A lot of insults and name calling are still being flung on blogs which have made their opinions quite clear and where it is impossible to get a fair hearing for all sides on the issue. This is where you get your hearing.
Make your points, but don't expect information that you forward as fact to go unchallenged. You don't have to sign your name, but it is better that you do.
YouTuber captures massive ice breech
-
A Youtube video shows the dramatic surge of ice over the Niagara River
shorewall at Fort Erie Sunday.
6 years ago
I think everyone including the opposition to the Bay Beach Condo Project,I suppose, would like to know the source as to which a study concluded that 90% of taxpayers are against the present development in Crystal Beach.
ReplyDeleteI for one,as a life long Crystal Beach full-time resident of Crystal Beach,which ultimately is a town of Greater Fort Erie, didn't receive any forms,"proper unbiased" petitions, or random studies to address this issue. Did I not get the memo? I haven't been away for more than a night. How can anyone conclude that the vast majority of "Canadian voters" are against anything, let alone building a development of this nature in my town?
Sure a couple of hundred residents came out to a couple of Town Council meetings.Some were seasonal American waterfront residents who worry about losing their private beaches. Some were "friends" of seasonal American waterfront residents that worry about not being able to enjoy their "friends" private beaches.(Some would think sharing their beach with us full-time Canadian residents with voting privledges are not worthy).Some were business people offended by competition brought upon by this development. Some were opposed because they ultimately oppose everything this present Council engages in,I suppose,for their own self absorbed existance. Some were supportive of this new plan. To conclude or rationalize the support or opposition strictly on attendance at council meetings or biased petitions loaded with misinformation would be very misleading.
I for one would like to know HOW MANY Greater Fort Erie, full-time taxpaying,Canadian voters,and their families and friends would be OFFENDED if OUR Town Council would reclaim some of our waterfront, at NO cost to us, and further more, would be OPPOSED to enhancing the entrances to our waterfronts all across OUR town, including Bay Beach, again at NO cost to us?
Could the figures swing to 10% of full-time, Canadian, taxpaying voters and their "friends", are OPPOSED to this very important issue? Maybe 5%? 1%? No one?
Misleading the public to receive recognition is the wrong way to express anyones views. It is very transparent! Two present Council members have been against The Gateway Project in Bay Beach since day one. Reinforcing their views with misinformation has allowed many of us to question their motives. Are they using our town and its endeavours to slight other councilllors? Are they trying to manipulate the facts to further their political futures? Are they encouraging others like themselves to join their politcal viewpoints? John Hill, John Papadakis and Sue Salter took the bait! Richard Berry has the bait drawn in intervenously. We must ask ourselves, do we want these individuals to explore other possibilities if elected? What would happen if a highly reputable business or industry decide to locate in Greater Fort Erie and these "aspiring" Councillors are holding all the cards? Can you trust Bob Steckley and Ann-Marie Noyes to be impartial until all comments and opinions are gathered by ALL their constituents? Can you trust the rest of our newly crowned candidates? I think that the Hospital issue isn't going away anytime soon. Would you like these folks to carry the fight?They have already proven to many of us that they don't listen to us. Please make your votes count in October! Vote for honesty, vote for transparency!
ReplyDeleteIt's Salzer, not Salter. Sue Salzer has been the spokesperson for the Save the DMH campaign and has registered for the municipal election.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment, but I would like to restrict the discussion to the Bay Beach issue. The reason is the results of the municipal election in October will have no bearing on whether the Town proceeds or not.
If I read the Memorandum of Understanding correctly, the Town (a corporation) is bound to act in good faith to move forward. Now that the bylaw has been passed (notwithstanding what the decision of the OMB will be), if a new council backs out, the Town will be faced with a multi-million lawsuit.
So a candidate can campaign until he or she is blue in the face about tearing up the deal, but there will be a huge cost associated with it.
Thanks for the comment, but let's try to keep the discussion focused on Bay Beach and stay away from the election.
ReplyDeletePost apparently REJECTED on the Strand ( submitted 24 hours ago):
ReplyDelete"I would like to respond to Marcia Cryin's comments that you posted on your faux newspaper.
Item 1: The TOWN will GET " .... the equal exchange of good and valuable consideration between the Buyer and the Town in the amount of two million seven hundred thousand dollars."
Item 2: You stated " "amenities" (things we don't want or need):"
Who the hell are you to say what WE .... full time CANADIAN residents of this town want or don't want.
Item 2 ( 2nd line) . The current storm water system is in serious need of updating. Yes .... it is much better for the town to pay $600,000 for the update than $400,000.
Item 2 ( 3rd line) As previously discussed on this blog, there has been considerable damage to the beach and properties from storms during the winter and spring months. A protection from these events at half the price sounds like a sound investment to me.
Item 2 ( 4th line) " Molinaro builds a new washroom/changeroom facility close to the water in a flood hazard zone" ALL of Crystal Beach is in a " flood hazard zone".
Updated washroom and changeroom facilities are badly needed .... to think we can get them for free !!!
Item 2 ( 5th line) ..... WOW a 2,200 sq ft meeting room ..... FOR FREE !!!! Yup the town is stupid to agree with that. Let's see, as per your calculations $45,000 a year operating costs, plus my calculations of $200,000 a year for event/function rentals .... hmmmmm that's $155,000 a year for no investment.
Item 2 ( 6th line) .... 30,000 sq. ft. of paving block surface that will allow access to the beach area for the handicapped FOR FREE !!!! Easily a $100,000 (minimum) enhancement for free.
Item 2 ( 7th line) "Molinaro paves and installs sidewalks and curbs on 4 roads near the condo tower, upgrades the 2 public parking lots across the
street, and adds landscaping and benches on the east side (all of which will help in selling condo units)."
My Lord woman, have you looked at the street today ..... its a dump, except the south side by the Yacht and Tennis club who have done a tremendous job to enhance the beauty of Crystal Beach. Too bad the business owners and Bia have not got the same pride.
This project would spearhead the resurgence of Crystal Beach to a point comparable to the glory days when the amusement park was open. And THAT is where you really blew it .... you are thinking about yourselves ..... instead of the history and promise of Crystal Beach.
Should you succeed in your battle against this rejuvination of Crystal Beach ..... well, let me just suggest this to you. This evening, take a stroll along Erie Road ......observe your surroundings ..... that is your future. "
It's Carlyn, not Cryin. Marcia Carlyn. Please refrain from ridiculing people, ESPECIALLY if you choose to post anonymously.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies ... I will refrain from altering persons names in the future.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the previous poster. Sue Salzer was quoted in "The Post" as saying that the present Town Council doesn't listen to the people. She was making references to the Bay Beach issue and how the majority of the residents are against it. She also questioned the present Council and how can they just move forward with this plan in Bay Beach, without the consent of the people. She, as well as the rest of the other prospective candidates use the same arguement. How did Salzer and the rest of them, conclude that so many people are being ignored? How can anybody run for office without any facts to back up their statements? Where are all the facts? No one asked me about this issue. No one in my neighbourhood was questioned either. How can I vote in good conscience for any of these people? John Hill spoke in front of Town Council and continually made references to the plan being offensive to the majority of the residents.He has also surrounded himself with a few people that are against this issue. It all started with Ann-Marie Noyes and Bob Steckley making up their minds before asking how all of us felt about the Bay Beach plan. Instead of searching for people on both sides of the fence, they just latched on to the "opposers" and continually down-played any mention of support. That is not democracy! Plain and simple!
ReplyDeletePolitically motivated Councillors are not new to Greater Fort Erie. The lack of conscience by these individuals mentioned above is very apparent. It doesn't take long to figure out their intentions. Unfortunately most taxpayers don't pay attention to all these people, and WE will ultimately pay the price in the end.
ReplyDeleteBay Beach today, another opportunity lost tomorrow. No wonder this town has lost so many jobs. Look around and see how this town has lost ground to other more progressive areas. Factories closed, some hanging by a thread, homes and businesses for sale or abandoned all over town, especially in Crystal Beach.Not to mention a Hospital that needs to be saved!
The Bay Beach development is a start. A plan that helps recapture a sense of viabilty. A high-density development that encourages growth in both residential and business sectors. A private/public partnership is cast aside by some, when most municipalities struggle with their very existance.
This town is at a cross-roads. Do we accept help from the private sector and acknowledge change or do we scoff at it and continue to struggle with the status quo?
I personally, would embrace the new plan, with its enhanced access to our beach and modern amenities over chain-linked fences, burms and primative facilities. I can get used to accepting more beach access from our neighbours. I promise to share it, not prohibit anyone from enjoying it. It's in the palm of our hand.
Has anybody else noticed that when Councillor Shular voted against the development based on his opinion that more time was needed before voting, both Sharon Bowers and Marcia Carlyn became his friend as he was, quote:" on their side now". But now he is on their Black List again.
ReplyDeleteMy, how the tides turn in the Bowers camp.
As I recall, the Yacht and Tennis Club was developed under the previous council's terms, and Point Abino has always had a gated entrance.
At least this council is making sure that the public has access to the beach. Unlike the previously mentioned Yacht and Tennis Club thanks to councillors of that day ..... Berry, Noyes, Lewis .....
Richard Berry, Ann-Marie Noyes and Tom Lewis had nothing to do with the Tiburzi development (Crystal Beach Tennis and Yacht Club) at the old amusement park.
ReplyDeleteIf memory serves me, the council of the day was headed by Mayor John Teal. The Crystal Beach councillor was Russ Wilson. Doug Martin was on council with Bruce Moore, John Gibson, Darlene Hazlett, Horst Wolff, Tom Mather (who resigned to take a job in the clerk's department and was replaced by John Gordon) and Anne Marie Hudak.
If it wasn't that council, it was the one elected in 1991 when Wayne Redekop defeated John Gordon. All the rest of the players were the same.
At regional council was Stella Ziff, hero of the anti-golf course fight in her neighbourhood in 2005, and proponent of the Tiburzi plan then.
Ron Rienas was the planner, Ken Zurby, the CAO. They got the same invective from the public as the current staff today.
The Crystal Beach Tennis and Yacht Club development is much different than the Molinaro Plan(The Crystal Beach Gateway Project). This plan includes public access, whereas the "gated community" at C.B. Tennis and Yacht Club, does not allow public access and also has its own private beach. These two plans are totally different from eachother. The developer in this new plan must include an enhanced entrance to the waterfront whereas the Tiburzi Plan(CBTYC) does not. This new plan also allows for more access in the future. As it is stated in writing, any new development adjacent to this plan will turn over all their private beaches to the public.
ReplyDeleteThe present council did do its job protecting our waterfront and allowing more public access in the future, at no cost to the taxpayer. Zoning changes are subject to turning over private beachfront,according to the articles included on The Towns website.
That is my biggest gripe with Noyes and Steckley. Why are they protecting the rights of summer residents and not the rights for full-time Canadian, "voting", taxpayers? Why do they allow foreignors to continue denying our access to "our" waterfront"?
Well, I stand corrected as to who was on council when the Crystal Beach Tennis and Yacht Club was approved and the conditions that affected it. I bow to your supreme expertise in this matter.
ReplyDeleteThe point that I was trying to make was, as I had stated and a subsequent poster stated, at least THIS council is ensuring a continued public access to the beach and all of the proposed amenities.
I didn't want to offend you. I just want to be sure we don't get side-tracked by wrong information.
ReplyDeleteBut there are a couple of things that come up with your references.
First of all, the Tiburzi development included the transfer of all of that wonderful beach from the pier to Schooley Road to the Town as part of the site plan. It's something like 600 feet. So the compromise for a gate was ownership of the beach.
Second, in 2001 when the Town bought the beach, it was Tim Haggerty who moved the amendment to direct Zurby to go ahead and make the deal with the provision that Zurby come up with some economic development plan to provide a "reasonable" return on investment. It was approved by council, including Berry and Noyes. Surprise, surprise . . . they are now both against trying to get a return. Flip-flops aren't just beach wear.
If I may comment on your dialogue. The Beach west of the pier to the Ashwood Rd, entrance is subject to interpretation. Tha CBTYC residents have security guards discouraging access to the beach from an invisible boundary. Are you, Adminstrator, telling us that it is "public access"? As an avid beach goer, I have under the impression that the beach from the pier to the Ashwood Rd. entrance is private and has been private, even when the Hall family owned the Amusement Park. Can you clearly define what is public beach and what is private beach, please?
ReplyDeleteAs for Noyes and Steckley, their underhanded approach in this issue is quite disturbing! Thank you.
My mistake. The beach dedication from the Tiburzi development is about 600 feet east from Schooley Road, taking it just past the Ashwood Avenue road allowance. It is private beach from a little east of Ashwood all the way to the pier and beyond to the boat launch park at the Palmwood.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely no offence taken Administrator :-)
ReplyDeleteI would like to add that the educated and factual discussion on this blog is very refreshing and informative. Keep up the good work.
I wouldn't characterize Noyes and Steckley as being underhanded. Steckley has been upfront in his opposition from the beginning, seeing as he is the owner of the Crystal Beach Candy Company with headquarters in the Jarvis Street BIA. Noyes changed her mind in 2009 when the twin towers plan was developed.
ReplyDelete"Underhanded" could be interpreted as not representing the intentions of this proposal in Bay Beach, in its entirety, by these two councillors. Their reasoning for not supporting this plan has always been their displeasure with the "look" of this proposed structure, not its "purpose".
ReplyDeleteI've asked myself and others close to me about this structures size and form. Would we be offended by this structure because it's out of character with its surrounding? Does "The Albany Apartment Building",in Fort Erie, look out of character surrounded by single-storey dwellings and businesses? Possibly. Would we allow another building similar to it, nearby? Probably. So what is the real issue in Bay Beach? Is it that we don't want this structure? Or the result of it.
The result of it is quite clear to most of us, including all summer residents in close proximity to this development. Public access will be enhanced, more visitors will enjoy the waterfront and in the near future more waterfront will be turned over to the public.
Scary proposition if you like the status quo.
I would like to know why the admin pointed out that councillor Steckley's business is headquartered in the Jarvis Street BIA. I don't think that where his business is located has anything to do with his opinion of the Bay Beach Project. Or does it have to do with the BIA, which we all know he has issues with.
ReplyDeleteThank you Admin for finally putting together a blog that discusses the facts as opposed to the biased, mostly misleading, misinformed blogs elswhere. As one of the Full time permanent residents of the beach (who used to live at the Ashwood beach entrance) I really am happy to see the facts being laid out and corrections made to any incorrect information. I have stated before and will state again, it is about time that council took some forward steps with regards to this property. Eleven years is long enough to wait for a solutions to the problem. I too am not excited about a 12 story condo, that being said when it is south side of Erie or nothing....well you have to compromise somewhere and the benifits outweigh the negative aspects greatly. Thank you again for such a great diplomatic/democratic blog.
ReplyDeleteOn the topic of Bob Steckley and his views on Bay Beach:
ReplyDeleteHe made it clear from the beginning, that he is opposed to the plan for development. His reasoning falls on the "majority" of the residents are opposed to it, as he has stated publically on many occasions. Has he looked for anyone in support of this new plan. Has he investigated the possibilty that more than a few people are for it? Will we just have to speculate that his views are self-motivated? Maybe he wouldn't like to offend his Western New York customers that buy his "knock off', Crystal Beach Amusement Park Suckers. Maybe he listens only to the few that are opposed to the new development that distort the facts and like things to remain the same? Same old wire fences surrounding a birm and a small opening that hides Greater Fort Erie's greatest treasure. A beautiful waterfront with affluent U.S. summer residents and just a couple metres away from the beach are full-time residents living day to day on meager incomes. Makes you wonder doesn't it?
It was an observation that Bob Steckley is a member of the Jarvis Street BIA which made a resolution at a meeting last winter that it supports the Bay Beach development proposal.
ReplyDeleteI see...that's why he has issues with the BIA. I thought it was because his two friends were kicked off.
ReplyDeleteYou actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this topic to be really something that I think I would never understand.
ReplyDeleteIt seems too complicated and very broad for me.
I am looking forward for your next post, I'll try to get the hang of it!
my site :: additional idol lash reviews info