Windsor Mayor's integrity questioned in formal complaint

Integrity Commissioner complaint filed against Mayor Dilkens relating to incendiary public comments

On July 8, 2019, The Windsor Star reported that local resident Dee Sweet filed a complaint against Mayor Drew Dilkens. Ms. Sweet took issue with the mayor's May 2019 public criticism of the Business Improvement Associations' (BIA) financial support of CAMPP's LPAT appeal. The backstory:  According to The Windsor Star, the mayor claimed at a May 17, 2019 media event that "taking taxpayer-levied dollars from their members to fund a third-party appeal of a city decision is clearly outside of the scope of what a BIA can do."

He went on to say that City Council could decide to dissolve their boards for breaching the Municipal Act. He stated that he suspected Council would instead opt to reduce BIA budgets, and make changes to the budgets BIAs had submitted. But the situation was not as clear as the mayor claimed Two weeks later, after the BIAs presented their own lawyers' position, the issue was resolved: City Council unanimously approved their budgets and the pledges to support our legal challenge were allowed to stand. (Watch the Council debate from 7:23 to 7:55).   Read about the integrity complaint Ms. Sweet posted this message on social media on July 11, 2019:

The many conversations about responsible government that are taking place in the community are very good news indeed.

Recent media coverage of similar issues in other Ontario communities

Sudbury: A parallel case is heating up: The Sudbury Star reported May 29, 2019 that the Downtown Sudbury BIA is squaring off against city councillor Robert Kirwan.

Multiple LPAT appeals have been filed against Sudbury's controversial approval of an entertainment district and arena on Sudbury's outskirts. The underlying issues are very similar to the reasons CAMPP is appealing Windsor City Council's development approval for Sandwich South. The outspoken councillor has been openly critical of the BIA's involvement and would like to see it disbanded, and the project fast-tracked. According to The Sudbury Star, the BIA accused Councillor Kirwan of violating the municipal code of conduct and deliberately spreading misinformation, “defaming known individuals and maliciously sowing discord in the Greater Sudbury community.”    Read the story

Ottawa: The deeply unpopular planned addition to Chateau Laurier is a study of the struggle between city vs. suburban interests, and the powerlessness of councillors in the most-affected wards.

“I’m not sure we could get a worse design,” according to Ottawa Councillor Catherine McKenney. Macleans published a thought-provoking article titled "The Chateau Laurier fiasco exposes the idiocy of city amalgamations" on July 11, 2019. It explores the underlying reasons that led to Ottawa's Planning Committee granting approval to a B.C. developer, Larco Investments, for an addition that is overwhelmingly unpopular among both area residents and heritage experts. "In municipal power struggles, suburban voters have different priorities than people who live close to downtown. They tend to be more interested in highways than in transit, more pro-development and less inclined to take measures against the kind of sprawl that produces short-term profits but ends up imposing tax burdens on people who live in denser areas." As the author Stephen Maher points out, "There is something mysterious about the council’s refusal to bend in the face of the biggest public outcry over a municipal issue in living memory."

Save the date: Upcoming event on August 27, 2019 Amherstburg Community Foundation presents: Thought Leaders Speaker series - Gil Peñalosa “Creating a Vibrant and Healthy Community ... Or Becoming Irrelevant”

The Amherstburg Community Foundation, with the active support of community builder and philanthropist Richard Peddie, is hosting a series of public lectures. The guest speaker at the first of these will be Gil Peñalosa.

Mr. Peñalosa MBA, PhDhc, CSP is an influential urbanist, a Certified Professional Speaker, and the Founder and Chair of the Board of 8-80 Cities. This is a Canadian non-profit organization that promotes the idea that "if everything we do in our public spaces is great for an 8 year old and an 80 year old, then it will be great for all people." Mr. Peñalosa was also an early donor to CAMPP's legal challenge. He commented: "I feel ALL public investments in cities must be in the right places to build a healthy and vibrant community". From his website: Gil Penalosa is passionate about cities for all people. He advises decision makers and communities worldwide on how to create vibrant cities and healthy communities for all, regardless of age, gender, ability and social, economic, or ethnic background. His focus is on the design and use of parks and streets as great public places, as well as the promotion of sustainable mobility: walking, riding bicycles, using public transit, and new use of cars. Where: Libro Centre Arena, 3295 Meloche Rd, Amherstburg When: Tuesday, August 27, 2019, 6.30 p.m. Seating is limited, so the event organizers ask that you obtain your tickets ahead of time through Eventbrite. You won't want to miss this!

In their own words: Weekly round-up of comments from our friends and neighbours

"Perhaps they forget that citizens make up this city, that they are responsible and accountable to the citizens and not the corporation of the city. Communication with citizens are critical, and not to be avoided, but instead with open ears and open minds."

"Hospitals are anchor institutions and should be built in city centres to help with economic growth and community building. Hospitals belong near academic institutions where medical schools are for easy access for med students and researchers. There are so many reasons why the hospital belongs in the core. Every other city in Canada has figured that out .... why would we do something different??"

"Explain to me why Windsor taxpayers should foot the bill to increase sprawl to accommodate Tecumseh, LaSalle and Amherstburg?"

"Does the airport need a hospital? If anything, the airport is in the way and people and ambulances will take longer to get there."

"Makes no sense. People who live in those areas do so because they do not want to be in the City of Windsor. This is not "Field of Dreams". Just because you build it, does not mean they will come. But allowing sprawl WILL hollow out the core neighbourhoods and create ghost towns. Downtown Windsor is a prime example. So many years of allowing big box sprawl has hollowed out the retail downtown."

"Windsor-Essex deserves better. We need to advocate for more not less than we have now. We need to advocate for a plan that is financially, socially, and environmentally sound."

"County Road 42 only got the nod because it was a fraction of a percent cheaper. A few million on a 2 billion dollar project."

"I've often wondered if this was mostly a con, never expecting the hospital to be built, just using it as an excuse to develop an area unnecessarily. We need business and community leaders to understand, this isn't just about a hospital."

"We have to make sure the Hospital never gets built way out in the county, worst place ever."

"I've never seen a municipality develop around an airport. It's just unheard of to develop across from an airport!"

"Name a city where a hospital is in the county. It doesn’t make any sense. The city of Windsor is already in trouble! Keep the jobs downtown."