By Doug Draper
Well, well, well.
As if you should be surprised in this day and age when the Ontario Municipal Board so often tips its hat to the developer over protests from a mass of residents that live in the community.
There you go folks, for better or worse.
So much so that Fort Erie’s recently elected town council finally buckled and gave its final approval, by a vote of four to three this March 22, to a controversial agreement between the town’s last council and a Toronto-area developer to move forward with a 12-storey condo tower in front of one of the few remaining public beaches in Niagara, along the Lake Erie shore.
The drive to sling up condo towers along picturesque lakeshores, for those rich enough to afford to occupy suites in them, seems to be catching on in this province at a furious pace. Therefore it should be of no surprise that plans by the Molinaro Group have been approved for the Fort Erie community of Crystal Beach.
There were many in this historic old community who protested this plan, arguing that it would compromise public assess to one of the last open beaches in Niagara and would not be in character with community composed of homes and businesses that are mostly only one or two-storeys high. But others, including Fort Erie Mayor Doug Martin, believe that this development might reinvigorate a Crystal Beach that has, at least in some peoples’ view, been floundering since the closing more than a decade ago of the classic amusement park by the same name.
In the wake of all this, the city’s Economic Development and Tourism Corporation has filed a lawsuit against a local citizens’ blog called the Crystal Beach Strand, and against two anonymous commenters to this blog, and to Google, Inc., which carries it no less. This is a blog that featured commentary against the condo project.
Niagara At Large has already received email from regular readers and commenter from Fort Erie, noting that they are afraid to comment any more for fear that they might be sued for saying anything negative against the powers-that-be in their municipality.
This is nutsville and it may be one more reason why people in Fort Erie and all of us have to think about getting past the parochialism of local municipal councils and moving toward one region of Niagara. When it gets down to nutty stuff like this, what other way is there to go?
(Share your comments on this issue below, if you dare, and visit Niagara At Large at www.niagaraatlarge.com for more news and commentary on matters of interest and concern to residents in our greater Niagara region.)
Niagara At Large 
Yes, the real reason I am being sued is that I have been constant in my opposition to the Crystal Beach Gateway Project as well as even earlier plans to sell off the Bay Beach Properties which were bought with gaming revenue from the Rebstock Family in 2001. Jim Thibert has taken exception to comments posted on my blog about his behaviour and his handling of the EDTC. He became very involved in the previous election, especially in Ward 3 where Bob Steckley was re-elected. Thibert is using tax dollars to pursue this lawsuit against me, Google, Inc. and two unknown posters on my blog.
As to the Bay Beach Properties: it was always thought to remain public, but, in 2007, it was put up for possible development by the then town council. New council members were elected on the promise that they would at least take another look at the issue. They did. Bob Steckley changed his vote because he was afraid to gamble with taxpayer money in a lawsuit. What the taxpayers do not know, and may never know, is how much it will cost them to allow the completion of the condo tower. Staff failed to provide the documentation of what it has cost the taxpayers to date and projected costs in the future, as requested by council to be available last evening. Staff cited “illness” in its inability to prepare the documents in time. What is the big unknown is how much will the town be on the hook for when the building begins and onward.
I hope that people will not be afraid to speak out because of this lawsuit. This is an attempt to scare people who have anything negative to say about their elected or non-elected officials. I intend to fight this lawsuit.
LikeLike
What is astonishing is that the bad decision was made after it should be more clear to people why dynamic beaches, when designated by the Ministry of Natural Resources, should be off limit to development. Not only should the subject lands be prohibited from development, but all cottage properties that like in in Fort Erie that are within the dynamic beach boundariy, should be purchased by the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and turned into a park. Recent events in Japan tell us that the action of waves can be quite powerful. This makes it important that areas that have been mapped as hazard areas, be publicly acquired and put back into a natural state.
LikeLike
I am very dissapointed in Bob Steckley, I thought this councillor had more backbone, he has sold out the residents of Fort Erie, he is no different than miss Zanko, the Chamber of Commerce pick for Crescent Park. I hope he has nightmares from now on in. thats my opinion.
LikeLike
Fort Erie is one of the most parochial, backward cesspools in the province. Everything about it, historically, economically, environmentally and culturally that could be an asset, seems to be mishandled…eg beach access, condo development, Point Abino historic lighthouse and the continuing downhill slide of the formerly wonderful Friendship and Highland festivals. Where were our elected representatives during the fight for our ER services? They were negotiating with the surreptitious NHS who everyone knew could not be trused, or hiding behind their desks. Thanks a lot!
Fort Erie is perpetually run by an old boys’ club with big palms and small cerebral cortices.
LikeLike
All this because the 4 people from out previous council, our planner and a few other’s @ Town Hall insisted on pushing there Own Agenda’s!
And this is my opinion ( Without Prejudice! ) I suggest everyone use this turn when posting !!!
“without prejudice
Definition
Legal term signifying that something is being done, proposed, or said without abandoning a claim, privilege, or right, and without implying an admission of liability. (1) When used in a document or letter, these words mean that what follows cannot (a) be used as an evidence in a court case, (b) be taken as the signatory’s last word on the subject matter, and (c) be used as a precedence. Contents of such documents normally cannot be disclosed to the courts but, when a party proposes to settle a dispute out-of-court, it is the genuineness of the effort that determines whether the proposal can disclosed or not, and not if the words ‘without prejudice’ were used. (2) When a court case is dismissed, or a court order is issued, without prejudice, it means that a new case may be brought or a new order issued on the same basis as the dismissed case or the original order.”
LikeLike
For the Taxpayers of Fort Erie any result pro or con they lose, the Molinaro Group can now try and sell these cono units, if they don’t sell he will abandon the idea, it happened all over our Town hudreds of trees cut down and no Homes , Black Creek at the back of my house nobody wanted to buy them either project dead in the water, that developer was from Toronto area. if the Gate way project does sell taxpayers are on the hook for millions of dollars to supply sewer and water services , it cost Fort Erie taxpayers %1.9 million dollars to put in services for the Helicopter plant on Gilmore Rd and that was 27 years ago.the Fort Erie people are the most gullible people in Canada..
LikeLike
The CEO report that coincidently was not ready for review when the decision to proceed was to be made will be presented Monday night.
To date the taxpayers expenditure is $747,675 for the {without prejudice sic} free condo.
When you see the flooding 3 weeks ago of Erie Road and surrounding areas the arguement of dynamic Beach seems very plausible and may hold water…pardon the expression.
LikeLike