- the native canadian

Man stabbed to death in city, 53rd homicide of the year

12/8/05

Rochester Police are investigating a homicide on the city�s southeast side Thursday morning. Police officials tell NEWS 10 NBC 35 year-old Ian Crawford was stabbed to death after answering the door to his apartment on Averill Avenue. He was found outside of the apartment home shortly before 7:00 a.m. unresponsive. Police say the suspect fled on foot. Neighbors are asked to contact 911 if they have any information.

Monday, December 20, 2004

The Rochester-Toronto Ferry

Note: This afternoon's entry is a local piece, but one that may interest a more general audience because the multi-year saga of folly it chronicles makes a point about U.S.-Canada relations. Your host, it should be noted, is a dual American-Canadian citizen who lives in Toronto.

About five years ago, a friend who has lived in Rochester NY for most of his life began telling your host with enthusiasm about the new fast ferry, a massive, Australian-built catamaran connecting his city to Toronto via Lake Ontario. It was going to be a major project, he said, and a great opportunity for his town and mine to forge a new link with each other.

This was news to the Green Knight.

In opening the conversation, my friend had taken a casual, "I suppose you�ve heard all about this" approach. When I confessed that, no, I hadn�t heard a thing about it, he replied confidently that I would be hearing plenty, soon enough.

A couple of years passed, and still my friend from Rochester was the only source of news about the ferry. Nobody in Toronto was talking about it; no media were covering it; nobody from government was saying a word about it. No Canadian companies were advertising, synergizing, getting on board, or investing. A federal election was held, then another one; other elections came, provincially and municipally; no politician talked about it � and this in a city where harbourfront issues are a very big deal. I seemed to be the only person in Toronto who knew that a ferry was coming.

Something was fishy, and I began expressing my misgivings to my friend. "Are you sure that the Canadians are on board with this?" I asked. "Because if they are they�re being awfully quiet about it."

"Don�t worry," he said. "They�re on board. The company is a jointly owned Canadian and American corporation."

"Really?" I asked. "What�s it called?"

"Canadian American Transportation Systems," he replied.

I paused and thought. Never heard of it before, I mused, but then I�m not an expert in transportation. Maybe it�s nothing to be concerned about.

A few months before the ferry was set to open, we finally began hearing some news in the Toronto press about it. A short piece on a local cable channel gave a cursory mention of it; there followed a small spattering of newspaper editorials and articles, most written with a tone of amused contempt.

The Toronto Star ran an editorial called "Fast Ferry to Nowhere" (unavailable on line) in which the editors chuckled over the idea of Torontonians going to Rochester (Rochester? For what?), and pondered the possibility that the dopey Americans had been sold the Brooklyn Bridge by some clever hucksters. No Canadians, the Star noted, were involved in this silly project.

Shortly afterwards, NOW Magazine, Toronto�s arts weekly, ran a brief article about the ferry, which mostly detailed how the corrupt and incompetent Toronto Port Authority had utterly dropped the ball, failing to build a terminal, provide for customs service, or generally do its job. The TPA�s idiocy is a familiar theme to Torontonians, but the article made no great claims about the ferry itself. Indeed, a few weeks after that, the magazine ran a brief piece about "New York's armpit ... run-down Rochester," a "crime-ridden, collapsing city" that "only tourists with a death wish" would visit.

And then there was the Globe and Mail�s Jan Wong. Canadians are used to her hatchet jobs on perfectly nice people; she�s conducted them for years. In fact, very few Canadians of note will even speak with her anymore. In Rochester, though, her vitriolic modus operandi came as a bit of a shock; people there talked about it for weeks, positively savouring the humiliation. I won�t repeat all the nasty things Wong said, but I still wonder what on earth Rochester�s mayor was thinking, sharing all those juicy crime statistics with a reporter he didn�t know.

Some Rochesterians that I met during that time developed a bad taste in their mouths about their Canadian neighbours from this incident, and it�s not hard to see why. The big city nearby, full of arrogant metropolitan types, ignoring or sneering at the mid-sized, hardworking industrial town: it�s a well-known tale, and one that seemed to fit.

Eventually, the ferry began to lurch into service, kind of. A stern warning from the FDA about the water system, accidents, hydraulic failures, and scheduling disasters quickly gave it a bad reputation on the North side of the lake. As for the first Rochesterians who came to Toronto, many were insulted � and rightly so � by the shabby collection of huts that greeted them when they arrived at Cherry Beach, easily one of the nastiest parts of southern Ontario. Here was proof positive of Toronto�s contempt for them.

Things weren�t looking very good, I thought.

Now, I am fond of Rochester, which is a much nicer place than the Toronto press gives it credit for (although it is in serious decline due to deindustrialization), and I usually visit the town in the summer at least once or twice, so I figured I�d give the ferry a shot. The trip through Toronto to the ferry terminal was surprisingly difficult; it took me nearly an hour to get from my midtown apartment to the docks. Usually, the trip to the lake takes maybe fifteen minutes, but Cherry Beach is not only ugly but also remote. The Toronto Transit Commission does run a bus route, but it�s a milk run, stopping every thirty feet. Still, I had expected a long trip, and got to the dock in time to see the ship come in.

It was impressive, I had to admit. The Spirit of Ontario was plenty big, certainly comfortable, and not that expensive to travel on. The food wasn�t great, though, and you couldn�t get away from the bloody televisions ... Wait a minute.

Now that I was on board, I began to notice things. Vividly, I recalled my friend (and his friends and family, repeatedly) saying, "Canadian American Transportation Systems." But hold on: if this company was even partly Canadian, it had some major explaining to do.

Why were the televisions all tuned to American stations? Why was there no sign of Canadian stations like CBC, CTV, CanWest-Global, or the CHUM stations? And why was Fox News, which did not at that time have a Canadian broadcast license, showing, even when the ferry was in Canadian waters?

Why, in an allegedly part-Canadian-owned international carrier, was there scarcely a word of French printed, and not a word of it spoken?

Why was the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle available for free, but no Toronto papers were in sight?

Why was the so-so food supplied by a caterer from Rochester, when Toronto�s world-renowned restaurant and catering industries were nowhere in evidence?

Why was the only Canadian beer on board Labatt�s? This is not a good beer by Canadian standards, and it�s partly owned by Americans anyway.

Why were all the prices in American dollars only? And why were the vendors on board absolutely flummoxed by Canadian money?

Why did the friendly logo appear to be a star swallowing a maple leaf � to Canadian eyes, an ancient symbol of hostile American imperialism?

To sum up, and for the umpteenth time, why no involvement by the Canadian governments, media, or business sector?

The answer is actually pretty simple, and is (or was) provided on the tight-lipped FAQ page of the company�s web site: "Who is Canadian American Transportation Systems (CATS)? CATS is a privately held company based out of Rochester NY" (Later, the answer was changed to the vague "with offices in Rochester, New York and Toronto, Ontario"). Notice that, although the company has "Canadian" in its name, and a branch office in Toronto, it is not a Canadian company. It is an American company, and has relations only with other American companies � and, of course, with its Australian backers.

Of course, Rochester mayor Bill Johnson has pointed out that the Toronto Port Authority has known for years that the ferry was coming � to which most Torontonians would say, "big deal." The TPA knowing that it�s coming, and our being active participants, are not the same thing. The TPA doesn�t answer to us; our city government has no power over it, and it is constantly acting against our interests. It is not a reliable or legitimate partner, and somebody should have found that out.

But there seems to have been little fact-finding in general. The same lazy sloppiness that led Johnson to give that foolish interview to Jan Wong was also in evidence in his, and CATS�s, failure to engage and comprehend the city and country with which they were trying to forge a connection.

If they had, they might have discovered that the TPA was a pretty shadowy outfit, that the previous municipal government was deeply corrupt (it has since been bounced out of office and some of its members are facing criminal charges), that Canadian cities do not in any case have the power to take the kind of initiatives that American cities do, that they would have to deal directly with provincial and federal ministries, and that, given budgetary restraints, now was really not a good time for this kind of project on our side of the lake.

Most importantly, they would have found out that nobody was asking the citizens � Torontonians, Ontarians, or Canadians � whether or not we actually wanted another border crossing with the United States. Given the deep unpopularity of the US government (especially but not exclusively the Bush administration) among Canadians, the default answer is usually no, we�d rather keep our distance from you folks where we can, thanks.

Are you getting the picture?

The reason why Canadians have been so lackadaisical about getting involved with the ferry is that we weren�t asked. This project was foisted upon us, like it or not. We had to build a port of some kind because, well, a bunch of Americans were going to be showing up and it wouldn�t do just to leave them sitting out there in the lake.

It�s like a close relative arriving unannounced at your house and proclaiming that he�s moving in, and you won�t mind if he just takes over this part of the living room and by the way he doesn�t eat eggs and can you please not use up so much hot water in your own shower? You can�t very well turn him away, you may be very fond indeed of him, but you won�t be very pleased about the nature of his arrival.

By the end of July, the ferry seemed to have recovered from much of its stumbling start; now, of course, it is broke, has stopped service, and may never run again. Of course, maybe it will return to life; maybe it will improve; maybe it will even deign to ask for some real Canadian involvement. But make no mistake about it: Rochesterians are not being ignored, slighted, and railroaded by the bigger, more arrogant power next door. It�s the other way around.

_________

Postscript as of mid-December: the latest brilliant scheme is for Rochester to buy the ferry at tremendous cost and run the thing itself. It�s a bit like that episode in The Simpsons when Springfield bought a monorail.

Better cancel those plans for a winter boatride to Rochester � the beleaguered fast ferry, originally established as a year-round enterprise, won't start its next season until March 31. The city's outgoing mayor, William Johnson, is determined not to have his legacy sunk, despite flawed financial assumptions and a schedule that discourages Toronto travelers from making a day trip to Rochester. The new plan may involve something similar to what's done with the high-speed ferry between Bar Harbor, Maine and Yarmouth, NS, which is shipped to the Port of Spain in Trinidad and Tobago for half the year. Hanging in the balance is a request for the local government to back a $10 million loan, adding to the $40 million the venture has already burned, including the $32 Ferry_1

million to buy the craft itself from a failed private consortium. Meanwhile, three other American towns are hoping to launch ferry operations to Canada over the next year, with prospective routes connecting Cleveland to Port Stanley, Grand River to Port Burwell, and Erie, PA to Port Dover: "Part of the theory behind these ventures is that they will give local tourism a big boost," writes the Akron Beacon Journal. "But if Rochester is any indication, that may be overly optimistic." And even more optimistic if plans are to run those shuttles during colder months. High winds last Saturday resulted in northbound Rochester riders being herded on a bus instead, not because the ferry couldn't stand the weather, but because a choppy trip would result in the seasick passengers giving the boat bad PR.

Comments

I cannot believe that this ferry-saga goes on for years. It only indicates how incompetent those people are.

Sending people by bus... this one is really good!

I'd say no matter how much money Americans want to lose - it's their business... but on the onther hand Toronto loses on this unfortunate venture.

What a pity!

Posted by: matt | December 07, 2005 at 02:45 PM

So the Akron Beacon-Journal figures similar ferries will be good for tourism. Presumably it means the tourism industry on the U.S. side, in Cleveland, Erie, and... that other place that apparently wants a ferry of its own.

I think they're getting ahead of themselves. Don't you have to have a place worth visiting first?

Posted by: estragon | December 07, 2005 at 04:28 PM

Man stabbed to death in city, 53rd homicide of the year

Monday, December 20, 2004

The Rochester-Toronto Ferry

Toothless ferry

Comments