In their haste to build a “better” bridge, we’ve lost our rail link to the rest of the Island, removed the possibility of ever getting it back again, and plunged the city into a morass of debt and financial risks.

At the very least, a public review of the City Manager’s actions and the whole process which developed around this project should be called for and initiated by either the province or an independent counsel, appointed by the CRD. Time is of the essence!

to FOCUS Editor Leslie Campbell

Letter edited and published first @ ‘Focus online’ and then released on paper in February 2013 number available in FOCUS boxes around Victoria now.

“Turning the City around before it sinks” by Focus editor Campbell, and “Stumbles on The Path Forward” and “The battle of the QC’s” by Focus publisher Broadland are the kind of investigative reports that are rare in Victoria, unique to the magazine, and very much in the public interest of accountability, common sense and fiscal prudence.

The latter article focuses on the ongoing scandal of the Johnson Street Bridge replacement project, which should perhaps more properly be called “Victoria’s Canadian job replacement bridge project,” as millions of dollars of design work on it was done in England, and the bascule’s steel span is expected to be fabricated in communist China, at the expense of Canadian taxpayers and steel workers.

Mr Broadland’s article was accompanied by a photograph of one of the two lawyers referred to in the title, William Pearce, QC, who alleges a very serious conflict of interest between MMM Group and the City of Victoria.

I believe that Mr Broadland’s investigations have kept this maddening construction corruption scandal alive in the minds of attentive Victoria taxpayer-voters.

The combination of Mr Broadland’s encyclopaedic understanding of the history of the JSB tragedy and Mr Pearce’s seasoned legal understanding of how MMM Group apparently conspired with the City of Victoria to mislead Victoria voters in the referendum makes for powerful reading.

My sincere concern is that all of this good work done in the public interest by David Broadland, Leslie Campbell and other Focus writers might be wasted if Mr Pearce doesn’t follow through with a public interest lawsuit to challenge the validity of the bogus referendum.

May I take this opportunity to challenge Mr Pearce to find the courage of his convictions to launch such a lawsuit in the public interest, as the very obviously questionable legality of that stolen referendum would certainly render the new contract signed between the City of Victoria and PCL Constructors Westcoast null and void should a fair-minded, objective judge examine the historical evidence.

To show our gratitude, Victoria taxpayers who value heritage, honesty, hard work and fiscal restraint will surely support such a lawsuit with donations to cover any legal costs.

Once Mr Pearce is victorious in court, Victorians can get back to work immediately, repairing and maintaining our very own Joseph Strauss heritage bridge for a lot less money, and all that work will be done here, not in England or China.

Gregory Hartnell, President, Concerned Citizens’ Coalition

The Blue Bridge was to become a monument. Visitors from around the world have seen it. But many, many more won’t even get a chance. In just a few short years, it would have enjoyed becoming a century old – along with other great Victoria landmarks such as the Empress Hotel and the Parliament Buildings. From across the water, or during a ride on the harbour ferry, citizens and visitors would have enjoyed a greater-than-180 degree view of a beautiful and historic city.

Unfortunately, a city’s council, after decades of improperly funding and dealing with maintenance and repairs, made Victorians feel cornered and forced to look at other options. But the truth is simple: it was very possible, realistic and cost effective to keep the Blue Bridge. San Francisco continuously maintained and improved the Golden Gate Bridge, which no longer has any of its original parts, but yet is still the striking monument that it always was. It is also a clear sign of a population’s resolve to enjoy this masterpiece for centuries to come.

A big piece of Victoria will die with the Blue Bridge. A modern, lower profile bridge certainly won’t hide undesirable views of industrial properties and ever emerging condo buildings. A modern bridge, even if it were to be a brilliant and spectacular design – which it isn’t, won’t fill those Blue Shoes. Nothing else will. You simply can’t put a price on more than 88 years of history.

I’m not originally from Victoria. In my home town, [Chicoutimi, Quebec] an old Green Bridge [Pont de Sainte-Anne] was to be taken down to make place for a ‘modern’ concrete atrocity. Instead, the citizens rallied and convinced the city to keep the old Green Bridge for pedestrians and bikers, and build the modern bridge on the other side of it. This was over 30 years ago, when walking and biking wasn’t as popular as it is today. Yes, the Green Bridge is still there and being enjoyed by thousands every single day. It’s not the prettiest bridge, but people love it because it is still there, and has become the symbol of a city rich in history. It also greets incoming cruise ships like an old reliable archway – until they see the concrete water-crossing-apparatus erected behind it.

People don’t travel to see a modern, ordinary bridge. They visit cities that need to be visited because of what they have to offer. Well, soon, there will be one fewer things for Victoria to showcase.

Monday Magazine
Letter to the Editor

As the daily monopoly newspaper is certainly not doing a proper job critically analyzing the City of Victoria’s completely out-of-control UN Agenda 21 project to replace our Joseph Strauss heritage bridge, Monday Magazine’s City Watchdog Simon Nattrass has an important role to play, following in the steps of Russ Francis.
Mr. Nattrass correctly highlights how the City’s ‘powerfully vague language’ has enabled it to change the replacement bridge project significantly since ‘what seems like eons ago.’
The City of Victoria-commissioned Delcan report recognized the heritage value of the Strauss bridge and concluded that it could be safely rehabilitated for $17.9 million in 2008.
The project really started to go off the rails when the City of Victoria naively allowed the MMM Group, the project management engineers, to disregard the Delcan report cost estimates instead of using them to guide Victoria voters in the subsequent referendum.
William Pearce, QC, a former senior litigation lawyer for the Attorney General’s Ministry, is quoted in an article by David Broadland in Focus magazine’s current number as saying ‘MMM was in a conflict of interest.’
‘When the decision was made to hold a referendum, MMM Group was asked to provide cost figures for the rehabilitation and replacement options.
‘MMM’s base construction cost figures for the rehabilitation of the existing bridge structures amounted to $36.5 million as compared to Delcan’s base costs of $17.9 million.
‘No reason was ever provided to explain the increase in rehabilitation costs of over 100 percent.’
It is clear to me that Mr. Pearce’s analysis is correct and that MMM’s obvious conflict of interest with the City of Victoria effectively nullifies the results of the rigged referendum, and thus the recent secret contract between the City of Victoria and PCL Constructors Westcoast is clearly null and void also.
The Concerned Citizens’ Coalition doesn’t launch lawsuits, but many CCC voters would certainly financially support any new legal effort that Monday Magazine, Mr. Pearce, johnsonstreetbridge.org, Focus or anyone else may organize to fight this corruption.
It is my sincere personal hope that a lawsuit is launched in the public interest to stop this out-of-control UN Agenda 21 ‘replacement bridge’ that we call ‘Fortin’s Folly’.
The Johnson Street Bridge replacement project is a classic example of a completely opaque UN Agenda 21 public-private partnership.
Because false information was used in the referendum to mislead the people of Victoria, because of on-going secrecy, strange delays, Canadian federal stimulus money for bridge steel fabrication in communist China, and cost hikes in a period of economic depression, it is not in the public interest and should be stopped as soon as possible.
We have a huge growing scandal here that is comparable to that recently exposed in the Quebec construction industry, and we need to stop it before it is used as a template for other infrastructure scams like the unneeded UN Agenda 21 regional sewage treatment project.

Gregory Hartnell, President
Concerned Citizens’ Coalition

Victoria Times Colonist
Letters to the Editor

Re: “Keep a close eye on Blue Bridge,” Jan. 9

The TC’s main editorial reported that the new Johnson Street replacement bridge contract wasn’t endorsed by newly elected Victoria City Councillors Helps and Isitt who ‘say they can’t adequately comment … and that means taxpayers need more facts.’
This unneeded socialist UN Agenda 21 make-work project has been mired by secrecy, apparent conflicts of interest between MMM Group and the City of Victoria, unexplained cost exaggerations for the rehabilitation option used by the City to mislead voters prior to the referendum, false promises by the City and the Canadian government of 900 local jobs, transfer of Canadian stimulus and Victoria property taxes to English architects, replacement costs upgrades, and Canadian jobs lost to poorly paid steel fabrication jobs in Communist China.
All that even before construction has started, and yet the editorial also warns that the ‘City is on the hook for some potentially costly variables.’
Before any more of our hard-earned Canadian and Victoria tax dollars are wasted on this scandalously opaque project which would replace our heritage Joseph Strauss bridge, a public interest lawsuit to stop it is in order.
The results of the rigged referendum have been called into question by William Pearce, QC who alleges a serious conflict of interest between MMM Group and the City of Victoria because inflated cost estimates for the rehabilitation option were used by the City, favouring the replacement option which MMM had a vested interest in pushing.
The legality of the new contract between the City of Victoria and PCL Constructors Westcoast would thus also be called into question pending the outcome of any court challenge by Mr. Pearce or other concerned parties.
My hope is that Mr. Pearce will soon find the courage of his convictions to challenge the conflict which he alleges in the courts with a public interest lawsuit which would surely be supported by prudent skeptical Victoria property taxpayers.
Otherwise, it is surely a forgone conclusion that ‘as much transparency as possible’ will never materialize as the editorial advocates, but rather inflated costs on Victoria’s very own UN Agenda 21 Canadian job replacement bridge will continue to go up for no good reason.

Gregory Hartnell, President
Concerned Citizens’ Coalition

Granted, there are differences between Johnson St. and 17th Ave. The report documents a practical, can-do approach to a similar problem but no mention of arbitrary seismic prerequisites or political/beauracratic jerrymandering. Neither, any mention of the specifications being changed behind closed doors.

It strikes me, we are in the face saving stage of our dear project…but at what cost?

Mark B