I hate to say "I told you so" but...

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, in a report released this week , warned that municipal infrastructure is facing imminent collapse. (Check out the press release, the report and the powerpoint presentation) According to the report municipalities need $123 billion to replace infrastructure that is rapidly approaching the end of its' projected life expectancy. AM800 reported that Mayor Francis is pushing to establish a National Framework to address the issue of reduced funding levels from the federal level and make the sharing of gas tax revenues permanent in a desperate attempt to avert the catastrophe that has been decades in the making.

While the future prospects are ominous, but the question begs to be asked -- Why do we continue to support sprawling infrastructure? It's like the smoker who has lung cancer, yet continues to chain smoke -- we know that we are dying, yet the addiction to sprawling development continues. Alas, city administration tends to speak out of both sides of their mouth on this issue. It appears that Mayor Francis knows that changes need to be made, hence his push for the national framework, yet we expect that, in the 21st century, our pattern of consumption will continue to be sustained by ever increasing transfers of federal funds, spiralling taxes, or a combination of the two. While Francis is plotting his future path (he has already stated that this is his last term as mayor) on a national scale by pushing Windsor's chronic problems into the federal limelight, he still supports decisions that, on a micro-scale, compromise the sustainability of our community. Developments on Walker Road, which has ballooned from a couple of Big Box developments to a full-blown shopping-lot, complete with its' very own 6 lane road, were once heralded by the mayor as "smart development".

Chris Holt, one of the contributing editors as ScaleDownWindsor, put together a 12 part series on the myths of growth called Debunking the Growth Myth. (Ed: Here are all twelve parts, for easy reference -- 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12) The fantastic series addresses the many falacies and ideas of how to develop a strong city; and Windsor has been going about it all wrong. Instead of promoting sprawling sub-divisions and big box development, we should be concentrating on reinvigorating our core communities. Mayor Francis loves to tout his fiscal record and his "pay-as-you-go" policies for city hall. While I applaud the concept, it is nothing more than window dressing as the failed development policies, truncated community improvement plans, and a penchant for all things big, bright and sprawling mortgage our future prosperity for short-term fiscal and political gains.

The solution is simple -- stop sprawling infrastructure and invest in the currently built environment. We could take it a step further and start charging sprawl-divisions the real costs of establishing and supporting new developments. Once the real costs of building on the city periphery were passed on to the consumer, coupled with tax incentives for living and investing in our core communities, we would see an reversal of the exodus that has devastated both the residential and commercial landscape in Windsor proper and a real change in the face of Windsor. Our perpetually falling tax base would be bouyed up by new investments and reinvestments and, as the city coffers filled, a balance of decreased taxes and increased services would perpetuate a pattern of growth instead of the pattern of failure that plagues us.

Alas, council has, at least in my recent memory, continued to support the myth that we need to grow to be sustainable. Until council and administration take the initiative to be innovative and courageous in the redevelopment plan for Windsor we will continue to defer the payments of our current lifestyle for future generations to pay in full.