Windsor Ontario News / Comment

City's deft strokes save cultural institutions

First there was the art gallery-central library combo. Now it’s the Windsor Symphony–arts groups combo. The mayor and city council have struck major solutions with announcements in November and this week to solve persistent funding problems for Windsor’s financially-tottering arts organizations. With the art gallery announcement the city takes ownership of the building saving the gallery $600,000 per year. The city also assumes the AGW’s $2.5 million debt. By moving the central library into the AGW’s first floor the city will also save $300,000 for library operating costs. And now, with the decision to have the WSO take over the previous empty Capitol Theatre the city also writes off its loan to the symphony of almost $250,000. The city will also pay upwards of $2 million to upgrade the property for the symphony and other arts groups. (Hopefully the seats get replaced.) And it will mean more than $200,000 in annual WSO rental savings for performance and office space. And since the WSO will manage the city-owned Capitol in can make money from leasing space to other arts groups for theatre or film productions and for special events. As well, the fact it will be masters of its own house means it won’t have to be play second fiddle, so to speak, to the scheduling priorities of its former landlord, St. Clair College, at the Chrysler Theatre. (On the other hand the art gallery and the symphony will lose annual grants of $450,000 and $300,000 respectively.) All this means that both the AGW and WSO should no longer be drains on the city purse, as well as no longer have to go cap in hand to council for emergency funding. So, in a couple of deft strokes, the city’s most established arts institutions – cultural cornerstones for arts and economic development – should no longer have money problems and will have secure homes. Meanwhile community arts organizations that campaigned incessantly over the last five years to save the Capitol – or since the Capitol went into bankruptcy – should be jumping for joy over this new arrangement. Because it means they will have a secure long term home too.

Is downtown's future institutional?

There has been a lot of energy of late put into trying to remake downtown. This includes the aquatic centre, the move of the University of Windsor into The Windsor Star and former Armouries buildings, upcoming renovations at the Art Gallery of Windsor to make way for the new shared library, and in all likelihood an announcement of a new community museum adjacent to the art gallery. At the same time The Windsor Star is planning to move into the former Palace Cinemas building. Then there’s the transformation of the former Windsor Arena into an upscale urban market. Another massive project is the expansion of the Windsor-Detroit tunnel plaza, which will result in the elimination of Goyeau Street between Wyandotte and Park streets. On the surface the projects look positive. But they also raise questions. Just how might the introduction of hundreds of university students bring retail, which is the perennial quest for downtown? Has the introduction of St. Clair College students downtown over the last several years sparked any change? The closing of the Palace was a significant blow to downtown entertainment and has reduced the core’s dimensions. The expansion of the tunnel plaza will transform the eastern flank into the equivalent of a giant parking lot and choke off that section of the city. The market, to the immediate east, should help counter that. There has also been relocation of several high tech firms downtown, which is a positive development. The aquatic centre should bring people to the core. But after swim times will families simply drive back to their homes in South Windsor and Forest Glade? Aside from the market and high tech firms all these initiatives are large and institutional – and mostly publically-funded. The question remains: once all these “pieces” are installed, will they spark the revitilization of new small businesses, residential housing, and vibrant pedestrian streets?

ALC patients' families should share the pain

Elderly patients – and their families – in acute care beds in Windsor’s two hospitals should do the right thing and have those beds given up so that the patients for whom they are really intended, can use them. This in turn will cut down on what has started to emerge as an ongoing problem in local emergency departments – long waits because there are insufficient beds because patients can’t be transferred to regular beds, occupied by elderly – or so-called Alternative Level of Care (ALC) – patients. No one wishes harm on elderly family members. But their rightful places should not be in hospitals but in long term care facilities. True, Windsor has a deficit in long term care beds. But Windsor, and the county, are not lacking in beds altogether. The real issue is that elderly patients and their families refuse to move because the homes are not top of their wish list. Perhaps the facilities are too far away, or an older building, or their reputations aren’t up to scratch or perceived not to be. It’s not as if choosing a second or third tier home means an elderly patient will always be there. It means they would be there temporarily until a bed is freed-up at the facility of choice, which could be months, weeks or even days. Sure, we all love our family members, especially the cherished elderly. But waiting until the number one facility becomes available smacks of a little selfishness when there are people with immediate and serious care needs who should be occupying those beds. Family members should make more of an effort to screen long term facilities. Nursing homes should launch a campaign to inform the public about their properties and dispel some myths. The Local Health Integration Network (LHIN), the government agency overseeing regional health services, could play a role. Some facilities may look down at the heels but are well kept and provide exemplary care.

Office more likely to hinder information flow

If Mayor Eddie Francis wants to find a sure fire way of saving the city a bundle he can eliminate the new corporate communications office. $500,000 has been set aside for what is simply another layer of unneeded bureaucracy and is more likely to stymie information coming out of city hall than enhance it, as its also relatively newly-hired director Jason Moore argues. Reporters knew something had changed when city staff over the last year began directing inquiries to this new office. Up to now Windsor had an unofficial custom of regular city hall staff responding directly to reporters’ calls. If an employee didn’t know the answer the reporter would be directed to the appropriate official or a senior department member. No fuss no muss. It worked beautifully. The creation of this new office is now throwing sand into the gears. If reporters are directed to the office it simply creates a middle man that will inevitably delay a response from the city simply because a third party or buffer has been created. Moore’s report to council calling for a new media policy and set of procedures will formalize what took place on an ad hoc basis. Now everything will have to be documented. Official department spokespeople will have to be appointed. The old laissez faire approach will be thrown out the window. While the policy, which still needs to be approved by city council, doesn’t prevent staff from speaking to reporters the bureaucratic nature of it, simply by its existence, will have a tendency to slow city hall access. “Official” written procedures are like that. They become the default position. Many city staff, especially newbies, will likely defer to the communications department, rather than to their own senior staff. The policy simply isn’t needed. Moreover, questions should be raised about this office altogether. The office now has a staff of six including Moore. Altogether there are a senior manager, three communications officers, a writer-editor and a marketing assistant, to soon be located in a centralized “Communications Hub.” But what has this group done? Since June there have only been 26 media releases posted on city hall’s website. Most are very general in nature - often just a few or several paragraphs - and often are simply announcements of events such as those at city parks or the WFCU Centre. Over the years, of all the city hall “spokespeople,” only one comes to mind for being well-identified with the city and who not only wrote press releases but was often interviewed in the media - Pat Lewis, and she was from parks and recreation. This new office is unnecessary bureaucracy, an expense the city doesn’t need, and a subtle if unintentional threat to the flow of information coming from city hall.

Planning principles defeat businesses

The news that the Palace Cinemas will close in January is heartbreaking because it’s the last commercial movie theatre downtown. Anyone who cares about downtown as an entertainment venue should at least be a little concerned. Sure, progress is progress. And The Windsor Star’s move into the Ouellette Ave. building is part of a giant effort to redevelop the downtown. (The Star will vacate its current digs for University of Windsor classrooms.) And no doubt the Palace’s landlord, Mady Development Corp., will do much better financially from its new tenant. You can’t blame a businessman for opting for improved long term income from what had previously been a weak property. But what has been interesting beyond the immediate closure of the Palace is the effect of urban planning on the downtown theatre. Palace manager Gina Facca said that when Imagine Cinemas took over the property weekly attendance was at 1800. Then the city embarked on major streetscaping. This included new sidewalks, lampposts and “street furniture” like benches and trash cans. Once completed the design was lambasted by downtown merchants for the gray or bland colour. City planning officials defended it as providing a gray landscape to highlight the colourful facades of the businesses. Former city planner Jim Yanchula (now with the City of London) said the gray “palette” was meant to be “neutral” so individual storefronts could “stand out colourfully in it.” The downtown business association derided the effort, and ironically had to spend its own money to partially counter it. “On top of the money that we spent to partner in streetscaping we have to also now contribute more money to brighten the street up,” former BIA director Chris Edwards told WON.com. Now Facca’s comment is probably indicative of other businesses that lost money under a project that, to add insult to injury, took longer than expected. “We did a profitable business up until that whole streetscaping fiasco happened,” she said. “And then the foot traffic just wasn’t there and it was too difficult to get to the Palace.” The city spent nearly $5 million on this project. Yet it effectively crippled if not killed a major business. So it begs the question: how useful are these urban renewal projects? What also comes to mind is the 20-year-old Sandwich St. rejuvenation in west Windsor. It was done to spark businesses in the perennially depressed neighbourhood. But in the aftermath little has changed. A few bars have opened but other stores have come and gone. Arguably the same would have occurred without the investment. These kinds of projects are examples of modern planning principles that don’t seem to work and in fact might do more harm than good, using businesses' tax money, of course, against their own interests.

Judge gets it right, protesters have to go

Toronto judge David Brown ruled today that Toronto’s trespass bylaw doesn’t infringe on free speech, dealing a blow to the Occupy Toronto protesters, who have been camped out in a park for more than a month. The judge did not say Occupy Toronto did not have a right to protest. He simply said the group, just like any other citizens, must abide by public trespass laws – namely, no camping in the park overnight. The same argument can be made for any other city where there is a so-called Occupy group including Windsor. In fact Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis said the issue in Toronto is identical to the one here. City authorities have bent over backwards to accommodate these groups, despite a host of questions they raise about trespassing, sharing public space, and sanitary or health issues. When have any other protest group – whether of the Left, Right, union, religious or ethnic – been given such treatment, at least in Windsor? Moreover, allowing these protesters to occupy public space indefinitely seems to imply two sets of rights. That is, one for the protesters and one for the rest of us. Other members of the public, after all, would have to obtain a permit to pitch a tent, let along install an outhouse, if they would be allowed to do so at all. The demands by the Occupy protesters also seem to imply a me-first attitude and that they are above the law, hiding behind free speech rights. By this reasoning any public space could be occupied indefinitely – from a major roadway to train line - no matter how much damage it does to the greater society. Finally, where have other authorities like the health department been? The Windsor-Essex County Health Unit is still living down its notorious raid several years ago on a group of volunteers preparing egg salad sandwiches for a Willistead benefit. The health unit questioned the sandwiches’ safety because they were prepared at home; inspectors poured bleach over them. Yet Occupy Windsor was allowed to put a porta-john on their site with nary a concern from the usually quick-to-intervene agency. If we have learned anything from the Occupy phenomenon it’s not only that some people have more rights than others it’s the degree of cowardice by authorities in standing up to them.

Precedent for market in a parking garage

Downtown Windsor Farmers' Market administration and vendors are concerned about the future location of the still growing seasonal outdoor weekly market, which recently completed its third season of operation. The market will have to vacate its current digs at the old Greyhound terminal to make way for re-development of the Windsor Armouries across the street, which likely will become a new home for University of Windsor facilities. The city is looking to at least a couple of alternative locations, one of which has been met with some rebuke. This is the first floor of the Pelissier Street parking garage. Opponents scoff at the idea of putting a produce (in part) market in a structure where vehicles are located, where there are fumes, and no doubt even oil stains on the floor. Mind you, the city has indicated such a location could also have market stalls spill out to the great outdoors of Pelissier Street, which would be temporarily blocked off for the once-a-week venue. But there is precedent for a farmer’s market in a parking garage. For many years the Hamilton Farmers Market, which dates from 1837 – and which is at the very same location it’s at now! – was, yes, in a parking garage. (Last year the market was completely renovated. Picture above left) The complex was in the Lloyd D. Jackson Square in the heart of downtown. Says a spokeswoman for that city, “It was part of the parking structure that was where the market is right now...and the vendors came in each market day.” (The market operates four days a week.) This market in the Steel City is a sprawling and highly popular facility, and always has been, and it appears being in a parking garage never really did it much harm.

Irony abounds in DRIC bridge vote

Well, well, well. A pivotal chance to get the Michigan legislature to once and for all support the new DRIC bridge collapsed yesterday at a state legislative committee. For months – no, years – we’ve been hearing that it has been those nasty Republicans in the state house – bought off by Ambassador Bridge owner Matty Maroun – who have held up supporting the new bridge. Of course it couldn’t be because these legislators have genuine concerns about the fact taxpayers could at some point be on the hook for the cost of the bridge if there aren’t sufficient tolls to pay for it, and they simply don’t trust assurances of the bridge backers that taxpayers won't be. This is a democracy, after all, and the people's representatives have a right to decide any way they want. But let’s concede the critics are right and that some (but by no means all because many support the bridge) Republicans are being bought off. Then came yesterday’s vote, the lead up to which was becoming increasingly dramatic with Governor Rick Snyder, a bridge supporter and Republican, hoping a vote endorsing the bridge could take place by the end of October. But, no, the bridge endorsement was scuttled. The motion was not defeated by Republicans but by two Democrats who abstained from voting! Why? Apparently because they didn’t get a last minute appendage to the legislation that would provide community benefits for the downtrodden neighbourhood of Delray, where the DRIC bridge would land on the Detroit side. This raises the question of whether these Democrats - Tupac Hunter and Virgil Smith, both of Detroit – used this addition as a fig leaf to not vote for the bridge. The vote was three to two (three Republicans voted for and two against). Had the two errant Democrats taken a stand they could have easily passed the bill from committee to the main legislature for a general vote. Even Gov. Snyder admitted this was a substantial “setback.” After all these months of anticipation the Democrats’ abstention – on a relatively minor item - is breathtaking. And it is ironic indeed given that, for months, the finger pointing has been directed solely at Republicans.

U.S. politics open & Canada's system closed

Compare and contrast. In the United States at the current moment the Republican Party is choosing a new presidential nominee to run in the 2012 election against Democratic President Barack Obama. As part of this process the Republicans have so far held several debates, are holding yet another tonight, as part of – count them – more than 20, winding up early next year. Most of the debates have had full television coverage. In fact, the candidates have been so scrutinized that they seem to rise and fall with their performances in each debate. Previous frontrunners have been Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, only to see their stars fall. Currently in the lead is Herman Cain. In fact some commentators have suggested this is overkill. Holly Bailey, writer of The Ticket blog on Yahoo News, asks whether Republicans in fact are having too many debates. “More so than in any other presidential cycle in recent memory, this year's primary debates have exerted an outsize influence in redefining expectations about the field of candidates. And the debates are also one of the key reasons no candidate has truly emerged as a clear frontrunner in the race.” All this is in contrast to what is taking place here in Canada with the NDP leadership race. Since the untimely death of Jack Layton in August there have been several New Democrats who have thrown their hats in the ring for the party’s top job, including party president Brian Topp and Quebec MP Thomas Mulcair. Party members will vote in March. But will Canadians as a whole get to see this these candidates slug it out in debate prior to the party’s internal election? This simply isn’t a tradition, by any party, in Canada. And it aptly shows the degree that out electoral system is closed compared to the openness of the U.S. one. Something to think about the next time you hear someone lauding how superior Canadians politics is compared to those of our neighbours south of the border.

How to lose an election ... and

There are several lessons from last Thursday’s provincial election:

- Keep on target and pound hard on the issues that animate the electorate. Conservative leader Tim Hudak (left) at the start of the campaign tapped into voter anger about electricity rates, the HST and taxes. Problem: He didn’t keep on script strongly enough and let the Liberals’ argument he was a green energy job killer stick to him.

- Charisma helps. As evidenced from the leaders’ debate Hudak had none. He looked like a shrub with nothing to say. Even a normally lacklustre Dalton McGuinty showed personality-plus by comparison.

- Brister bristles: It didn’t help local Conservatives that the man with the best chance of winning, Dave Brister, kept to his old taciturn ways. Always the unfriendliest city councillor Brister scoffed at showing up for election debates, as did his cohorts in Windsor West and Windsor-Tecumseh. Voters might have asked: what kind of accountability would these people have shown in office?

- Elections Ontario pulled out all the good-natured stops and opened the advance polls a month before the official voting date. Made no difference. In fact, ironically, for the first time in Ontario provincial election voting history turnout slipped below 50 per cent. As one wise political expert said, the people who are committed to voting will vote virtually under any circumstances. Advance polls will hardly help. The problem is an increasingly apathetic, cynical and alienated electorate.

- Yes, the Liberals win but they also lost a lot – 17 seats to be exact. They were punished hard by the electorate and have received a frustrating by-one-seat minority government as a result.

- Solidarity never: The trade union movement has finally capitulated to the Liberals. It was the old Buzz Hargrove maxim: strategic voting first and ideological principles be damned. Forget traditional labour allies the New Democrats when the Liberals had the best chance of defeating a threatening Progressive Conservative party.

- And why oh why is the sliver of southeastern Essex County including Leamington placed in an entirely different regional riding – Chatham-Kent-Essex – that has totally different issues than its counterparts in Windsor and Essex County?

Time to buy out Ambassador Bridge

The future of a new river crossing seems to remain as intractable as ever. Despite enormous resources poured into the campaign to build a new downriver bridge between Windsor and Detroit – including vast amounts of news releases, public statements, editorial opinion and, finally, hard cash on the table by the Canadian government – a new span seems as remote as ever. It must be admitted at this point that the management of the Ambassador Bridge has been very successful in blocking the new DRIC (or as Americans call it, New International Trade Crossing (NITC)) bridge from going forward. The stumbling block? Votes in the Michigan legislature that would agree to the plan as well as accept $550 million from Ottawa to front the cost of connecting bridge infrastructure on the U.S. side, Michigan itself not having the money. (The bridge would be privately financed and run under government auspices.) And Despite almost ad infinitum arguments a handful of Michigan politicians simply don’t believe that the bridge won’t cost their taxpayers “a dime” especially with decreasing border traffic from which tolls are to be used to pay back the Canadian government. Moreover, ideology increasingly seems to be playing a role. The Republican legislators believe it’s unfair of the government to build a bridge that would compete with a private firm that earns its own keep. This public versus private “unfair competition” debate plays itself out in numerous industries. In Canada, government-subsidized Via Rail competes with privately-owned bus companies and airlines. In the U.S. National Public Radio competes with private broadcasters. For those who are ideologically-inclined against government spending, those examples are simply further proof of injustices. The time has come for governments to resolve the bridge issue once and for all by offering to buy out the Ambassador and operate it as a government entity, while at the same time building the new DRIC bridge. This would fairly compensate the Maroun family, which owns the bridge, and eliminate the legitimate charge of unfair competition. Fears of even more increased government expenditures to operate two bridges could be settled by the government tendering the Ambassador’s operation (including a new span) to a private entity, similar to how the Windsor-Essex Parkway is being built and will operate as well as the new downriver bridge.

How much special treatment do police get?

The current hearing for a Windsor police officer found with a booze cache after coming back from a shopping spree in the States is very revealing especially given Canada Customs officers’ testimony about how to handle law enforcement types who have run afoul of smuggling laws. From the testimony it seems that Customs in fact had gone light on police officers illegally importing goods. “There was a lot of pressure around us because there had been previous officers doing stuff,” said an obviously scared Customs agent Carrie Smith. “Our officers were suspended for letting other law enforcement officers go.” In the case at hand police detective Dorothy Nesbeth allegedly entered Canada with four cases of beer, two five-litre cases of wine, and two bottles of rum, without declaring them. Another Customs officer testified he was so worried about “ramifications” for charging the cop that he made doubly sure to watch his driving habits. Nesbeth had apparently said “what goes around comes around.” If this is true it’s outrageous because it shows a high-handedness and above-the-law sense of superiority that no citizen – in uniform or out – should have. And it calls for a formal investigation. Does this mean Customs officers are intimidated by police? Does it mean they give free passes to police with smuggled goods as a matter of course? The current case follows on the recent criminal trial where motorist Deborah Stein had been charged with careless driving, a charge just recently dropped. Here, the public’s eyes were opened to the type of me-first mentality that seems to pervade Windsor police. On the night Stein’s car was broadsided by a police cruiser and her best friend killed the police car was racing to the aid of a fellow officer who had suffered a heart attack. The public learned that police often block traffic for ambulances where fellow officers’ health is in jeopardy even if they are off-duty. Who knew? These cases are revealing and beg the question of just what other special treatment is afforded to the men in women of the WPS?

Sentences in two gay crimes leave questions

A couple of widely varying sentences were issued from Windsor courts over the past week. Both had to do with assaults on gay men. In one case the sentence was simply probation. Justice Guy DeMarco of the Ontario Court of Justice handed John Raymond Meloche a probationary term of 18 months. This, despite evidence that Meloche punched Justin Jarecki and Denton Callendar May 30 of last year following an argument at the Pizza Pizza downtown. Jarecki required reconstructive surgery for a broken nose and cheekbone. Callender received minor injuries. The altercation was sparked by Meloche making derogatory anti-homosexual remarks against the two men and Callender verbally confronted him. Yet judge DeMarco said there was not enough evidence to conclude this was a hate crime under the Criminal Code. DeMarco concluded the attack came because Meloche believed the two men were gay and called it an "extremely aggravating circumstance." Yet he found the evidence did not meet criteria to be a hate crime which could have resulted in a jail term. In passing sentence the judge noted Meloche’s otherwise “exemplary character” working as a volunteer with an autistic child and his work with Big Brothers and Big Sisters. Nevertheless, evidence also indicated Meloche ran from police after the attack and had to be subdued by two officers, surely an aggravating factor. The evidence seemed to cover the grounds of a hate crime including the fact the attack occurred because the victims were members of an identifiable group and took place in public. Meanwhile, in another case, in Ontario Superior Court this week, Justice Scott Campbell meted out a substantial jail term for two defendants who attacked a gay man also on Ouellette Ave. May 21 last year. They received 36 months for the violent robbery of Chris Rabideau, who suffered two black eyes, a fractured nose and other injuries. The judge called it a “horrific attack.” There were no witnesses but Rabideau, who was described as openly gay, testified that defendants Stephen Lambert and Michael Allard used homophobic slurs during the attack. Rabideau used the trial to illustrate the targeting of homosexuals generally. Yet Justice Campbell said there was insufficient evidence to conclude this was a hate crime. The day before the sentencing, an opinion article appeared in The Windsor Star by University of Windsor law professor David Tanovich, criticizing Justice Demarco for the suspended sentence in the Meloche case and calling on the Crown to appeal. The next day Campbell gave Lambert and Allard the severe sentence though robbery was also involved and two men had ganged up on one. Still, he found no hate crime. The cases raise the question of just what criteria is required for a hate crime. We think of hate crime as media or Internet broadcasts of vile speech directed against racial or religious groups. But hate crime could also be individual everyday crimes. Perhaps these cases will be wake up calls to the justice system. It will be interesting to see if Windsor courts continue to rule as they have should similar cases occur.

Dwight Duncan channels Winston Churchill

Dwight Duncan as Winston Churchill? Full head of hair and lack of cigar aside you could be forgiven for thinking Duncan, of otherwise similar stature, might be channelling the famous British prime minister. Duncan has come out fighting over the Ambassador Bridge’s latest TV ad directed at Ontarians over spending $1.4 billion (it says $2.2 billion) for the “road to nowhere” Windsor-Essex Parkway. That, the company says, is despite the fact there is no agreement on the Michigan side to build a connecting bridge to the U. S. Duncan is featured saying his government is proceeding with the highway “regardless of the crossing.” The ad calls on the public to contact the premier’s office and demand the Parkway not be built. The ad has clearly irked Duncan and he has fired back in no uncertain terms. He claims it might violate Ontario’s third party election advertising before the upcoming Oct. 6 vote. He also, a bit bizarrely, took a sideswipe at the opposition Tories, saying: “They defend the actions of the billionaire monopoly owner (of the Ambassador Bridge) but won’t come clean on their plans for the roadway.” The implication is that the bridge company with their ad is supporting the Conservatives. But the Tories say the Liberals have received almost $30,000 to their $2000 from the bridge company between 2003 and 2007. When WON.com asked how a foreign company could be violating third party advertising laws, Duncan’s office was mum. Instead it sent this quote: “This roadway and bridge need to be built. We will take this fight to the streets – down Ouellette to Riverside Drive. We will fight them on the corner of Wyandotte and Riverdale.” Hmm, that has a familiar ring. Here’s an excerpt from perhaps Churchill's most famous speech: “We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender...”

Clang clang clang should go this idea

Windsor city councillor Al Maghnieh has a streetcar obsession. The councillor has been pushing for a rail-based streetcar service for downtown Windsor over the past few months. A report on the feasibility of the service will come back to the Transit Windsor board in August. It’s hard to fathom where Maghnieh, in his first term on council, is coming from. Yes, we understand there are burgeoning new initiatives downtown – such as University of Windsor buildings, and the combination aquatic centre and new central library. There might be an argument for some type of downtown shuttle such as the bus that briefly served the core back in the early 1990s. But a fixed rail shuttle? In an otherwise small density and strained tax revenue city like Windsor? Maghnieh is even talking about large lumbering Toronto-type streetcars (photo). The reported costs of such a rail system would be up to $25 million per kilometre and for an overhead wire trolley up to $10 million. Buses – even ones designed to look like trolleys – would be much cheaper. But hold on. Wouldn’t it make much more sense to have Transit Windsor run a circle route around the core during the day or at higher density times like nights and weekends? And if the objective is to transport students from the University of Windsor’s existing west side campus that could probably be solved by simply adding buses to existing routes. Alternatively the U could operate its own shuttle bus such as many universities do to connect campuses scattered throughout cities. Maghnieh’s idea really needs to be seriously scrutinized especially when there are more pressing transit needs such as extending bus service to outlying communities. On that score there has been absolutely no movement since a consultant’s report proposing new routes dropped with a thud on area politicians’ desks well over a year ago.

Lawsuit further reveals McGuinty gov't hypocrisy when it comes to natives

You’ve got to love this. The Ontario government is taking Big Tobacco to court, for health care costs associated with tobacco use. Never mind the ongoing hypocrisy of a government that benefits from taxation of tobacco products in a classic case of speaking out of both sides of its mouth (or should that be smoking out of both sides?) In any case, angry that the province has targeted large tobacco companies and not the myriad of small cigarette producers on native Indian reserves along the St. Lawrence River, for example, Imperial Tobacco is suing those native manufacturers, some of which it contends sell contraband cigarettes. A spokesman for Imperial said there are 18 such producers and his company has launched a $1.5 billion lawsuit. “There’s no reason why tobacco manufacturers on First Nations reserves should be treated any differently from legal manufacturers. This is what the lawsuit is all about,” he said. But for the McGuinty government it is all about a double standard between how native society is treated compared to its non-native counterpart. Just take a look at how it kept a firm hands off policy when it came to dealing with Indian protesters who occupied a housing project in Caledonia, preventing access to municipal streets for months on end. And of course there have been the disruptions by native protesters – seemingly allowed by authorities - of Highway 401 and the CN/VIA main line near where those St. Lawrence reserves are located. Michael Perley of the Campaign for Action on Tobacco, an anti-smoking group, said the province might not be targetting smaller producers on reserves because it is focussing on marketing and advertising by the big manufacturers. If so it’s a pretty clever loophole. After all, it is smoke that kills people, not billboards. In reality, this action seems simply like more of the McGuinty government’s hands-off approach when it comes to natives, raising its hypocrisy level even higher.

Aquatic centre vote - thankfully - ends another longtime Windsor discussion

Finally, a major development will be constructed on the Western Super Anchor site. The project is another example, along with a new arena, of the fulfillment of the city’s long unfinished business. Both the arena and the super anchor bedevilled numerous successive city councils and mayors. In the super anchor’s case, buildings on the blocks on downtown’s western fringe were demolished as long ago as 1989 for any number of proposed projects, mainly an arena. Instead city council decided to build the new arena – which opened in 2008 - on the eastern outskirts of Windsor. Meanwhile the downtown land remained a vast and none-too-pretty makeshift parking space. With this week’s decision to approve a $66 million combined aquatic centre and new Windsor Public Library main branch, the city will close another frustrating chapter in its urban history. Is a combo aquatic centre and library the best use of the land? No, said small groups of community activists and residents who were adamant that neighbourhood pools and the current main library branch – all less than a mile away from the new facilities – should not be closed to make way for the project. Otherwise, what else could have been put at this site? Virtually every other idea over the past two and a half decades had been floated (excuse the pun) – arena, aquarium, engineering school, housing, an urban canal. None proved feasible. The city could have spent another 25 years coming up with suggestions. There comes a time when you have to act. And the lack of an Olympic size pool combined with Windsor hosting the 2013 International Children’s Games – plus the long sought goal of providing a dazzling family attraction in the form of a water park – made the aquatic centre as good a project as any. Upon reflection, it’s interesting that the project was approved under the administration of Eddie Francis – who worked tirelessly to bring the Games here - as was the arena. It begs the question of whether, had Francis not been in office, these projects would ever have gotten off the ground and the Western Super Anchor and arena would have been stupefying coffee shop talk for years to come.