"WILLISTEAD GATE" AND MICELLI'S SECRET REPORT

By Harold G. LeBoeuf

Serpentine Locks of Medusa

The blatant arrogance of Miceli to the simple request of Howard Weeks asking to be advised of the content of a report Miceli says was requested by The Heritage Committee, apparently knows no bounds. Unquestionably, his ego has grown so large that he honestly believes that he is a member of hegemony and who, like Mayor Eddie, can force his agenda on any person who comes along and has the audacity to question him. He states that Weeks is “suggesting that I am denying the public’s right to know”; that Weeks demanded “that I provide you with a copy of a report that has yet to be made public.”  He accuses Weeks in words implying ignorance on the part of Weeks, and is “alarmed” that Weeks does “not seem to understand the severity of such a request…”  And he concludes with. “I ask you to please summarize what changes you are “alarmed” by at Willistead that were not addressed in the plan available for public review on the City’s website or what was discussed at the Public Meeting of the Heritage Committee held on the January 8th, 2014 whereby you appeared as a delegation?”

In truth, the bully type of ranting Miceli expressed in his reply constitute nothing more than a pitiful reply of a person who has been caught with his hands in the cookie jar, and whose only aim is to spring the plans of himself and Marshall on an unsuspecting public. Well Miceli, you are indeed denying the public’s right to know, and your condescending reply to Weeks speaks volumes against your managerial skills and diplomacy. Your attempts at putting Weeks on the defensive by asking him to enumerate problems not addressed or discussed at a Heritage Committee meeting and not having any knowledge of what is contained in your “secret report” only confirms that you may have something to hide or, at the very least, it is in your best interests for the public not to know prior to the November meeting of the Committee (Will you be there? If so, I want to challenge your standing to address the Committee when you are no longer an employee of, or resident of, the City of Windsor. Perhaps you should send Clement or Marshall.) Why do you find such a simple request for information “alarming,” or of a nature that any member of the public shouldn’t be allowed to ask?

Now I am in a position to discuss the content of your “secret report” with Weeks, with the other Ward 4 candidates, and with the concerned members of the public. Miceli, in an earlier reply stated that the report only dealt with seeking the approval for a pedestrian gate to be installed beside the main gate on Niagara Street. That is simply not a true statement and one that is intended to be misleading and put an end to the simple request. In fact, the “secret report”, while it does request approval for a new pedestrian gate, also includes approval to construct an “accessible route to be connected to the new pedestrian gate” and plazas at each of the other pedestrian gates. It may include, or a request will be withheld for a future presentation, elements such as benches and lighting for all of the serpentine locks of Medusa (instead of roadways, we may in the future have to refer to them as airport runways). Miceli’s henchmen will later have to request from council additional funding over the $400,000.00 already granted because, as he states in a report submitted to the Heritage Committee on January 8^th, the effects on the budget cannot be determined at this time. We can be reasonably satisfied that it has long ago exceeded the $400,000.00 approved due to the accelerated work to get the pathways done before Art-in-the-Park and the Beer Tent Festival; the extra trucks, extra labourers, and, oh yes, all of the rented equipment to get the job done.

Now here is where we get down to the nitty-gritty as to what was discussed or not discussed, and what was obscured from view unless you thoroughly examined the plan to determine what Miceli and Marshall had in mind (and we have absolutely no guarantee that the approval being sought at the November Heritage Committee meeting concludes what is in the Daring Duo’s proposed plans or for what approval will be sought in the months to come. What were not discussed in detail were the proposed pedestrian gateway and the accessible route to the manor. Was it included in the report and plan? – YES. Could those attending the meeting be aware of this if it wasn’t specifically discussed and if the details of the hidden aspects on the plan weren’t specifically discussed? – NO. Don’t forget, all of these features were deferred to a future meeting for discussion and approval. That meeting is in November; it wasn’t to be discussed on January 8^th.

If you go to the following website, and I quite strongly urge you to do so because what I am about to tell will be revealing and even fun, you will see the plan of the proposed changes to Willistead (Don’t forget, Miceli says this was all available to the public for almost a year now. Would you know how to navigate your way around the cryptic website to see this document?):

http://www.citywindsor.ca/residents/parksandofrestry/Parks-Development/Documents/Proposed_Pathways.pdf

Here is where the fun comes in to play. The plan consists of many “layers” on top of each other until the desired final drawing is completed. To the left of the colourful plan you will see a legend which sets out the identity of each and every layer. And, to the left of each layer’s description, there exists a check box. You can click on any of the layers, the mark will disappear, and that layer will be “dropped” from the plan. To some of you, like David Hanna, this is old hat. Here is what you do:

Step 1: Identify the legend and various layers of the plan;

Step 2: Click to the left of “tree” and “hatch”. All trees should have disappeared and you will have a clear view of the broken red line;

Step 3: Click on “accessible route” and the broken red line will disappear showing what has been hidden underneath;

Step 4: Click again on “tree”, “hatch”, and “accessible route”. The plan will once again appear as when you first saw it.

When you first open the plan you will see a broken red line which leads from the proposed new gateway all the way to the parking lot, the manor, the circular sidewalk at the south end of the parking lot, then in front of the Coach House to the pathway leading to Chilver Road, and finally out the Chilver Road gate. What you are looking at is nothing more than a broken red line showing how people can walk around the park from the proposed gateway. This is the only view of the drawing available and the one presented to the Committee on January 8^th. Believe me when I say that members of the Committee didn’t have at hand the necessary computers, and certainly persons from the public didn’t have them, to play around with the legends aspects. And Miceli certainly didn’t explain what the dashed red line hid. You, almighty sages and seers, are attributed the ability by Miceli to have x-ray vision to see what’s under the broken red line and to know what lay in the mind of both he and Marshall. Yet he dares to tell you and Weeks that it was all presented over a year ago. Was it?

If you have done what I described above, then you probably have guessed what I am going to tell you the “secret report” contains. For those of you who have not gone to the site, you will now find below three versions of the proposed plan. The first shows the plan as presented on the website with the dashed red line; the second shows the plan with all of the trees and obstructions removed; the third shows the plan with the dashed red line removed.

Plan as it appears on the website and presented to Committee

Same plan without the trees and clutter.

Same plan without the dashed red line.

Voila! Do you see the pad at the proposed site of the new pedestrian gate? Do you see what else is being sought approval for – a new asphalt path of similar width to the others leading from the gateway pad to two of Methuselah’s serpentine locks; and do you see what appears to be an narrower (don’t count on it because we have seen in the immediate past how proposed pathways to be between six feet and ten feet wide became ten feet to twelve feet in width) new walkway to the east side of the driveway leading to the Manor’s Courtyard? Do you remember any of this being explained in detail to you at any of the public meetings or at the January 8^th meeting of the Heritage Committee? Of course you don’t because it wasn’t. It was deferred to a future time (November).  And by telling you that all of this was available then, it is a deliberate attempt on the part of Miceli to direct attention away from a simple request for information and to keep secret from the public what is contained in his secret report (By the way, I don’t believe for one minute that the Heritage Committee ever requested Miceli to prepare such a report. He had to prepare the report to get approval.).

Do you see the small flared out sections at the other pedestrian gates? These are the concrete plazas that no doubt approval is being requested for in the “secret report.”

Do you also see the semi-circular bumps in the serpentine locks of Methuselah? No, they are not warts; I am guessing that these are concrete pads upon which future benches will be placed. These may or not be included in the report (If you recall, Miceli has stated that the report only concerns the pedestrian gates.). But don’t be surprised if they are included.

Miceli may have also contained a request for approval to replace the main gates on Niagara Street so there is the ability for them to be securely closed and locked. More public control! And why do I say that you may ask. Here’s why. Have you ever seen or tried to close and secure the main gates? I have closed them and the gates cannot be secured; they don’t even meet in the centre because there is a significant gap between the two sections of approximately 21.2 feet as I measured it. Take a look below:

Main entrance gates closed.

If nothing else, this does give credence to Miceli’s statement that a pedestrian gate did historically exist and that it was removed when the driveway was widened. My guess is that the original gates had a gate similar to, and built into the gates. By the way, see the four pillars. Micelli is on record stating that these will not be removed or altered in any way.

Miceli complains that pedestrians walking on the driveway pose a risk both for them and motorists. This is how he justifies the addition of the new asphalt walkway on the east side of the driveway leading towards the Manor.

The driveway measures twenty-five feet in width at this point and generally except for where it meets the parking lot which branches out in westerly and southerly directions (it is twenty-eight feet in width there). By comparison, Chilver Road, Devonshire Road, and Niagara Street, also measure approximately twenty-five feet in width. Where allowed, the streets have the capacity for a row of parked cars along a curb and ample room left over for two passing automobiles. Parking and or “standing” is specifically not permitted on the Willistead driveway; it is a designated fire route. Now correct me if my calculations are wrong, but by comparison, the driveway is wide enough for two automobiles to pass leaving a car’s width free. Couldn’t part of that free space be delineated for pedestrians such as the city delineates bicycle paths on roadways instead of constructing a further ugly, black tentacle to the east of the driveway? Here’s how it looks now:

Southerly view from the proposed pad at new gateway.

If you are familiar with the present walkways as I am certain most of you are here is how the existing walk looks:

View looking north from Manor Gates.

This cobbled stone section might have been intended as an area for disembarking from vehicles and its surface is primarily level with the surface of the parking lot. There is nothing to suggest that vehicles cannot park on this surface and there is ample evidence soiling the stones to suggest that it has been done. There is no reason why parking cannot be prohibited along this section. Also, I cannot find evidence that Miceli intends to suggest that this cobble stone area be removed and supplanted with more black gunk. But who knows? See below:

Tour bus parked on cobble stone path.

This cobble stone pathway terminates at a point where the driveway meets the parking lot. See below:

Terminus of cobble stone path.

In the unadorned picture of the plan, you will see that there exists a “break” in the curb line. That may be simply an anomaly in rendering the layer, or it possibly could indicate change that approval is being sought for. In other words, does the accessible route from the tentacle directly across from the Gate House to that “break” represent a further construction of an asphalt walkway to the point where the cobble stone portion ends, or does the “secret report” contain other yet to be identified recommendations. Miceli won’t tell you. He’s keeping that a secret even though he blatantly states that all proposed changes have been obvious for almost a year now. Sure they have!

Important: From all of the changes that Miceli states were so patently obvious for the past year or so, where is it that I can find the requests for, and the approval for all of the electrical facility that has been added to the park such as the four electrical stanchions strategically placed around the park, and the 220-240 volt electric outlet installed in the main east pillar to the main entrance. For what use and purpose do you intend that? And why was it necessary to unbolt the small section of fence located in the space between the two pillars on the east side of the driveway? And why haven’t the bolts been replaced? What does your “secret report” have to say about that?

I have covered the proposed new pedestrian gateway, the accessible route and what you intend to do so that a path extends from the proposed pad at that gateway to the two tentacles of Methuselah, the concrete plazas to be constructed at the other pedestrian gates, the semi-circular concrete pads upon which you eventually (oh, I forgot, you won’t be here will you) intend to place benches, lighting for the airport runways, the missing section between the main gates which doesn’t permit the gates to be closed and secured (Giovanni, I have a feeling that the 220-240 volt electrical circuit and the controlling device already installed may be intended to control automatic gate closures for when the main gates are replaced. Is that in your report?), and I previously discussed the two very large sections of fencing that have not been replaced on Devonshire Road and Chilver Road.

Now what Mr. Miceli was so patently secret about what may be in your report that you couldn’t have conveyed it to Howard Weeks and the candidates for Ward 4. Now everybody knows (or do they?).

Miceli, have I missed anything? Oh yes I have! Where is your recommendation that someone goes on top of the Gate House to remove the tree growing out of the chimney (do they still call them smoke stacks?)?

 Tree growing out of chimney flue.

I wish you God speed to your next job, John. I mean, hurry up and go!

THE PLOT THICKENS AND SECRECY ABOUNDS

By Harold G. LeBoeuf

The purpose of this article is to expand on the previous one entitled MSSRS. MICELI AND MARSHALL ARE AT IT AGAIN, due to additional information I have along with photographic evidence which serves to support what the “Daring Duo” are really up to.

You will recall that Miceli stated that The Windsor Heritage Committee requested that a report be authored “dealing with the details of the gate and the entrances to the park from Devonshire, Richmond, Chilver and the main gate on Niagara.” Miceli doesn’t say to whom the request for this report was sent, nor has he produced a copy of said request. Neither does he state whether the request was in writing, or simply a verbal request. Was the request sent to Miceli at the Dept. of Parks, or to Marshall and the Board of Willistead Manor, or to both? If it was a verbal request by the Committee, who from the Committee communicated the request and to whom did the individual speak to? The Heritage Committee has been involved with the E. Chandler Walker property for approximately forty years. Surely it has sufficient information on file in its own records to know the answer to the request. Frankly, any reasonable person walking around the perimeter of the park could provide the details being requested. Any member of the Committee could do the same. Therefore, if the request was actually made by the Committee, specifically for what purpose and why did it want the information? On the other hand, perhaps The Heritage Committee didn’t make such a request in the first place. Perhaps this is yet another instance whereby Mssrs. Miceli and Marshall have concocted a further plan to control their intended commercialization of the Willistead Park and Manor. But they will produce a copy of the request. Won’t they?

Miceli has stated that the report has been completed and we have now learned that he has said that it will be presented to The Heritage Committee for its approval at the November meeting of the Committee. Miceli also refuses to produce a copy of the report until it is presented to the Committee as it is his practice not to release such things to the public in advance. In fairness, the following is an excerpt from an open communication between Miceli and Howard Weeks who is a hopeful candidate to become the Councillor for Ward 4. In other words, another politician:

Howard Weeks 4:14pm Sep 10 A response from Mr. Miceli : Thank You Howard. The report is scheduled to go to the November Heritage Committee meeting. It is not our practice to release the report to the public before the members of the committee receive it so at the present time I cannot accommodate your request. Perhaps you can make an appointment to come see me and we can discuss the report and I can answer your questions. My Response: Hi John, I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the report. Just let me know when and where. Howard

“Come see me and we can discuss the report.” 

Miceli states that he can’t release the report to the public but he is willing to discuss it with Weeks. Is not Weeks just a member of the public? Since Miceli is apparently prepared to give special status to a candidate running for Ward 4, is he also prepared to extend such confidence to the other candidates running in the Ward who, like Weeks, are simply members of the public vying for the same position? Do not the other candidates have the same interest in matters affecting Willistead, and are they not entitled to the same deference as Miceli is prepared to extend to Weeks? If Miceli doesn’t want the public to know what is in the report but is willing to discuss it with Weeks, will this budding politician release in detail everything that he learns from the report to the public or will he, too, decide that the secrecy should prevail until the Committee meeting? My bet is that he won’t release a factual thing from the report other than “politician speak” as Miceli has already done: “Our plan is to add a pedestrian gate on Niagara which was part of the original gates to the Manor.” I still want to see the proof he has for that statement because, believe me, I can find no evidence of such a gate, and even if I could, what is the sudden misplaced desire on the part of the Committee or the Daring Duo to restore Willistead to its original appearance and condition? Miceli and Marshall want to add a gate alright, but it isn’t solely because there might have originally been one, and it certainly isn’t because The Heritage Committee wants to restore the original condition of the Manor and its grounds. We have already seen proof of that in what the Committee allowed the Daring Duo to do with the asphalt roadways.

Here is what I believe the Duo wants authorization for, and what they have already set into motion to accomplish it. To refresh your memory, here is a photograph of the existing conditions where they want to install the gate.

Proposed location for new pedestrian gate.

Please note the following about this proposed site:

1. A gravel bed has already been laid to accommodate an asphalt or concrete pad which would lead pedestrians from the southern Niagara sidewalk into the park and directly back to the existing driveway, a distance of perhaps twenty feet (Why not let them continue to use the driveway as they have for decades?). I have used a probe in numerous places in this gravel bed to determine whether or not there is evidence of any pre-existing bed. There is not;
2. No evidence is seen of an existing column to the right of this photo which would have been necessary to support what Miceli states existed in the past. All other existing gates in the park have “concrete” columns or a rectangular open frame iron column which matches the fencing.
3. New electrical conduit has been installed tapping into the existing electrical power used to operate the lamps situated on top of the main column. Also installed is a remote sensor at the top of the conduit which apparently is intended to activate/de-activate the electricity to a GFCI protected receptacle, said receptacle being of the type approved by the Hydro Dept. to accommodate 220-240 volts of electricity. A special plug is required to access this receptacle which has one prong shaped in the form of the letter “T” lying on its side. That does not mean the circuit is actually wired for that much voltage, and it probably is not since I can’t believe that the main lamps on top of the columns operate on 220-240 volts of electricity. It was probably done to prevent the public from attempting to get free electricity. However, I am certain that Miceli or Weeks will advise us as to the nature of the circuit and what it is intended for (or will they?).
4. The two existing columns on the left are approximately sixteen inches apart or sixty-seven centimeters. Between them is a small section of fencing which is obviously original. All of the bolts have been removed from that section of fencing and the panel is simply held in place by its friction fit to the two columns. You can easily remove that panel and put it back. I know because I did it and I have the photographic evidence.

  

Small section of fence just hanging there.   Top left bolts removed.

I have four such photos re the bolts.

Here is what I surmise that the Daring Duo wants The Heritage Committee to approve:

1. They want approval to finish the gateway bed with an appropriate material be it concrete or asphalt;
2. They want approval to move the smaller of the two columns to the right or easterly side of the intended entrance, and/or they seek the approval to move the existing column to the westerly limit of the proposed gateway, and to construct a new, similar column on the easterly side of the proposed new gateway;
3. They seek approval to have constructed a new gate using the materials from the existing fence that has been removed;
4. They seek approval for the installation of appropriate security mechanisms to permit the gate to be securely closed and to prevent access by the public except for when Art-in-the-Park or the Beer Tent Festival or other venues exist which require an admission fee to be paid (all part of their commercialization plans).
5. Whether or not they ultimately seek approval in the future for barbed wire to be installed atop the existing fencing around the entire park and security cameras and warning devices in case of an intruder remains to be seen.

And exactly how will Miceli and Marshall justify this additional gate? They may perceive the public so gullible (as they have in the all too nearby past) to say that the main purpose is to control vandalism in the park. How dare they! They didn’t see that as a viable reason for not installing the asphalt roadways all over the park; the attitude was come who may and the more the merrier. Do not be fooled. The sole purpose is to control access to this public park by the public when their pet money making ventures are being held and when they want to make even more money by charging an admission fee. The gateway will make a far more narrow entrance for people to be admitted to those events and, try as they may, no free-loading Windsorite will be able to sneak into those events without having paid the required admission charge.

Oh, but wait just a darn minute! The Committee meeting to which the report has been tabled will be held in November. Miceli will have abandoned his post on October 17^th, and will no longer be in the employ of the City of Windsor. Will he leave his new cushy job as CAO with the Town of Amherstburg to attend the meeting and make the presentation? I wouldn’t count on his return to face the music about the report and the questions it raises. And if he did, why on earth would he be given standing? He’s not even a Windsor resident. Yes, I know, he is one of the Daring Duo and instrumental in all of the secrecy surrounding the projects implemented in Willistead Park in the last couple of years. Personally, I would love the opportunity to cross-examine him if he makes the presentation; not just about the report but to whom he has been awarding the projects to on a “pay-as-you-go” basis (much more on that in a few weeks).

Now all of the asphalt in the park is complete (or is it?), and all of the large machinery and dump trucks are gone (or are they?). What else might Miceli’s report contain that his secret approach hasn’t alluded to?

There continues to exist two large portions of fencing which have not been replaced, nor has the gravel bases which were used by the heavy dump trucks to enter the park to discharge or pickup their loads. One is located on the mid-east side of the park on Kildare Road; the second is located on the west side of the park on Chilver Road. Here are the photographs of the two sections missing:

Easterly view of missing fence and gravel drive on Chilver.

Westerly view of missing fence and gravel drive on Devonshire.

Sections of fencing were removed from each of these sites to permit the ingress/egress of trucks and large equipment installing the drainage materials and ugly asphalt roadways, or as I prefer to call them, “The serpentine locks of Methuselah.” But one is to assume that all of the work in that regard has been completed because that is all Council approved. That being true, why is it that all of the gravel hasn’t been removed, the grass sod replaced in the park and boulevards, and why hasn’t the fencing been replaced? Could it possibly be that the Daring Duo, cloaked in all of their secrecy, also seeks approval to construct new driveways on both roads to permit more ingress/egress by automobiles into the park?

For those residents who have resided in the area for many years and prior to when public approval for expansion of the Manor’s parking lot was sought, you may have also attended the public meeting that was held in the Coachhouse. The City didn’t just seek public approval for expansion of the parking lot; it also sought public approval to install another driveway to permit vehicles to exit onto Chilver Road. The public outcry was deafening, so much so that the request to do so was abandoned and the City promised never to construct or seek permission to construct such a driveway again. That was then, and this is now. The principled persons of the time are no longer involved leaving Councillor Hillary Payne (he was one of the presenters) and Councillor Fulvio Valentinis (he is currently on The Heritage Committee). Therefore, given those facts, it is most highly unlikely that any promises made then will be kept or even admitted to (what happened to the detailed minutes that were made for that public meeting?). Although a lame duck, we probably still have to deal with Mayor Eddie and the other group of ten toadies who didn’t hesitate to approve the project for the “serpentine locks of Methuselah.” Perhaps they will say that the approval given then included everything that Miceli and Marshall have included in their secret report to be produced in November. Prove it!

This article could include so much more, but I have a deadline to meet for a report dealing with whom Miceli, Marshal, and the City of Windsor has been conducting business with, particularly, but not limited to, projects assigned by Miceli involving Jackson Park and Willistead Park.

It’s your Willistead Park, and it’s your Willistead Manor. Please don’t sit idly by and allow Miceli and Marshall to continue on with the commercialization of same. As the colourful lawyer, Jeffery Feiger says, “If you don’t stand for something, you end up standing for nothing.” Please stand up for something and let your view be amply expressed in the upcoming civic election.

Harold.

MSSRS. MICELI AND MARSHALL ARE AT IT AGAIN!

By:  Harold G. LeBoeuf

Proposed pedestrian gateway next to the main entrance to Willistead.

Now the “Daring Duo” intend to install a “pedestrian gate” adjacent to the existing main entrance to Willistead, and they plan on obtaining approval for this change from The Heritage Committee at its next meeting. Miceli states, “Our plan is to add a pedestrian gate on Niagara which was part of the original gates to the Manor.” That Miceli possesses information about the original gates, perhaps he would be so kind as to supply us with a picture of the original pedestrian gate. As you may conclude in the following, approval of this additional project must be considered a fait accomplis in view of the work that has already been done in this regard, as was the proposal for the labyrinth of serpentine asphalt roadways that now exist throughout the park.

Miceli seems to imply that the sole purpose of the proposed gateway is to restore what he says existed in the beginning. Really! He also states, “We have a report as was requested by the heritage committee dealing with the details of the gate and the entrances to the park from Devonshire, Richmond, Chilver and the main gate on Niagara. The report is complete and we are hoping to have it on the agenda on the next heritage committee meeting.” Do Miceli and Marshall really believe that the public is so gullible as to imply that they, and The Heritage Committee, are keenly interested in restoring the Willistead property to what it originally was after the vile desecration they have accomplished to the grounds? Please produce the report that you say is in your possession, Miceli. Both of them have long since lost any credibility that they may have enjoyed, yet once again they are prepared to ramrod another pet project down the public throats with all of the gall and temerity they can muster.

Then what may be the true purpose of installing such a gateway; to provide easy access to those unfortunate persons who have a physical disability; to enable city vehicles to conduct maintenance in the park? Just who on earth do they think they are kidding? The real purpose must be to control access by the public to this public Willistead Park! There can not be any other legitimate purpose for this maneuver. They, not The Heritage Committee, want the ability to control access to the park when such functions as Art-in-the-Park and their pet beer tent festivals are being held. Apparently they believe that the citizens of Windsor are bound and intent on sneaking onto the grounds of the park on those occasions without paying the precious entrance fees. At those times, they will be able to close and lock the gates to the driveway to ensure that no person enters without paying. What’s next, Miceli and Marshall? Do you plan on installing barbed wire on top of the fencing all around the park? Perhaps installing security alarms and cameras to ensure that you caught everyone could follow at some future point.

I urge the readers to take a closer look at what has already been installed by the Daring Duo’s henchmen and, in spite of anything the two may say the purpose is, come to your own conclusions. 

New electrical installation from light standard.

New electrical control.

New electrical outlet next to proposed gate.

Miceli made reference in the foregoing statements about a requested report by The Heritage Committee, and he also suggested that such a gate was present in the original configuration of the fencing surrounding Willistead. Tell us Mssrs. Miceli and Marshall, was all of this new electrical installation also a part of the original configuration that The Heritage Committee is so interested in restoring? And why is the electrical outlet configured for 220-240 volts of electricity? Have you simply used that type of outlet to prevent the general public from stealing electricity using a normal two-prong or three-prong plug, or do you have yet another project in mind?

It really would be nice if, just for once, Miceli and Marshall were totally honest with the public as to what their real intentions are with these changes. They certainly weren’t very candid when it came to the proposed changes for the asphalt roadways. But one must conclude that they are not willing to admit that their sole purpose is commercialization of the Manor and the Park.

And by the way, who authorized the cost for the electrical installation, the base for whatever pad is going to be installed (probably more asphalt or even concrete), the construction of the new gate, etc.? It most definitely wasn’t included in the authorization extended by Council for the roadway labyrinth. Has Miceli got a slush fund he can draw from? Thankfully, Miceli will no longer be with us after mid-October when he takes up his new digs with the Town of Amherstburg as its new CAO. Better them than us! And hopefully, Marshall will take the hint and voluntarily leave his post on the Board of Willistead Manor.

To the current members of Windsor’s Heritage Committee, Councillor Fulvio Valentinis, Lynn Baker, Simon Chamely, Robin Easterbrook, Andrew Foot, Jeffrey Mellow, and Noreen Slack, do not be hoodwinked yet again by the nefarious plans of the Daring Duo. Commercialization of the Willistead grounds and manor as envisioned by these two is not consistent with the preservation of this historical, city gem any more than your authorization for the construction of the hideous asphalt roadways for the benefit of Art-in-the-Park and perhaps other venues was. There is absolutely no need for the construction of this pedestrian gateway other than for the nefarious purposes set out in the foregoing. Please, do what you were appointed to do in good conscious. Don’t feel that it is necessary for you to follow the edicts of Miceli and Marshall. They do not have the best interests of this heritage property in mind.

And finally, I would like to show you what other municipalities and countries are doing rather than using precious natural resources to create ugly asphalt roadways.

Paving machine laying down pavers in perfect herringbone pattern.

If new pathways were really a necessity, and they weren't, it certainly 

is much more presentable than ugly wide asphalt roadways isn't it?  

And the machine can accommodate many widths automatically.