Snyder in Talks with Canadians in Windsor About New Bridge

[Scottathew]

Nice try Snyder/Bridge supporter.....and yet you ignore the biggest most important question that everyone wants answered.........if tolls don't cover the loan/maintainence/workers salaries....who is on the hook for the balance?

If you can PROVE to me that Michigan will NOT be on the hook for ANY FUNDS then yes build it. Otherwise.....its just a gamble....leave that to the casinos.

First off, the bridge will be paid for by tolls.

Secondly, even if it is not, can you tell me how many self-funding infrastructure projects there are in Michigan? As a matter of fact the only public infrastructure that I can think of are bridges. Buses are only partially funded by fares. Roads in Michigan are wholly subsidized by taxpayers. Michigan has thousands of bridges that have been built by taxpayers for the greater good.

So your point is not valid on both counts because:

#1 The bridge will be funded by a Canadian loan, that loan is repaid through future tolls

and #2 Even if the bridge wasn't funded wholly by future tolls, public infrastructure in nearly all cases with only a few specific exceptions is wholly subsidized by tax dollars

The more important question is, do we need a bridge? And even Matty Moroun says that we need a bridge. He just wants the lucrative tolls to go to him.

There's enough toll revenue to pay for Matty's bridge and give him a nice profit. Now wouldn't it make sense that the same tolls that would pay for the private bridge could instead be used to pay for a public bridge, in a better location, with new plaza structures, that bypassed downtown Windsor using a new freeway?

[Wesley Mouch]

...Secondly if there are two bridges, then based on common sense & math would tell me that tolls will be less for both bridges.....Having said that, the question I have is what if the tolls are not enough to pay the loan off? Who is going to pay that bill? I have the answer.....You and I...

Your error is that you are using math, not economics. I'm sure both were used in toll projections.

That aside, driving this discussion with toll revenues is absurd.

Is the I-280 bridge in Toledo paying itself back with toll revenue? Does anyone know?

[Searay215]

Well to all you supporters of building the bridge...you have your opinion...and that's fine....personally, I do not, and do not condone circumventing the due process of the government and will continue to write my representatives to fight the building of this and will vote against Snyder in the next election...that is MY opinion and I am entitled to that, as are you entitled to your opinion.

Also in writing....all the revenue from the lottery is going to go to the schools....LOL Believe what you want......

[corktownyuppie]

Well to all you supporters of building the bridge...you have your opinion...and that's fine....personally, I do not, and do not condone circumventing the due process of the government and will continue to write my representatives to fight the building of this and will vote against Snyder in the next election...that is MY opinion and I am entitled to that, as are you entitled to your opinion.

Like I said. You can have your own opinion. Whether you choose to make up your own facts is up to you.

Also in writing....all the revenue from the lottery is going to go to the schools....LOL Believe what you want......

When using a past, unrelated event to prove a conclusion in the present, the burden is on you to demonstrate how the past example is similar to the present question. If the correlation is that some government entity made some promise and then broke it later, then you're off to a start -- albeit a weak one. But to do so is to state that "x entity promised something in the past and did not deliver. Therefore they can never and will never do so in the future". It's a stretch.

But it does go to the true heart of the matter. It doesn't matter what reasons you're given or what contractual obligations are put into place. It seems that if your premise is that government can't be trusted with anything, anywhere, at anytime...then it's understandable why hundreds of thousands of people are against this bridge.

They're so blinded by their anger and distrust of government that they are no longer willing to listen to reason.

[Searay215]

Like I said. You can have your own opinion. Whether you choose to make up your own facts is up to you.



When using a past, unrelated event to prove a conclusion in the present, the burden is on you to demonstrate how the past example is similar to the present question. If the correlation is that some government entity made some promise and then broke it later, then you're off to a start -- albeit a weak one. But to do so is to state that "x entity promised something in the past and did not deliver. Therefore they can never and will never do so in the future". It's a stretch.

But it does go to the true heart of the matter. It doesn't matter what reasons you're given or what contractual obligations are put into place. It seems that if your premise is that government can't be trusted with anything, anywhere, at anytime...then it's understandable why hundreds of thousands of people are against this bridge.

They're so blinded by their anger and distrust of government that they are no longer willing to listen to reason.

Call it what you want....blinded, anger distrust....yes they have been so honest with all of us, don't you agree? Oh that's right you said I have weak agrument on thier honesty.....seriously? I have whatever your drinking or smoking.....

I am 65 years old and have been around since before you were a twinkle in your dad's eys.....so please don't try to BS me about how the government is so honest and forthright.... You have no facts.....

Go ahead tell me how I'm wrong and your right......I am done. Your not going to convince me and I am not going to convice you....let it go. I am now and always will be against the building of this bridge.

I got better things to do.....I'm going out to my boat and relax.

[Scottathew]

I am 65 years old and have been around since before you were a twinkle in your dad's eys.

Ah yes.

We present you with facts and hard evidence about what's really going on with the NITC bridge and your retort is, "I'm going to ignore all your facts and say they you're wrong because I'm 65 and probably older than you."

And yes, you are most certainly entitled to your opinion, as are we. We just merely giving you actual hard facts and truth about the bridge, instead of what the contemptuous Matty says in his commercials that are design to sway public opinion so that he can make more money.

[Danny]

Dave Bing on Gov. Rick Snyder's plan for a new bridge.

"What's the big ideal for another bridge proposal with the Canucks! Maroon, the baffoon made a bridge but it went nowhere. Snyder want's a bridge that would destroy half of Southwest Detroit in the process. Me, Detroiters and the rest of Michigan will get the tax bill. So much for Snyder's reinventing Michigan!"

[corktownyuppie]

Go ahead tell me how I'm wrong and your right......I am done. Your not going to convince me and I am not going to convice you....let it go. I am now and always will be against the building of this bridge.

If you think that my purpose was trying to convince you, then you have misunderstood. My purpose is to weigh ideas in hopes of identifying the highest and most reasonable ones to consider.

Enjoy the boat. It's gorgeous out.

[corktownyuppie]

Ah yes.

We present you with facts and hard evidence about what's really going on with the NITC bridge and your retort is, "I'm going to ignore all your facts and say they you're wrong because I'm 65 and probably older than you."

Lol. Is the counter to this argument, "I'm young enough to be able to have learned from past mistakes without having become irrationally jaded and bitter"?

[Richard]

Dave Bing on Gov. Rick Snyder's plan for a new bridge.

"What's the big ideal for another bridge proposal with the Canucks! Maroon, the baffoon made a bridge but it went nowhere. Snyder want's a bridge that would destroy half of Southwest Detroit in the process. Me, Detroiters and the rest of Michigan will get the tax bill. So much for Snyder's reinventing Michigan!"

Here is what the first phase will take.and it is wondered why speculators are sitting on the land by the airport.

http://detroitregionaerotropolis.com/

There have been links posted that are supposed to represent the facts ,lets look at a few even though the report is over 7 years old and in itself uses data that is over 10 years old maybe we can agree that the world is a much different place
7 to 10 years later.Who made the report anyways?

"Additionally, the construction
of this new border crossing system is expected to generate and/or preserve as many as 25,000 jobs
within Michigan and 70,000 jobs nationally.3"

It will take or is stated to take 750 jobs to run the plazas etc when completed where are they coming up with the other 24000 plus jobs as the companies that will build it already have employees.

The U.S. government will cover the federal portion of the U.S. plaza.

How can you say no US taxpayer monies will be spent then add that part?Where does the US government get their money?

The State of Michigan would bear no responsibility for repayment of the Canadian funding.

Really? Why are they being so specific when they say The State of Michigan?

We have a deep pool of talented workers, plenty of usable land, and an abundance of natural resources that can be leveraged to help any industry flourish.

So all of those reports about the lack of talent in the past weeks were just news fillers? Where are the 60,000 acres coming from?

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/sn...w_362601_7.pdf

So really that piece could have been written by either side to support their argument.

But really one needs to look at the whole big picture and not just tunnel vision on the bridge,look at what is coming after and the real reasons behind it and the impact it will have on the city good and bad ,nobody wants the state to come into Detroit with a EFM or anything else but is anybody paying attention to what is happening and what the real goal is?
Run by the state and corporations.

The city does not have a plan because it does not need one it has already been laid out for you.

So in theory the bridge is a mott issue, its a jumping point to what is to come and that is where the real issues are going to be.

[jtf1972]

I bet that Snyder took the tunnel.

[kraig]

Two facts.

First of all, Mr. Moroun's second bridge cannot be built because the Government of Ontario will never approve it. This has been stated, publicly and often, by Ontario officials. So all the money he spent on the approaches on the Detroit side were an expensive fantasy and a waste of time.

Second of all, nearly every toll bridge and toll road in North America is successful, by which I mean the tolls are sufficient to be able to pay off the construction bonds over time, and then sufficient to pay for maintenance and upkeep. There are, I believe, four border crossings [[and for sure at least three) in the Buffalo, NY area; all are bridges, all are tolled, and none cost the State of New York or the Province of Ontario any money. Buffalo and Fort Erie are much smaller towns than Detroit and Windsor. Detroit, at the present time, has two border crossings.

Not only do toll bridges and toll roads pay their own costs, they are the ONLY form of transportation infrastructure which do so.

The only reason Mr. Moroun's specious arguments hold any weight with the public is that he has sufficient resources to produce television advertisements and buy air time for these advertisements, and we are all conditioned to believe the bullshit that comes out of our television speakers.

Opinions change every election. Some other politicians may view things differently. Which is probably what Matty is holding out for.

[kraig]

sorry but this is complete non-sense

Please explain why it's nonsense [[no hyphen). Every statement in the first paragraph is a documented fact. As far as the second paragraph goes, that's my opinion, but it's not without merit. Except for the part about the Corrigan Group [[feel free to look them up) trying to get the public to foot the bill for them. That's not only a fact, it's their stock in trade.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

You can't have it both ways. Either you support the DRIC/NITC or you support Matty Maroun, not both.

First, I can have it any way I want; it's an opinion. Second, I don't "support" Matty at all. I just don't hate him. If he wants to build another bridge on his own, I have no opposition to that [[I know Ontario does, so it likely won't occur). And I support NITC. I do think they need to be very careful about it's finances [[particularly who pays for overruns, which always occur). Detroit/Windsor/Michigan/Ontario/Canada/United State/Construction Companies/Chambers of Commerce/and Construction Unions would have it built already if they had all their own ducks in a row. Matty Maroun has no ability to stop a bridge, other than to advertise and lobby. Pro-bridge people are more numerous, wealthy [[collectively), and weild more power. Reminds me of when the Lions sucked. The Lions were never terrible BECAUSE the other teams were good. They lost on their own. I hope the NITC gets built [[although I hardly think it's a be-all-and-end-all issue for the city or region). I also hope Matty builds a new Ambassador. But whatever. A new bridge would be beneficial. Two bridges would be better. I'm not sure that revenue would justify 2 spans, nice as that would be. It's just a bridge. Won't fix Detroit all by itself.

[Wingnatic]

The Canadian / Ontario/Windsor Government has said that they don't want another bridge in the downtown Windsor area , they want it further down the river . I guess they have some say where it goes ?

[Detroitdave]

Nice try Snyder/Bridge supporter.....and yet you ignore the biggest most important question that everyone wants answered.........if tolls don't cover the loan/maintainence/workers salaries....who is on the hook for the balance?

If you can PROVE to me that Michigan will NOT be on the hook for ANY FUNDS then yes build it. Otherwise.....its just a gamble....leave that to the casinos.

I don't have ALL the facts , but I'll give you a couple facts.
1) Windsor, Ont, and Canada will NEVER, in our life time ,allow a second span right next to Matty's How many ways do they have to say it?
2) if he wants to waste money on TV ads that will go nowhere let him .
3)as stated earlier he went back on his deal to work with the state and build spans from I75 to his current bridges .
4)Every year He [[MATTY) holds up a bridge, that Windsor, Ont, Canada and the US agrees on, money that would go across a second span downriver goes to NY or elsewhere,he uses his UNFAIR advantage i.e [[money) to influence to get his way.
5) He's hell bent on getting his way, even if he had to go to jail. He's like a 3 year old child, he wont be happy until he gets his way , which the people who make the rules on both side of the boarder already said it's not going to happen , no matter who he has in his pocket on this side of the bridge, thank goodness his money doesn't work in Windsor, and no matter how many of those one sided commercials he airs , some people really get it .
6) Since fees are down and tolls would never pay for it , why is he so ready to build another one right next to his current one?
He's a successful business man, does that sound like something a successful business man would do ?.
A second span can work and he knows it ! he just wants right next to his and the money coming to his pocket ! anyone can see that ... well maybe not ?
I've been across many toll bridges in this country and 99% pay for themselves, if not he would have gotten rid of the ambassador a long time ago .If anyone can't see this then I don't know what to tell ya?
Can I PROVE that the folks in Michigan won't be on the hook for it , NO, no one can until it's built up and running , however history proves when you build a toll bridge it will pretty much pay for it self 90% of the time ,if it is run right. Also with as busy of a span and truck traffic here in Southeast Michigan matty sure seems to bet on it ,
I'm not saying I know everything , but I'm pretty sure these are all facts. I'm just using my common sense, I may be wrong , if so please let me know.
I'm always ready to learn.
keep an open mind all the best !

[Richard]

99% of all toll bridges are increasing tolls to be self supporting
due to decreased useage because of higher fuel costs.

How is Canada's Port Mann toll bridge doing lately ?
Not so self supporting Hugh? But hey we can say this one
will be.

Play nice with Matty maybe he will give a discount on trucking
the bulk shipping of 55 gallon drums of grease to help ease the
pain for the city folk being hung out to dry.

[Wesley Mouch]

How is Canada's Port Mann toll bridge doing lately ?
Not so self supporting Huh? But hey we can say this one
will be....

The Port Mann bridge is not open yet. Toll will be $3.00 for cars, photographically collected.

[Richard]

The Port Mann bridge is not open yet. Toll will be $3.00 for cars, photographically collected.

Thanks,I was reading search results from the Vancover press where they were not expecting self supporting for at least ten years as per thier financial commission.

[Wheels]

The Mackinac Bridge was supposed to be toll free after the initial pay back was achieved. Since then the toll has remained and raised in price. I do think it is self sufficient though.

[mwilbert]

The Mackinac Bridge was supposed to be toll free after the initial pay back was achieved. Since then the toll has remained and raised in price. I do think it is self sufficient though.

Many toll roads/bridges that were supposed to be paid off and then made free have not been, but I have a hard time thinking of any that weren't able to pay off their construction costs. In any case, just in principle, it is preferable not to have the same entity having a monopoly on the crossing. Since Maroun already controls the bridge and the tunnel, it would be poor public policy to allow him to control a new bridge. Not that this region is a stranger to poor public policy.

[RO_Resident]

There is an advocacy group. It's called the Corrigan Group.

Tell me more about this 'Corrigan Group'. I am aware of a real [[tm) engineering and planning firm working on the bridge planning and prep work. But their name is more Italian, less Irish.

They've been spending money just like Matty has been during the entire process. In many ways, they're the ones who manufactured all of this controversy. In the beginning, everyone, the City of Detroit, Windsor, M-DOT, and both federal governments were all on board with Matty's plans for a second span. The Corrigan Group spent a ton of money securing a no bid contract to do the DRIC study and have been engineering things behind the scenes ever since.

While we may like to see this as a Matty is the bad guy issue. It's really just a fight between parties with large sums of money trying to make even larger sums of money. The biggest difference here is that the Corrigan Group is trying to get the public to pay for their bridge, lock stock and barrel.

You are confusing cause and effect. The state and DIBC had a fallin out back while DeSana was the MDOT director.

And yes, there has been some engineering going on in the background. http://www.partnershipborderstudy.co...%20PPTnews.pdf

This 'nefarious' group has even managed to put a former employee on the state legislature. That's the kind of influence the 'Corrigan Group' has. [[Note, that is sarcasm. The current state rep has been involved in the community beyond his professional work. I could imagine him getting elected had he worked at PB, HNTB, Parson, OHM, SD, URS, Somat, et al.)

[Hypestyles]

if Snyder were to "go around" the legislature as some articles have speculated is an option, how exactly would that work?

[professorscott]

if Snyder were to "go around" the legislature as some articles have speculated is an option, how exactly would that work?

It's interesting that people put it that way, because ordinarily road and bridge projects happen all over Michigan without any action by the legislature at all.

One might say, for instance, that M-59 was widened in a way that "went around the legislature", or that even as we speak, nobody consulted the legislature about MDOT finishing up the approaches to the Ambassador Bridge.

Construction projects, even big ones, don't ordinarily involve legislative action or approval. Gov. Snyder may have tried to bring in the legislature before, as a courtesy or because it was a fairly significant project, but it's not at all common in this realm.

[corktownyuppie]

Thanks,I was reading search results from the Vancover press where they were not expecting self supporting for at least ten years as per thier financial commission.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? Not sure if I understand correctly. Are you saying that the bridge won't be self-supporting until:

[[1) 10 years from now?
[[2) 10 years from when the bridge is complete?
[[3) 10 years from when the construction started in 2008?

I really hope it's not #3, because considering that the bridge won't even have its first full year of operation until 2014, then saying it'll be 10 years to be self-supporting is somewhat of an unfair statement.

That's like saying, "It took me 17 years to get my college degree" without saying that stopwatch started on your first day of kindergarten.

Is there a source you could cite?
Do you believe that the tolls will be unable to support the proposed bridge in Michigan?
Do you reject the obligation that Canada promises to be responsible for any shortfall?