ELECTION SELECTION
Columnist Jarvis explains her pick for mayor
They are astute voters who were looking for an alternative to Mayor Drew Dilkens. They hoped they had one in Matt Marchand, former CEO of the Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce.
But three days before the election, “I haven’t decided who I’m going to vote for,” said one. “I’ll probably decide at the ballot box on Monday,” said another. A third is voting for Dilkens. That says everything. Windsor 2022, Marchand’s platform to revitalize downtown, from addressing homelessness and crime to fostering neighbourhoods and business, captured the best of his candidacy. Downtown, the face of the city, is key, he said, and the mayor must lead this. He’s willing to explore progressive ideas, like micro grants, work with neighbourhoods and learn from other cities. He recognizes that little things make a difference, like alley lights. It was a distinct and substantive alternative. Finally — this was late September — we had a campaign.
Marchand scored with other planks, too — more collaboration between council and the community, hiring an auditor general, protected bike lanes, reforming Enwin.
But many things left me uneasy. Marchand announced he would eliminate, reduce or redirect almost $227 million in city spending to better reflect people’s priorities. The problem was many of his numbers were so wildly incorrect that one observer called them “cringeworthy.” Marchand, who as mayor would head an $800-million corporation, should have known better, or he was spinning.
His first plank was moving council meetings around the city. Windsor just spent $43.9 million building a new city hall. Meetings are live-streamed. There are ward meetings. “Hokey,” said one voter.
It seemed difficult at times to get unfiltered answers to basic questions. Was he still chamber CEO? He evaded the question at his campaign launch. Would he outsource city jobs? Marchand, endorsed by labour, evaded that question at the debate. He refused to say anything about downtown before his platform was ready, even as the homeless wandering the streets reached a crisis. He panned the Christmas lights at Jackson Park and restoring the streetcar, yet proposed a vague, $50-million “livability” fund. The lights dazzled people, and the streetcar celebrates our history. This is livability.
He was the only candidate to acknowledge the shameful fact that one in four children in Windsor live in poverty, pledging to support Prosper-Us. But it was buried.
“I struggle with Matt,” concluded one of the undecided voters. “He hasn’t inspired me.” Despite 12 years as adviser to former mayor Mike Hurst and six years leading the call for an auto strategy as chamber CEO, I’m left — and this is a very difficult call — uneasy about whether Marchand has command of the job. Dilkens, despite critical flaws, is the better leader now. Dilkens has grown into the job and advanced the city. Pursuing a joint bid for Amazon’s second North American headquarters with Detroit was brilliant. Now, because of that, Detroit billionaire Dan Gilbert’s Quicken Loans is establishing a tech centre here, one of the most significant announcements in innumerable attempts to diversify the economy.
New, aggressive incentives have lured $60 million in investment downtown. The sewer master plan has been expedited to address devastating flooding. Regional transit and policing, long sought, have started, with bus service to LaSalle and Windsor police in Amherstburg. We’ve begun to address neglected basics, like vacant buildings.
The talk is no longer largely about tax freezes. It’s about building a community — highlighting our history and distinctive neighbourhoods and supporting the arts. We’re creating a library from an old firehall in Sandwich, restoring a historic streetcar and investing in the Windsor International Film Festival. We erected a statue of General Brock and Tecumseh, with another of Hiram Walker to follow, and opened Peche Island to the public with a boat. They weren’t all Dilkens’ initiatives. Some councillors deserve much of the credit. But nothing happens without Dilkens. There have been fundamentally bad decisions, like opening Sandwich South to development instead of shoring up the core, ripping out the stores in the Pelissier Street parking garage and rejecting licensing rental housing. Yes, we need more police to address rising crime downtown, but we also need more homes for the homeless and more care for the mentally ill and those addicted to drugs. The problem is the way Dilkens governs — reversing decisions at closed meetings, appearing to whip the vote and reward and punish councillors. There’s money for the mayor’s projects but not always for measures proposed by others. It’s destructive. Insisting that replacing the stores in the Pelissier Street parking garage with more parking was key to landing Quicken Loans seemed like more pettiness.
Key questions haven’t been answered this election, like how Windsor will parlay the Quicken Loans tech centre into a burgeoning tech sector? How will we lift our children out of poverty? There is a choice. Dilkens supports the Riverside Drive underpass, sports tourism office, money for the Detroit Grand Prix. Marchand doesn’t. Marchand supports an auditor general and protected bike lanes. Dilkens doesn’t. But it wasn’t the deeper, incisive debate on the city’s future that voters wanted. Dilkens spent much of his campaign warning that “going back is too risky,” referring to Marchand’s role under Hearst. Voters want to hear what Dilkens will do the next four years, not what Dilkens alleges Marchand did under a former mayor 20 years ago.
Several new, more progressive councillors will be elected. They must change the dynamic. They must lead the way to more openness, reason and compromise on council and to a more innovative city.
The problem is the way Dilkens governs — reversing decisions at closed meetings, appearing to whip the vote and reward and punish councillors.