in your mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.
F Scott Fitzgerald
I can both support and oppose the mayor at the same time. The fact that you can’t speaks more about you than him.
I fulfilled your so called challenge when I stated my position on the ABC’s second span being essential to make Nexus work as well as my belief that while they are under seige by gov’t now, they have been beneficiaries of gov’t protection against private competition as well. I don’t believe many other people state those points although I don’t profess to be the originator of those points
Instead of being a mayor supporter or basher why don’t you try to show some independent thought by acknowledging his accomplishments while at the same time criticizing his weaknesses.
Its feels free to not be beholden to any one group,
Mark,
You did know Fitzgerald copied a lot of his writings from his wife’s diary?
“Plagiarism begins at home.”
Zelda Fitzgerald: The Collected Writings
Just thought it was interesting an point of history.
OK then, according to Fitzgerald you are a true intellect, and the fact that I cannot support and oppose the Mayor at the same time says something (I presume unflattering) about me. I am not a true intellect like you, I guess is your point.
I am not beholden to any group, and I come by my complete opposition to this Mayor from my own direct experience.
What mayoral accomplishments should I acknowledge?
I suppose I could acknowledge his achievment in raising his own take home pay 100 percent in 5 years while the City he is supposed to lead crumbles around him.
I think you are being disingenuous Mark. You say you can hold two opposing thoughts in your mind at the same time…yet the reason I always respond on here is because you are always calling out the Mayor’s critics in your articles.
Can’t you just say what you want without making it a soapbox for defending the Mayor from his critics? You directly challenge those who oppose this guy, then act surprised if we respond.
I am not a true intellect, I just thing its simplistic to say a guy is Good or Bad.
Most of my friends can’t even say that about myself.
Problem is that if the Mayor fails, Windsor Fails and Windsor is more important to me than any individual Mayor.
What I want is to make it about the issues, to give anyone credit where it is due and be critical where it is due.
What I’d like to do is not make it about the mayor, I’d like to be able to acknowledge something he did is good without having his critics show their utter and complete insecurity, and yes, lack of intellect by having to take it away from him somehow. You know, you can oppose him while still acknowledging he did some good things, well you could if you were an adult
I’d think guys like you make him powerful by assigning responsibility for everything that happens to him.
There’s 6 councillors who could overrule the mayor on every issue. They would act if their consituents would get off their asses and stop whining that they are powerless against the mayor.
“What accomplishments should I acknowledge?” This implies that you know of none.
Agreed…the current mayor can neither be labelled ‘all good’ nor ‘all bad’ but now is the time, as we try to pick up the pieces and rebuilt our economic prosperity, for each of us to decide whether we’re better off with four more years of his particular style of ‘leadership’…which will come down to your impression of his “accomplishments” related to past issues such as ‘GreenLink’, the CUPE Strike, the WFCU Ctr. and the Sandwich Heritage District…what measure of success?…or seek dynamic change through installation of a new player (who will ultimately emerge).
“guys like you” “if you were an adult” “utter and complete insecurity”
Whats with the insults Mark?
We’ve already quarelled in other places about our differing perspectives on the Mayors achievements or lack thereof. We can agree to disagree respectfully, can’t we?
You seem to imply that if we hold our leaders accountable, then we are responsible for their failures, or want them to fail. I think that is illogical.
You are assigning “victory” to Eddie on the border file in these past couple of articles. I disagree with that assessment entirely.
You say “I want to make it about the issues…” Well, leadership that is secretive, bullying and over-reliant on PR is a big ISSUE in terms of the way it affects everyone in the region.
Eddie has made himself an ISSUE by chasing talent out of City Hall and annointing himself Chairman of every board, sole spokesperson on the border etc etc. No one would care that he was a micro-manager if it was successful. I believe it has been very unsuccessful. Apologists like the Windsor Star and yourself come along and try to revise history and say “the mayor was right all along”. You weren’t there all along. Anything we get from the province will be despite his 5 years of sound & fury signifying nothing, not because of it.
As for the strategy of using the Heritage Act dishonestly, even you admit that was not a good thing. I think its sets the tone. He is a dishonest player.
I don’t think that those houses on Indian road should be designated “heritage”. However, I don’t think that houses should be able to be bought up and demolished - anywhere in the city.
How would you feel if someone bought up the three houses next to yours, and then demolished them? (Or let them sit boarded up and dilapidated for that matter). I don’t think anyone should be granted a demolition permit without showing plans on what is going to be done with the land.
I agree with Steve, I don’t think one citizen has the right to unilaterally decide for a city on the use of land in a neighborhood.
We saw what they did and what they’re doing in Mexican town and currently in different areas of detroit.
Regardless of how the Michigan Senate rules, the Bridge has lost the public trust in how it manages a public asset. Everything it does now just reinforces the public’s belief. I can’t imagine a court forcing an elected gov’t to not build infrastructure. I see the bridge running a slate of candidates in this next municipal election, Chris Schnurr unfortunately being one of them, I say that because he will be lumped in with LOS and uniblogger for his defense of the Bridge. See the nice grouping here in the comment http://detroit.blogs.time.com/2010/04/12/hero-or-villain-matty-moroun-on-his-detroit-holdings/
Mark B, I agree that no one should unilaterally destroy any neighbourhood. But to say Chris, LOS are potential candidates because the bridge is putting them up is a bit much.
My opinion for what it is worth, is that both care deeply about their city and both are deep into the procedure of things which could bog any idea down. But then can you blame them due to Windsor’s past? This by-law was yet another knee-jerk reaction by a council that got caught flat-footed once again.
Dave - there is reason for the procedures that are in place.
Looking at all the OMB challenges the city has lost; in addition to the lawsuits that are piling up against the city (and generally losing); ignoring procedure bogs down progress over the long term.
Following procedure may take some time; but the end result is defensible public policy.
Chris S, I don’t disagree but at times movement can get bogged down due to policy and procedure. This city also does that at the worst of times.
Bill 51 is part of the reason, Dave.
http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page211.aspx
Anything and everthing council does or decides to do, has to be defensible.
Thus the reason for process and procedures.
Yes, I agree, sometimes a handful of councilors love to micro-manage planning; but city planners are held to the standards and law setforth by council and the Province.
Any deviation from those (generally speaking) could result in challenges, with city planners unable to defend some contrary decisions made by council sometimes resulting in legal challenges out the ying-yang not to mention significant costs borne by residents for council to defend the undefensible.
Here is something for you Mark B.You are a cheerleader for the mayor
State Supreme Court grants bridge company’s motions in Gateway construction case
WARREN, Mich. – The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order today granting a motion by the Detroit International Bridge Co. for immediate consideration of its application to appeal a Feb. 1, 2010, circuit court order in a case involving the construction plans for the Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project.
The Supreme Court also granted the bridge company’s motion for a stay of enforcement of the order issued by Wayne County Circuit Court and put a hold on further proceedings in the lower court.
The Supreme Court’s order provides, “the motions for immediate consideration and for stay of enforcement of the February 1, 2010, order of the Wayne Circuit Court and for stay of further proceedings in that court are GRANTED.” The court’s order also provides that the “application for leave to appeal the March 17, 2010, order of the Court of Appeals remains pending.” The Michigan Court of Appeals had declined to grant the bridge company’s request to appeal the Circuit Court ruling while the case was still open.
“The Detroit International Bridge Co. is pleased that the Michigan Supreme Court is taking the time to carefully review the application for leave to appeal that the bridge company filed with the court,” according to a bridge company statement. “The bridge company remains confident in the strength of its legal position. “
Due to ongoing legal proceedings and its pending application for appeal, the Detroit International Bridge Co. will not make further comments at this time about the proceedings and the issues pending before the Michigan Supreme Court.
I’m beginning to dislike my own blog. It has turned into something I don’t need in my life.
Here, here Chris. What happened to the one Blog that educated people about new and emerging issues in urban living.
This is part of the reason I only read and no longer post (not that I posted all that much to begin with). The overall tone of the blog has become very negative and is generally no longer focusing on the positives that Windsor and the area can focus on and leverage to create a sustainable and functioning community. Here’s to hoping that cooler heads and productive dialogue prevail.
I don’t want to be part of a “negativity” problem on your blog, Chris, honestly.
I don’t think that Mark Boscariol baiting “mayor-haters” really helps your cause though. Will you admit that he does that? The last two posts on the border lead with a ‘told-you-so” defense of the Mayor. What does that tactic do to advance any of Scaledown’s stated objectives?
I have tried to be civil, respectful and focused in my comments, he continually resorts to dismissive insults and refuses to consider my perspective on its own. When I call him on it, he ignores me.
Don’t blame me for the schoolyard level of discourse, it is coming from you.
Don’t blame the responders to the blog!!! Look at the source material. Mark’s border articles do not seem very thoughtful or well-considered. They rush in with guns blazing on behalf Eddie. Tell me, what does that have to do with “educating people about emerging issues in urban living”?
Rather than blame your readers for responding, maybe you should vet Mark’s posts for basic logic and objectivity. They seem to me like deliberate attempts to fire up the critics of the mayor.
Chris Holt -
Your blog inspired me to learn more. To look at the bigger picture of our unsustainable development. Your blog inspired me to build my own composter; to consider urban gardening (and even attempt last summer); and give me pause in my own consumption habits - sometimes successfully, sometimes not so much.
When an argument degenerates into personal attacks and smears, it has been lost. They are tactics of this council majority that I sense a good number of Windsorites want changed.
Such words and arguments are from yesterday as evidenced by the tone of the progressive candidates stepping forward who are truly changing the conversation.
I have disagreed with you and you with me from time to time as is expected; but I respect your consistent positions. And look forward to the day when the discussions you lead return.
Look, I’ve left, everyone assume your normal position.
…and I don’t like it, Mark. Take a break, get away from the people that distract you from the original goals that first attracted you to SD, and come back refreshed.
Dan Stamper rips apart what DRIC claimed.
“FACTS ARE PESKY THINGS” and legitimacy may ultimately prove right from wrong.
While the DRIC continues to hold GREAT NEWS CONFERENCES, they forget to tell what they lack to accomplish their goal.
While the State and Governor and others continue to have GREAT NEWS CONFERENCES about all the things that DRIC has, they forget to tell you the following:
DRIC has no Congressional approval
The Ambassador Bridge has Congressional and Parliamentary Approval.
DRIC claims they have EPA approval, they have had the luxury of approving themselves — They didn’t tell you it is being challenged Community Groups as well as DIBC.
The Ambassador Bridge has filed all environmental studies and the US Coast Guard has publicly acknowledged the “FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT” and the only delay is Government red tape (by the same bureaucrats that manage the DRIC)
DRIC claims they have approval of their EIS in Canada they again are attempting to approve themselves — They didn’t tell you that it is being challenged by Sierra Club.
The Ambassador Bridge has filed all environmental studies in Canada and again the only delay is Government red tape (again by the same bureaucrats that manage the DRIC)
DRIC claims they are ready to go—They didn’t tell you that they own no land in Detroit and that they have to condemn 250 homes, 50 businesses and multiple non-profits and churches.
The Ambassador Bridge owns all land need except for less than one fourth of an acre on City owned park that has been closed for more than a decade and that the city had signed an agreement to sell it at one time.
DRIC claims Canada will not allow The Ambassador Bridge to land in Windsor—
The Ambassador BRIDGE NEWS FLASH we have already landed and built the landing for the Enhancement Bridge with approval from Canada.
DRIC claims that 17 traffic lights separate the 401 highway and the Ambassador Bridge.
The Windsor Essex Parkway that is part of DRIC connects 401 directly toward the Ambassador Bridge and eliminates all but three traffic signals.
DRIC claims they are ready to go—They still are faced with attempting to build over salt mines and hazardous material.
The Ambassador Bridge is building on solid bed rock with 80 years of history supporting the current bridge.
DRIC claims that a new bridge is needed now due to traffic increases
Ambassador Bride traffic even with the uptick of the first quarter of 2010 over 2009 (lets not forget that the auto industry was mostly shut down in 2009) is only at 1987 levels.
DRIC claims they are ready to go and will put 10,000 folks to work in 2010— They didn’t tell you that in a SEMGOG report MDOT states that construction won’t begin until after 2021.
DRIC claims they need a P3 partnership to make a go of their bridge
The Ambassador Bridge needs no partner or taxpayer money for the Enhancement Project.
DRIC claims Ambassador Bridge has no support.
The Ambassador Bridge and MDOT received full support for the Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project that included as the first priority to allow for the second span. This support was in written form from the Ontario and from the City of Windsor and Detroit.
While the State and Governor and others continue to have GREAT NEWS CONFERENCES the Ambassador Bridge continues to employ folks and create JOBS/
What we all heard today was a contradiction of statements.
The Governor claims that the DRIC will be built with someone else’s money “NOT TAXPAYERS MONEY.”
But, then she is asking again for legislation to allow MDOT to continue to move forward with TAXPAYER money on top of the $33 million of TAXPAYER MONEY that has already been spent.
While the States and Governor and others continue to have GREAT NEWS CONFERENCES The Ambassador Bridge continues to construct needed infrastructure to the border.
While the States and Governor and others continue to have GREAT NEWS CONFERENCES The Ambassador Bridge continues to operate the best BORDER CROSSING IN NORTH AMERICA
Based on my knowledge of the area, there are two lights at EC Row and Huron Church (Eastbound off ramp and Westbound off ramp). Then there are also lights at the following intersections; Northwood, Malden Road, Prince Road, Dorchester Road, Tecumseh Road West, Girardot, College Ave.
If my grade four math teacher was correct, 9 > 3
Dan Stamper accused the Canadian government of backing the DRIC in retaliation for its failure decades ago to take over the Ambassador Bridge.
“They tried to take it away and lost,” Stamper said. “So now they’re trying to take away our business through the DRIC.”
Stamper attacked Granholm, saying the governor flies all over the world “looking for jobs for Michigan, and then comes to Detroit and tries to take away business from the best run, privately owned bridge in the world.”
Stamper said the DIBC — which is already embroiled in numerous lawsuits with the U.S. and Canadian governments, the city of Detroit and MDOT — was prepared to file more lawsuits “even if it takes five, 10 or 25 years” until it is vindicated in its quest to build a second Ambassador Bridge.
Sen. Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt, a longtime foe of the public plan, said he doesn’t trust the Canadian government to follow through on its offer.
“Canada wants to own the bridge. Canada wants to own all the international crossings,” he said.
He blasted the Canadian government Friday for failing to spend the original $300-million joint federal-provincial border commitment to Windsor “to get rid of the stoplights between Highway 401 and the bridge.
“I don’t know where that all went to,” Cropsey said of funds instead allocated to build new rail separations on Walker Road and Howard Avenue, plus assorted other small-scale border improvement efforts.
“Now they are making a commitment to give a loan to Michigan. I’m not going to hang my hat on that.
“Take the $550 million, keep it and fix the road going to the Ambassador Bridge. That way you don’t have to rip up the highways in Michigan and build another span. That doesn’t make sense to me.”
I wouldn’t worry much about it Chris H. This is a very divisive debate in an open forum.
Like all forums that are anonymous you will people who go on personal attacks, others who stick to the facts and yet still others who throw in blind punches with stupid names like one above.
I hear more positive things about Scaledown, and I believe Scaledown has done more good than harm. Just try and ignore the ones who go on personal attacks and lets look to the next column.
I know who will solve all our problems - two word: bacon man
Awesome! A bunch of one-sided propaganda by the bridge company! Tell that to those of us who live in the west end, and have to live near the boarded up Indian Road. This eyesore produced by the Ambassador Bridge Company. http://vimeo.com/1862439
Hey ‘Down with DRIC’, we know who you are…your writing style gives it away. Why the ruse?
Geeez Mark…
Can’t you drop that bad analogy for the “sign of a true intellect”. It’s getting really old. We got past that in grade nine but for some reason you are stuck on it. Here’s a new take on it for you. “The ability to to hold two opposing thoughts in your mind at the same time” is just a short circuit. Much like the synaptic mess happening here.
I completely agree Vincent.
One of the many things Mark Bosc. doesn’t like to address is my expressed concerns over the other homes not on the east-side of Indian Road.
Are these lands part of CBSA demands? Or is the company hedging their bets they will be required to go into these areas?
I’ve always understood the east-side of Indian Road based upon a review of other border crossings and security concerns raised by government officials.
As far as the project itself, we really don’t have a say thanks to the International Bridges and Tunnels Act. I won’t bore scaledowners with the legislation - I’ve written enough on my own blog about it. But only the Federal Government has authority, to put it simply.
The only issue where the Mayor and council have authority over (though that is even questionable without access to any agreements signed between MOT, GOC, and CBSA, are the homes. Secondary inspection, and fixing the plaza conditions (as cited by CBSA as “today” and “in the future” says alot about CBSA’s requirements and intentions).
And council has opted for the status quo. You have to wonder why?
Is it by choice to create the conditions for dissent - thus playing cheap politics? Is it they actually have no powers? Or do they know something the rest of us haven’t been told about (ie CBSA demands, requirements, future demands etc.) but can only speculate.
Now after being boarded up for 3 years without heat or hydro, these homes are probably too far gone to maintain. Blame whoever you want to; the reality is these homes are probably not suitable for habitation.
So either tear em down, or order the company to rebuild/repair - the latter of course would be appealed.
Hopefully, the parties can come to some type of agreement vis-a-vis the OMB re: the heritage study appeal.
But that won’t deal with the vast majority of the other homes owned by the company.
I think some of the homes on the west side on Indian towards Mill may be required for secondary commercial vehicle inspection. Trucks need plenty of room to manoeuvre.
Or ABC could be doing what the Province is doing: Buying homes as a means to minimize vocal opposition. MTO has bought all the homes on Chappus east of Matchette. None of those homes are required for DRIC. MTO will likely resell those homes after DRIC is complete.